Community Services for Working Legally & Ethically- myassignmenthelp

Question: Discuss about theCommunity Services for Working Legally Ethically. Answer: Issue The key issue is whether I should adhere to parental confidentiality as required by my profession or bend the rules keeping in mind Garys long term health. Stakeholders The key stakeholders are as follows. Garry His parents Myself Organisation since the reputation and business of the company could be impacted Garrys ex-boyfriend since his relationship with Garry would be impacted by the decision that I undertake in the scenario Legal Issue Breaching the parental confidential norms could have legal consequences owing to the nature of practice and also breaking the rules of the organisation especially if it brings any disrepute. Ethical Issue There are two ethical dilemmas which are inherent in this situation. As a support worker, I am required to maintain parental confidentiality which is highlighted in the rules of the organisation as well. But on the other hand, as someone who cares and provides support to the client, it might be worthwhile to take actions by bending the rules for the long term well-being of the client. Hence, the ethical dilemma is whether to maintain Garrys trust or potential long term well-being (Kidder, 2013). Also, ethical issue arises with regards to safeguard organisational interest on one hand and securing clients interest on the other. For safeguarding organisational interest, the rules of parental confidentiality should not be violated but to secure Garry well-being in the long run, it might be worthwhile to be flexible and communicate to his parents (Icheku, 2011) Option There are two options for me in the given scenario. Ignore the advice given by the manager and continue to adhere to the parental confidentiality norms irrespective of the consequences. Go along with the managerial advice and be flexible with parental confidentiality rules keeping in mind Garrys long term well-being. Final Decision The preferred action would be to maintain the parental confidentiality with regards to Garry. The above action is preferable since if the rules of parental confidentiality are bent in the future and his parents do confront him regarding the issue of his ex-boyfriend, Garry could potentially lose trust and faith on me. As a result, he would stop sharing with me which could potentially prove to be more disastrous in the future as there would not be anyone of counsel him if the need arises. A better course of action would be that if Garry does go back to his ex-boyfriend, then I warn him about the potential long term impact owing to the health history of his boyfriend. Additionally, also, I would like to educate him on the potential risks in being a gay from the health perspective. This could potentially help him to safeguard his health in the long term (White, 2017). Informing the parents would on one hand breach the rules of parental confidentiality set by the organisation and could potentially take things out of control. It is known that Garrys parents are already quite concerned of his decision to be gay. Hence, additional health concerns could potentially trigger an extreme reaction from them which Garry may not listen to since he might consider those concerns to be more on account of his being gay rather than the health history of his ex-boyfriend. SCENARIO 2 Issue The key issue is whether the co-worker should have acted in a manner which is inconsistent with the organisation for helping his neighbour. Stakeholders The key stakeholders are as follows. Co-worker Organisation employing the co-worker Myself as my decision could alter my relationship with the co-worker Legal Issue It might be possible that the owner who chopped the tree may go to the cops and file a complaint that the co-worker threatened him/her citing his professional influence. Ethical Issue The key ethical dilemma in this scenario is that while the co-worker did a good deed by helping her neighbour but at the same time he acted in a manner which is not consistent with the organisation. This is because he used his company ID even though the neighbour was not a client and thus potentially adversely impacted the organisations commercial interests (Kidder, 2013). Options There are potentially three choices that I have in the scenario provided. These are summarised below. Praise the co-worker for helping his neighbour without any reference to the method Praise the co-worker for helping the neighbour but simultaneously explain him that the manner in which he acted was inappropriate and the fact that he should not have used the company ID and represented the neighbour. Report the matter to the superiors so that suitable action can be taken against the co-worker for inappropriate use of companys ID. Final Decision In the given scenario, the most suitable decision would be to praise the co-worker for the gesture but simultaneously point out that the means were no appropriate and similar abuse of companys power should not be done in the future. It is imperative to praise the intention of the co-worker to help the neighbour. However, the fact that the co-worker acted in a manner not approved by the organisation implies that he should rectify the actions in the future. This is because acting in the manner that he did could potentially adverse the commercial interests of organisation and also lead to job loss for the co-worker. Not emphasising on the incorrectness of the manner of help would pass across the message that only the final result is significant. However, this is not the case since both means and outcome are important (Icheku, 2011). Also, in relation with the reporting of the matter to the seniors or the appropriate authority, such an action is not requisite. The reporting of the incident to the company would have been required if my co-worker accepted money for offering services privately while using the companys ID. However, since the action was not driven by any financial gains but only to extend help, hence I would not talk with my superiors about the incidence. However, if such an action is repeated by my co-worker in the future, then the matter would have to be reported so that the company can take suitable punitive action (White, 2017). References Icheku, V (2011). Understanding Ethics and Ethical Decision Making, 2nd ed. New York: Xlibris Corporation Kidder, R (2013) How Good People Make Tough Choices : Resolving the Dilemmas of Ethical Living, 3rd ed., London: Harper Collins White, T. (2017) Right and Wrong: A practical introduction to Ethics, 2nd ed. London: Wiley