The update of the ethical code of social workers in Slovak Republic - a basic draft

Introduction

The ethical code denotes a set of written ethical principles, values, and standards that are relevant and normative for a specific profession, institution, or organization. The aim of this paper is to show the importance of the ethical code of social work, its basic typology, and to present a basic outline of the concept for updating the Ethical Code of social workers in the Slovak Republic.

Formulating an ethical code for helping professions—including social work—has several reasons and meanings in relation to professional practice itself, the protection of clients, social workers, the profession, and its position in society. The most important functions of the ethical code are (cf. Mátel, 2010a, pp. 58-59):

  • it serves as a guide to ethical practice for professional social workers, which is especially important for those who are beginning work in the profession;
  • it sets norms for which behavior of social workers can be judged ethically acceptable and which cannot;
  • it helps ensure the protection of clients and members of society;
  • it promotes discipline and directs professional performance;
  • it points out moral hazards arising from conflicts between private and public interests;
  • it helps deal with moral dilemmas;
  • it provides a basis for assessing complaints and a criterion for evaluating current practice;
  • it is significant for the professional identity of social work at different levels, whether academic, community, political, or societal;
  • it is one of the common denominators of diverse types of social services and an important guarantee of their quality.

Typology of ethical codes

According to the typology of deontological codes, we can distinguish ethical codes by several criteria. Given a specific profession, and therefore specific professional activity, we distinguish the ethical code of a healthcare worker, social worker, police officer, teacher, the ethical code of psychological work, etc. In relation to social work, one can distinguish the ethical code of the social worker (e.g., in Slovakia, the Czech Republic, Russia, Israel) and the ethical code of social work (e.g., in the USA, Canada, Australia, Germany, the United Kingdom). In the second case, the scope is usually broader and more complex: ethical responsibility is not limited only to the activity of the social worker but also to the external conditions of this activity, and the responsibilities of employers, national associations, and society. The author considers this form more suitable. If a social worker must or should act professionally and morally responsibly, then they need appropriate conditions for their work and, as a person, also have rights ensured by other actors in the professional activity of social work (employers, supervisors, society, etc.).

On the basis of specialization of professional activity, it is possible to distinguish from the ethical code of social work specific ethical codes for clinical social work, counseling, supervision, social prevention, management, research, probation, and mediation, among others. For example, many authors nearly identify ethics in supervision with the ethics of social work. Both share certain values, principles, and ethical responsibilities toward oneself, clients, colleagues, the workplace, the profession, and society. However, supervision as a distinct method of social work and a specific activity of social workers also requires distinct ethical attention (Mátel, Roman, 2010a). In the Slovak context, no ethical code has yet been codified for social work supervision specifically (cf. Schavel, Tomka, 2010, p. 84). Change can be made in two ways—through a dedicated ethical code or through specific sections in a more broadly conceptualized ethical code of social work.

A very important criterion of ethical code typology is also the scope of its reach. In this case, we distinguish international (supranational) ethical codes, national ethical codes, and ethical codes of organizations, firms, or institutions. In this paper, we will not focus specifically on the latter, though they are very important in social work. Ethical codes of individual social service institutions can draw on the core values, principles, and responsibilities generally formulated in national and international ethical codes and apply them to specific client groups and the specific context of a given organization. Agreement with them can be part of an employment contract, which changes the character of the ethical code from a recommendation (as is the current Ethical Code of social workers in the Slovak Republic) to a binding document, at least within a specific organization.

International and supranational associations of individual professions seek to formulate core ethical principles and values into the form of an “international ethical code.” In social work, this role is fulfilled by the International Federation of Social Workers (IFSW, http://www.ifsw.org), which in its current form emerged in Munich in 1956. This organization, based in Bern, Switzerland, brings together national social work associations worldwide. In matters of education and ethics, it cooperates closely with the International Association of Schools of Social Work (IASSW, http://www.iassw-aiets.org). A current international ethical code for social work can presently be considered the joint IFSW/IASSW document “Ethics in Social Work: A Statement of Principles” (http://www.ifsw.org/p38001872.html), adopted in 2004. Historically, the earlier important document was “Principles and Standards for Social Work Ethics” (http://www.ifsw.org/p38000020.html) (1994), which in turn drew on the IFSW Ethical Code of 1976. The referenced international ethical code of social work (1994) was in practice composed of two documents: the “International Declaration on Ethical Principles for Social Work” and the “International Ethical Standards for Social Workers.” Their purpose was to present the basic ethical principles of the profession, to recommend procedures when ethical dilemmas occur, and to address the relationships between the profession of social work and social workers with clients, colleagues, employers, and other members of society. The new document “Ethics in Social Work: A Statement of Principles” (2004) is their substantial revision. It sets out core ethical principles with brief commentary. These should be formulated more clearly and contextually by national social work associations in each country, taking into account local legislation, culture, and other specifics (cf. Mátel, 2010a, pp. 59-60).

National ethical codes of individual countries illustrate broad diversity in details such as types and forms of social services, approaches to them, fee payment methods, and the participation of service users in research. National ethical codes of social work, or of social workers, are usually formed by the national social work association, which is a member of the IFSW. This function was at one time fulfilled in practice by the Slovak Association of Social Workers, founded in 1994. At a conference in Žilina in 1997 it declared the Ethical Code of Social Workers in the Slovak Republic in line with then-current IFSW Principles and Standards (1994). At that time, it was the first and to this day the only ethical code of social workers in Slovakia, and it has a recommendatory character.

Why is an update of the ethical code needed?

One striking statement of the postmodern era runs: “Nothing is more unnecessary than yesterday’s newspaper.” This is not a denial of the importance of history or historical events, but of the need to continuously reflect contemporary developments in society. Social work, as a profession, academic discipline, and field of education, is relatively young, but precisely because it constantly strives to respond flexibly to current client needs—clients being an individual, a family, a community, an organization, or society—it has become one of the most dynamic professions of our time. The more promptly and appropriately it responds to what is happening in society, the more effectively it can offer preventive measures and systematic support in addressing the harmful consequences of social events.

The question is whether dynamic social changes affect core values, moral principles, and individual ethical responsibilities. Different ethical philosophical approaches would answer this differently, but I will not treat these in detail here. In any case, what changes independently of philosophical concepts is:

  • new global ethical issues linked to technological development or new social events (e.g., bioethical questions related to genetic engineering; ethics of online communication; the development of international terrorism and potential misuse of charity and social work for this purpose);
  • new ethical problems and dilemmas associated with professional practice (e.g., the question of the responsibility of social service institutions for preparing new social workers, which can be identified as an ethical obligation to cooperate with schools of social work);
  • changing value orientations (e.g., in social work, moving away from paternalistic and religious orientations toward clinical orientation, orientation toward social justice, or, most currently, toward a legitimate defensive orientation in which client rights are prioritized while social workers’ rights are also taken into account);
  • identifying and formulating general human rights (e.g., emphasizing anti-discrimination approaches, the right to work, the right to sexual orientation);
  • identifying and formulating ethical principles in professional activity based on new research and theories (e.g., holistic approach, emphasis on client strengths);
  • development and transformation of social services (e.g., in Slovakia, the shift in alternative family care from institutional care to family-based substitute upbringing);
  • changes in legislation, which create something like a “minimum behavioral standard” that is also binding for professional ethics (e.g., legislation on discrimination, corruption, personal data protection, and in Slovakia the legal definition of a social worker under Act No. 448/2008 Z. z., which can conflict with the minimum age set by IFSW);
  • although many ethical values and principles of social work may be timeless, the way they are formulated is subject to changes in social and professional language and thinking (e.g., the term “help to self-help” is often replaced by empowerment, corresponding to the English term empowerment).

Updating the social work ethical code in Slovakia – basic outline

From the reasons above it is clear that every ethical code is a time-limited document that requires systematic evaluation. Responsibility for this primarily lies with social workers themselves, for whom the deontological code is intended to support professional practice. For an ethical code to fulfill all its objectives, it must be regularly updated. This update depends on several factors, including:

  1. institutional support;
  2. staffing support by experts and specialists in social work and professional ethics;
  3. conceptual processing, taking into account: a) the current international ethical code (currently IFSW/IASSW 2004), b) the specifics of social work in Slovakia, c) current international and national legislation.

Institutional support for updating the ethical code is one of the fundamental problems in Slovakia. Given the historical context, the Slovak Association of Social Workers, a member organization of the IFSW and within it the association under which the current ethical code of social workers was formed and declared, would be the most suitable position. Unfortunately, this association currently shows almost no activity in Slovakia, neither toward IFSW. This means that there is no real institution to initiate, promote, and carry out a revision and update of the social work ethical code. The question is whether it is possible and appropriate to reactivate the ASP’s activities in Slovakia, or whether another form of institutional support should be sought. In the latter case, it is worth considering whether it would be more appropriate to develop a newer ethical code within state administration (under the auspices of MPSVaR) or within one of the active non-governmental organizations, with the caveat that these typically represent only a specific subgroup within social work (e.g., the Association of Educators in Social Work in Slovakia; the Association of Supervisors and Social Counselors; the Association of Social Service Providers). An advantage of these associations is their broad pool of experts in social work and professional ethics. A possible alternative would be a joint preparatory ethical committee composed of experts—representatives of public administration and NGOs—under the auspices of MPSVaR. In this context, it is useful to note that Slovakia lacks a professional self-governing organization of social workers, including one strong umbrella association with an ethics committee. A draft law establishing the Slovak Chamber of Social Workers was previously prepared by Štefan Strieženec (2006). Unfortunately, after his sudden death, no such institution has so far been established (Mátel, Roman, 2010c). In this institutional vacuum, it would be useful to combine especially the human resources of experts from education, clinical social work, social services, and ethics from different institutions, who have a serious interest in improving the quality of social work and social service provision through development of professional ethics. In a shared dialogue, opportunities for finding a suitable institutional solution increase.

Based on the formulation of the current ethical code, several fundamental conceptual questions are important for professional discussion:

  1. Should we continue with the ethical code of social workers, or would it be more suitable to adopt a broader conception of the ethical code of social work?
  2. Would this be an update of the 1997 ethical code, retaining structure and key sections, or would it be better to create a completely new ethical code?
  3. Is it appropriate that essential (key) values and principles of social work be distinguished as the constitutive basis of individual responsibilities?
  4. Through which mechanism can the ethical code of social work be made binding for social workers, counselors, and supervisors in Slovakia?

In older forms of ethical codes, clearly formulated general ethical principles—serving as the basis for specific rules of ethical conduct—were often absent. Currently, several major national social work codes (e.g., the American NASW code /2008/; the Canadian CASW code, http://www.casw-acts.ca /CASW 2005/; the British BASW code, http://www.basw.co.uk/about/codeofethics /BASW 2002/) have a structure in which key starting points are identified social work values and principles. In the well-known Social Work Dictionary (2003, p. 453), Barker defines values as “habits, beliefs, standards of behavior, and principles regarded as desirable by a group of people, a culture, or an individual.” Values are a source of motivation and strongly influence our sense of life and goals we seek to achieve during life (Loran, 2009, p. 92). In social work and other helping professions, values shape both the nature of the work and the nature of the relationship between worker and client, colleagues among themselves, and broader society. Within individual professions, ethics experts typically try to distinguish the values most central to performance in that profession, without which something essential would be missing. Values are also very important in resolving ethical problems and dilemmas. The examination of values therefore currently belongs among the most important topics in the ethics of helping professions (Mátel, Roman, 2010b). If professional consensus is reached in a community around their selection, these tend to be the core of that country’s or institution’s professional ethical code. For example, the American National Association of Social Workers (NASW) identified six key values included in the American code of social work (2008): 1. service, 2. social justice, 3. dignity and worth of the person, 4. importance of human relationships, 5. integrity, 6. competence. By comparison, the British Association of Social Workers identified and included in its ethical code BASW (2002) the same five core values, except for the importance of human relationships. The Canadian Association of Social Workers adds confidentiality in professional practice to the previous five key values in its ethical code (2005). IFSW has repeatedly identified two principles, i.e., values, as fundamental to social work: respect for human rights and social justice (cf. the definition of social work at the General Assembly in Montreal, 2000). The European social model in the European Union is based on respect for basic human values, namely dignity, freedom, rights, solidarity, and participation. Social services of European states must respect these values (Tomeš, 2010, p. 37).

If Slovakia were to follow the route of identifying key values and principles of social work, it would be methodologically appropriate to prepare and carry out research in this area. Additional goals of empirical research could be oriented toward identifying specific characteristics of social work ethics in Slovakia, including ethical demands of social workers. The identification of national specificities would be a conceptual track that should proceed in parallel with textual analysis of the current international ethical code (IFSW/IASSW), taking into account national ethical codes of countries with long-standing experience in this area (especially NASW, BASW) and countries culturally close to us (especially the Czech Republic and their current code from 2006). Important international documents and current legislation in the Slovak Republic should also be part of textual analysis. International declarations and human rights conventions formulate general standards and point to rights accepted by the global community (IFSW/IASSW, 2004, Art. 3). The scientific tools for a new or renewed ethical code would therefore be empirical research focused on specific values, principles, and responsibilities of social workers (social work) in Slovakia and textual analysis of relevant ethical, legal, international, and national documents. These would form the scientific basis for a working group of experts.

If we were to follow the structure of the current Ethical Code of Social Workers in the Slovak Republic (1997), in the individual ethical responsibilities, the following topics would also deserve discussion and review:

Ethical responsibility toward oneself – this area is currently quite deficient in Slovakia. In newer deontological codes, social workers are often required to care for their professional growth. However, this also requires access to professional development tools and systemic support from institutions, especially employers’ responsibilities for social workers in continuing education, trainings, and supervision (Mátel, Roman, 2010c).

Ethical responsibility toward clients – extraordinary attention in international and national ethical codes is usually paid to respecting human rights. The requirement of equal treatment and anti-discrimination is an integral part of almost all ethical codes (unfortunately except the Slovak one). Explicit attention in most deontological codes is also devoted to professional boundaries, sexual and intimate relationships. Some national codes directly address the issue of sexual abuse and sexual violence, where this is not only a violation of ethical principles but also violent criminal conduct and abuse of professional position (Mátel, 2010b).

Ethical responsibility toward the workplace – this does not include only employees (social workers) but also employers. Traditionally, this section is titled “ethical responsibility toward employers.” Ethical requirements here, however, must be reciprocal because ethical responsibility is not borne only by employees but also by employers (often social workers as well). In relation to colleagues, some ethical principles regarding consultation and supervision may be regulated in deontological codes. For example, in the American ethical code (NASW, 2008), with regard to supervisors in social work, it is explicitly stated that they must establish clear, appropriate, culturally sensitive boundaries and must not become involved in any dual or multiple relationships with supervisees in which there is a risk of abuse or potential harm (Mátel, Roman, 2010a).

Ethical responsibility toward the profession – it is very important to explicitly state responsibility toward schools of social work and ethical rules of research in social work (Mátel, 2010c). In Slovakia, students of social work and also higher-education assistant practitioners who ensure professional practice placement for them often encounter refusal and negative attitudes from managers in social service institutions, for example: “We have too much work... not enough staff... no one will have time... They will just be a hindrance...” (Mátel, 2010a, p. 96).

Ethical responsibility toward society – the decisive terms in international terminology are social inclusion and exclusion. International ethical principles IFSW/IASSW (2004) state that social workers have a duty to face social conditions that contribute to social exclusion, stigmatization, or oppression and to work toward an inclusive society. National ethical codes in this section address social workers’ responsibilities at the whole-society and political level.

Conclusion

Updating the ethical code of social work is an extremely urgent challenge in Slovakia and is closely connected to the quality of social service delivery. A key problem in this area is the institutional vacuum, as there is no organization that would initiate, promote, and carry out this process. The proposal presented here is therefore to initiate this process by several experts from the fields of social work and professional ethics who would create an interinstitutional working group. Scientific tools for updating the ethical code would be empirical research focused on specific values, principles, and responsibilities of social workers (social work) in Slovakia and textual analysis of relevant ethical, legal, international, and national documents. Discussion and reconsideration should be conducted in several areas and topics, including ethical responsibility toward oneself, the workplace, and schools of social work, as well as respect for human dignity, anti-discrimination, professional boundaries in relationships, and others. Particular attention should be paid to research, supervision, and clinical social work.

Author: PhDr. ThDr. ThLic. Andrej Mátel, PhD. List of bibliographic references

[1] BARKER, R. L. 2003. The Social Work Dictionary. 5th Ed. Washington, DC : NASW, 2003. 493 p. ISBN 0-87101-355-X. [2] British Association of Social Workers. 2002. The Code of Ethics for Social Work. Birmingham : BASW, 2002. 16 p. [3] Canadian Association of Social Workers. 2005. Code of Ethics. Ottawa : CASW, 2005. [4] International Federation of Social Workers. 1994. The ethics of social work: Principles and standards. Geneva : IFSW, 1994. [5] International Federation of Social Workers. 2004. Ethics in social work: Statement of principles. Geneva : IFSW, 2004. [6] LORAN, T. 2009. Paradigma kreovania ľudského kapitálu Rómov. Bratislava : SPN, 2009. 170 s. ISBN 978-80-89225-56-9. [7] MÁTEL, A. et al. 2010a. Etika sociálnej práce. Bratislava : VŠZaSP sv. Alžbety, 2010. 183 s. ISBN 978-80-89271-85-6. [8] MÁTEL, A. 2010b. Etická zodpovednosť voči klientom. In: Dni sociálnej práce a InteRRa 8. Zborník z konferencie s medzinárodnou účasťou konanej na UKF v Nitre. Nitra : FSVaZ UKF, 2010. ISBN 978-80-8094-650-0, pp. 162-174. [9] MÁTEL, A. 2010c. Etické aspekty výskumu. In: Výchova a vzdelávanie v ošetrovateľstve zamerané na rozširujúcu rolu sestry - sestra výskumníčka, Varia. Zborník z XII. vedeckej konferencie s medzinárodnou účasťou. Skalica : VŠZaSP sv. Alžbety, 2010. ISBN 978-80-89271-82-5, pp. 101-110. [10] MÁTEL, A. 2010d. Etické hodnoty a princípy relevantné pre sociálnu prácu s rómskym etnikom. In: Dialóg ako cesta spolužitia. Zborník z vedeckej konferencie s medzinárodnou účasťou. Ružomberok : Verbum, 2010. ISBN 978-80-8084-538-4, pp. 132-138. [11] MÁTEL, A. – ROMAN, T. 2010a. Etika v supervízii – kľúčové hodnoty a vybrané etické dorazy. In: Prohuman, odborný internetový časopis. [online 2010-30-09]. Dostupné na internete: < http://www.prohuman.sk/socialna-praca/etika-v-supervizii%E2%80%93klucove-hodnoty-a-vybrane-eticke-dorazy >. ISSN 1338-1415. [12] MÁTEL, A. – ROMAN, T. 2010b. Konflikty hodnôt v pomáhajúcich profesiách. In: Človek a hodnoty. Zborník z vedeckej konferencie s medzinárodnou účasťou. Trnava : Inštitút existenciálnej psychológie a noo-logoterapie, FF TU, 2010. V tlači. Abstrakt In: NANIŠTOVÁ, E. – HALAMA, P. (Eds.) Zborník abstraktov z vedeckej konferencie s medzinárodnou účasťou „Človek a hodnoty“, Trnava : Inštitút existenciálnej psychológie a noo-logoterapie, FF TU, 2010. ISBN 978-80-970471-0-8, p. 19. [13] MÁTEL, A. – ROMAN, T. 2010c. Zodpovednosť sociálneho pracovníka voči seba a defenzívna orientácia v sociálnej práci. In: Rizika sociální práce. Sborník z konference VII. Hradecké dny sociální práce. Hradec Králové : Gaudeamus. V tisku. [14] SCHAVEL, M. – TOMKA, M. 2010. Základy supervízie a supervízia v praktickej výučbe v sociálnej práci. Bratislava : VŠZaSP sv. Alžbety, 2010. 193 s. ISBN 978-80-89271-87-0. [15] STRIEŽENEC, Š. 2006. Teória a metodológia sociálnej práce. Trnava : Tripsoft, 2006. 296 s. ISBN 80-969390-4-1. [16] TOMEŠ, I. 2010. Úloha sociálních služeb v evropských systémech sociální ochrany. In Dni sociálnej práce a InteRRa 8. Zborník z konferencie s medzinárodnou účasťou konanej na UKF v Nitre. Nitra : FSVaZ UKF, 2010. ISBN 978-80-8094-650-0, pp. 30-42.

The lecture was delivered at an international scientific conference Applied Ethics in Social Work and Other Helping Professions, which took place on 20–21 October 2010 in Piešťany and was published in the proceedings of that conference: MÁTEL, A. – SCHAVEL, M. – MÜHLPACHR, P. – ROMAN, T. 2010. Aplikovaná etika v sociálnom práci a ďalších pomáhajúcich profesiách. Zborník z medzinárodnej vedeckej konferencie. Bratislava : VŠZaSP sv. Alžbety. 413 s. ISBN 978-80-89271-89-4.