Ethical Foundations and Axiological Frameworks in Social Work: Enhancing Community Welfare

Introduction

This chapter dives into the fundamental ethical principles and value systems of social work, elucidating their critical role in societal well-being. The investigation, which focuses on the interaction between ethical principles and the creation of values in social work, includes a variety of perspectives (Anscombe, 2020; Andersen, 2022). The chapter introduces ethical frameworks and viewpoints based on the profession's commitment to individual and community well-being (Boylan, 2020). The chapter thoroughly analyses existing literature and theoretical frameworks, focusing on various ethical philosophies. As Indigenous wisdom entreats us to redefine the authentic domain of ethics as phronetic action for the “polis,” the collective community, the sterile corridors of traditional ethics collapse. There is a suggestion of interdependence by Cajete (2000), the well-being of the community is echoed by Chillisa (2019), and Western abstractions are challenged with useful applications by Mika (2015). In social work, Wilson (2008) provides an example of this by showing how indigenous techniques prioritize the needs of the community. Ubuntu, which emphasises how interconnectivity is the foundation of our very humanity, brings this chorus to a crescendo (Chowdhury et al., 2023). The symphony is completed by the focus on phronetic knowledge on practical application for the “polis” (Siraj et al., 2023) and Ihsan's exhortation to virtuous deeds for their own sake (Chowdhury et al., 2022). The real field of ethics is this, not some dusty textbook; it is a dynamic dance of knowledge, community, and action. Social work can shed its abstract exterior and adopt a practice based on empathy, connectivity, and transformative actions here in the light of indigenous voices. The voyage has begun, a symphony just waiting to be played. Social work, at its core, is a dedication to social justice and the well-being of individuals, families, and communities (Dominelli, 2016), and demands a robust ethical compass. This compass, informed by diverse philosophical frameworks and attuned to the evolving needs we serve (Ermine, 2007), necessitates a journey into the ethical foundations and axiological frameworks shaping our practice, particularly focusing on integrating Indigenous perspectives. Braiding established ethical theories like virtue ethics and deontology (Aristotle, Nichomachean Ethics; Arnold & Bowie, 2019) with Indigenous values of reciprocity and interconnectedness (Cajete, 2000), we can foster an integrated approach centering community well-being more than anything else. This necessitates critically examining major paradigms and dissecting their axiological underpinnings and core features (Morrow & Coates, 2018) while acknowledging the limitations of any singular framework. Virtue ethics, with its emphasis on cultivating virtues like compassion, humility, and interconnectedness, beautifully aligns with Indigenous teachings, urging us to see ourselves as part of a web of relationships, with ethical responsibilities flowing outward. Deontology, with its focus on duty and respecting individual rights (Shafer-Landau, 2019), while valuable, can overlook the complexities of social work (Askarzai & Unhelkar, 2017). Utilitarianism, with its focus on maximizing happiness and minimizing harm (Mill, 1863), offers a consequentialist approach but can prioritize short-term gains over long-term sustainability (Munro, 2021). Major social work paradigms also contribute diverse axiological foundations. Positivism/post-positivism, with its emphasis on objectivity (Hodgson & Watts, 2017), can inform decision-making but neglects subjective experiences (Boivin, 2021). Cognitivism, with its focus on individual thought processes (Mackie, 1977), can help us understand dilemmas but overshadows the role of social structures (Morrow & Coates, 2018). The critical paradigm, highlighting power imbalances (Morrow & Coates, 2018), is crucial for dismantling oppressive systems, but can risk neglecting individual agencies (Munro, 2021). Pragmatism, with its emphasis on practical solutions (Guba & Lincoln, 1989), offers a valuable tool but raises concerns about sacrificing long-term ethical principles for expediency (Barnett, Williams, & Davis, 2005). Finally, the Indigenous research paradigm, centering on reciprocity and respect (Lumsden, 2015), challenges Western dominance, urging us to engage with communities collaboratively and ethically (Ermine, 2007). Our goal is not to simply collect ethical tools but to forge a path toward a more just and equitable society, one where social workers function as enthusiastic advocates, guided by a deep understanding of power dynamics, cultural sensitivities, and the ever-changing social landscape (Munro, 2021). By drawing upon the diverse tapestry of ethical frameworks and integrating Indigenous voices, social work can embrace the complexities of our world and navigate the challenges of the 21st century with renewed purpose and direction. The following critical examination deconstructs virtue ethics, deontology, and utilitarianism, revealing their origins and implications in social work (Arnold & Bowie, 2019; Boylan, 2020). Section four digs into the axiology and essential aspects of social work paradigms, providing insight into their ethical implications and role in developing the field (Hodgson & Watts, 2017; Creswell & Creswell, 2017; Jaworsky, 2019), while section five promotes the integration of virtue-ethics and the indigenous research paradigm, creating a holistic approach to community participation. Individual virtues are declared in virtue ethics, whereas the indigenous research paradigm, which is based on community collaboration, provides a helpful perspective for varied community requirements (Boivin, 2021; Breier & Ralphs, 2009). Section six emphasizes the importance of axiology in social work ethics, emphasizing the need for ethical knowledge to be closely aligned with the well-being of the “Polis” community (Chilisa, 2019; Brandenburg & McDonough, 2019).