Fall 2026 SOWK 430 Week 05 - Our Values and the Code of Ethics

Fall 2026 SOWK 430 Week 05 - Getting Started with the Code of Ethics and Values in Social Work

In week five, we start to be more focused on going through the code of ethics. This week is a continuation of the discussion that began last week regarding the evolution of the code of ethics. It is also the start of some introspection on our own values and biases. On Tuesday we meet in person and work through four ethics case scenarios in small groups.

Learning objectives this week

• Identify key concepts in the NASW Code of Ethics Preamble
• Explore personal values systems
• Discuss ways in which values systems vary

Week Five Plan

Agenda

• Icebreaking Activities
• Considering Values as a Social Worker
• Practice Applying Standards

Learning Objectives

Develop connectedness within the program Apply the code of ethics to dilemmas.

Two Truths and Lie

One of the goals we have in this to have you all get to know us and us to get to know you. We thought it would be fun to a couple of rounds of two truths and lie.

Ruby goes Jacob goes Maybe 5 other students or so

Continuum: What Side of the Line Are You On

[Whole Class Activity] Opening icebreaker. Clear a lane across the room — one wall is Strongly Agree, the other Strongly Disagree, everything in between is the middle.

Read a statement, everyone moves to where they actually stand, then ask two or three people why they stopped where they did. Start trivial and escalate only into the mild end.

• Pineapple belongs on pizza.
• It is okay to be ten minutes late to a meeting.
• You should always tell a friend the truth, even when it hurts.
• Family members should care for elders at home and not put them into nursing homes.

There are all different values we might have or take on.

People can go back to seat

• As professionals in social work, where do our values come from?
• What are some of the values we take on?
• Are there competing values sometimes, and how do we make decisions?

NASW Core Values - Ethical Principles

Social workers do the following:

• Social workers’ primary goal is to help people in need and to address social problems.
• Social workers challenge social injustice.
• Social workers respect the inherent dignity and worth of the person.
• Social workers recognize the central importance of human relationships.
• Social workers behave in a trustworthy manner
• Social workers practice within their areas of competence and develop and enhance their professional expertise.

Reference - Full Text of Ethical Principles

The following broad ethical principles are based on social work’s core values of service, social justice, dignity and worth of the person, importance of human relationships, integrity, and competence. These principles set forth ideals to which all social workers should aspire.

Value:Service
Ethical Principle: Social workers’ primary goal is to help people in need and to address social problems

Social workers elevate service to others above self-interest. Social workers draw on their knowledge, values, and skills to help people in need and to address social problems. Social workers are encouraged to volunteer a portion of their professional skills without expecting significant financial return (pro bono service).

Value: Social Justice
Ethical Principle:** Social workers challenge social injustice.

Social workers pursue social change, particularly with and on behalf of vulnerable and oppressed individuals and groups of people. Social workers’ social change efforts are focused primarily on issues of poverty, unemployment, discrimination, and other forms of social injustice. These activities seek to promote sensitivity to and knowledge about oppression and cultural and ethnic diversity. Social workers strive to ensure access to needed information, services, and resources; equality of opportunity; and meaningful participation in decision-making for all people.

Value: Dignity and Worth of the Person
Ethical Principle: Social workers respect the inherent dignity and worth of the person.

Social workers treat each person in a caring and respectful fashion, mindful of individual differences and cultural and ethnic diversity. Social workers promote clients’ socially responsible self-determination. Social workers seek to enhance clients’ capacity and opportunity to change and to address their own needs. Social workers are cognizant of their dual responsibility to clients and to the broader society. They seek to resolve conflicts between clients’ interests and the broader society’s interests in a socially responsible manner, consistent with the profession’s values, ethical principles, and standards.

Value: Importance of Human Relationships
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.

Value: Integrity
Ethical Principle: Social workers behave in a trustworthy manner.

Social workers are continually aware of the profession’s mission, values, ethical principles, and ethical standards and practice in a manner consistent with them. Social workers should take measures to care for themselves professionally and personally. Social workers act honestly and responsibly and promote ethical practices within the organizations with which they are affiliated.

Value: Competence
Ethical Principle: Social workers practice within their areas of competence and develop and enhance their professional expertise.

Social workers continually strive to increase their professional knowledge and skills and to apply them in practice. Social workers should aspire to contribute to the profession’s knowledge base. (National Association of Social Workers, 2021, “Ethical Principles” para. 1)

The Four Sections of the Code

Chapter 1 walks through how the current code is put together. Worth orienting students before the scenarios.

• Preamble — the mission statement and the six core values
• Purpose of the Code — what a code of ethics can and cannot do
• Ethical Principles — one broad principle for each core value, at a high level of abstraction
• Ethical Standards — the detailed section, in six categories, some enforceable and some aspirational

The core values are deliberately not in rank order. “Core values, and the principles that flow from them, must be balanced within the context and complexity of the human experience.”

Reamer describes the standards as covering three kinds of issues: honest mistakes with ethical implications, genuinely difficult decisions, and outright misconduct. The scenarios below are mostly the middle category.

(Reamer, 2023)

Ethics Case Scenarios Discussion Groups: Small Group Activity

• Divide into four groups
• Read the scenario
• Review the standards of practice in those relevant sections
• Discuss the questions at the end
• Report back about the scenario and discussion to the whole group

[Small Group Activity] Groups take one scenario each, read the background, then work the questions. Report back to the whole class.

The standards below are all from Section 1 of the code, Ethical Responsibilities to Clients. That is next week’s reading (Reamer chapter 2), so today is a preview — the point is practicing the move from a principle to a defensible decision, not mastering the standards yet.

Framing questions for every group

• Which core value is under pressure here?
• Which standard actually applies, and what does it say rather than what do you assume it says?
• What would you do, and how would you defend it to a supervisor?

Scenario One: Social Worker and Former Teacher

Dual relationship in a rural community with few alternatives.

Rachel is a social worker practicing in a rural community where social services are limited. She receives a referral for a new client — Mr. Allen, a retired schoolteacher dealing with grief, depression, and social isolation after the recent loss of his spouse. When he arrives for his first session, Rachel recognizes him as her former high school history teacher. Their interaction was limited to the classroom over a decade ago, but she remembers him fondly as an influential figure during her teenage years. Mr. Allen sought Rachel out specifically because he feels a sense of trust and familiarity, and because options for therapy in their town are scarce.

The dilemma. Rachel is now in a dual relationship — former student and current social worker to the same person.

• The prior student-teacher relationship may blur professional boundaries and affect her clinical judgment.
• She may struggle with transference or countertransference, especially since she credits Mr. Allen for inspiring her interest in social justice.
• The client’s vulnerability and limited access to other providers complicate the decision to refer him elsewhere.

Relevant standards

• 1.06(c): Social workers should not engage in dual or multiple relationships with clients or former clients in which there is a risk of exploitation or potential harm to the client. In instances when dual or multiple relationships are unavoidable, social workers should take steps to protect clients and are responsible for setting clear, appropriate, and culturally sensitive boundaries. (Dual or multiple relationships occur when social workers relate to clients in more than one relationship, whether professional, social, or business. Dual or multiple relationships can occur simultaneously or consecutively.)
• 1.01: Commitment to clients — the social worker’s primary responsibility is to promote the well-being of the client.

Questions

• Can Rachel ethically proceed with providing therapy to Mr. Allen, given their prior relationship?
• If not, is it ethical to refer him to someone else, knowing that mental health resources in their town are very limited?
• What steps could Rachel take to minimize potential harm if she continues working with him?
• How should Rachel document and supervise this case to ensure ethical practice?

Scenario Two: Practicing Outside Area of Competence

Competence versus access. The systemic pressure is the interesting part.

David is a social worker at a community health center that has recently seen an increase in refugee clients due to resettlement in the area. The intake coordinator asks him to take on Amal, a 17-year-old recently arrived refugee from Syria, who is exhibiting symptoms of PTSD including flashbacks, nightmares, and severe anxiety. David has never worked with refugees, has no specialized training in trauma-informed care for war-affected populations or in cross-cultural mental health, and is unfamiliar with the cultural and religious norms of Amal’s background. The clinic is understaffed and no other provider is available. If David refuses, Amal may wait several months for care.

The dilemma. David wants to help and sees the urgent need, but worries his lack of experience could lead to ineffective or even harmful treatment.

Relevant standards

• 1.04(a): Social workers should provide services and represent themselves as competent only within the boundaries of their education, training, license, certification, consultation received, supervised experience, or other relevant professional experience.
• 1.04(b): Social workers should provide services in substantive areas, or use intervention techniques or approaches, that are new to them only after engaging in appropriate study, training, consultation, and supervision from people who are competent in those interventions or techniques.
• 1.04(c): When generally recognized standards do not exist with respect to an emerging area of practice, social workers should exercise careful judgment and take responsible steps to ensure the competence of their work and to protect clients from harm.
• 1.01: Commitment to clients.

Questions

• Is it ethical for David to accept a case outside of his current scope of competence in order to prevent service delay?
• What steps should David take if he chooses to accept the case (supervision, training, consultation with experts)?
• Does the client’s lack of access to other providers justify the risk of working outside one’s competency?
• How can David maintain ethical practice while navigating systemic limitations such as staff shortages and lack of specialists?

Scenario Three: Former Client, Current Relationship?

The burden of proof clause in 1.09(c) is the thing to draw out.

Tanya is a social worker who provided counseling at a community mental health center for over 10 years. About 18 months ago she worked with Chris, a 29-year-old man who came to therapy for anxiety and low self-esteem related to a difficult breakup. They met weekly for about six months, and Chris terminated services voluntarily, reporting he was doing much better. A year and a half later, Tanya runs into Chris at a local art event. They talk, keep running into each other at community events, and there is a clear mutual attraction. Chris eventually asks her out for coffee, emphasizing that he is no longer a client, that significant time has passed, and that he is interested in getting to know her personally.

The dilemma. The therapeutic relationship has ended and time has passed, but concerns remain about power imbalance, potential for harm, and the perception of impropriety within the profession and the community.

Relevant standards

• 1.09(a): Social workers should under no circumstances engage in sexual activities, inappropriate sexual communications through the use of technology or in person, or sexual contact with current clients, whether such contact is consensual or forced.
• 1.09(c): Social workers should not engage in sexual activities or sexual contact with former clients because of the potential for harm to the client. If social workers engage in conduct contrary to this prohibition, it is the social worker — not the client — who assumes the full burden of demonstrating that the former client has not been exploited, coerced, or manipulated, intentionally or unintentionally.
• 1.01: Commitment to clients.

Questions

• Does 18 months create sufficient ethical distance to consider a romantic relationship?
• Can Tanya truly assess whether a power imbalance or residual vulnerability still exists?
• What would the potential impact be on Chris, on Tanya’s professional reputation, and on the perception of the profession?
• If Tanya proceeds, what steps should she take to ensure ethical integrity and protect both parties?

Scenario Four: Friend Request from a Client

This is the one that connects back to last week’s digital period forum.

Monica is a social worker at a nonprofit that provides counseling to adolescents. Her client Maya, 17, has been attending weekly sessions for several months for anxiety and family-related issues. One evening Monica receives a friend request from Maya on Instagram. Maya’s account is public, and her posts include personal photos, emotional reflections, and comments about her family and peers — some relating to topics discussed in therapy. Monica hesitates. She is concerned about boundaries, dual relationships, and privacy, but also wonders whether rejecting the request might harm the therapeutic relationship or make Maya feel rejected or ashamed. Monica’s own personal Instagram includes photos of her family, social events, and opinions on social issues. She never discusses work online, but realizes that letting a client see her personal life could influence the professional relationship.

The dilemma. Whether to accept, ignore, or address the request in session — maintaining clear professional boundaries without damaging rapport.

Relevant standards

• 1.06(h): Social workers should avoid accepting requests from or engaging in personal relationships with clients on social networking sites or other electronic media to prevent boundary confusion, inappropriate dual relationships, or harm to clients.
• 1.06(c): Dual or multiple relationships where there is a risk of exploitation or potential harm.
• 1.06(f): Social workers should be aware that posting personal information on professional Web sites or other media might cause boundary confusion, inappropriate dual relationships, or harm to clients.
• 1.07(a): Social workers should respect clients’ right to privacy.
• 4.06(a): Social workers should make clear distinctions between statements made and actions engaged in as a private individual and as a representative of the social work profession, a professional social work organization, or the social worker’s employing agency.

Questions

• Should Monica accept Maya’s friend request on Instagram? Why or why not?
• How might accepting or rejecting the request impact the therapeutic relationship?
• What policies or boundaries should Monica establish regarding social media use with clients?
• How can Monica use this situation to model healthy boundaries and discuss digital behavior with Maya?

Debrief

[Whole Class Activity] Each group reports back.

• What standard did you land on, and was it the one you expected going in?
• Where did the group disagree?
• Which of these feels most likely to show up in your own practicum or workplace?

A value you hold near and dear to your heart

[Whole Group Activity] Share what it is and why, and post it on the poster at the front.