Running Head: SOCIAL WORK ETHICS 1

Social Work Ethics:

NASW Code of Ethics vs. Social Worker Beliefs

Kathryn R. Pranger

Loras College
SOCIAL WORK ETHICS 2

Abstract

The National Association of Social Workers (NASW) has created a Code of Ethics to be used by

all social workers in practice. It references six principles to live by, but it does not give direct

rules because it works as a guideline. This paper argues that a social workers moral opinions or

beliefs can be integrated into this code, and it should always be referred to when making ethical

decisions as a social worker. Using the example of the ethics around abortion in practice, this

paper states that the personal belief a social worker may have on the personhood of the fetus can

be in line with the Code of Ethics when dealing with a pregnant client. This is due to the vague

descriptions of principles not clarifying when life begins. This suggests that even if the beliefs of

a social worker conflict with or differ in priority with the Code of Ethics, referring to it is still

always necessary in practice.

Keywords: NASW, code of ethics, abortion, social work, ethics, guideline, morals
SOCIAL WORK ETHICS 3

Social Work Ethics:

NASW Code of Ethics vs. Social Worker Beliefs

The National Association of Social Work states in its code of ethics that its primary

purpose is to enhance human well-being and help meet the basic human needs of all people,

with particular attention to the needs and empowerment of people who are vulnerable, oppressed,

and living in poverty (NASW, 2008). This information is the core on which the entire document

is built and is the foundation for each of its principles. The social work code of ethics is central

to the social work profession, and social workers are required to live by and practice it to the best

of their ability. The purpose of this paper is to argue that a social worker working within the

child welfare system, whose morals may differ or conflict with the code, should always use this

code to help make decisions, while interpretation of the code and the order of importance can

and will vary from situation to situation.

One example of this ethical dilema is that of abortion, especially those pregnancies

involving more difficult circumstances like child or teenage pregnancy, rape, or insect, etc.

Within the child welfare system, this particular choice of a client can be extremely difficult to

determine, and it can be just as hard for the social worker who wants nothing but the best for this

client. A social worker has to weigh each of the principles to come to the best decision, but it is

unclear how to prioritize these principles according to the code. A social worker might in the

code that he or she has the responsibility to commit to their client, respect their self-

determination, give them all of the information about every option, and be knowledgeable about

all options and the situation the expectant mother would be in (NASW 2008). Because abortion

is currently a legal option in varied forms, it would be considered an option, but this is where a

social workers morality may conflict with the code, if somewhat indirectly. The US government
SOCIAL WORK ETHICS 4

does not specify what constitutes a human life consistently, and the NASW Code of Ethics does

not mention it either. This indecision leaves the question of personhood up to the beliefs of

society, the client, or the social worker themselves. All social workers are mandatory reporters of

child abuse, no matter the effects on the adult, so it would seem important to know at what point

a fetus turns into a child with human dignity and the right to live.

Because the guidelines of the NASW Code of Ethics are vague to some degree, the

interpretation of each section leaves room to combine it with ones own beliefs without major

conflicts. For example, Brenden and Shank discuss in their article on integrating Catholic Social

Teaching with social work curriculum that after their research on both teachings that they are

compatible and complimentary, both focused on the same principles such and social justice,

human dignity and more (2012). This example of a faith-based teaching (that would advocate

against abortion) matching up with the teachings of the Code of Ethics as equals would suggest

that there is much room for interpretation of certain aspects of the Code of Ethics. McCarty also

agreed that the two were compatible stating, However categorized, I soon recognized that there

was broad compatibility, at least in theory, between the Code and the various themes of Catholic

social thought (The Works of Mercy at a Catholic Worker House: Combining Catholic Social

Teaching with Social Work Practice, 2012).

The NASW Code of Ethics promotes Self-determination, which would say that women

have the right to choose what happens to their bodies, including choices regarding surgeries and

their own health and well-being. This principle when regarding pregnancy would determine they

that have the right to chose abortion, if the fetus is not considered a separate life. In any other

situation outside of the womb, a woman would not have the right to kill her child because they

had her DNA, grew inside of her, or that they were a bundle of tissue that came from her, which
SOCIAL WORK ETHICS 5

are all true regarding the child. If the mother or social worker believes that a fetus is a life, it

would automatically take abortion off the table as an ethical decision, just as it would be

unethical to kill her child outside of the womb. There is another section in the Code of Ethics

called Commitment to Clients which could also argue for abortion. This section also mentions,

though, that it is okay to forego that commitment when a social worker is required by law to

report that a client has abused a child or has threatened to harm self or others, then the code

states in the next section on Self Determination, Social workers may limit clients right to self-

determination when, in the social workers professional judgment, clients actions or potential

actions pose a serious, foreseeable, and imminent risk to themselves or others (NASW, 2008). If

the social workers professional judgment is that the unborn fetus is a life, then advising against

abortion would then be ethically acceptable according to the Code of Ethics.

Nevertheless, most social workers will argue that it is the mothers choice when

discussing abortion, ignoring the conversation on life or personhood. Wright, Bird, and Frostin

their review on social work literature say that legislation suggesting earlier personhood is simply

attempting to take away safe abortion options, which is problematic, but they dont address the

question of life within the document (2015). This evidence of personal beliefs being used to

interpret the code of ethics shows that there are definitely situations when a social workers

personal morality may differ with the code of ethics yet still coincide in concept. This articulates

that no matter a persons moral beliefs, the code of ethics should absolutely always be referred to

when making an ethical decision. Unfortunately because of the vague guidelines, its nearly

impossible for every person to refer to this code and make the same decision every time, and

every case is different. The NASW Code of Ethics should be the foundation of social work

decisions, but it is a guideline, not a set of rules, with a lot of room for varied interpretations.
SOCIAL WORK ETHICS 6

References

Brenden, M. A., & Shank, B. (2012). Social Work for Social Justice: Strengthening Social Work

Education through the Integration of Catholic Social Teaching. Social Work &

Christianity, 39(2), 128-150.

McCarty, D. A. (2012). The Works of Mercy at a Catholic Worker House: Combining Catholic

Social Teachings with Social Work Practice. Social Work & Christianity, 39(3), 327-339.

National Association of Social Workers (NASW) Delegate Assembly. (2008, January 1). Code

of Ethics of the National Association of Social Workers. Retrieved February 22, 2017,

from http://www.socialworkers.org/pubs/code/code.asp

Wright, R. L., Bird, M., & Frost, C. J. (2015). Reproductive Health in the United States: A

Review of the Recent Social Work Literature. Social Work, 60(4), 295-304.

doi:10.1093/sw/swv028