Legal and Ethical Issues
Legal and ethical issues is from the diversion between the areas of law and ethics, Law states what you can or cannot do, whereas ethics is a moral standard that governs how and what people should or should not do. The workplace has become more diver over the years with differing backgrounds, perceptions of acceptable behaviours the values and their goals. The diverse of the multi-cultural population of workers are being asked to work one another in co-operation. For the success of the organization, the pressure on employees to make hard decisions in organizations with the “Do more with less” approach. In that response people, might cut corners, and at times risk losing their personal integrity. (Kirrane 1990, P.55)
Accountability, is an acknowledgment of the responsibility for individual’s actions, managers must communicate what their expectations are to the person who is responsible of any action or task at work. Completing any tasks/assignments are done correctly along with being consistence for clients, staff and the success of the organization.
In some workplaces, they are using biometric devices such as fingerprint scanners to ensure employees are held accountable for their doings. Seedhouse (2009)
Working at Community Solutions my role is varied from creating and arranging activity based groups to befriending service or working with families, attending meetings and more. The organization works directly with housing associations, the police and others where we get referrals. for the Benefit of Data Protection (1998)
I will refer this lady as “Kellian” for quite some time kellian has been regular attending activity based groups which this is very beneficial to her due to her complex needs, it is in place to encourage her to become socially interactive with other clients. However some clients one in particular, again for the purpose of Data Protection I will refer to this gentleman as “Steven” Steven brought up to our attention kellian wanted all the attention he verbally expressed his views further more continuing to be quite hostile towards her. Kellian has been attending the groups and one to one support for quite some time, she has built up a rapport with all the staff and is over coming some off her issues. It could, however, appear to be seen as favouritism but this was far from it. However, in this situation kellians needs are quite complex and required extra support this dilemma appeared straight forward by just altering the situation and giving her just the one to one support rather than in a group. The reason why this couldn’t happen is that having one to one support just isn’t enough, she requires a group setting with multiple staff members with different expertise such as housing agents, drug support workers and so forth. To further assess her needs.
Organizations have to adhere to follow policies and procedures such as equal opportunity’s, dignity at work, bulling and harassment, code of conduct, health and safety disclosure and barring service along with many more. Where bullying and harassment, promoting safety, manage risk, record keeping and more. Health and safety, along with promoting safety managing risk, came in force due to Stevens actions towards kellian.
The Care Quality Commission (CQC) regulates organization in England, that expects organizations to meet standards of the quality and safely
Equality Act (2010) states making anyone feel intimidated by way of bullying, harassment is unlawful picking on someone. As this was the case with kellian, undermining a competent worker as this also was the case staff were accused of “favouritism”.
Ethical decision process is one of a moral awareness critical to identify a moral problem within a situation, so it is key to initiate an ethical decision making, in turn it makes ethical behaviour more likely. Rest (1986)
The organization felt we ought to act, there was an ethical issue here we could see something had to be done. Firstly, we spoken to Steven at length it was transparent he was not aware of any wrong doing he appeared very apologetic, we spoke about counselling as he has shown signs of aggression outside the complex on one occasion previously. He agreed for counselling sessions and to see if there were anything underpinning his aggression, it did however, transpire he was having marital issues at home with arguments on a regular basis, which brought out his aggression at the group with kellian, by his own admission he went on to say he wouldn’t off over re acted so harshly at the situation with kellian. With this information, we could help him more and support him further. We placed him on a cognitive behavioural therapy CBT course. He is now a regular client striving in the groups he attends. We did arrange a supervised meeting on a one to one basis with kellian do discuss any issues they might have, kellian disclosed some of her troubles she has and why she requires extra support from many of different staff members. As under the Data Protection Act (1998) sharing any information to another client isn’t expectable, we have no right to disclose any personal information regarding any individual this wound undermine and breech the polices this would not only be un ethical, but committing a serious crime.
With kellian choosing to disclosing some of her complex needs helped give Steven have a better understanding of her her situation. An argument as to why allow the client to stay in the organization. The manager wanted to place him on the barred list and stop him from attending anyone session etc.. we had a meeting and discussed the way forward for both clients as steven had shown aggression previously and had been warned about his behaviour but I felt it was worth giving him this chance to prove himself only on the basis he took part in some counselling sessions before he were allowed to re join any activity’s my manager agreed to this suggestion but did make it clear it was down to myself to make it work. Otherwise he would have to leave the organization. We all deserve a break and sometimes it pays of, good moral character, an individual should analyse the consequences of the exercising bad moral character and preform actions that are ethically correct. I go into the Deontology described as “Duty” is based on rules, action morals discussing by way of non consequtionist, doing the right thing because its right, people acting accordingly, regardless of the “good” or the” consequences” that might be produced. Darwel (2002)
This was the approach we taken regarding Steven, policies say with a zero tolerance to any form of abusive behaviour, as he was the client being disruptive. However, using the Deontology view was preferred to use in this instance it was seen the “right” thing to do rather than the contrast of “Utilitarianism” approach, which places the right or wrong based on the consequences beyond the scope of their own interests of other people such as the more good of the “consequences” of an act the better and/or more right act. Bentham (1968) if this theory was applied in the first instance then the client Steven would have still of had underlining issues that ought to have been addressed but would have gone un noticed and banned from the organization. It was the right decision, So therefore, using and applying the Deontology theory in my view was the best outcome for all involved.
Whilst recognising a greater accountability as an example if you ask a group of people to Define leadership, everyone in the group would have their own view on the understanding in leadership. The accountability within the specific needs of the organization Mohant (1993) being accountable, responsible for ones work and answering for the repercussions of ones actions Beaver (1993) As with Steven we were would have been accountable if it wasn’t the “Right” decision. Such as moral judgment is built mostly on Kohlberg (1969) cognitive and moral judgment. Once the individual becomes aware of an ethical issue the ethical judgment is then more than likely to be made.
...(download the rest of the essay above)