Analysis of Ethical Considerations in Community Service Practices

This report delves into the ethical considerations surrounding confidentiality within community service practices. It analyzes the importance of maintaining client confidentiality as per the Australian Community Workers Code of ethics, the challenges of balancing confidentiality with duty of care, and the implications of using digital tools in service provision. The report examines the role of informed consent, particularly when dealing with minors or clients with diminished capacity, and highlights the exceptions to confidentiality, such as mandatory reporting. It discusses the significance of privileged communication and the need for community service workers to be aware of ethical dilemmas in their work. The report also emphasizes the importance of evidence-based practice, comprehensive documentation, and ongoing ethical training to navigate complex situations and ensure ethical service delivery. It references key studies and guidelines to support its analysis, concluding with the need for improved understanding of ethical considerations and the development of robust ethical frameworks.

Running head: ETHICS AND PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE
ETHICS AND PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author note:

1ETHICS AND PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE
Introduction
Community service workers have been focusing on efficiently maintaining of
confidentiality in their practice. Confidentiality can be explicitly explained as form of regulation
in terms of legal and ethical, which safeguards the clients’ right of confidentiality. According to
Reame (2015), in community services, Community service workers are committed to safeguard
and preserve the confidentiality, truthfulness and security of clients, employees as well as
volunteer’s personal data and information (Wolf et al., 2015). Community service agencies have
been using practical efforts for safeguarding clients’ personal information and further complying
with the obligations imposed by the Australian Privacy Principles (APP). The following paper
aims to analyse ethical considerations of maintaining utmost confidentiality in Community
service practices.
Discussion
As per ethical practice guideline set by ACWA, individuals must exercise ethical
behaviour in every situation as per the Australian Community Workers Code of ethics.
Furthermore, community service workers have been efficiently distinguishing and effectively
addressing ethical issues related to violations of confidentiality, discretion and professional
limitations, which may take place while using digital tools for service provision. Furthermore,
workers in community services as per ACWA guideline have been working in relation to child
protection, the importance of duty of care associations have been depending greatly on the
information of each specific case. For community workers, the practice guidelines have been
recognized as key resource for service providers as well as employers. The strategies and
indicators can be used as vital part of the duty of care procedures in order to ensure workers have
the essential competencies to maintain confidentiality of clients. Studies reveal that organized

2ETHICS AND PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE
health-care setting where community service workers identify them does not tend to determine
all of community ethical critical considerations. Karpman and Drisko (2016) mentioned in their
studies that before the concept of managed care materialized, community service workers
showed incompetence in offering their clients with utmost secrecy and confidentiality.
Meanwhile, study on the fields of psychology and psychiatry revealed that clients tend to
value confidentiality from their counsellors. Moreover, particularly in the domain of clinical
work, community service workers have shown considerable deference and admiration in support
of their clients and their need for confidentiality. According to Haley et al. (2016), trust and
reliance between community service workers and client is perceived to be imperative and tends
to rely on assurance of confidentiality of community service workers. Modern community
service workers have identified that maintaining confidentiality cannot be significantly outright.
On the other hand, there can be found several exceptions to clients’ confidentiality authorities.
Banks (2016) noted that identified exceptions linked to safeguard of third parties such as
compulsory reporting of child or adult molestation in addition to clients’ threats of self-harm,
which necessitate proper revelation of confidential information. Thus, in the view of Mänttäri‐
van der Kuip (2016), clients in domain of community service have authority to relative
confidentiality. For instance, if a client has authority to secrecy in relation to her sexual
orientation, however community service workers showing tendency to reveal information
regarding severe risks and dangers to welfare and health for example considering clients’ self-
harm attitude. Privileged communication is narrower concept. In order to comprehend the
boundaries of discretion and confidentiality, community service workers must develop
acquaintances with the doctrine of privileged communication (Unguru, 2018).

3ETHICS AND PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE
Karpman and Drisko (2016) noted that rights of privileged communication, which
supposes that professional community service workers do not have the authorization to disclose
confidential information deprived of the client's agreement. In contemporary times, Community
service workers as well as other health care providers have been held to the growing demand of
informed consent principles. Meanwhile, Ragsdell, Downes and Marchant (2016) have opined
that recently introduced distance counselling in addition to additional community service, which
have been conveyed digitally, has improved obligation and ability of community service workers
in guaranteeing that clients fully recognized the characteristics of these services in addition to
their likely welfares and hazards. However, these factors can be challenging if community
service workers fail to meet clients personally or did not receive any chance of discussing issues
with clients with their informed agreement (Jordan, 2017). Meanwhile, comprehensive studies
have mentioned that critical challenges tend to arise while dealing with minors, especially when
community service workers offer unrestricted facilities. At this juncture, state regulations and
laws tend to fluctuate significantly vis-à-vis minors’ right to obtain mental health services devoid
of parental permission. It has been noted that while state and federal laws and guidelines tend to
vary in understanding and applications of informed consent principles, community service
workers show consensus regarding accomplishment of strong-arming and excessive effect,
which should be avoided while determining clients’ judgements (Wolf et al., 2015).
Considering ethical considerations, clients should possess the required ability of
providing permission. Drawing relevance to such a factor, authors claimed that minor clients
especially suffering from mental illness show inability in understanding the consent practice. On
the other hand, other clients who have been suffering from drug or substance abuse may also
exhibit inability of providing consent while sharing information. Reamer (2015) in their studies

4ETHICS AND PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE
has asserted that typically community service workers are expected to understand clients’ ability
of evaluation and making informed decisions. In addition to this, Community service workers’
are likely to distinguish significant facts and preserve information, gain current situations and
interconnect requirements. However, while evaluating ethical considerations, community service
workers assessment tends to be highly stimulating when Community service workers cooperate
with clients on digital base rather than meeting in person, thus increasing the areas of issues
regarding confirming their identity and age. Community service workers at times present
clienteles with wide-ranging, largely expressed agreement forms that tend to disrupt clients’
authority to be learned and tend to be measured as unacceptable if confronted through legal
regulations. There has been found compelling grounds for community service workers to
comprehensively document applicable information digitally (Wolf et al. 2015).
Community service workers regardless of being aware of risks associated with traditional
forms of documentation have been encountered with continual documentation challenges. In the
view of authors, Community service workers are beholden to base practice involvements on the
most easily accessible empirical evidence. Furthermore, Jordan (2017) claimed that Community
service workers must position interventions on evidence acquired from well-designed measured
studies; if there is any lack of availability of Community service workers and nonrandomized
measured trials with determined eligibility standards as well as outcome procedures and
estimations of valued authorities based on clinical experiences, imaginative revisions or reports
of expert commission. Meanwhile, authors in their studies have mentioned that Community
service workers in regular practice of their duties typically encounter ethical dilemma related to
confidentiality that are relied upon the competing standards of individual as opposed to
collective moral and upright. Ragsdell, Downes and Marchant (2016) highlighted issues

5ETHICS AND PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE
pertaining to the way Community service workers obtain ideas about ethical considerations.
Studies further accentuated that Community service workers have surpassed the focus on
practical knowledge related to the Code of Ethics to a highly comprehensive experiential
pedagogy. Thus rather than simply shedding light on Code, Community service workers must
throw light on dialogic and ontological knowledge about principles and ethics which have been
occurring in recent times in the proximity of the human encounter. At this juncture, studies have
suggested that practitioners are encountering important ethical defies during their attempt of
preserving confidentiality and secrecy while attending clients (Unguru, 2018). Moreover,
practice guidelines in recent times have been developing concurrently while continuing to make
decisions within individual acceptance of ethical practice.
Conclusion
Hence to conclude, Community service workers necessitate improved understanding of
ethical considerations and questions which they encounter in preserving client information in
addition to the attributes and nature of dilemma in addition to the process of resolution.
Additionally, Community service workers must proficiently continue their unbiased detection of
novel methods of aiding, and identifying efforts, which must fall within the domain of
Community service workers.

6ETHICS AND PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE
References
Banks, S. (2016). Everyday ethics in professional life: Social work as ethics work. Ethics and
Social Welfare, 10(1), 35-52.
Barsky, A. E., & Northern, H. (2017). Ethics and values in group work. Handbook of Social
Work with Groups, 74.
Haley, D. F., Matthews, S. A., Cooper, H. L., Haardörfer, R., Adimora, A. A., Wingood, G. M.,
& Kramer, M. R. (2016). Confidentiality considerations for use of social-spatial data on
the social determinants of health: Sexual and reproductive health case study. Social
Science & Medicine, 166, 49-56.
Jordan, S. (2017). Relationship based social work practice: the case for considering the centrality
of humour in creating and maintaining relationships. Journal of Social Work
Practice, 31(1), 95-110.
Karpman, H. E., & Drisko, J. (2016). Social media policy in social work education: A review
and recommendations. Journal of Social Work Education, 52(4), 398-408.
Mänttäri‐van der Kuip, M. (2016). Moral distress among Community service workers : The role
of insufficient resources. International Journal of Social Welfare, 25(1), 86-97.
Ragsdell, G., Downes, T., & Marchant, T. (2016). The extent and effectiveness of knowledge
management in Australian community service organisations. Journal of Knowledge
Management.
Reamer, F. G. (2015). Clinical social work in a digital environment: Ethical and risk-
management challenges. Clinical Social Work Journal, 43(2), 120-132.

7ETHICS AND PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE
Unguru, E. (2018). The Limits of Confidentiality and of the Right to Privacy: A Bioethical
Approach of Social Work. In Ethical Issues in Social Work Practice (pp. 155-173). IGI
Global.
Wolf, L. E., Patel, M. J., Williams Tarver, B. A., Austin, J. L., Dame, L. A., & Beskow, L. M.
(2015). Certificates of confidentiality: Protecting human subject research data in law and
practice. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 43(3), 594-609.