Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The second section, "Purpose of the NASW Code of Ethics", provides an overview of the Code's main functions and a brief guide for dealing with ethical issues or dilemmas in social work practice. The third section, "Ethical Principles", presents broad ethical principles, based on social work's core values, that inform social work practice. The ...
Challenges were identified in partnership with sister organizations, including the National Association of Social Workers, Council on Social Work Education, [9] Society for Social Work and Research, Group for the Advancement of Doctoral Education in Social Work, National Association of Deans and Directors in Social Work, and the St. Louis Group ...
The Common Rule is a 1991 rule of ethics (revised in 2018) [2] regarding biomedical and behavioral research involving human subjects in the United States.The regulations governing Institutional Review Boards for oversight of human research followed the 1975 revision of the Declaration of Helsinki, and are encapsulated in the 1991 revision to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services ...
It was created to study bio-ethical issues such as the effects of income and residence on the availability of healthcare, the definition of death, patient consent, human research subjects, and genetic engineering, counseling and testing. [1]
Principlism is an applied ethics approach to the examination of moral dilemmas centering the application of certain ethical principles. This approach to ethical decision-making has been prevalently adopted in various professional fields, largely because it sidesteps complex debates in moral philosophy at the theoretical level.
In philosophy, an ethical dilemma, also called an ethical paradox or moral dilemma, is a situation in which two or more conflicting moral imperatives, none of which overrides the other, confront an agent. A closely related definition characterizes an ethical dilemma as a situation in which every available choice is wrong.
The Potter Box is a model for making ethical decisions, developed by Ralph B. Potter, Jr., professor of social ethics emeritus at Harvard Divinity School. [1] It is commonly used by communication ethics scholars. According to this model, moral thinking should be a systematic process and how we come to decisions must be based in some reasoning.
Social contract orientation: Everyone has a right to choose life, regardless of the law. The scientist has a right to fair compensation. Even if his wife is sick, it does not make his actions right. Universal human ethics: Saving a human life is a more fundamental value than the property rights of another person.