1. Please read the Jones Case carefully. As you read, highlight anything you see – graduate researcher

1. Please read the Jones Case carefully. As you read, highlight anything you see that you believe might be an ethical dilemma.
2. Review the following documents sources below
 http://socialworkers.org/pubs/code/code.asp
 Kentucky Division of Protection and Permanency SOPS—Ethical Practice
http://manuals.sp.chfs.ky.gov/chapter1/00/Pages/11%20Ethical%20Practice.aspx
 Confidentiality, Informed Consent, and HIV
http://manuals.sp.chfs.ky.gov/chapter1/01/Pages/home.aspx
 Laws and Regulations Pertaining to the Practice of Social Work 201 KAR 23: 080
http://www.lrc.ky.gov/kar/201/023/080.htm
These documents govern professional behavior and are extremely important. It is important to remember that individuals seldom get up in the morning and decide to abuse or neglect their children, circumstances and a series of events might lead them to take that action, but it was not generally a planned event. Likewise, individuals do not generally begin their social profession with the intent of behaving unethically. However, as social workers we struggle with issues of confidentially, dual relationships, documentation, accepting gifts, and personal biases daily. In protective services we work with individuals we may not like, yet as professionals we are called upon to offer them the best services and make decisions without allowing our personal biases to influence our decisions. Behaving ethically is a struggle for social workers in the complex work with families and the constraints on time and resources many workers face. We do face ethical dilemmas on a daily basis. Our codes of ethics offer us guidelines for making ethical decisions. 3. Write a 4-5 page paper on the ethical concerns of the Jones Case. At a minimum, include the following sections. Each section is worth specified points based on how well you answer the questions utilizing the above materials listed and specific examples. a. Identify at least five ethical issues/dilemmas you see in the Jones Case. Cite the Code of Ethics, SOP, and KRS within each of the above documents that apply to each of the ethical issues/dilemmas you have identified. (25pts) b. Discuss how the identified sections of the Codes/Laws/SOP apply specifically to the five identified issues/dilemmas. (20pts) c. Select three of the six core values of the Social Work Code of Ethics (Service, Social Justice, Dignity and Worth of the Person, Importance of Human Relationships, Integrity, and Competence. Discuss how you will use each of these 3 core values to positively impact the family. Give specific examples of how you will conduct yourself in these 3 chosen areas to support your work with the family. (40 pts.) d. Identify three strategies that you will use to practice ethical behavior in the field. (15pts.) Remember to utilize APA style paying particular attention to spelling and grammar. The completed paper will be required to be submitted to safe assign. Jones Case for Writing Assignment 1 Susan had worked for child protective services in a rural county for approximately seven years. Off and on during that time she had worked with the Jones family as an ongoing worker. Ms. Jones suffered with severe substance abuse issues and had lost custody of her two young boys several times over the years for this issue. The children were always placed with the maternal grandmother each time and were never placed in foster care. Susan had developed a close relationship with Ms. Jones and maintained regular contact, even during times of stability when the case was closed, i.e. Ms. Jones would call Susan regularly, stop by and visit when she had meetings with family support and Susan would check on the children at school (talking to the teacher and guidance counselor) whenever she was conducting her other investigations. Even though Susan recognized Ms. Jones had substance abuse issues, she was very compassionate towards the client and believed Ms. Jones needed her regular support and encouragement to remain sober. They were Facebook friends and often spoke on the phone and texted one another. The supervisor recognized Susan’s sincere concern for the family and assigned her the case each time it was reopened. Anytime there was a new investigation involving the Jones family (whether a case was open at the time or not) Susan would talk with the investigative worker on a regular basis regarding the investigation and would always participate in the interviews as she knew the family so well. Susan became very protective of the family and always defended any allegations of physical abuse, as she knew through her relationship with Ms. Jones that she would never harm her children. Susan would also maintain contact with the maternal grandmother during the investigations as well, so the grandmother could stay informed about Ms. Jones’ current condition and the status of the investigation. The grandmother would also contact Susan on a regular basis to update Susan and ensure there were not current investigations or problems with Ms. Jones and the children. This contact continued whether the case was opened or not. Susan would regularly log into TWIST and review the case file for the latest recordings, whether she was assigned to the case or not. The grandmother was very appreciative of Susan’s commitment to the children and made her a beautiful handmade quilt to show her appreciation. Susan’s children attended a local day care and she was able to get the day care provider to accept Ms. Jones’ children as a personal favor (otherwise there was a long waiting list). This also made it easier for Susan to take Ms. Jones’ children to the day care when needed, because Ms. Jones’ car was not reliable. Since Susan’s children were about the same age as Ms. Jones’ children, they really enjoyed riding to daycare together and being in the same class at daycare. Susan transported the children whether the case was open or closed. Susan explained to the day care classroom worker the situation the children were in so she could be more tolerant of their occasional aggressive behavior and then to also make sure she was aware of Ms. Jones’ condition (sobriety) when she brought the children. Susan told the daycare workers to call her, rather than the DCBS hotline, if there were any issues with the children. As the years went on, the grandmother became very ill and passed away. Tragically Ms. Jones was killed in a DUI accident, although the children were not with her at the time. The supervisor felt since Susan had developed such a close relationship with the family that she should notify the family. This was very difficult for Susan and she became emotionally distraught during the process and remained so for the coming weeks (being unable to work a full week at a time, crying when she did attend, and complained of being unable to sleep/eat). The supervisor continued to encourage Susan’s regular contact and involvement with the children, as Susan was the closest contact the children had left at this time. The two children had separate fathers and had not had any contact with them since birth but due to the circumstances, it became necessary to locate the fathers. The home evaluations were assigned to other workers, however, Susan assisted throughout providing information relayed to her from Ms. Jones about the fathers, as well as attended each of the home visits for the evaluation. She was very protective of the children’s placement and in fact testified in court against the fathers obtaining custody as she knew Ms. Jones would not approve. Workers, who actually completed the home evaluations on the fathers, recommended placement with the father. Susan, however, used her connection with the court to have herself subpoenaed to court. She provided testimony that the children should be placed in foster care with a goal of adoption. Susan had confided to several workers that she planned on seeking permanent custody or adoption of the children. She reported that since the children were well acquainted with her and her children, this plan would meet their permanency best. The County Attorney then made contact with the supervisor, regarding concerns Susan had become too involved with the case and explain how the court hearing went. The supervisor was shocked and stated she just didn’t understand how this happened.