Although for most social workers accustomed to working with authority, there is little hesitation in embodying effectively this factor within the stream of social work practice, there are for other social workers not well acquainted with this concept, many moral dilemmas in an area heavily structured with authoritarian standards. The social worker is confronted by such issues as—how can one help a person who rejects the intrusion of others in his life, without diminishing the dignity of that individual? How can one avoid the autocratic qualities of direction and the threatening constraint over behaviour which can not only demean, but also rob a person of making an unfettered choice? Is it possible to aid constructively the development of attitudes which line up with what society demands, when, for example, the individual knows that his liberty or the receipt of welfare assistance, or the custody of members of his own family, is contingent on his strict conformity with the advice of the social worker? Is there ethical justification for involvement in a situation where the client cannot withdraw without often serious personal loss and where frequently there is not full comprehension on his part of what conditional liberty, or the granting of assistance, or compliance with social sanction, means by way of his own commitment to the relationship?
Tijdschrift beschrijving