Learning Goal: I’m working on a social science and need to help me learn.
Overview
For this assessment, imagine yourself in the role of a supervisor in a human services program with the mission of securing housing for members of a diverse communityone to which you do not belong. You will use the dilemma in the scenario provided to discuss relevant laws in your state for addressing an ethical dilemma. You will then apply two different ethical decision-making models and evaluate each as related to staff actions, your actions as leader, and the cultural competence in each model. You will then choose the best model to fit the case study.
Scenario
You are a supervisor in a human services program that provides relocation services to individuals who are refugees from another country and for whom English is not their first language. You have two staff, Andi and Sam. Andi is a recent human services graduate and does not live in the community or speak the dominant language in that community. Sam lives in the community and can speak the dominant language. Andi’s responsibilities are to help families set up housing and get adjusted to the neighborhood. Sam’s responsibility is to assist families with all paperwork needed to establish housing needs (electricity) as well as any paperwork required by the state.
It is moving day for the Boaes family, new clients for your organization, and Andi is at the house to help the family move in. The family includes a grandfather, mother, father, and four children (all girls ages 13 years, 11 years, 10 years, and 11 months). The house has three bedrooms. The mother informs Andi that the older three girls will share a room with grandfather, the baby will share the room with the mother and father, and the third room will be set up for worship. Andi tries to explain that the house is set up for the grandfather having his own room, the parents and baby sharing a room, and the older girls sharing another room. The rule is that each bedroom must be used to offer sleeping areas to the residents. Andi is not comfortable with the older girls sharing a small room with the grandfather. She has been worried in the past with how they speak and act around him. She is not sure what it is, but it almost seems like they are afraid of him. Andi is also not comfortable with the parents sharing a bed with the baby.
In the worship room, food is left out as a gift to the gods. Andi sees this practice as potentially dangerous because the food is changed out once per day and by the end of the 24 hours has started spoiling. Andi understands that the grandfather is the head of the house, and all decisions go through him. Andi asks to speak to the grandfather, and he refuses as he is not comfortable speaking with an unmarried female. Andi becomes frustrated. She tells the family that they are at risk of being asked to move out of the program. She also tells the family that she may report them for neglect and endangerment.
At the office Sam is furious when she hears what happened. She yells at Andi, accusing her of being culturally incompetent and ethnocentric. She tells Andi that Andi is still a baby in the field and should stop acting so superior to everyone. Finally, she says that she will go over to family and tell them that Andi is out of line and that from now on they should avoid working with her.
As the leader, you see two ethical red flags, one related to the work with the family and the other to the professional relationship between staff. Both have serious consequences to the family. Consider the decisions Andi made throughout her meeting with the family:
- What were cultural and value differences?
- Was she correct to tell the family she was going to report them for neglect and endangerment?
Now consider the interaction between Andi and Sam:
- Are there ethical issues in this interaction?
As a leader, consider how you might address those issues while also working to resolve the ethical issues with the family. What laws in your state would affect your decisions? How do these compare with the NOHS ethical standards? How can ethical decision-making models be applied to resolve the dilemma?
Instructions
Use the scenario above to complete the assessment. The final submission should include the following:
- Describe the ethical dilemma, including how it connects to the cultural diversity between the leader of the program and the people receiving services. Use scholarly references to support the analysis.
- Compare state laws that may address the dilemma to the related standards in the NOHS ethical standards, including citations to support the comparison.
- Apply two human services ethical decision-making models to the scenario. Use scholarly references to support the analysis.
- Provide a cited summary of two ethical decision-making models, including the strengths and weakness of each model.
- Include cited discussion on strengths and weakness as related to diversity.
- Analyze the cultural competence of ethical decision-making models. Use scholarly references to support the analysis.
- Consider how each model considers cultural values. Can they be applied regardless of culture?
- Provide specific and concreate reasons for your choice.
- Compare the evaluation from both a leadership and a staff level of responsibility.
- Analyze the distinction between personal values and worldviews and others’ values and worldviews. Use scholarly references to support the analysis.
- Discuss the connection or disconnection to your own personal values and worldviews.
- Discuss the possible outcomes of the connections and disconnections.
- Include a decision on the role of self-awareness with this connection or disconnection.
Submission Requirements
- Written communication: Write concisely and directly using correct grammar, usage, spelling, and mechanics to convey clear meaning and engage readers.
- Length: 8 double-spaced pages, not including cover and reference pages.
- References: Include at least 8 scholarly references.
- Format: Use current APA style and format for references and in-text citations. Visit for help with APA as needed. Include headings for sections of the paper, aligned with APA standards for headings.
- Font and font size: Times New Roman, 12 points.
| Ethical Decision-Making | ||
|---|---|---|
| Criteria | Ratings | Pts |
| Describe the ethical dilemma, including how it connects to the cultural diversity between the leader of the program and the people receiving services. Use scholarly references to support the analysis. |
32 to >27.2 pts DISTINGUISHED Describes the ethical dilemma, including how it connects to the cultural diversity between the leader of the program and the people receiving services. Uses scholarly references to provide strong support for the analysis. Provides examples. 27.2 to >22.4 pts PROFICIENT Describes the ethical dilemma, including how it connects to the cultural diversity between the leader of the program and the people receiving services. Uses scholarly references to support the analysis. 22.4 to >0 pts BASIC Provides an incomplete description of the ethical dilemma, and/or does not provide sufficient scholarly support. 0 pts NON_PERFORMANCE Does not describe the ethical dilemma. |
/ 32 pts |
|
Compare state laws that may address the dilemma to the related areas in the NOHS ethical standards, including citations to support the comparison. |
32 to >27.2 pts DISTINGUISHED Compares state laws that may address the dilemma to the related areas in the NOHS ethical standards, including citations to support the comparison. Addresses the differentiation within the framework of diversity. 27.2 to >22.4 pts PROFICIENT Compares state laws that may address the dilemma to the related areas in the NOHS ethical standards, including citations to support the comparison. 22.4 to >0 pts BASIC Provides an incomplete comparison of state laws that may address the dilemma to the related areas in the NOHS ethical standards, and/or does not include sufficient citations. 0 pts NON_PERFORMANCE Does not compare state laws that may address the dilemma to the related areas of the NOHS ethical standards. |
/ 32 pts |
|
Apply two human services ethical decision-making models to the scenario. Use scholarly references to support the analysis. |
32 to >27.2 pts DISTINGUISHED Applies two human services ethical decision-making models to the scenario. Uses scholarly references to provide strong support for the analysis. Includes strong analysis of strengths and weaknesses related to diversity. 27.2 to >22.4 pts PROFICIENT Applies two human services ethical decision-making models to the scenario. Uses scholarly references to support the analysis. 22.4 to >0 pts BASIC Provides an incomplete application of two human services ethical decision-making models to the scenario, and/or does not provide sufficient scholarly support. 0 pts NON_PERFORMANCE Does not apply two human services ethical decision-making models to the scenario. |
/ 32 pts |
|
Analyze the cultural competence of ethical decision-making models. Use scholarly references to support the analysis. |
32 to >27.2 pts DISTINGUISHED Analyzes the cultural competence of ethical decision-making models. Uses scholarly references to provide strong support for the analysis. Provides specific and concrete reasons for this choice. Provides cited comparison of the evaluation as related to a leadership and staff role. 27.2 to >22.4 pts PROFICIENT Analyzes the cultural competence of ethical decision-making models. Uses scholarly references to support the analysis. 22.4 to >0 pts BASIC Provides an incomplete analysis of the cultural competence of ethical decision-making models, and/or does not provide sufficient scholarly support. 0 pts NON_PERFORMANCE Does not analyze the cultural competence of ethical decision-making models. |
/ 32 pts |
|
Analyze the distinction between personal values and worldviews and others values and worldviews. Use scholarly references to support the analysis. |
32 to >27.2 pts DISTINGUISHED Analyzes the distinction between personal values and worldviews and others values and worldviews. Uses scholarly references to provide strong support for analysis. Discusses the possible outcomes of the connections and disconnections. Includes a decision on the role of self-awareness with this connection or disconnection. 27.2 to >22.4 pts PROFICIENT Analyzes the distinction between personal values and worldviews and others values and worldviews. Uses scholarly references to support the analysis. 22.4 to >0 pts BASIC Provides an incomplete analysis of the distinction between personal values and worldviews and others values and worldviews, and/or does not provide sufficient scholarly support. 0 pts NON_PERFORMANCE Does not analyze the distinction between personal values and worldviews and others values and worldviews. |
/ 32 pts |
|
Apply the standard writing conventions for the discipline, including structure, voice, person, tone, and application of APA formatting. |
40 to >34 pts DISTINGUISHED Exhibits strict adherence to the standard writing conventions for the discipline. Elements of structure, voice, person, and tone are well matched to the intended audience. Exhibits strict and nearly flawless adherence to APA formatting. 34 to >28 pts PROFICIENT Applies the standard writing conventions for the discipline, including structure, voice, person, tone, and application of APA formatting. 28 to >0 pts BASIC Applies writing conventions that are inconsistent with disciplinary standards or inappropriate for the intended audience. 0 pts NON_PERFORMANCE Does not apply the standard writing conventions for the discipline. |
/ 40 pts |
| Total Points: 0 | ||
