For this post, the scenario that was chosen from the Reamer’s was the issue that a social worker had in determining if it was ethical to provide clinical services to someone with whom they had a personal Facebook relationship. I have chosen this article because this is an issue that many social workers are not aware of, nor know what they should do in circumstances such as this. In the scenario,  Reamer states that the social worker joined a Facebook group that focuses on women’s reproductive rights. The social worker provided the group with her experience regarding this topic and discussed an abortion that they had. One of the members reached out to the social worker requesting clinical services from her, which leaves the social worker wondering if it would be ethical to provide clinical services to this person, given that they have a personal relationship with them on Facebook. One can see the dilemma in this scenario, which is a conflict of interest. While the social worker would be able to provide effective clinical services with this individual, they have a relationship that was developed outside of the social worker’s occupation. Given that the social worker has a developed relationship with this individual and as a result could be considered a conflict of interest should she provide services to this individual, a remedy would be to explain to the individual why she can not provide services to her, which will provide clarity and provide her with other agencies that provide clinical services that are similar to hers. Doing so will allow the client to understand the reason for rejection of service and will be compliant in seeking services with other agencies.  The boundary dynamic that I have chosen is personal gain. I have chosen this dynamic because this is a topic that can take many forms.  The forms can be an individual assisting another individual, so that they can get back on their feet, which would benefit the individual who received the assistance, or an individual committing a good deed for recognition, in which case the person doing the good deed would receive the gain, as they have received the recognition that they needed. In terms of professional relationships, there are examples in which that could occur. For instance, if a social worker provides resources to a client, and this client is satisfied with the services that they have received and they are able to refer their peers to the social worker, then the social worker would receive personal gain through word of mouth, as they have been given recognition not just from the services that they have provided but because of the relationship that they had with the client. An article  the student has chosen is  “Personal gain or organizational benefits: how to explain active corruption” In this article, the author challenges the belief that curropted practices are influenced by rational choices of individual  employers (Pohlmann, et al 2019). From this article the student understands that organizations could pressure their employees to perform sat their standards to prevent decentralized management as this can increase the chances of corporate illegality which can cause an organization strain (Pohlmann, et al 2019). This is where there could be a line between organizational benefits and personal gain which begs the question do agency employees  provide services for the care of their clients to promote personal gain or are they operating from  the pressure to perform at their agency standards to promote organizational benefits. I believe that developing social media policies is a concept that should be implemented in social service agencies. This strategy benefits the social worker as they would be able to enforce a boundary towards their client that promotes privacy for them and would benefit the client as thehy ould be able to receive services without that service being terminated due to possible  conflict of interest. Some things that could be included in the policy would be to only disclose social media information to staff members and ensure that consent is verified by both parties. This policy would be effective as oit would allow the social worker privacy and control of who they provide their social media information to. This also decreases the chances of an unhealthy relationship with  clients as the social worker would not be able to interact with the client outside of work.

Reference

Pohlmann, M., Bitsch, K., & Klinkhammer, J. (2016). Personal Gain or Organizational Benefits? How to Explain Active Corruption. German Law Journal, 17(1), 73–99. doi:10.1017/S2071832200019696