Cultural Sensitivity in the Workplace and Community

 

Advanced human services professional practitioners are bound by laws (e.g., Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964), by the NOHS code of ethics, and by organizational policies and procedures that promote ethical behavior and cultural sensitivity. Practitioners may encounter challenges when the laws, code of ethics, and organizational policies and procedures conflict. For example, suppose a service user asks the practitioner to pray with them at an intake assessment because they are experiencing stress. The practitioner reluctantly agrees to pray to avoid exacerbating the service user’s stress, even though the organization’s policy prohibits discussing religion. Leaders created the policy to prevent practitioners from trying to convert service users to their religion. The practitioner’s supervisor ultimately decides to terminate the practitioner for violating the policy. Did the supervisor make the right decision? How might these and other violations be better addressed?
explore a human services organization’s policies and procedures to determine how ethics training is addressed in relation to maintaining appropriate boundaries and cultural sensitivity. You will also use the NOHS code of ethics to evaluate the organization’s response to violations of policies and procedures.


• Identify a local human services organization with which you are familiar. This could be an organization in which you currently work or have previously worked, an organization in which a friend or family member works, or an organization that is well-known in your community.
• Go to the organization’s website and find the policies and procedures. Read the policies and procedures, paying particular attention to how the organization addresses ethics training in relation to maintaining appropriate boundaries and cultural sensitivity. In addition, consider the following questions:  
o Are there professionals who come from the same cultural groups served?
o Are professionals given training on self-reflection in order to be aware of potential bias or imposing their own values?
o Are alternative healing practices needed and implemented?
o How do the cultures in this community view mental health?
o Are assessments biased in terms of worldview or linguistic accessibility?
o Are interpreters available for all language groups?
o Are there cultural differences in symptoms or disorders?
o Are microaggressions evident?
o Are services restricted based on religious principles?

 

The core problem is that the organizational policy is too rigid and fails to distinguish between harmful proselytizing and therapeutic, client-initiated spiritual support.

 

Better Alternatives for Addressing Violations

 

Instead of immediate termination, which incurs costs (hiring, training, low morale) and disregards the practitioner's ethical intent, the organization could better address this and similar boundary/policy violations through a tiered, educational approach:

 

1. Progressive Disciplinary/Educational System

 

Verbal Warning/Consultation: For a first-time violation with clear client benefit (as in this case), the supervisor should issue a verbal warning. The focus should be on consultation, not punishment. The supervisor should explore the ethical reasoning with the practitioner:

“I understand your ethical intent to reduce stress, but what were the risks of this action? How could you have offered spiritual support without violating the policy?”

Written Warning/Mandatory Training: For repeat offenses or higher-risk behaviors. This should be paired with mandatory, targeted ethics training on "Client-Initiated Spiritual Support vs. Practitioner-Initiated Proselytizing."

Termination: Reserved for willful, high-risk violations (e.g., actual attempts to convert, financial exploitation, sexual misconduct) or continued non-compliance after progressive discipline.

Sample Answer

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The hypothetical situation involving the practitioner who prayed with a service user presents a complex ethical dilemma where the supervisor's decision to terminate the practitioner is defensible from a policy standpoint but ethically questionable from a humanistic and cultural sensitivity perspective.

 

Analysis of the Supervisor's Decision

 

The supervisor's decision to terminate the practitioner was likely not the "right" decision in terms of resolving the ethical conflict effectively, although it was a direct application of policy

Unlock Your Academic Potential with Our Expert Writers

Embark on a journey of academic success with Legit Writing. Trust us with your first paper and experience the difference of working with world-class writers. Spend less time on essays and more time achieving your goals.

Order Now