HSSW513 Human Rights the Law and Social Justice

Recently, Jen came to the Marigold Community Centre in distress and seeking help, as she quoted, “I’m in really deep shit with the law”. She further stated that “Mick is gonna hit the roof when he hears”. This was because the AFP police on the same day interviewed her, thereby charging her with various offenses concerning social security fraud; hence, she was seeking advice. Thus, she was referred to Glenaurie Community Legal Service and wanted to meet Jen in the afternoon. After that, Jen never showed up to the counseling appointments.

Berry Starr called from at the Glenaurie Community Legal Service and told that they would represent Jen on a severe fraud along with deception and dishonesty charges worth $70,000. Barry has stated that she will plead guilty in the court for mitigating the offense for ensuring that Jen will be sent to a community-based order instead of custody. In case of not cooperating with the advice of Barry, a subpoena will be charged against the record of the agency. However, the agency (Marigold Community Centre) does not include itself in the legal process. Here, it can be advised that the human service workers need to be more confident regarding their knowledge of the respective for challenging it for pursuing social justice for the client (Jen) and her interests (Kennedy, Richards, & Leiman, 2016 ).

The main issue is associated with the confidentiality of the client’s information and service user rights. As per the Australian Association of Social Workers (AASW) Code of Ethics, social workers need to respect service user’s rights in terms of privacy, trust, and confidentiality of the information (Australian Association of Social Workers, 2020). A social worker is further responsible for using the obtained information while providing services (Australian Association of Social Workers, 2020; National Association of Social Workers, n.d.). The social worker must also focus on taking care of not intruding on the privacy of the service user (Jen) while seeking information (Australian Association of Social Workers, 2020).

Rights of Service Users

In the context of the rights of service users, social workers value transparency, honesty, reliability, competence, discernment, reflective self-awareness, empathy, and commitment. Additionally, the ethical principle of social justice is the key principle that a social worker is obliged to uphold as well as promote the same to the service users. Thus, as per the ethical principle of social justice, it emphasizes promoting justice along with reducing barriers and to all people, especially the underprivileged and vulnerable (Australian Association of Social Workers, 2010). Hence, under this principle, Jen can be protected from getting custodial arrest. Additionally, under the Code of Ethics, social workers will focus on maintaining the best interest of the people using services and consider it a priority with due regard for respective interests, as well as other's rights. "In exceptional circumstances, the priority of service users' interests may be outweighed by the interests of others, or by legal requirements and conditions" (Morley, Ablett, & Macfarlane, p. 134). Thus, in such types of situations, service users are made aware of their interests, which can further lead to jeopardizing others (Australian Association of Social Workers, 2020).

Social workers in the Australian context will focus on promoting self-determination along with the independence of service users. They further emphasize making informed decisions on their behalf. Additionally, social workers are engaged in discussing the rights, as well as responsibilities of the service users. Thus, the service users further focus on providing accurate and honest available information concerning the information record and the people can access the same. Besides, the service users will be provided the right to obtain a second opinion for either ceasing or refusing service. Social workers will attempt to minimize using legal along with another compulsion. In case any action is found to diminish or violate the civil/legal rights of service users, it can be considered to be professionally, ethically, and legally justifiable (MCSW, 2015). Thus, this kind of action will be made only after evaluating the situation carefully. This can be attained by maintaining collaboration between other professionals and service users (Australian Association of Social Workers, 2020).

Client Handling and Service Information

Concerning handling of the client along with service information, social workers need to focus on integrating information management. This approach mainly focuses on collecting, storing, processing, retrieving, sharing, and managing information. “This ethics and practice guideline covers four main areas: social work case records; ownership of social work case records; access and sharing of confidential client information; and information management following an unexpected short-term, long-term or permanent absence of a social worker” (Australian Association of Social Workers, 2015).

As per the 2010 Code of Ethics, the social worker is engaged in recording information accurately and impartially, thereby reporting relevant and essential details. The information type, which is considered relevant, depends on the practice. However, it will comprise a record of discussion along with client interactions with other people and services engaged in the provision to support referral information, email, and telephone correspondence. In terms of accessing social work records or information, it is the responsibility of the individual social workers owning the records or the agency for ensuring that the information related to clients remains confidential. Social workers are also engaged in ensuring only individuals, who require information, have the access to such privilege (Australian Association of Social Workers, 2015).

Additionally, social workers must not give any client information to a third party in terms of access to concerning confidential information. In this context, social workers must not provide information related to the client without any written consent. Furthermore, the social worker has the belief of granting access to third-party in the client’s best interest. Besides, the Code of Ethics is highly précis, especially at the time of giving information to a third party. In all circumstances, social workers are to maintain confidentiality, as we as privacy of the clients. They are further engaged in obtaining informed consent beforehand from the client for releasing data and information.

There are instances, wherein a social worker believes that by revealing confidential information of the client, an exclusive risk can be prevented from any harm concerning a specific individual. “Section 5.2.4 b of the Code of Ethics outlines the importance of social workers discussing with clients at the commencement of the professional relationship the limits to confidentiality; the purpose for which information is obtained; to whom the information may be made available; and how the information may be used” (Australian Association of Social Workers, 2015, p. 5). On the other hand, social workers and clients need to converse in terms of professional relationships, thereby indicating that social work record can be legally requested through either a police warrant or subpoena. Additionally, notes can be subpoenaed for different reasons. Hence, the process to respond to a subpoena may also differ based on the type of Court. Besides, organizations can also differ in terms of policy along with procedure (Australian Association of Social Workers, 2015). Hence, the doctor-patient information of Jen can be kept confidential.

Incorporation of Principles of Natural Justice and Processes for Procedural Fairness

Procedural fairness refers to the legal principle, which helps in ensuring fair decision-making. However, this has developed over the years by the courts specifically in administrative law cases. Hence, the administrative and professional decision-making processes of Marigold Community Centre can also incorporate the same (Australian Government, n.d.). The rules concerning procedural fairness cannot be applied to government decisions. However, the rules of procedural fairness are not mandatory to adhere to in all decision-making procedures of the government. The rule mainly applies to decisions, which harm the existing interest of an individual or a company.

For instance, procedural fairness can be applied in a decision for canceling a license or benefit. It can also be used for disciplining an employee,  imposing penalties, and publishing a report, which can deteriorate an individual’s reputation (Ombudsman Western Australia, 2019). On the other hand, natural justice is perceived as a basic human right. In this context, natural justice in Australia states that every individual is “entitled to a decision by a disinterested and unbiased adjudicator (nemo judex in causa sua or in English, the hearing rule)” (Australian Human Rights Commission, n.d.). Besides, the involved parties are to be given the proper notice associated with the case against them, as well as the right to respond (Australian Human Rights Commission, n.d.). Thus, this would help Jen in receiving notice and respond against the case charged by AFP police.

 In case, the issues are referred to Conciliation or Mediation, the AASW engages in providing complainants and respondents with a fair, efficient, and reasonable process. This is done through mutual agreement along with shared understanding regarding the ways to avoid future problems (Australian Association of Social Workers, 2019). Human service workers use power and make vital decisions regarding others' lives. These decisions are often made in private and remain unchallenged. Thus, for this reason, the decisions need to be taken based on principles of procedural fairness (Oxford University Press, 2016). Hence, the decision in Jen's case can follow the principle of procedural fairness.

I am writing to inform you about Jen’s matter. In the past, Jen was arrested for fraud, obtaining money by deception, forgery, stealing, breaking with intent, and burglary. She was young then and was given community-based orders; however, Jen failed to obey the conditions. Additionally, Jen moved from one out-of-home care placement to another as was by squatting and couch surfing. Furthermore, she has committed crimes of dishonesty that led to her serving six months in a youth detention center at Manfred Harbour. However, this toughened her up and released them; she was caught up in violent crimes. This led to serving another four months in the juvenile detention center. She was released on parole, as Jen was only 15 years old. She contacted her family but did not go well, which resulted in her living in the streets and stayed low. Jen further had a problem with gambling. However, recently AFP police have charged her for several offenses of Social Security fraud. After this event, I only see Jen during a playgroup session. Besides, she made counseling appointments; however, has never shown up.

Family’s Demographic Details        

Jen Johnson is a 21-year-old female, who is married to Mick of  25 years of age. Jen and Mick have two daughters, named Hannah (4 years old) and Bessie (3 years old). Hannah is in prep years and is ready to attend school the following year. She is intelligent along with being an engaging child. On the other hand, Bessie is intuitive and knows ways to social distance and respect her ways. However, she engages in both living and play activities. Additionally, Bessie is autistic and is currently assessed by the various health professionals at the Autism Early Intervention and Therapy Centre at Westmead Children's Hospital. Jen is finding it difficult to cope with the demands concerned with parenting of Bessie and due to this; there have been some incidents, which have led to sessions concerning behavioral management. Jen has difficulty in her childhood, as her mother suffered from depression, thereby being admitted to the hospital for prolonged treatment. This was because her mother was sexually assaulted when she was a child by her teenage neighbor. Jen’s father got angry and even spanked her when she failed to live by his expectations. Jen’s relationship with both her parents and sibling deteriorated.

I am a social worker and currently working at Marigold Community Centre located in Glenaurie. I have been in this position ever since I graduated in the field of social work. I completed my graduation in the respective field four years ago. I have been working with Jen Johnson along with her husband Mick Johnson for the last three years for several issues, including housing issues along with potential homelessness. I have also been working on Jen’s and Mick’s social, as well as emotional support, as they are a young family with significant pressure due to life experience. Besides, I am also working on their parenting skills, especially in the context of parenting Bessie (autistic). Additionally, Jen's gambling problem is also one of the key aspects that I am working on during the sessions. I also focus on Jen’s and Mick’s household and money management issues. I also focus on Mick’s problem of using ice.

Services Provided Jen and Family

The agencies and services included are Marigold Community Centre, Alpha Community Housing Association, Glenaurie Family and Community Services (FACS), Penrith Lifeline Problem Gambling Program, and The Autism Early Intervention & Therapy Centre at Westmead Children’s Hospital. In the case of FACS, the program has focused on enabling services for working together for better supporting the right to access justice and provide help to the families. Additionally, FACS focused on promoting early intervention along with inclusion (Communities & Justice, 2021). On the other hand, since Bessie is autistic, the different health professionals at the Autism Early Intervention and Therapy Centre at Westmead Children’s Hospital have gradually assessed her.

Factual Events

I have been working with Jen and her family for the past three years and dealing with their various problems. Recently, Jen came to see me I found that she was distressed due to some personal reasons. However, she told me that she was facing a big issue and further stated that she was troubled legally. She told me that she was interviewed by the AFP police on the same day she came to see me. Jen was charged with various criminal offenses associated with social security fraud and asked me to advise her. She has been charged with a $70,000 fine. In Australia, the maximum penalty that can be charged for social security fraud is 10 years imprisonment specifically for obtaining a financial advantage through deception under s.134.2(1) Criminal Code. Furthermore, for offense concerning general dishonesty, Jen can face 10 years conviction under s.135.1(5) Criminal Code. Besides, she can be given 12 months imprisonment for the crime of obtaining financial advantage under s.135.2(1) Criminal Code (Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions, n.d.).

Professional Assessments and Conclusions

Based on the facts obtained, Jen has committed social security fraud and is liable to be punished. However, the crime she committed was all in the past, especially when she was 15 years of age. At present, she has two daughters, Hannah and Bessie; thus, she needs to take care of them. Even at present, she is 21 years old and young. In case she is convicted under Sections 134.2(1), 135.1(5), and 135.2(1), it can have a significant impact on her family, comprising her husband and children.

Intervention

It is best suited that she can serve a community-based sentence, which is mainly a court order that will allow Jen to avoid going to prison (Makela, 2020). Herein, Jen has to serve her punishment within the community. This program differs as compared to a court order, as community-based sentences avoid punishment and rather address their behavior (The State of Queensland, 2021; Dahlstrom, 2017). Hence, this punishment can also have a low impact on her family.

References

Australian Association of Social Workers. (2010). Code of ethics. AASW, 7-55.

Australian Association of Social Workers. (2015). Information management: Social work records, records ownership, and access. AASW, 2-8.

Australian Association of Social Workers. (2019). Australian Association of Social Workers By-laws on ethics. AASW Board of Directors, 2-17.

Australian Association of Social Workers. (2020). Australian association of social workers code of ethics 2020. AASW, 5-31.

Australian Government. (n.d.). What is procedural fairness?

Australian Human Rights Commission. (n.d.). Natural justice issues in a tribunal hearing.

Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions. (n.d.). Social security fraud. Retrieved April

Communities & Justice. (2021). Who we are. Retrieved April 13, 2021, from https://www.facs.nsw.gov.au/about/who

Dahlstrom, F., (2017). Community based sentencing in New South Wales.

Kennedy, R., Richards, J., & Leiman, T. (2016). Integrating human service law, ethics and practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Makela, M. (2020). Criminal law. Retrieved April 13, 2021,

MCSW. (2015). Code of ethics. Social Work Code of Ethics, 9-30.

Morley, C., Ablett, P., & Macfarlane, S. (2019). Engaging with social work. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

National Association of Social Workers. (n.d.). Code of ethics of the national association of social workers.

Ombudsman Western Australia. (2019). Procedural fairness (natural justice). Guidelines, 1-3.

Oxford University Press. (2016). Law and the human services: Together and apart. Relationship between Human Service Practice, Law and Ethics, 20-42.

The State of Queensland. (2021). Community service – An overview. Retrieved April 13, 2021, from

Australian Association of Social Workers. (2019). AASW social worker of the year awards.

Australian Association of Social Workers. (2021). Draft code of ethics. Australian Association of Social Workers, 8-46.

Australian Association of Social Workers. (2021). Ethics & Standards. Retrieved April 15, 2021, from

Australian Association of Social Workers. (2021a). Professional development. Retrieved April 15, 2021, from https://www.aasw.asn.au/

Australian Law Reform Commission. (2021). Traditional Rights and freedoms—encroachments by commonwealth

Charles Darwin University Bookshop. (2021). Code of ethics. Retrieved April 15, 2021.

Legal Services Commission. (2021). Natural justice. Retrieved April 15, 2021.

Mattson, J. (2015). What's involved in making a 'fair' decision? -

Are you looking for custom writing help? Then you have come to the right place. We have handpicked the best subject matter experts to help you with your academic tasks. Whether you need help with an academic poster or you need a ghostwriter, we have got your back. Our essay writing service has garnered immense popularity from all over the world. This is mainly due to the client-centric services and reasonable prices we offer. We also provide online exam help to students and help them score good grades on the paper hassle-free. Get paper help from PhD-qualified experts and boost your grades like never before.