Photo credit: BigStockPhoto/Freshpixel
by Allan Barsky, JD, MSW, PhD
For many social work students, their entrée into the study of social work ethics begins with an introduction to the National Association of Social Workers Code of Ethics (NASW, 2021). The Code is a valuable educational tool, offering social workers three levels of ethical guidance:
- Values – six foundational ideals to which social workers aspire
- Ethical principles – six general guidelines for professional conduct
- Ethical standards – more than 150 specific guidelines for ethical practice
When faced with complex or challenging situations, social workers can refer to the Code to facilitate ethical deliberation and problem solving.
Although the Code provides practical guidance for resolving ethical issues, it is not the only lens through which ethical issues can be examined. Social work ethics courses also introduce students to various ethics theories that can enhance ethical decision making, particularly when social workers are faced with ethical dilemmas—situations in which there are conflicting professional, legal, or agency guidelines (Barsky, 2023). In these situations, prudent social workers may have legitimate differences of opinion about the best way to respond. There may be no one course of action that satisfies all the worker’s ethical, legal, and agency obligations.
Two commonly taught ethical theories are deontology and teleology. According to deontology, social workers (and all people) should act according to certain universal principles. These principles include demonstrating respect, telling the truth, keeping promises, preserving life, and helping others in need. Whereas deontology focuses on intending to act ethically, teleology focuses on the consequences of the act. According to teleology, social workers (and all people) should consider a range of options for resolving the ethical issue, and choose the option that leads to the greatest good.
This article introduces a third ethical theory, virtue ethics, and in particular, Aristotle’s concept of the Golden Mean. Unlike deontology and teleology—which emphasize behavioral guidelines and outcomes, respectively—virtue ethics focuses on living ethically and being a good ethical person. It asks us to consider not just how to behave, but who we should strive to become in terms of moral character.
Virtue ethics aligns with the social work value of “human relationships.” Whereas deontology and teleology assume that decision makers are detached rational thinkers, virtue ethics recognizes that ethics are also shaped by social contexts, emotions, personal morals, and relationships. Rather than having fixed rules or guidelines, virtue ethics allows social workers to take their relationships with specific clients, family members, employers, and others into account as they determine what it means to be an ethical social worker in a particular circumstance, taking moral character and professional identity into account.
Virtue Ethics and the Golden Mean
According to Aristotle (~350 BCE), living a good life (or achieving eudaimonia) means developing and embodying particular virtues (Wahat Hatib, 2022). Happiness and fulfillment come from being a person who embraces virtues such as being honest, sincere, generous, respectful, courageous, empathic, and witty. Virtues are enduring human qualities that reflect how a person thinks, feels, and acts. For example, if I am an honest person, I will tell the truth, not because of a rule or fear of punishment, but because honesty is central to who I am. If you are an empathic social worker, you will naturally tune in to clients’ thoughts and feelings and respond with empathic understanding—not merely as a clinical technique but as an expression of your moral being.
Aristotle suggests that each virtue represents a mean (or middle ground) between two extremes (Kraut, 2024). At one extreme, there is a vice that is defined by “excess.” At the other extreme, there is a vice that is defined by “deficiency.” The virtue of generosity, for instance, is a mean between the extremes of “stinginess” and “wastefulness.” It’s not exactly a half-way point, but somewhere in the middle of the extremes. Consider a situation in which you are serving a population of clients that has significant needs for your services. If you were stingy, you might refuse to provide any services to such clients—in other words, you would prioritize your self-interest over the client needs. A wasteful social worker, by contrast, might provide free services indiscriminately, even when those services are unlikely to be effective. A generous social worker practicing moderation might offer pro bono (free) services selectively—perhaps prioritizing clients with the most urgent needs or greatest potential to benefit—while still considering sustainability and cost-effectiveness.
According to Aristotle, virtue lies in the "Golden Mean"—a balanced middle ground tailored to the situation and the individual. It is good to be generous, but not overly generous. It is good to be compassionate, but not overly compassionate. To determine the Golden Mean in a particular situation, there is no mathematical calculation or specific formula to calculate the most ethical course of action. Each situation will require thoughtful reflection and holistic analysis, perhaps engaging in discussions with supervisors, ethics consultants, or professional colleagues. The right amount of generosity depends on the situation, giving room for subjective evaluation of the context and how generosity is being defined and implemented.
The Virtue of Compassion
Let’s consider the virtue of compassion. Compassion involves paying attention to and recognizing another person’s situation, needs, pains, and strengths. It also entails a commitment to act for their well-being. According to virtue ethics, compassion may be defined as a mean between two extremes: emotional openness and moral judgment. In other words, it is virtuous to be attentive and responsive to the needs of others, but not to the point of overindulgence. Assume that a social worker is counseling a client who is experiencing intimate partner abuse. A compassionate social worker has an emotional connection with the client, tuning in to their pain, fear, or other emotions, while also exercising clear ethical judgment. The social worker avoids overwhelming emotionality, not becoming overly sentimental or over-involved.
When social workers become over-involved with clients, they may lose objectivity and blur roles, becoming more like a friend or family member than a professional helping agent. For instance, over-involved social workers might try to save the client (e.g., inviting a client to stay at their home). At the same time, social workers should avoid becoming detached, distant, or under-involved. Under-involved social workers might minimize the client’s situation (“It’s not so bad.”) or blame the client (“Why don’t you just leave?).
A social worker reflecting the Golden Mean of compassion would demonstrate empathy, help the client process their concerns and explore options, and empower the client to make self-determined choices. Compassion becomes not merely a feeling or sentiment, but a skillful, ethical orientation grounded in both care and discernment.
The Virtue of Moral Courage
Moral courage entails doing what is ethically right, even in situations where there might be risks to the social worker, such as criticism, retaliation, professional isolation, or damage to one’s reputation (Strom-Gottfried, 2016). Consider a social work student who becomes aware that her practicum supervisor is financially exploiting clients. The right thing to do would be to address the situation by speaking to her supervisor, the program director, or another person who can help remedy the situation. The student might be afraid to raise the issue, fearing the supervisor might retaliate and the student might not pass her practicum. The virtue of moral courage suggests the student should do what is right and take steps to protect the clients from exploitation.
In terms of the Golden Mean, remember that moral courage reflects a moderate position between two extremes: cowardice and recklessness. When a social worker acts out of cowardice, they may fail to speak out or intervene when witnessing injustices, abuse, or other unethical behaviors. They may be acting on fears that are out of proportion to the actual risks. When a social worker acts out of recklessness, they may be taking bold actions without taking adequate attention to relevant risks, or perhaps not considering the most prudent approach to resolving the issue.
Thus, cowardice might mean the student does nothing to address the financial exploitation of clients. Recklessness might result in the student lecturing the supervisor about being abusive and boldly threatening legal action. The Golden Mean of moral courage might mean working with the faculty liaison to develop a prudent, measured strategy to protect clients from exploitation, while also protecting the student from supervisory retaliation. A courageous social worker is willing to stand up for what is right and is willing to assume some risks; however, a courageous social worker also uses discernment, consultation, and risk analysis to ensure their course of action is prudent and well substantiated.
The Virtue of Respect
Being respectful means treating clients, colleagues, and others with dignity, empathy, cultural sensitivity, and professional regard, regardless of the situation. Social workers are respectful of others, regardless of whether they are being treated with respect. Respect may be demonstrated by honoring clients’ self-determination, privacy, and social identities (NASW, 2021). Respect should be viewed from the other person’s perspective: what types of treatment do they consider to be respectful or disrespectful? I might believe that it is respectful to shake a client’s hand upon greeting them; a client might view this type of physical contact as disrespectful, for instance, if it violates the client’s cultural norms about touch between men and women.
Respect may be viewed as the Golden Mean between disrespect and excessive deference. Disrespect is often marked by dismissiveness or devaluation, such as when a social worker ignores a client’s wishes, shames a client for problematic behaviors, or disparages a client’s religious identity. Excessive deference might be reflected when a social worker simply accepts and supports a client’s harmful behaviors or unhealthy patterns of relationships.
Assume that a client is engaging in self-harmful behavior such as cutting. A disrespectful social worker might suggest the client is weak-willed or stupid for engaging in such behavior. An excessively deferent social worker might not only condone the cutting, but also avoid discussing it, not wanting to offend the client or appear judgmental. In contrast, a respectful social worker would show empathy for why the client is cutting. With the client’s permission, the social worker could also explore the underlying causes of cutting and offer to discuss safer, healthier coping strategies. Although respectful social workers honor client self-determination and privacy, respect also includes having frank and sensitive discussions with clients and others to address harmful or risky situations.
Conclusion
Virtues reveal who we are as moral beings—including who we are as professional social workers. By consciously embodying our virtues in every interaction, whether personal or professional, we actively cultivate the character required for ethical practice (Barsky, 2023). To further support our virtues, we can surround ourselves with people of good moral character and nurture ethical work environments.
Aristotle’s doctrine of the Golden Mean teaches us that genuine virtue lies between extremes of excess and deficiency—the courageous person, for example, avoids both cowardice and recklessness. In social work practice, this means not only striving for honesty, compassion, and moral courage, but also tempering these traits with discernment and practical wisdom (phronesis) to apply them appropriately in each unique context. There can certainly be too much or too little of a “good thing.” Self-awareness is central: we must recognize situations where our virtues may lean toward an extreme and adjust accordingly.
As Aristotle reminds us, moderation is not a fixed midpoint—it varies with the situation, guided by reasoned analysis and contextual understanding. This ongoing reflective practice transforms virtues from abstract ideals into guiding dispositions—earnestly embodied through habit, deliberation, consultation, and insight.
For social workers, the Golden Mean offers a robust framework for navigating ethical dilemmas. It shifts us from rule-following or consequence-calculation, grounding moral action in character and relational contexts. Employing virtues like moral courage, respect, compassion, social justice, and temperance helps us respond flexibly—rather than formulaically—to the nuanced challenges that we may encounter in our work with clients, family members, professional colleagues, and communities.
Ultimately, cultivating virtue is a lifelong project. It unfolds as we reflect on our tendencies, receive feedback from peers and supervisors, and choose reasoned moderation in the face of real-world complexity. This dynamic, character-centered approach supports not only ethical compliance, but a flourishing professional identity—one that honors both our own humanity and the well-being of the clients and communities we serve.
References
Aristotle. (n.d.; orig. ~350 BCE). Nicomachean Ethics (Book II, Chapters 6–7). In The Internet Classics Archive. https://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/nicomachaen.2.ii.html
Barsky, A. E. (2023). Essential ethics for social work practice. Oxford University Press.
Kraut, R. (2024, rev.). Aristotle’s ethics. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle-ethics/
National Association of Social Workers. (2021). Code of ethics. Author. https://www.socialworkers.org/About/Ethics/Code-of-Ethics/Code-of-Ethics-English
Strom-Gottfried, K. J. (2016). Moral courage. In A. Viera & R. Kramer (Eds.), Management and leadership skills for medical faculty: A practical handbook (pp. 183-190). Springer Science + Business.
Wahat Hatib, A. (2022). Aristotle’s theory of the golden mean: An exposition [Manuscript]. PhilArchive. https://philarchive.org/archive/WAHATO-2
Allan Barsky, JD, MSW, PhD, 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.