Ethics Alive! Elections in Light of Social Work Values
by Allan Barsky, PhD, JD, MSW
Tuesday, November 3, 2020, is Election Day, the culmination of many months of campaigning for local, state, and national positions. Many Americans will vote well before election day, via mail and early in-person voting. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the elections is uncertain. Not only will this pandemic influence who we elect for various positions, but it will also affect how we vote and the manner in which we vote. Given the current challenges facing the United States and countries across the globe, these elections will be very consequential.
As Abramovitz et al. (2019) noted in their research on social work voter mobilization, “The social work profession has always known that voting supports a robust democracy, a just society, and an equitable welfare state” (p. 624). In this article, I will explore how the six core values of social work (as stated in the National Association of Social Workers Code of Ethics, 2018) can be used to inform our participation as social workers in the current election processes.
Social Justice
Social justice may be defined in terms of equity or fairness in how wealth, opportunities, rights, responsibilities, privileges, and hardships are apportioned among various individuals and groups in society. Standard 6.04(a) of the NASW Code guides social workers to participate in social and political action “to ensure that all people have equal access to the resources, employment, services, and opportunities they require to meet their basic human needs and to develop fully.” Standard 6.04(b) implores social workers to act in a manner that expands “choice and opportunity for all people, with special regard for vulnerable, disadvantaged, oppressed, and exploited people and groups.” Standard 6.04(c) states that social workers “should promote conditions that encourage respect for cultural and social diversity within the United States and globally.” Standard 6.04(d) states that social workers “should act to prevent and eliminate domination of, exploitation of, and discrimination against any person, group, or class on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, color, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, age, marital status, political belief, religion, immigration status, or mental or physical ability.”
Together, these standards suggest not only that social workers should vote for candidates who support social justice, but that they should also support candidates and groups who promote each of these elements of social justice. The code does not dictate which party or which individuals to support. As social workers, we need to use our own analysis, critical thinking, and decision-making to determine whom to support and how.
One of the most empowering ways to advocate for social justice is to ensure that all Americans 18 years of age and older have a right to vote and the ability to participate in the vote. When laws or administrative decisions make it more difficult for particular groups to participate in the vote—by virtue of race, poverty, party affiliation, or any other discriminatory factor—we should be at the forefront of advocacy to overturn these laws and decisions. When certain individuals or groups lack information, transportation, or other resources to participate in elections, we should work with community groups that connect people with these resources, so they can exercise their right to vote.
Integrity
Integrity refers to being honest, credible, and trustworthy. As social workers, we should support candidates who embrace and model these aspects of integrity. Some might argue that all politicians lie, break the law, or breach the public trust. Perhaps this statement is true in the sense that no politician has a perfect score on integrity. Still, we should gather credible evidence and use our critical thinking to determine which candidates display the most integrity—even when there are some significant concerns. We should avoid the temptation to skip voting or skip advocating simply because no candidate displays perfect integrity. Not voting and not speaking up may lead to the least qualified and least moral person being elected.
Integrity should guide us in how we participate in election advocacy and discourse. There is a lot of misinformation being spread on both social media and traditional media. We need to detect what information is true and what information is not. When one candidate or media outlet makes disparaging claims against another candidate, we should check various sources of information, searching for information that is most credible. We may check the veracity of information by referring to fact-check websites such as PolitiFact, Snopes, and FactCheck. We should be aware of the political perspectives of various sources of information so we can discern partisan biases from balanced analysis and evidence-based reporting.
When we advocate, we should advocate based on truth, avoiding exaggeration, misrepresentation, and outright fraud (Standard 4.04). We should also act to correct misinformation, encouraging others to also seek out the truth. We do not need to become the social media police, but we should consider when it is important to engage with others to correct falsehoods. Remaining silent may be tantamount to condoning or supporting the falsehoods.
Human Relationships
The value of human relationships means that social workers appreciate the importance of relationships such as families, friends, co-workers, community groups, recreational groups, and cultural groups. In terms of elections, this value suggests that we should consider candidates who foster collaboration and better relationships between people. We can tell a lot about candidates from their campaigns, including how they talk about their supporters, opponents, marginalized groups, and organizations that are vital to democracy and civil society. Yes, many of our elections have become very contentious and adversarial. Yes, many candidates make use of negative campaigning, scapegoating, and pitting one group against another. Still, we need to consider which of the candidates are most supportive—in word and in action—of promoting positive human relationships.
When we engage with candidates and others (in person, in writing, or online), we should also promote positive relationships. To be most effective as an advocate during an election, we need to work with others, connecting with existing groups or organizing new groups that support candidates and movements that support social work values.
Competence
Competence refers to having the knowledge, self-awareness, and skills to perform particular jobs or functions. Competence may be gained through work experience, education, mentoring, supervision, and direct practice. We need to consider which specific competencies are desirable for particular positions and particular functions that we think will be most important. For instance, a mayor position requires knowledge of local issues, whereas a president is required to have knowledge of national and international issues. Some competencies are common across types of elected positions, for instance, communication, leadership, negotiation, critical thinking, and organizational skills. Some skills may be specific to current issues, for instance, managing issues related to a pandemic, ensuring adequate healthcare resources are available, identifying creative ways to manage the economy and social interaction, and inspiring people to rise up and work together in the face of crisis.
Service
Service refers to ensuring that people have access to resources to help them address their needs and to reach their full potential. As social workers, we elevate the needs of others above our self-interests. The primary function of elected officials is also to serve. As Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address suggests, our democracy is based on “government of the people, by the people, and for the people.” Accordingly, we should be looking for leaders who focus on the needs of the people, doing what is best for the city, state, or nation that they represent—including the most vulnerable people in society. We should be wary of leaders who are apt to misuse their power, who have a history of corruption, or who lack basic empathy for the people they are serving.
There are many ways in which elected leaders can ensure that people have access to housing, education, health care, and basic security. We can debate over what types of tax systems, incentives, regulatory systems, programs, and social policies are most effective. However, we need to support candidates who eschew corruption and self-aggrandizement. Candidates who reflect the value of service are ones who focus on the needs of their constituents.
Dignity and Worth of the Person
Dignity and worth of the person means that social workers respect and value all people, regardless of culture, race, political affiliation, religion, sexual orientation, gender, disability, or other social identifications. We should seek out and support candidates who use respectful language and promote social policies that value that dignity and worth of all people. We should alert candidates and supporters about the importance of respect in the manner of how they deal with people. We also need to remind ourselves to be respectful in our own dealing with others, including with people who have different political leanings. We do not have to agree with others to demonstrate respect. We can listen, ask clarifying questions, and encourage constructive dialogue. Rather than “booing” at rallies, blocking friends on social media, or sharing “angry emojis,” we can promote what we believe to be good, true, and desirable. And we can vote.
When considering the dignity and worth of our clients, it is important to remember that we should respect their values and choices, including their political choices. We should not impose our values or take advantage of our professional relationships with clients to further our political interests (Standard 1.06(c)). Likewise, we should not use our employing organization’s resources to support our personal political causes. For social workers working in political organizations, using their resources does not raise a conflict of interest. However, when providing direct services to individuals, families, and groups, we need to be particularly careful that we do not take advantage of our positions or misuse resources.
As citizens, we may participate in political activities and support political causes, as long as these activities do not harm our professional relationships with clients. Thus, when we submit messages on social media or carry a sign at a political rally, we should be aware that clients (or potential clients) may have access to this information and it may affect our personal relationships. We should use language that is respectful and honest. Our public personas should reflect our professional values.
Conclusion
The NASW Code of Ethics does not specifically require social workers to vote or to participate in electoral processes. However, voting and participating in electoral processes are vital ways to promote social justice and the other core values of the social work profession. With all the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic, misinformation being spread through various media, and negative campaigning, we may be tempted to disengage, isolate ourselves, or lose hope. We need to counter these urges by focusing on how we can have a positive impact. This is the time to empower ourselves and our communities.
Find your purpose in the upcoming election. Connect with likeminded people. Whether it is voting, helping others register to vote, helping people get to the polls (in person or via mail), supporting candidates who reflect your values, or engaging in constructive discussions and advocacy, please stay engaged.
Elections have consequences to our democracy, our judiciary, our health, our education, and so many other aspects of our individual and communal well-being. We can make a difference.
Resources
Abramovitz, M., Sherraden, M., Hill, K., Smith, T. R., Lewis, R., & Mizrahi, T. (2019). Voting is social work: Voices from the national social work voter mobilization campaign. Journal of Social Work Education, 55(4), 624-644.
Barsky, A. E. (2017). Conflict resolution for the helping professions. Oxford University Press.
League of Women Voters. (n.d.). https://www.lwv.org
Vote.org. (n.d.). https://www.vote.org
Voting is social work. (n.d.). https://votingissocialwork.org/
Allan Barsky, PhD, JD, MSW, is Professor of Social Work at Florida Atlantic University and author of Social Work Values and Ethics (Oxford University Press).
The views expressed in this article do not necessarily represent the views of any of the organizations to which the author is affiliated, or the views of The New Social Worker magazine or White Hat Communications.