Revision of the Code of Ethics of Social Workers in the Slovak Republic

A code of ethics denotes a set of written ethical principles, values, and standards that are relevant and normative for a given profession, institution, or organization. The aim of this article is to highlight the importance of the code of ethics in social work, its basic typology, and to present a basic outline of the concept for revising the Code of Ethics of Social Workers in the Slovak Republic.

Typology of Codes of Ethics

Within the typology of deontological codes, we can distinguish codes of ethics based on several criteria. With regard to a specific profession or professional activity, we distinguish the code of ethics of a healthcare worker, social worker, police officer, teacher, code of ethics for psychological practice, etc. With regard to social work, one can distinguish between a code of ethics for social workers (e.g., in Slovakia, the Czech Republic, Russia, Israel) and a code of ethics for social work (e.g., in the USA, Canada, Australia, Germany, Great Britain). In the latter case, the scope is usually broader and more comprehensive; ethical responsibility is not limited exclusively to the activity of the social worker themselves, but also encompasses the external conditions of this activity, the responsibilities of employing organizations, national associations, and society. The author of this article considers this form more appropriate. If a social worker must or ought to act professionally and morally responsibly, they need suitable conditions for their work, and as a person they also have rights that are ensured by other actors in the process of professional social work activity (employers, supervisors, society, etc.). Within an interdisciplinary conception of the social worker's work, ethical responsibility for the procedures used to alleviate disability and support persons with various types, degrees, and combinations of disabilities, and for one's approach, is essential (Hučík, Hučíková, 2010).

Based on the specialization of professional activity, it is possible to distinguish from the code of ethics of social work specific codes of ethics for clinical social work, counseling, supervision, social prevention, management, research, probation and mediation, etc. For example, many authors almost 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. Supervision as a distinct method of social work and a specific activity of social workers, however, also requires specific ethical attention (Mátel, Roman, 2010). In the conditions of the Slovak Republic, however, a code of ethics specifically codified for supervision in social work does not exist (cf. Schavel, Tomka, 2010, p. 84). Change can be achieved in two ways – through a separate code of ethics or through specific sections within a more broadly conceived code of ethics of social work.

A very important criterion in the typology of codes of ethics is also the territorial scope of their application. In this case, we distinguish international (supranational) codes of ethics, national codes of ethics, and codes of ethics of organizations, companies, or facilities. The last of these will not be specifically addressed in this article, although they are very important in social work. It is precisely the codes of ethics of individual social service facilities that can build upon the basic values, principles, and responsibilities generally formulated in national and international codes of ethics and apply them to specific target groups of clients and the specifics of the given organization. Consent to them can be part of the employment contract, thereby changing the character of the code of ethics from a recommendation (which the Code of Ethics of Social Workers in the SR has so far) into a binding document, at least within the given organization.

International and supranational associations of individual professions strive to formulate basic ethical principles and values in the form of an "international code of ethics." In social work, this role is fulfilled by the International Federation of Social Workers (IFSW), which in its current form was established in Munich in 1956. This organization, headquartered in Bern, Switzerland, brings together national social work associations worldwide. In matters of education and ethics, it works very closely with the International Association of Schools of Social Work (IASSW). Currently, the joint IFSW/IASSW document Ethics in Social Work – Statement of Principles (or Declaration of Ethical Principles of Social Work), adopted in 2004, can be considered the current international code of ethics of social work. Historically, preceding it were the important Principles and Standards of Ethics in Social Work (1994), which in turn were based on the IFSW code of ethics from 1976. The aforementioned international code of ethics of social work (1994) consisted de facto of two documents – the International Declaration of Ethical Principles of Social Work and the International Ethical Standards for Social Workers. Their purpose was to present the basic ethical principles of the social work profession, to recommend procedures for dealing with ethical dilemmas, and to address relationships between the social work profession and social workers towards clients, colleagues, employers, and other members of society. The new document Ethics in Social Work – Statement of Principles (2004) is a fundamental revision of them. It contains briefly formulated ethical principles with a short commentary. These should be formulated in greater detail and more specifically by national social work associations in individual countries, taking into account local legislation, culture, and other specifics (cf. Mátel, 2010a, pp. 59-60).

National codes of ethics of individual countries illustrate great diversity in details such as the types and forms of social services, approaches to them, methods of payment of fees, or user participation in research. National codes of ethics of social work or social workers are usually created by the national social work association that is a member of the IFSW. This function was for a time actually fulfilled in our country by the Association of Social Workers in Slovakia, founded in 1994. In Žilina in 1997, it declared the Code of Ethics of Social Workers of the Slovak Republic in accordance with the then-current IFSW Principles and Standards of Ethics in Social Work (1994). At that time, it was the first and so far only code of ethics of social workers in Slovakia, and it has a recommendatory character.

Why is a revision of the code of ethics necessary?

One of the apt sayings of the postmodern era is: "There is nothing more unnecessary than yesterday's newspaper." This is not about denying the importance of history or historical events, but about the need for constant reflection on current events in society. Social work as a profession, scientific discipline, and field of education is relatively young, but precisely because it constantly strives to respond flexibly to the current needs of its clients – who may be an individual, family, group, community, organization, or society – it is becoming one of the most dynamic professions of today. The more promptly and specifically it responds to events in society, the more effectively it offers preventive measures and systematic assistance in addressing the negative impacts of social events.

The question is whether dynamic changes in society also affect basic values, moral principles, and individual ethical responsibilities. Different philosophical schools of ethics would answer this question in various ways, which I will not address in detail in this article. In any case, what changes independently of philosophical conceptions are:

• new global ethical themes linked to the development of technologies or new social events (e.g., bioethical questions related to the development of genetic engineering; ethics of internet communication; the rise of international terrorism and the potential misuse of charitable-social work for this purpose);
• new ethical problems and dilemmas related to the performance of the profession (e.g., the question of the responsibility of social service facilities for the preparation of new social workers, which can be identified as an ethical duty to cooperate with schools of social work);
• changing value orientations (e.g., in social work, moving away from a paternalistic and religious orientation towards a clinical orientation, a focus on social justice, or most recently towards a legitimate defensive orientation, where alongside the priority of clients' rights, the rights of social workers are also taken into account);
• identification and formulation of general human rights (e.g., emphasizing an anti-discriminatory approach, the right to work, the right to sexual orientation);
• identification and formulation of 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, in alternative family care, the transition from institutional care to a family-type alternative upbringing);
• changes in legislation, which also creates a kind of "minimum standard of behavior" binding for professional ethics (e.g., legislation on discrimination, corruption, personal data protection; in Slovakia, also the definition of a social worker according to Act No. 448/2008 Coll., which may conflict with the minimum age set by the IFSW);
• although many ethical values and principles of social work may be timeless, the way they are formulated is subject to changes in the thinking and language of the given society and professional community (e.g., the phrase "help for self-help" is often replaced by the term strengthening and empowerment, which corresponds to the English term empowerment).

From the above reasons, it is clear that every code of ethics is a time-limited document requiring systematic evaluation. Responsibility for it lies primarily with the social workers themselves, whom the deontological code is intended to assist in the performance of their profession. For a code of ethics to be a document that fulfills all its stated objectives, it must be regularly revised and updated. Revision depends on several factors, such as:

1. institutional support;
2. staffing by experts and specialists in social work and professional ethics;
3. conceptual processing, which includes: a. a procedural concept, b. a content concept, c. a structural concept.

Methodological Introduction to the Research

In November 2010, the author of this article conducted research aimed at presenting a conceptual proposal for the revision of the code of ethics of social workers in the Slovak Republic as a relevant part of its change or update.

The basic research question was formulated as follows: "How to carry out the revision of the Code of Ethics of Social Workers in the SR in terms of content, structure, and procedural approach? What could a revised code of ethics contain in terms of content concept, what structure is most appropriate for it, and what procedural approach can be proposed for carrying out its revision?"

The research problem was to determine the content, structural, and procedural approaches for revising the Code of Ethics of Social Workers in the SR, particularly identifying the key values, ethical principles, specific activities, areas of ethical responsibility, and ethical norms that could form part of the content of the revised code.

From a methodological standpoint, the author chose a qualitative strategy. The method used was document analysis, defined as a qualitative-interpretive analysis for processing existing material according to the research objective. The research sample consisted of 15 selected international and national codes of ethics of social work.(1) Various hermeneutic methods were used in the analysis of the materials, particularly structural, linguistic-syntactic, semantic, pragmatic, and content analysis.

In analyzing the codes of ethics, the author paid attention to the following external and internal features of the examined documents:

1. Scope of the document
2. Form of the electronic document
3. Information about the process of its creation/revision
4. Official title of the document and the institution/association responsible for the text
5. Type of code
6. Sources used
7. Basic structure of the document
8. Declared objectives and significance of the code
9. Binding nature and sanctions for non-compliance
10. Specific areas of social work addressed (or not)
11. Identified (key) values and/or principles
12. Areas of responsibility
13. Ethical rules

Data management was carried out in three phases, during which data fixation and scaling were performed on a constructed matrix.

Importance of the Code of Ethics

The formulation of a code of ethics for social work has several reasons and significances with respect to the professional activity itself, the protection of clients, social workers, the profession, and its position in society. The examined codes of ethics directly state 20 objectives and significances in the text (the number of codes in the research sample is given in parentheses if greater than 1):

1. Provides ethical standards to serve as a guide for the practice of social work and for the responsible delivery of services (8).
2. Identification and explicit presentation of the key values of social work that are an integral part of it (7).
3. Promotes ethical discussion and reflection (5).
4. The code of ethics is an essential component of the quality of service provided to clients, as well as a means for its achievement and assurance (4).
5. Provides standards by which professional behavior can be evaluated and assessed (3).
6. Offers values and principles that should guide the professional conduct of social workers – how to interpret and apply these values and principles (3).
7. Provides guidance on how to proceed when choosing methods, or recommends procedures when ethical dilemmas, ethical problems, or professional conflicts arise (3).
8. Formulation and explicit presentation of the basic ethical principles of the social work profession and standards of professional conduct (2).
9. Publicly presents the ethical standards by which the public can consider the social work profession accountable (2).
10. Deepens ethical awareness.
11. Provides a foundation for the professional identity of social work.
12. Maintains high standards of professional work.
13. Places ethical behavior at the center of the profession's interest.
14. Identifies problem areas in practical social work.
15. Provides a basis for reviewing and assessing formal complaints about unethical conduct.
16. Provides social workers with a foundation for ethical reflection and for making ethically responsible decisions.
17. Guides social workers by establishing mutual rights with employers, colleagues, and the professional association.
18. Provides clarification of social workers' behavior in the context of labor or legal disputes.
19. Facilitates the socialization of new social workers with regard to the mission, values, ethical principles, and standards of social work.
20. Is an important part of the education of social workers.

The Slovak code of ethics is among the 20% of codes that do not clearly and explicitly state the significance and objectives of the code. The question is what awareness social workers have of the importance of a written formulation of a code of ethics. It is precisely the insufficient awareness of its relevance that may be one of the reasons for its neglect and lack of updating. The author proposes that the significance and purpose of the code for the profession of social work, social services, and social workers be directly and explicitly incorporated into the revised code of ethics.

PROCEDURAL CONCEPT

The process of creating or revising a code of ethics is usually very closely linked to the national social work association. Of the 13 national codes examined (we do not include the IFSW codes here), national associations are responsible for the creation and/or revision of the code in 12 cases (a 93% share). The exception is the Italian code of ethics, where the Codice deontologico dell'Assistente Sociale was created and revised by the Ordine Assistenti sociali, a state institution responsible for the exercise of the social work profession in Italy. It falls within its competence to create and evaluate the deontological code of social work, a binding document for registered social workers in Italy.

Unfortunately, it is currently the case that in Slovakia there is no real institution that would initiate, push forward, and actually carry out the revision and updating of the code of ethics of social work. Together with Brnula (2010), the author reflected on the institutional possibilities:

a) In view of historical continuity, the most suitable position would be held by the Association of Social Workers in Slovakia, which is a member organization of the IFSW and within which the current code of ethics of social workers was created and declared. Unfortunately, this association currently shows almost no activity in Slovakia, nor towards the IFSW, and therefore has the status of a "provisional member" of the IFSW, which is no longer a form of full membership. The question is whether it is possible and appropriate to revive the activity of ASP in Slovakia, or to seek other institutional arrangements.

b) Among alternative non-governmental organizations, only those that actually show active activity (unlike ASP) come into consideration. According to the author, these include, for example, the Association of Educators in Social Work in Slovakia (AVSP); the Association of Supervisors and Social Counselors (ASSP); and the relatively young Association of Providers of Social Services (APSS). The advantage of these associations is that they have a broad potential of experts in social work and professional ethics. On the other hand, each of them has a limited scope of operation, whether in education, counseling and supervision, or the provision of social services. None of them is universal for all social workers in Slovakia.

c) In this context, it is worth noting that Slovakia lacks a professional organization of social workers, including one strong umbrella association with an ethics committee. The idea of establishing a Chamber of Social Workers in Slovakia has been around for some time. The activities of Štefan Strieženec in this regard are known, dating back to the end of the 1990s. Unfortunately, the atmosphere in Slovakia has still not been conducive to the establishment of such an organization. For a professional association "umbrellaing" its members to be created, not only the work on its establishment is necessary, but also a political climate that would support such a proposal. It is precisely in this direction that we see an opportunity for involvement in the AVSP. Its members could help establish the chamber by opening a discussion not only in professional but also in political circles. Štefan Strieženec (2006) even included a specific draft law on the establishment of a chamber of social workers as Appendix IX in his publication. This could be considered at least a model on which to work for the creation of this organization. Unfortunately, after Strieženec's sudden death, no similar institution has yet been established.

d) Given the deficit in the non-governmental sector, it is worth considering whether it would be more appropriate to develop a newer code of ethics within the state administration, for example under the auspices of the Ministry of Labour, Social Affairs and Family of the SR, where most of the performance of social work within the state administration currently falls. This would follow the "Italian model" with respect to the research sample examined. However, this requires a favorable "political atmosphere."

Institutional provision for the updating of the code of ethics in Slovakia is therefore one of the fundamental problems. A possible alternative proposed by the author would be a joint ethical working group consisting of experts – representatives of public administration and non-governmental organizations – under the auspices of the Association of Educators in Social Work and the MPSVaR. Within the existing institutional vacuum, it would be appropriate to combine especially the human potential of experts from the fields of education, clinical social work, social services, and ethics from various institutions who have a serious interest in increasing the quality of social work and social service provision through the development of professional ethics. Through joint dialogue, the possibilities of finding a suitable institutional solution will increase.

Based on good practice experience gained from the research, it is appropriate to establish one "expert group" coordinated by one person (in our case, an "ethical working group"). If this group is officially delegated by a national association, it is usually called a revision committee (currently inapplicable in Slovakia). It may invite an expert – a specialist from another country or the IFSW (worth considering).

According to the experience of several national associations,(2) three phases of the national code of ethics revision process can be distinguished.

1. Study phase – critical study of relevant literature in the field of professional ethics, source literature, and identification of important concepts. In this phase, research analysis of relevant documents, particularly selected codes of ethics, may take place under the auspices of a research team. The author's presented work represents precisely this stage. The output of this phase is usually the creation of a basic concept for a new code or a revision of an older one.
2. Suggestions and comments phase – all important institutions and organizations are invited to actively participate in the revision of the code.
3. Revision phase – comments are reviewed by the commission and incorporated into the text of the working draft. At its end, a final text is formulated, which will be considered by the highest body of the national association (usually the general assembly). After its approval, the revised document comes into effect according to an agreed date.

Closely related to the first phase is the question of identifying usable SOURCES for the revision of the code of ethics. Within the research sample, 12 codes cite at least one source. The sources cited in the codes can be divided into four basic groups:

1. International documents (9 codes) – of a human rights nature, especially the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other documents derived from it; the Swiss code also cites the European Social Charter;
2. International code of ethics (11 codes) – all national codes citing at least one source mention the international code of ethics, whether in its current form or an older version, depending on whether they are codes from before 2004 or after;
3. National codes of ethics of other countries (3 codes) – the source codes include the American NASW 2008 (drawn upon by the Canadian, Australian, and Russian codes); the Australian AASW – in its older version from 2002 (drawn upon by the Canadian, British, and Russian codes); the British BASW 2002 (drawn upon by the Russian code). The Russian code of ethics, in addition to the three codes from our research sample, also considered another four codes (Danish, Polish, Finnish, and from Lithuania);
4. National legislative documents (3 codes) – especially the Constitutions of the respective states; we can also include the Italian code of ethics created under the auspices of the state.

For the revision of the Slovak code of ethics of social workers, the identification of sources, or the four groups of sources mentioned, is important with regard to the study phase. The author recommends studying all the mentioned sources, namely:

1. International documents a) UN documents: Universal Declaration of Human Rights; International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination; Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women; Convention on the Rights of the Child; b) European Social Charter (2006) – a Council of Europe document; c) European Union documents – especially the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the Treaty of Lisbon; - International code of ethics – IFSW/IASSW 2004; - National codes of ethics of other countries – the author proposes paying particular attention to NASW 2008, AASW 2010, AS 2006, SSP ČR 2006; - National legislative documents – especially the Constitution of the SR (Act No. 460/1992 Coll.); further Act No. 365/2004 Coll. (Anti-Discrimination Act); Act No. 300/2005 Coll. (Criminal Code); Act No. 428/2002 Coll. (on Personal Data Protection); and Act No. 448/2008 Coll. (on Social Services) as amended.

CONTENT CONCEPT

Key Values of Social Work

Social work is currently understood as a profession based on values. Among the research sample, six national codes of ethics identified, named, and explicitly presented key values of social work. The international code of ethics IFSW/IASSW (2004) is specific in that it de facto identified two key values but categorized them as "fundamental principles" – human rights and human dignity and social justice. Eleven individual key values were identified in the research sample. I list them in order based on the number of occurrences:

1. Social justice (6)
2. Dignity and worth of the person (5)
3. Integrity (4) 4a. Competence (3) 4b. Service (3) 5a. Human rights (2) 5b. Humanism (2) 6a. Importance of human relationships (1: NASW 2008) 6b. Confidentiality (1: CASW 2005) 6c. Respect for persons (1: AASW 2010) 6d. Social activity, mobility, and flexibility (1: ССОПиР 2003)

From the perspective of qualitative research, it should be noted that a higher frequency represents a criterion of more general and universal acceptance from an international (supranational) standpoint, but the uniqueness of designating a particular value as key may be a sign of a national specific. Its qualitative significance is therefore no less. Along with the key values, 32 important ethical principles of social work were identified in this phase of the research.

The Slovak code of ethics belongs to the group of codes without explicit, comprehensible, and evident identification of key values. To a large extent, this is related to the older international code IFSW 1994. This state of affairs is not in line with the current trend in professional ethics that social work is a profession based on values. The author therefore proposes that the revised code of ethics identify and name the values that can be designated as key and that will form the fundamental ethical basis for the formulation of individual principles and rules of conduct. With regard to the global community, it would be appropriate to include both fundamental principles of IFSW/IASSW, namely 1) respect for human rights and human dignity; 2) promotion of social justice. Due to their relevance and frequent occurrence in national codes, two other key values deserve attention: 3) competence; 4) integrity. The question is the identification of the value(s) essential for the national context of social work in Slovakia. The Slovak code of ethics is specific – and close to NASW (2008) in this respect – with its emphasis on the primacy of service: The social worker considers serving as the primary commitment in their work (1.C).

Areas of Responsibility and Ethical Standards of Conduct

In the entire research set, 6 areas of responsibility and 68 standards of conduct were identified. 41% of the occurrences of ethical conduct rules pertain to clients, but only 4% concern the responsibilities of social workers toward themselves. These too are only mentioned implicitly within other areas of responsibility, especially concerning professional conduct. The Slovak code of ethics lags behind international and national ethical standards in many respects. Regarding the labeling of individual areas of responsibility, the shortcoming is particularly the reduction of the work environment exclusively to the responsibilities of social workers toward employers and employing organizations. This one-sided and unidirectional view does not correspond to current standards. Therefore, the title should be changed to ethical responsibility toward the workplace. With regard to individual areas of responsibility, the author notes the following:

1. Within Responsibility toward Clients

The question is the terminological (in)appropriateness of using the designation "client," which in several codes, including IFSW/IASSW (2004), is replaced by the term "user of social services." This important epistemological question should be more widely discussed in our context.

In accordance with the international code of ethics and the good practice of several national codes, ASP SR (1997) briefly states the primacy of the client's interests, the duty to maintain confidentiality of information, respect for the right to privacy, and the social worker's conduct at a high standard level. These should be further developed and deepened, for example with "informed consent" in relation to the protection of personal data guaranteed in the SR by Act No. 428/2002 Coll. on the Protection of Personal Data as amended. In addition, the following topics identified in the research are missing and should be explicitly stated and developed:

• anti-discrimination – in accordance with the Constitution of the SR and Act No. 365/2004 Coll. (Anti-Discrimination Act);
• respect for the client's right of access to information about themselves;
• respect for and promotion of the right to participation;
• empowerment of clients;
• risks of dual and multiple relationships;
• avoidance of sexual harassment and sexual violence – in accordance with Act No. 300/2005 Coll. (Criminal Code);
• recognition of ethnic, cultural, and national diversity, including the identification of strengths of different cultures.

In order for the code of ethics of social workers to become an indispensable element of social work, constant respect for the person as a human being must be maintained (Hučík, Hučíková, 2009, p. 156).

2. Within Responsibility toward the Profession

The Slovak code of ethics briefly addresses three norms in this area: maintaining the honor of the profession; service to the community (which would be more appropriately placed in the area of responsibility toward society); advancement of knowledge. These should be deepened and further norms identified in the international code of ethics and good practice of national codes of ethics should be added:

• ethical responsibility for cooperation with schools of social work – this is a serious current problem encountered by social work students;
• professional and unimpeachable conduct of social workers – in relation to points 1. A. C. D in ASP SR, 1997;
• providing services only within the boundaries of one's own competence;
• protection of the profession against unfair criticism, along with constructive critical suggestions for positive change;
• making ethically grounded decisions.

3. Within Responsibility toward Colleagues

The Slovak code of ethics does not distinguish and name two groups of colleagues – those from social work and those from other helping professions. In this area of responsibility, it very briefly addresses two norms: courtesy and politeness; working with colleagues' clients (a norm de facto aimed at clients). These should be deepened and further norms identified in the international code of ethics and good practice of national codes of ethics should be added:

• the need for cooperation with colleagues in social work and professionals from other helping professions;
• consulting with colleagues – as an important tool for improving quality and further professional growth;
• avoidance of negative criticism, but also the need to draw attention to violations of professional ethics – here the link with institutional provision by a professional association or state bodies is important;
• responsibility for social workers with serious difficulties – also requiring systematic and institutional solutions.

4. Within Responsibility toward the Workplace

Above I noted the inappropriateness of the old form of the title responsibility toward employers and employing organizations, as it is one-sided and unidirectional. It would be appropriate to add to this area of responsibility standards identified in the international code of ethics and good practice of national codes of ethics:

• striving for the highest possible standard of quality of the service provided – it would be appropriate for the code of ethics to be among the quality standards of social services mentioned in Act No. 448/2008 Coll.
• non-acceptance of discrimination, bullying, and harassment in the workplace – in accordance with the Constitution of the SR, Act No. 365/2004 Coll., Act No. 200/2005 Coll. Labour Code (Act No. 311/2001 Coll. as amended);
• regular verification of the effectiveness of the social service provision process – in accordance with Act No. 448/2008 Coll.

5. Within Responsibility toward Society

The Slovak code of ethics briefly addresses one norm in this area – promotion of the general welfare of society. This should be deepened and further norms identified in the international code of ethics and good practice of national codes of ethics should be added:

• improvement of social conditions and solidarity;
• fair distribution of resources;
• promotion of participation in public affairs.

A discussion with experts on social policy would be appropriate in this area, or inviting them as active participants and members of the "ethical working group."

6. Within Responsibility toward Oneself

An innovative step within international ethical standards would be the explicit statement of the social worker's responsibility toward themselves as a specific area of responsibility. The author proposes precisely this approach. In terms of content, it would be appropriate to include:

• the duty of professional self-care;
• instrumental provision of professional growth

– including supervision, lifelong learning, etc.; - recognition of the possibility of conflicts of interest, occurrence of dilemmatic or problematic areas in professional activity.

Specific Areas of Activity in Social Work

A partial research question was: "What specific activities do the codes of ethics address?" The following were identified:

1. Research (8 codes)
2. Supervision (4 codes)
3. Education and training (4 codes)
4. Management (3 codes)
5. Evaluation (2 codes)
6. Psychotherapy performed by a social worker (1 code).

The Slovak code of ethics, in line with IFSW 1994, briefly mentions research and study (the Slovak form of the term "education") as specific areas. Both specific areas of professional social work activity should be further developed and supplemented. With regard to ethical responsibilities toward oneself, the profession, and the workplace, it would be appropriate to also include a very important professional activity, namely supervision. In Slovakia, supervision has become one of the quality standards for the provision of social services. Since a specific code of ethics for supervision has not been created in our country, it would be appropriate to incorporate it into the national code of ethics. A current identified trend, with respect to the area of responsibility toward the workplace, or separately, is to elaborate and present ethical standards of management. Whether such a procedure is timely should be discussed within the ethical working group.

In the professional literature, we find several ethical principles that should be observed in social counseling and in other helping professions (critical approach to the field and to oneself, controlled dedication, professional distance, ensuring the sensitive needs of the counselor as well as client protection, collegiality and openness, confidentiality, discretion regarding information and data, etc. (cf. Hučík, Žolnová, 2006).

STRUCTURAL CONCEPT

In the research sample, we can distinguish a typology in terms of the scope of application and character of the codes. I. Code of Ethics of Social Work – out of the examined codes, 7; II. Code of Ethics of Social Workers – out of the examined codes, a total of 8. The Swiss code of ethics is specific in that its title is Berufskodex der Professionellen Sozialer Arbeit, but in terms of content, it is more of a code of ethics of social workers.

The current Code of Ethics of Social Workers in the SR is, by title and content, a national code of ethics of social workers. An important question for discussion by the working group and the wider professional community is whether the revised code should retain this character, or whether it would be more appropriate to expand it into a "code of ethics of social work." The author inclines toward the second alternative for the following reasons:

a) a code of ethics of social work makes it possible and appropriate to expand the content to include specific activities such as supervision, research, management, etc. (see above); b) a code of ethics of social work better takes into account the reciprocity of ethical responsibilities; for example, with regard to the workplace, it is not appropriate to list exclusively the responsibilities of social workers toward employers, but also the responsibilities of employers or management; c) a code of ethics of social work better incorporates into its text also social work students, who under Slovak legislation cannot yet be defined as social workers.

The scope of the code is mainly related to content and typology. According to word count and document size, the code can be divided into 5 scales:

A.

Very small (up to 1,000 words) – only the Slovak code,

B.

Smaller (1,000 – 2,500 words) – 6 codes, e.g., Czech,

C.

Medium (2,501 – 6,000 words) – 3 codes, the Russian one is borderline,

D.

Large (6,001 – 10,000 words) – 3 codes, e.g., American,

E.

Very large (over 10,000 words) – 2 codes, e.g., Australian.

The Code of Ethics of Social Workers in the SR lies at the lowest scale in terms of size. By its scope, it is among the smallest codes of ethics of social work in the world. In its revision, the content aspect is the priority criterion, but it would be appropriate to consider the limits of the extent to which the revised text should go. With regard to a certain rule of continuity, the author proposes a maximum shift relative to the above scaling of 2 scales – i.e., to smaller or medium.

In the examined sample, based on the results of the first research phase, we can distinguish three types of documents with regard to their physical and content integrity:

1. Integral documents in terms of both content and physical form – 13 codes;
2. Content-divided documents – 1 code, namely IFSW 1994, which consists of two documents: the International Declaration of Ethical Principles of Social Work and the International Ethical Standards for Social Workers;
3. Physically divided documents – 1 code, namely the Canadian one, consisting of the Code of Ethics and the Guidelines for Ethical Practice, which are physically separate documents.

The standard structure of codes of ethics usually has three basic parts and one optional part. The basic structural parts, together with optional content, include:

I. Introduction

• Preamble
• Definition of social work
• Identification of sources used
• Significance and purpose of the code of ethics

II. Values and Principles

• Identified key values (principles)
• Detailed characteristics of individual values and principles

III. Standards of Conduct

• Divided according to individual areas of responsibility (and specific activities)

An optional component may be specific provisions regarding the particular character of national codes, e.g., disciplinary and sanction measures (Italian code), or problem areas and methods of their resolution (Czech code). The most common optional component is appendices, which may contain:

IV. Appendices

• Glossary
• Bibliographic references used
• Acknowledgements
• Sample forms

With regard to standard structuring, the Slovak code of ethics lacks a section on values and principles. Therefore, a thorough elaboration of this section and its incorporation into the text should be part of the revision of the code of ethics.

Binding Nature of Codes of Ethics

With regard to the binding nature of codes of ethics, based on the research results we can distinguish four scales:

1. Codes of a recommendatory character – apart from an ethical appeal, they lack any mechanism for ensuring compliance with ethical norms. They do not refer to any disciplinary measures nor do they have an established sanction system; from the examined sample, this applies to 4 codes – both international documents, the Slovak and the Czech code of ethics;
2. Codes binding for members of the association without specified disciplinary and sanction mechanisms – compared to the first type, these have binding character explicitly stated in the text. This applies to 5 codes; the Canadian code sub-delegated compliance control to the territories; the British and Israeli codes leave disciplinary measures to the state administration, and two codes mention no disciplinary-sanction mechanism (Russian, Swedish);
3. Codes binding for members of the association with specification of disciplinary and sanction mechanisms – in 4 codes from the examined sample, national associations have established their own bodies ("ethics committees") with disciplinary and sanction powers. The codes of ethics then refer to them (German), while most of them do not directly address disciplinary and sanction measures in the text – these are elaborated in a separate document (e.g., American, Australian), with the exception of the Swiss code, which briefly mentions disciplinary-sanction measures directly in the text.
4. Code under the auspices of a state institution, thereby directly ensuring a control mechanism – 1 code: Italian.

The Slovak code of ethics falls into the first group – it is a code of a recommendatory character. Furthermore, it should be added that since it is a document of ASP SR, which is a non-governmental institution voluntarily associating social workers and not a professional association, such a code of ethics is non-binding. The effort of revising the code of ethics should be directed in such a way that compliance can be demanded from social workers themselves. Given the institutional vacuum in Slovakia, one possible alternative is the so-called "Italian route," i.e., through the auspices of the state administration (MPSVaR SR). An example of good practice in Slovakia is the Code of Ethics of Healthcare Workers contained in legislation – as Appendix No. 4 of Act No. 578/2004 Coll. on Healthcare Providers.

Conclusion

The revision of the code of ethics of social work in Slovakia is a very urgent challenge closely related to the quality of social service provision. The author's qualitative research comparing international and national codes of ethics can be one of the important steps in the process of a comprehensive revision of the code of ethics of social workers in the Slovak Republic. The key problem in this area is the institutional vacuum, because there is no organization to initiate, push forward, and implement this process. The presented proposal is therefore to initiate this process by several experts from the fields of social work and professional ethics, who would form an inter-institutional working group. Discussion and reassessment should be carried out in several areas and topics, such as 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.

Author: doc. PhDr. ThDr. Andrej Mátel, PhD.

List of Bibliographic References

[1] Akademikerförbundet SSR. 1997. Yrkesetiska riktlinjer för socionomer. Stockholm : ASSR, 1997. 8 s. [online 2010-17-10]. Available at: < http://www.ifsw.org/cm_data/Sweden_ethics_swe.pdf >. [2] Associação dos profissionais de serviço social. 2007. Código de Ética. Lisboa : APSS, 2007. [online 2010-15-10]. Available at: < http://www.apross.pt/interna.php?idseccao=12 >. [3] Australian Association of Social Workers. 2010. Code of Ethics. 3rd Ed. Canberra : AASW, 2010. 55 s. ISBN 978-0-9808661-0-0. 2002. Code of Ethics. 2nd Ed., Canberra : AASW, 2002. 33 s. ISBN 0-909255-32-6. [4] Avenirsocial. 2006. Berufskodex der Professionellen Sozialer Arbeit. Bern : AvenirSozial, 2006. 4 s. [online 2010-15-10]. Available at: < http://www.ifsw.org/cm_data/Berufskodex_A4_d_1.pdf >. [5] BRNULA, P. 2010. Reálna potreba praxe alebo len nevyhnutnosť. In: MÁTEL, A. – SCHAVEL, M. – MÜHLPACHR, P. – ROMAN, T. 2010b. Aplikovaná etika v sociální práci. Brno : Institut mezioborových studií, 2010. ISBN 978-80-87182-13-0, s. 40 – 51. [6] Canadian Association of Social Workers. 2005. Code of Ethics. Ottawa : CASW, 2005. [online 2010-15-09]. Available at: < http://www.casw-acts.ca/practice/codeofethics_e.pdf >. [7] Canadian Association of Social Workers. 2005. Guidelines for Ethical Practice. Ottawa : CASW, 2005. [online 2010-15-09]. Available at: < http://www.casw-acts.ca/practice/guidelines_e.pdf >. [8] Consejo general de colegios oficiales de diplomados en trabajo social y asistentes sociales. 1999. Código Deontológico de la Profesión de Diplomado en Trabajo Social. Madrid, 1999. [online 2010-15-09]. Available at: < http://www.trabajosocialnavarra.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5&Itemid=8 >. [9] Consiglio nazionale. 2009. Codice deontologico dell'Assistente Sociale, Roma : CN, 2009. [online 2010-15-09]. Available at: < http://www.cnoas.it/codicedeontologico.php >. [10] Deutscher Berufsverband für Soziale Arbeit. 1997. Berufsethische Prinzipien des DBSH. Göttingen, 1997. [online 2010-15-09]. Available at: < http://www.dbsh.de/BerufsethischePrinzipien.pdf >. [11] Hučík, J – Hučíková, A. 2009. Kauzistika v sociálnej práci. Bratislava: VŠZaSP sv. Alžbety, 2009. 203 s. ISBN 978-80-89271-66-5. [12] Hučík, J. – Hučíková, A. 2010. Kazuistika v špeciálnej pedagogike. Prešov: PU v Prešove, Pedagogická fakulta, 2010. ISBN 978-80-555-0143-7. [13] Hučík, J. – Žolnová, J. 2006. Etika v špeciálnopedagogickom poradenstve. In: EFETA, 2006, roč. XVI. č. 3. ISSN 1335-1397. [14] International Federation of Social Workers. 1994. The ethics of social work: Principles and standards. Geneva : IFSW, 1994. [online 2010-15-8]. Available at: < http://www.ifsw.org/p38000139.html >. [15] International Federation of Social Workers – International Association of Schools of Social Work. 2004. Ethics in Social Work: Statement of Principles. Geneva : IFSW, 2004. [online 2010-15-8]. Available at: < http://www.ifsw.org/p38000398.html >. [16] Mátel, A. a kol. 2010a. Etika sociálnej práce. Bratislava : VŠZaSP sv. Alžbety, 2010. 183 s. ISBN 978-80-89271-85-6. [17] Mátel, A. 2010b. Aktualizácia etického kódexu sociálnych pracovníkov Slovenskej republiky – základný náčrt In: Aplikovaná etika v sociálne práci a ďalších pomáhajúcich profesiách. Zborník z medzinárodnej vedeckej konferencie. Bratislava: VŠZaSP sv. Alžbety. 413 s. ISBN 978-80-89271-89-4, s. 274-284. [18] Mátel, A. – Roman, T. 2010a. Etika v supervízii – kľúčové hodnoty a vybrané etické aspekty. In: Prohuman, odborný internetový časopis. [online 2010-30-09]. Available at: < http://www.prohuman.sk/socialna-praca/etika-v-supervizii%E2%80%93klucove-hodnoty-a-vybrane-eticke-dorazy >. ISSN 1338-1415. [19] Mrázová, A. 2000. Etický kódex sociálnych pracovníkov SR. Žilina: ASPS, 1997. In: Zdravotníctvo a sociálna práca. Trnava: FZaSP, 2004. [20] National Association of Social Workers. 2008. Code of Ethics. Washington: NASW, 2008. [online 2010-18-5]. Available at: < http://www.socialworkers.org/pubs/code/code.asp >. [21] Союз социальных педагогов и социальных работников. 2003. Кодекс этики социального работника и социального педагога. Москва, 2003. 20 s. [online 2010-30-09]. Available at: < http://socpedagogika.narod.ru/Kodeks.html >. [22] Společnosti sociálních pracovníků České republiky. 2006. Etický kodex sociálních pracovníků České republiky. Praha: SSP ČR, 2006. [online 2010-15-10]. Available at: < http://www.socialnipracovnici.cz/images/pdf/Eticky%20kodex%20SSPCR.pdf >. [23] 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. [24] Strieženec, Š. 2006. Teória a metodológia sociálnej práce. Trnava: Tripsoft, 2006. 296 s. ISBN 80-969390-4-1. International and legislative documents [25] Európska únia. 2003. Charta základných práv Európskej únie. Bratislava: SNSLP, 2003. 28 s. ISBN 80-89016-07-3. [26] Európska únia. 2007. Lisabonská zmluva. Úradný vestník EÚ (2007/C 306/01-271). ISSN 1725-5236. [online 2010-18-10]. Available at: < http://www.socialworkers.org/pubs/code/code.asp >. [27] Organizácia spojených národov. 1948. Všeobecná deklarácia ľudských práv, A/RES/217/III. [28] Rada Európy. 2009. Európska sociálna charta (revidovaná). Bratislava: Epos, 2009. 48 s. ISBN 978-80-8057-817-6. [29] Zákon č. 460/1992 Z. z. z 1. septembra 1992 Ústava Slovenskej republiky. [30] Zákon č. 365/2004 Z. z. z 20. mája 2004 o rovnakom zaobchádzaní v niektorých oblastiach a o ochrane pred diskrimináciou a o zmene a doplnení niektorých zákonov (antidiskriminačný zákon). [31] Zákon č. 578/2004 Z. z. z 21. októbra 2004 o poskytovateľoch zdravotnej starostlivosti, zdravotníckych pracovníkoch, stavovských organizáciách v zdravotníctve a o zmene a doplnení niektorých zákonov. [32] Zákon č. 300/2005 Z. z. z 20. mája 2005 Trestný zákon. [33] Zákon č. 305/2005 Z. z. o sociálnoprávnej ochrane detí a o sociálnej kuratele a o zmene a doplnení niektorých zákonov v znení neskorších predpisov. [34] Zákon č. 448/2008 Z. z. o sociálnych službách a o zmene a doplnení zákona č. 455/1991 Zb. o živnostenskom podnikaní (živnostenský zákon) v znení neskorších predpisov.

(1) Specifically, these were 2 international codes of ethics (IFSW 1994; IFSW IASSW 2004); 4 non-European codes of ethics (American NASW 2008; Canadian CASW 2005; Australian AASW 2010; Israeli SWI 2007); and 9 European codes (besides the Slovak one: British BASW 2002; Czech SSP ČR 2006; Russian ССОПиР 2003; German DBSH 1997; Swiss AS 2006; Swedish ASSR 1997; Portuguese APSS; and Italian CN 2009).

(2) Notably the National Association of Social Workers, Canadian Association of Social Workers, Australian Association of Social Workers, and British Association of Social Workers.