From past history, it appears that Basel will place a great deal of stock in Nathan’s decision. How might this complicate Nathan’s decision making? Should Nathan give weight in his decision to the thoughts and wishes of his colleagues and supervisors? If you were Nathan, what would you say? What should Nathan do?

Question

Nathan Bierwirth, BSW, worked as an employment counselor for Pathfinders Social Services, a nonprofit agency serving the Minneapolis metropolitan area. Pathfinders provided employment services for people leaving welfare, persons with disabilities, the homeless, and immigrants, refugees, and asylees. Part of Nathan’s caseload consisted of newly arrived refugees enrolled in Minnesota’s time-limited Refugee Cash Assistance–Employment Services (RCA-ES) program. Individualized Employment Plans (EPs) helped refugees transition from welfare to employment and self-sufficiency. EPs required a minimum of 35 hours per week of RCA-ES–approved activities, including employment services and formal education (limited to 20 hours per week). Nathan’s client, Ayana Tuma, a refugee from Ethiopia, had no educational or work experience and knew no English. This prevented her from effectively participating in employment service classes, so she enrolled in a full-time English as a Second Language (ESL) program. When Hennepin County audited Pathfinders, clients like Ayana, who exceeded the 20 hour instruction limit, could be sanctioned and even terminated from the program. As the audit approached, Nathan wondered if he should report Ayana’s ESL hours accurately or falsify her Employment Plan.

Answer 1

There is a lot of pressure on Nathan to go along with the wishes of his colleagues. However, social work’s professional ethics strongly suggest Nathan should act differently.
According to the NASW Code of Ethics, Nathan should not falsify Ayana’s case records, and he may be required to report his colleagues and supervisor for falsifying their case records. And yet, while he may act professionally and ethically if he adheres to the NASW Code of Ethics, he risks irreparably damaging his working relationship with most, if not all, of the DHS staff and others within Pathfinders if he does so. If Nathan decides only to report Ayana’s hours accurately he sets himself apart from, and in potential conflict with, his fellow co-workers. How will his co-workers view him? Will they treat him any differently? Will he retain their trust? Could this decision cost him down the road with his colleagues? These are only a few questions for Nathan to weigh. If he chooses to act differently than his co-workers, he also opens the door for the likelihood that clients may eventually discover that Nathan doesn’t permit any of his clients to attend school more than part-time, no matter how urgently they need it, while the other employment counselors do permit clients to attend school beyond part-time. What will his clients think of him? Will they feel confident that Nathan has their best interests at heart? Will they trust him in disclosing crucial information regarding their case or will they come to see him as an obstacle and potential adversary? This could create a host of unforeseen difficulties for Nathan, his co-workers, and the agency. Here too questions abound for Nathan to consider. And what if Nathan acts upon his ethical obligation to report? What will such action do to his relationship with his colleagues and supervisors? How will this hurt his co-workers professionally and occupationally? Is his job and reputation at Pathfinders on the line if he reports? What recriminations might come his way? Each choice before him will undoubtedly precipitate a sequence of events beyond his control, events which he cannot even imagine at this point.