Our
question-a-section trek through the
NASW Code of Ethics continues. All aboard!
Next up, 1.02, Self-Determination. The section is quick:
Social workers respect and promote the right of clients to
self-determination and assist clients in their efforts to identify
and clarify their goals. Social workers may limit clients' right to
self-determination when, in the social workers' professional
judgment, clients' actions or potential actions pose a serious,
foreseeable, and imminent risk to themselves or others.
What kind of questions might emerge from this section? Lots of
'em. The section lends itself to questions which assess for social
worker overreach, cape-wearing, and rescue-mindedness over simple
client care. Which kind of gives away the answer to an item like
this:
A client tells a social worker that she plans to take a
psychedelic drug over the weekend in an effort to decrease her
anxiety. What should the social worker do?
A. Explain the dangers of psychedelic drugs to the
client.
B. Discuss the pros and cons of the plan.
C. Notify police about the planned illegal drug
use.
D. Refer the client to a psychiatrist for anxiety
medication.
How do you wind your way to the right answer here? Take it step
by step. Eliminate the most eliminatable first. Call the cops (C)?
Social workers and police would rarely be off the phone with each
other if social workers made a reporting call every time a client
discussed drug use. Also, confidentiality. The other three are more
reasonable. Which one is right? Referring to an MD doesn't
directly address the drug-taking plan the client has introduced.
Explaining dangers risks alienating the client. Answer B respects
client self-determination while opening a discussion about the
wisdom of the plan. It's the best of the offered answers. BTW,
worth noting that the client isn't just making stuff up--recent
research shows
psychedelics can be useful in mental health treatment. But you
didn't need to know that to answer the question correctly. You just
had to remember section 1.02.
