| Course | PAC 411 Social Work as a Profession |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 3 |
| Paper type | Ethics paper |
| Length | About 1,117 words, 7 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Aspen University |
| Program | Psychology and Addiction Studies |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for PAC 411 Module 3
Same Meeting, Different Roles: Boundaries and Self-Determination for a Social Worker in Recovery in a Small Town
Student Name
Psychology and Addiction Studies Program, Aspen University
PAC 411: Social Work as a Profession
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Same Meeting, Different Roles: Boundaries and Self-Determination for a Social Worker in Recovery in a Small Town
Lauren is forty-four, a licensed clinical social worker and the only addiction counselor at a small outpatient program in a Missouri town of five thousand people, invented for this course. She has been in recovery from alcohol use for twelve years and attends the same Tuesday evening recovery meeting she has attended since her first year. Two dilemmas arose in the same month. In her second week of treatment, a new client, Kim, walked into Lauren's Tuesday meeting. And another client, Rosa, announced that she planned to move back in with her husband, who drinks heavily, after three months of sobriety at her sister's house. This paper works through both dilemmas. Lauren, Kim and Rosa are composites written for teaching; the code and research are real.
The Profession's Values and Standards
The profession's Code of Ethics (National Association of Social Workers [NASW], 2021) names six core values: service, social justice, dignity and worth of the person, importance of human relationships, integrity and competence. It sets out ethical principles based on these values and specific standards for practice. Several standards apply here. Social workers respect and promote clients' right to self-determination and limit it only when clients' actions pose serious, foreseeable and imminent risk to themselves or others. Social workers avoid conflicts of interest and dual or multiple relationships with clients where there is a risk of exploitation or potential harm, and when such relationships are unavoidable, they set clear, appropriate and culturally sensitive boundaries. And social workers protect clients' privacy and confidentiality.
How Social Work Ethics Developed
Reamer (1998) traced the evolution of social work ethics through several periods. In the profession's early years, the focus was on the morality of clients, who were judged as deserving or undeserving. Over time, the focus shifted to the values of the profession itself, which were codified in professional codes. In later decades, social workers drew on ethical theory and developed models for ethical decision making, and more recently the profession expanded its standards and attended to risk management. Reamer's history matters for addiction work, where the old habit of judging clients' morality has lasted longer than in many fields.
Crossings and Violations
Reamer (2003) examined boundary issues in social work, which arise when social workers have more than one relationship with a client. He distinguished boundary violations, in which a social worker exploits, manipulates or harms a client, such as through a sexual or financial relationship, from boundary crossings, in which the worker enters another kind of relationship that is not intended to exploit and may be harmful, harmless or even helpful, depending on how it is managed. He noted that some dual relationships are unavoidable, especially in small communities and in fields where workers share experiences with clients, and he recommended that social workers be alert to boundary issues, discuss them with clients, consult colleagues and supervisors, document their decisions and avoid relationships that pose a clear risk of harm.
The First Dilemma: The Same Meeting
Lauren consulted her clinical supervisor, who agreed that in a town with two meetings, this dual relationship was unavoidable. In their next session, Lauren raised the overlap with Kim directly. They agreed that both would continue attending, that Lauren would not sponsor Kim or discuss her treatment there, that neither would share what the other said in the meeting and that Lauren would avoid sharing details of her own struggles that might affect Kim's treatment. Kim could raise any discomfort in session. Lauren documented the conversation and the agreement.
| Option | Benefits | Risks | Code and concepts |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stop attending her meeting | Removes the overlap | Harms Lauren's own recovery; the town has only two meetings | Competence requires attending to one's own well-being |
| Ask Kim to find another meeting | Protects Lauren's space | Interferes with Kim's recovery and self-determination | Self-determination; dignity |
| Both continue, with clear limits | Both keep their support | Some awkwardness; risk to Kim's privacy | Unavoidable dual relationship; set boundaries |
| Refer Kim to another counselor | Avoids overlap in therapy | Nearest other program is forty miles away | Service; access |
The Second Dilemma: Rosa's Choice
Rosa's choice to return to her husband carries risks to her sobriety but is not a serious, foreseeable and imminent threat to her life or others'. Lauren asked whether Rosa had ever been afraid of her husband; Rosa said no. Lauren respected her decision, explored what Rosa hoped for and what worried her and helped her plan: keeping her sister's phone number at hand, asking her husband not to keep alcohol in the house during her first month, keeping her meeting schedule and agreeing on warning signs that would lead her to call. Lauren offered couples sessions with a family therapist if her husband was willing.
| Option | Benefits | Risks | Code and concepts |
|---|---|---|---|
| Advise Rosa not to move back | May protect sobriety | Overrides her choice; may damage the alliance | Self-determination |
| Support her choice without discussion | Respects her autonomy | Ignores real risks | Competence; service |
| Support her choice and plan for risks | Respects autonomy and addresses safety | Requires careful conversation | Self-determination with attention to risk |
| Report her husband or intervene | None indicated | No imminent danger; breaches confidentiality | Privacy and confidentiality |
A Worker in Recovery
Lauren's recovery is both an asset and a complication. Clients in small towns often know she is in recovery, and some seek her out for that reason; her experience lends her credibility and empathy. But her recovery also means she has needs of her own, including the meeting she has attended for twelve years, and the code's emphasis on competence includes attending to the worker's own well-being so that she can serve clients well. Giving up her meeting to avoid an awkward overlap would protect no one if it weakened her own recovery. Reamer's approach treats her situation not as a problem to be eliminated but as a boundary to be managed openly, with the client's understanding and the supervisor's oversight.
Values in Tension
Both dilemmas show values in tension: Lauren's recovery and Kim's privacy, Rosa's autonomy and her safety. The code does not resolve such tensions automatically. It asks social workers to weigh them, consult, act in clients' interests while respecting their rights and document their reasoning.
Conclusion
Lauren's two dilemmas are typical of addiction social work in small communities. The NASW Code of Ethics supplies the values and standards, Reamer's history shows why judging clients' choices has no place in the modern profession and Reamer's distinction between crossings and violations shows how an unavoidable dual relationship can be managed. Lauren kept her own recovery, protected Kim's and supported Rosa's choice with a plan for its risks, decisions she could justify, document and revisit.
References
National Association of Social Workers. (2021). Code of ethics of the National Association of Social Workers. https://www.socialworkers.org/About/Ethics/Code-of-Ethics/Code-of-Ethics-English
Reamer, F. G. (1998). The evolution of social work ethics. Social Work, 43(6), 488-500. https://doi.org/10.1093/sw/43.6.488
Reamer, F. G. (2003). Boundary issues in social work: Managing dual relationships. Social Work, 48(1), 121-133. https://doi.org/10.1093/sw/48.1.121
PAC 411 Module 3 instructions, in plain terms
Values and ethics are the third module of PAC 411, and assignments typically ask you to apply the profession's code to realistic dilemmas and show your reasoning. Read the Module 3 instructions as Aspen states them; Lauren and her clients are invented. Identify the values and specific standards involved. Explain relevant concepts, such as dual relationships and self-determination, with sources. Lay out options and their consequences. Consult and document. Reach a decision that you can justify. Apply the reasoning to the special conditions of addiction work, such as workers in recovery and small communities, citing the code and each source in APA 7. Show the conversation in which you raise a boundary issue with the client. Say how you would revisit the decision later.
How this PAC 411 Module 3 example is built
Lauren has attended the same Tuesday meeting for twelve years; her new client, Kim, appears there in week two. Another client, Rosa, wants to move back with her husband, who drinks heavily. The NASW Code of Ethics supplies core values and standards on self-determination, conflicts of interest and privacy. Reamer's Social Work article on the evolution of ethics explains how the profession moved from judging clients' morality to protecting their rights. Reamer's later article on boundary issues supplies the distinction between crossings and violations. Two decision tables lay out options. Lauren keeps her meeting while setting clear limits with Kim, documents the agreement and supports Rosa's choice with a relapse and safety plan and an offer of couples sessions.
Where the marks sit in the PAC 411 Module 3 rubric
Ethics papers earn credit for identifying specific standards, laying out options and reaching a justified decision. This example quotes the code's values and relevant standards accurately and uses Reamer's distinction to show that not every dual relationship is unethical. Both dilemmas are worked through in tables rather than resolved by intuition. The decisions protect clients while respecting Lauren's own recovery and Rosa's right to choose, which shows the balance the code requires. Consultation and documentation appear in each decision, as Reamer recommends, and the paper explains how small-town practice changes what is avoidable. Each decision can be reopened if circumstances change.
PAC 411 Module 3 help: mistakes that cost marks
Ethics papers often name values without applying specific standards. Cite the standards that apply and explain how. Another weakness is treating all dual relationships as forbidden; distinguish crossings from violations and consider the context, such as small towns or workers in recovery. Lay out options and their consequences before deciding. Respect self-determination, while addressing safety. Consult a supervisor and document the reasoning. Avoid moralizing about clients' choices. Consider how the decision affects the client, the worker and the agency. Explain how you would revisit the decision if circumstances change, since ethical choices are rarely made once. Ask whether the client has ever feared the person she is returning to.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Aspen University document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
More PAC 411 and Psychology and Addiction Studies sample papers
- PAC 411 Module 1: The Social Work Profession and Its History
- PAC 411 Module 2: Generalist Practice and Fields of Practice
- PAC 411 Module 4: The Strengths and Empowerment Perspective
- PAC 411 Module 5: Diversity, Social Justice and Human Rights
- PAC 411 Module 6: Human Behavior and the Social Environment
- PAC 411 Module 7: Populations at Risk
- PAC 411 Module 8: Social Policy and Services
- PAC 102 Module 3: Prevention in High Schools
- PAC 320 Module 1: The History and Theory of Addiction
- PAC 414 Module 7: Trauma and the Needs of Maltreated Children
- PAC 115 Module 3: Cardiovascular and Respiratory Terms
PAC 411 Module 3 questions, answered
What does PAC 411 Module 3 usually ask for?
Aspen's PAC 411 covers values and ethics in this module, so applying the NASW Code of Ethics to realistic dilemmas and justifying a decision is typical. Read your Module 3 prompt.
What are the core values of social work?
The NASW Code of Ethics names service, social justice, dignity and worth of the person, importance of human relationships, integrity and competence.
Is a dual relationship always unethical?
Reamer distinguished boundary crossings, which may be harmless or helpful, from boundary violations, which exploit or harm clients; context matters.
Where can I find a free PAC 411 Module 3 sample paper?
This page shows it in full: two ethical dilemmas for a social worker in recovery in a small town, worked through with the NASW Code of Ethics.
What is client self-determination?
The NASW standard that social workers respect clients' right to make their own choices, limited only when actions pose serious, foreseeable and imminent risk.