M6 cases from the field response

Discuss why you felt conflicted. Was this a professional conflict or a personal value conflict? Did this conflict involve bias or judgment?

As a worker for people with Dual Diagnosis, I encountered a client named M who had a history of aggressive behavior. M’s aggression was persistent despite the use of various behavioral management interventions and strategies that I implemented to address the behavior, and this posed a significant risk to M’s safety and other individuals in the program. 

As a worker, I found myself in a complex situation. My responsibility was to ensure the safety and well-being of all individuals working with the Agency, including M, who had a history of aggressive behavior, which presented a significant risk to M’s safety and other individuals in the Agency. I was conflicted, torn between my commitment to upholding M’s right to receive support and care and my duty to ensure the safety of everyone involved. This personal and professional value conflict required me to balance the principles of autonomy and safety. I approached this situation with no bias or judgment, understanding that M’s behavior was not a reflection of his character but a manifestation of his condition. Despite the challenge, I remained dedicated to providing M with the best possible care while ensuring the safety of everyone involved.

As you reflect on this conflict, did you believe it was of moral significance? In retrospect, were there elements of justice, autonomy, beneficence, or non-maleficence?

In this case, moral values were of utmost significance, and I had to consider various elements such as beneficence, justice, autonomy, and non-maleficence. My primary objective was to ensure the client’s well-being while striving to maintain equity and fairness in my treatment of him. Throughout the process, I respected his right to receive care and made sure to allow him to make decisions about his life. I also avoided causing him any harm while minimizing any harmful consequences that might result from his actions. It was crucial to balance all these factors and ensure that the person received the best care while upholding his dignity and rights.

If this was a circumstance associated with an issue in the field, with whom did you discuss this? If it was a personal issue, did you seek outside advice from anyone? Did you find the advice helpful in either scenario?

To address this challenging case, I decided to seek guidance from my supervisor. By discussing the case with my supervisor, I gained valuable insights and a fresh perspective on approaching the situation. Based on my supervisor’s advice, I developed strategic interventions to address the problematic behavior while respecting the individual’s dignity and rights. 

Using your knowledge from ethical decision-making, what theory and moral principles best apply to this case?

The utilitarian approach was most appropriate for this scenario. This approach emphasizes the importance of considering the safety and well-being of everyone involved in the Agency. By taking a utilitarian stance, I ensured that my interventions would benefit the individual in question and the broader agency community. In this case, it is essential to consider and apply all the relevant moral principles. These principles include justice, which ensures fairness and equality in treatment and outcomes for all parties involved. Beneficence requires that the actions taken result in the most significant possible benefit to all involved. Autonomy is the right of individuals to make their own decisions and to have control over their lives. Lastly, non-maleficence requires that actions should not cause harm to anyone involved. Considering all these principles is crucial in ensuring a fair, just, and ethical decision.

How did you ultimately resolve this conflict? Were you satisfied with the resolution? Were there moral traces? If you had it to do over again, would you change any aspect of how you approached this conflict?

Upon reflection, I successfully resolved a conflict by designing a comprehensive behavior care plan for the client. The plan involved a combination of environmental modifications, evidence-based strategies, and personalized care, resulting in a satisfactory solution. There were moral traces related to balancing autonomy and safety for the clients with dual diagnoses. In hindsight, I would not alter any aspect of my approach if I were to do it again.