My ethical dilemma involved my commitment to my clients, as in this specific case I was committed to a parent and her two young daughters and also I battled with respecting her right to self determination. I have been working with a family for 9 months and the case has been active with this particular family welfare agency for 2 ½ years. Many external factors of oppression have affected this family. I present a 35 year old African American single mother and two young daughters ages 8 and 12. This mother, Ms. Module, (name change for confidentiality), has a history with Child protective services for 2 years now, included in the allegations was substance and alcohol use, educational neglect, lack of supervision, and engaging in domestic violence disputes in the presence of the children. Ms. Module does not know who the father is of the girls, states they were conceived while she was dating various strangers for money. In September 2008 the two children were placed into foster care due to mother’s addiction to cocaine and alcohol including her inability to care for her children and provide a safe environment. Due to Adoption and Safe Families Act, when children are in Foster Care 15 out of 22 months, the Department of Social Services is mandated to file for termination of parental rights against the parents. Since the children have been in a foster home, Ms. Module has been in and out of various rehabilitation facilities. Ms. Module is also diagnosed with Major Depression and Bipolar Disorder and is under psychiatric monitoring and psychotropic medications.
As time has passed since 2008, currently the children were moved from two foster homes while Ms. Module had relapsed and battled from inpatient substance abuse treatment and mental health treatment. Most recently for the past 8 months, the current foster family caring for the two young girls have fallen in love with the girls and have opened the door to a new world they had never experienced. This new foster family is a two-parent family with adult children who live outside of the home. These two young girls have their own bedrooms, decorated as they wished. The foster parents have taken the girls on trips to many parts of the states, including Disney World which is a favorite for them, as well as taken them on a Caribbean cruise with the permission of family court and Ms. Module. For 2 young girls who had never been outside of Detroit, MI, this is a completely new experience. The girls go to church weekly, attend after school programs, are engaged in violin lessons and the family engaged in activities with the girls consistently. The girls are very happy with the foster parents and have mentioned that they would love to continue to live with this family “forever”. As I watched the 8 year old say this in the presence of the mother; I saw the pain in Ms. Module’s eyes as she held back her own tears, I held mine back as well. According to Ethical Standards I have an ethical responsibility of commitment to clients both the children and the parents. My responsibility is to promote the wellbeing of the children, which at this point meant to be separate from their mother and provide them with the best care. My commitment to Ms. Module is to work with her through this disease of addiction until she is well enough to care for her children without the need for child welfare intervention. The difficulty is that due to Ms. Module’s struggles with chemical and alcohol dependency, she has not been able to work through those demons. I have worked closely with her through the difficult times of entering a new inpatient program, and through her relapses as well, now the time had come for the Department of Social Services to file for her rights to be terminated. As I had this discussion with Ms. Module she sadly stated she did not want to go through all of that and felt the best decision she could do for her children is to surrender her rights since the foster parents had agreed if the children were freed from parental rights and eligible for adoption, they would adopt the both girls.
“All professions have value preferences that give purpose and direction to their practitioners.” (Hepworth 2010) Morally, one of the worst offenses that can be said to a parent is that they are a bad parent. Although it has never been articulated to Ms. Module that she is a bad parent, she may feel this way, by her constant struggles with mental health, substance use, having her children removed, and not having the ability to recover her children in the time frame allotted. Ms. Module is at a crossroads, she loves her girls deeply and she has verbalized she cannot continue to fight for her children, because she feels that she will never be able to recover, and she is hurting her children more than helping in her efforts to try and get her children back. For a parent to give up their children from a deontological perspective is “wrong”. A parent has an obligation to care for their children and for her although it was “wrong” she felt she was doing what is in her children’s best interests. The deontological approach will view this parent as immoral and should be punished by her act through the systems in place. The deontological view focuses on the process and the the utilitarian view emphasizes on the outcome.
Ms. Module lives in a residential substance abuse facility which will discharge her once she has stepped down from the program. As Ms. Module has no housing, so upon discharge she will become homeless. Ms. Module will go through the shelter system and be placed wherever a bed is available, without the prospect of obtaining an extra bedroom for her daughters.
The dilemma I’ve faced is respecting her ethical right for self determination. Ms. Module is able to make decisions for herself and her daughters and at this time she feels that the best she can do for her children is to allow them to remain with the current foster parents to be adopted because she feels that they will have a better life with the them. As I see this case specifically through a utilitarian lens, although it may be wrong to give up the fight to keep your children, Ms. Module’s struggles with poverty, being a single parent, being an addict, not raising her daughter’s has put her in a position in which she feels she has no choice. Ms. Module and I have acknowledged that the children have developed a relationship with the foster parents and have verbalized their desire to remain in their home as this is the most stability they have ever had in their lives; Ms. Module has made it clear to me that she is making a decision she feels will benefit her children.
I have to be mindful that my biases got in the way. Ms. Module did take part in self determination and came to a decision she wants to carry out. The lens of utilitarian perspective may see the outcome of the children being able to benefit from two parents that are prominent, have been able to invest not only in them financially, but emotionally, something that their mother was not able to do at the time. “Mindful practitioners use a variety of means to enhance their ability to engage in moment-to-moment self-monitoring, bring to consciousness their tacit personal knowledge and deeply held values, use peripheral vision and subsidiary awareness to become aware of new information and perspectives, and adopt curiosity in both ordinary and novel situations.” (Epstein 1999) I acknowledged my personal feelings initially and feeling that Ms. Module was giving up not only on herself but on her children and refused to fight for them, that was selfish on her part. I sat in the uncomfortable feeling for days after Ms. Module said she was willing to surrender her children. Ethically, I had to respect her decision to choose for herself, but personally I felt like I could not respect a parent who gives up their children. I can admit to having a conversation with Ms. Module where I did discuss the progress she had made and to thoroughly rethink her decision through, most likely because I was uncomfortable with the decision. I did not take in consideration at that time that she may have thought about this decision for months. I initially saw this dilemma in the deontological perspective. How could a mother who has worked hard for the last 2 years on doing what was right in efforts to get her children back give up on the progress made?
“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 (NASW). My actions could have merited a complaint if I had persuaded Ms. Module to retain custody of her children, sat before the court and requested time on behalf of Ms. Module based on her progress and the final outcome, something happen to her children, based on me not allowing her to have self- determination. Although I allowed my judgment to blur Ms. Module’s decision, after several conversations with Ms. Module she ultimately remained firm in her decision to surrender her children. At first I failed to understand why Ms. Module made the choices she did in regards to her daughters. Afterwards I could understand, I do see this situation with a utilitarian perspective, as within a few days of signing the necessary documents to surrender her children, she relapsed and left from her treatment facility.
In ethical standards, efforts of stick to our commitment to her as a client, I failed to respect her choice, her insight to her situation and realizing that she was unable to fully commit herself to a lifestyle change and did not want her children to see her in all of the oppressive roles she took part in. I commend, respect, and admire Ms. Module for sticking to her beliefs and making the most difficult decision she could have possibly made to keep her children safe, which was stepping back and allowing them to have a chance in a different environment which did not include her to have a primary role in. I empathize with the pain this family has lived with. I will never know how Ms. Module was able to set her priorities and making the decision that she made. I have my own biases and values and imposing it on this family was a learning experience for me. It was difficult being aware of my feelings and how it possibly may have impacted the family, this was growth on my part. I have a clearer understanding of the ethical principle, “Social workers recognize the central importance of human relationships. Social workers understand that relationships between and among people are an important vehicle for change. Social workers engage people as partners in the helping process. Social workers seek to strengthen relationships among people in a purposeful effort to promote, restore, maintain, and enhance the well¬being of individuals, families, social groups, organizations, and communities.” (NASW) As social workers managing unique circumstances with everyone we cross paths with, we learn that we have ethical dilemmas we face, utilizing mindful practice with our clients will allow us to see beyond what we want to see, and provide the best casework practice while we uphold the ethical responsibilities that we have not only with our clients, but with our profession and within ourselves.

Works Cited

Epstein, Ronald M. "Mindful Practice." Journal of American Medical Association 282.9 (1999). Print.
Hepworth, Dean H. Direct Social Work Practice: Theory and Skills. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole, Cengage Learning, 2010. Print.
"Code of Ethics." National Association of Social Workers.; http://www.socialworkers.org/pubs/code/code.asp