The article examines the principles and guidelines that practitioners ought to adhere to as they undertake research and evaluation. The author has differentiated research from evaluation in the sense that evaluation involves the contrast of the client's current situation against a set reference point such as an initial baseline or a starting point. This can be done through multiple baseline or repetition designs, which allow assessment of change without the need of considering the causal factors. Thereby, the provisions of ethical guidelines in a client-centered evaluation have established guidelines such as thorough assessment of the client to ensure that the practitioner succinctly considers the nature and scope of the client's concerns, leading to the establishment of the appropriate distress presented (Bloom, 2010). Further, the practitioner ought to review the appropriate empirical literature and research on individuals who have undergone similar situations faired after they were taken under different interventional approaches.
Moreover, the intervention and possible intervention design are chosen to address the client's informed consent and chosen goals. The practitioner has to focus on the plans that can adequately address the client's concerns and also establish the metrics to evaluate the progress. Therefore, the patient ought to have access to information that is necessary for the client to make an informed decision to either progress with the plan or not (Bloom, 2010). Additionally, it helps the customer in determining his/her desired outcomes from the established concerns. Moreover, the practitioner has to discuss the possible risks associated with the intervention as well as the possible outcomes. Regardless of an intervention working well for other, there is no assurance that it will be successful. Therefore, the client ought to have access to such possible risks or positive outcomes if any.
Further, the practitioner ought to create an individualized plan through evaluation-informed approach and practice. The plan adopted should incorporate the unique circumstances majorly focusing on the individual's strengths and the accessible social support. Additionally, the limitations and problems ought to be considered before establishing a dedicated intervention. The plan can be implemented through a mutual involvement and agreement (Bloom, 2010). The practitioner also ought to carefully monitor the progress, and the milestone achieved towards the client's desired goals. This allows for the modification or tuning of the intervention to ensure the attainment of the established targets. Therefore, the success of a set intervention will be judged based on the resolved or attainment of the desired goals. The article has therefore expressed the ethical guidelines that ought to be adhered to by the practitioners during the evaluation process to ensure that less harm is caused to the recipient.
I believe that evaluations on the interventions availed to a client ought to be transparent and seek his/her consent before it is adopted. As pointed out in the Belmont report, evaluation of interventions ought to enhance respect for persons, which can be interpreted as protection of the autonomous of the client as well as factor in his/her goals, opinions, and choices (Department of Health, 2014). Therefore, one has to consent to any procedure adopted by the practitioners. Otherwise, the whole process would be unethical. Moreover, the intervention should be evaluated to ensure that it does no harm to the subject through the utilization of evidence-based research and comparing the reactions exhibited by individuals who have been subjected to such an intervention (Jackson, 2010). Additional evaluation of the recipient's weaknesses should also be factored to reduce the possibility and degree of harm to the client. Further, the practitioners ought to monitor the progress of the intervention as a method of systematically assessing the benefits or risks accruing the evaluation. This ensures that the possible risks are reduced through sustained evaluation and modification of the intervention. Thereby, this ensures that the goals of the intervention are achieved through the adoption of alternative procedures and approaches.
The client consent is one of the major factors to be considered when selecting an evaluation method. If an individual cannot approve the evaluation, then it would be unethical for a practitioner to process it. Therefore, prior consultation and the communication of the necessary information ought to be essential to ensure that the client makes a sound decision (Department of Health, 2014). Moreover, practitioners ought to ensure that the evaluation adopted causes no harm to the client. This can be achieved through the evaluation of possible risks and positive outcomes accruing the available evaluations. If the risks exceed the positives outcomes, then such a evaluation s abandoned.
The best approach is the multiple baseline designs, which allows the consideration of the causative factors, assessment of change. The boy requires significant monitoring on the success of the interventions adopted since it involves a behavioral change (Bloom, 2010). Thus, an approach that involves the comprehensive examination of various logic will serve him the best.
The multiple baselines and ABM design present the best approaches since it incorporates the maintenance phase which will allow consideration of the causative agent as well as the possible sustained checkups (Jackson, 2010).
Multiracial evaluation presents the best intervention since it associates with culture-related factors. Therefore, ethical considerations such as diversity ought to be considered.
Social work delivery necessitates the consideration of different ethical factors to ensure that the clients receive minimum harm from the interventions adopted. Therefore, the article acts as a guide for the practitioners in the social sector during their interactions with their clients.
Bloom, M. (2010). Client-centered evaluation: Ethics for 21st-century practitioners. Journal of Social Work Values and Ethics, 7(1), 24-31.
Jackson, K. F. (2010). Ethical considerations in social work research with multiracial individuals. Journal of social work values and ethics, 7(1), 1-10.
Department of Health, E. (2014). The Belmont Report. Ethical principles and guidelines for the protection of human subjects of research. The Journal of the American College of Dentists, 81(3), 4.
Cite this page
Applying Ethical Protections to Research Situations, Free Paper for Everyone. (2022, Jun 08). Retrieved from https://speedypaper.com/essays/applying-ethical-protections-to-research-situations
If you are the original author of this essay and no longer wish to have it published on the SpeedyPaper website, please click below to request its removal:
- Free Essay Example on Business Politics
- Educational Discharge Planning - Free Essay in Nursing
- Essay Sample Describing the Current Drug Trends
- Risk Analysis at Tesco Ltd, Free Essay in Risk Management
- Education Essay Sample: Number of Students Enrolled in Universities
- Free Essay with Some Questions on Human Resources Management
- Paper Example. The Cleveland Orchestra