Introduction
All the realities surrounding the healthcare and welfare needs of all people under the age of 18 calls for the close attention of professionals, patient and parents/guardians. The concept of self-determination indicates that patients, even at child levels, have a firm right to determine their recovery trajectories. One way of activating a self-determination route is through the display of compliance at all recovery processes. As an example, if a patient exhibiting signs of behavioral deviance agrees to operate within a change based platform, they stand a chance of assuring autonomy and getting ‘released’ from any time of a holding environment (Mattner, Ehrlich, Chester, Crompton & Kendall, 2017). Any form of interference in the recovery process of a given employee may lead to the creation of poor choices. If a patient makes poor choices, they may lose the right to lead independent lives. Therefore, the issue of letting patients recover completely is a sure way towards the realization of the autonomous living.
The Ethical Dilemma
The story of Jennifer, a 15-year-old teenager in the city’s premier foster care has a challenge of leaving home when least expected to go. However, she has displayed a deep commitment resume in activating proper change mechanisms. While she made physical absence from the foster care, Jennifer did manage to sustain all components of the program in and outside the foster care facility. It is against this background that the nursing arm of the foster care made a relevant decision to let her go from the foster care home. However, as a child, Jenifer was more of an involuntary guest since she could not make decisions on her own. Her plight is the situation faced by millions of children faced by the dilemma of accessing release from foster homes against ethical requirements on involuntary foster care.
Self-determination is the ultimate objective in all psychosocial reform processes. An individual, who can direct their timelines and live, frees social workers from the burden of allocating time and resources to such people and creating a mentally recharged environment. The evidence of psychiatric barriers in foster care attendants indicates that they cannot live under minimal care (Mental Health America, 2019). However, the recovery of a person with a mental illness to the point of self-determination is the most excellent point of success in social based recovery. Three concepts inform the realities faced by [people facing mental challenges. First, they need a sense of social inclusion. While separating them from society is a necessary healing process and an appropriate mechanism, it is their integration into the normal functioning of the organization that facilitates proper recovery. It is the reconstruction of productive and meaningful conversations that assures nurses of the eventual healing position of mental case victims.
The right to self-determination is, in its most basic form, a human right. A person who has successfully gone through the entire healing process should not co-exist with those yet to achieve such a milestone. Therefore, if Jennifer is fully recovered and can re-integrate into the society, the nurse of welfare official has to let her go. The application of blanket policies is the first reason why professionals deny self-determination and autonomy to those who most need it. It is also another way of creating vague definitions around the issues of recovery. If a nurse fails to diagnose Jennifer as a recovered teenager, they will unethically deny her right to deserved self-determination.
As a professional with substantive knowledge on recovery statuses and human rights around psychosocial issues, the presiding officer should ensure that a child or a sick person access all their rights. Any gap around this truth can only be traced and blamed on the professional. While a patient may also get an advantage by having this information, professional ethics dictate that the professional bears first responsibility in understanding all facts, and rights, around self-determination.
Perspective of Society
The society, alongside self-determination, exists in the lines of professional players and social actors. In this case, Jennifer can either look up to professional welfare nurses or rely on interpretation from the parents, guardians or relatives. If the professional society chooses to ignore ethical values and retain her within the foster care, Jennifer can only access assistance if and only if her guardians are knowledgeable enough to understand and interpret her self-determination rights (Piltch, 2016). As a consumer of social services, Jennifer has a firm reason for autonomy and choice. However, as a child, this right only works if those charged with her care understand and accept its existence. The society, therefore, works on the knowledge platforms on the reasons possible under the autonomy need.
Perspective of Profession
Professionals have various capacities aimed at ensuring the full path to self-determination. Indeed, it is their voluntary and committed action towards realizing healing that assures self-determination. Five factors can provide the success of a recovery program and hence achieve self-determination. One, access to complete information on recovery is a critical step in creating strong recovery partnerships between professionals and nurses (Taylor et al., 2016). The in-depth exploration of all available interventions is another way of ensuring that professionals are fully committed to facilitating self-determination. Thirdly, the professional network can link up recovering warriors with mentors as a way of ensuring follow-up and creating a socially convenient recovery program. Mentorship is a viable tactic in assuring full recovery. Professionals also have the work of directing patients towards the engagement of productive work. By linking up to Jennifer with sports’ facilities and book clubs, the nurses and her guardians can gradually turn her mental status into positivity. The ultimate goal of activating a change management process is overturning grooming and negative realities into positive experiences.
Perspective of Religion
Almost every other individual around the world lives or associates themselves with religion. While the globe has a significant number of atheists, it is correct to present that religion affects every other person living around the planet. From a religious perspective, denying a deserving person a chance to lead an autonomous life is equal to caging. Putting Jennifer in a foster care setting even after her full recovery is akin to unethically retaining her in a prison system (Taylor et al., 2016). However, the challenge in basing interpretation of religion is that these perspectives are not legally binding. While people may esteem to hold high moral standards, they may also ignore them since they do not carry legal implications. This situation ultimately complicates the use of a religious lens to define the ethical dilemma. It is best that legally enforceable rules and policies limit decisions around the self-determination status of a client.
Ethical Justification Model
The ethical framework within mental care systems calls for the absolute followership of all the principles set out in the professional service charter. While ethics are a professional set of items, it is necessary that social workers carry themselves in a manner displaying sensitivity to the immediate situations of their patients/clients. In the case of Jennifer, it is possible to have an independent and accurate report without having to compromise her position. The only way around the ethical justification model is carrying out the right procedures at all times. The law or policies within a charter framework may define specific terms; however, it is the individual conduct of each professional that ultimately determines how such a person implements personal and professional ethical codes. It is the intersection of personal commitment against professional obligations that represent the moral values followed by an individual. In Jennifer’s case, it is merely necessary to let her go home. The most appropriate measure is creating follow-up mechanisms to ensure that her progress report is easily accessible, every time.
Challenges in Self- Determination
The biggest problem in addressing the needs around self-determination lies in time management processes and decision factors. If Jennifer recovers in May only for her to get exit permission in July, the access to self-determination will not dilute the inconvenience caused for two months. Ultimate help and assistance arise from timely decision making and practical observation of her emotional needs. Indeed, there are so many people living unnecessarily, in foster and residential care settings simply because an officer somewhere took a lot of time in the evaluation of their cases. While Jennifer may not suffer the same fate, it is highly necessary to remind users that bureaucracy around mental health realities has also cost the taxpayer massive amounts of unnecessary expenditure. Foster cares are run on tight budgets with support, in public care homes, coming from public coffers. It is also expected that those around her would be able to offer the most required assistance in case she needs the same. Unwarranted extension of a patient’s time over and above the recommended timeline hugely strains public expenditure. Decisive action is the way to go in efficiently sorting out cases like those of Jennifer.
General Realities in Organizational Psychology
Psychology is the branch of science that amplifies the reality of interdependence of individuals and organization. It is a conceptual framework designed to understand that organized workplaces can result in multiple benefits across all stakeholders up to the point of rendering positive benefits to the general society. Indeed, the effects of applying scientific principles to hitherto economic issues have been felt the world over. Satisfied employees have, directly, leading to increased revenues for companies. All organizations bear a given form of challenges in their day to day obligation delivering results. Most of these difficulties have a solution at hand only that the wrong prescription is applied. Industrial and organizational psychology fills this gap by presenting evidenced based responses to all workplace needs.
Industrial and organizational psychology is, as an academic discipline, guided by some theories. These concepts share some framework similarities with the overall psychology end only deviating to focus on the workplace. It is arguably correct that psychology typically studies human behavior. There is, thus, a consistent pattern in the critical psychological components of behavior, motivation and suitable environments. Even before transiting into the theories, one common factor in psychology is that there is a significant value when the needs of an individual worker are harmonized with the goals of an organization. This end can be achieved through some actions. One, the worker can be professionally trained to execute the job accurately.
On the other hand, the position can be customized to take the most of out of an employee’s ability. The other important facet in I/O is structuring the organization in a manner that attends to all needs. In that line, leaders and managers of such an organization must be adequately equipped to organize functional processes in such a way that every stakeholder’s need is met.
The first of the concepts in this field fall under social organization theories. This directly leads to studying how personal relations at the workplace can affect productivity. Further, the same theories address the all-important factor of employee motivation. Psychologist MaxWeber came with the bureaucratic approach that scrutinizes organizational leadership. Closely tied to this sociological concept is the administrative procedure. Weber was attempting to show how an impersonal attitude by the bosses towards employees can directly lead to a high sense of disorganization in effect diluting collective productivity. This work is seen as a response to the traditional theories that assumed the workplace was a closed system — the many organization’s methods to illuminate on the humanistic elements of the workplace. Individuals have their human needs, and any team is overlooking this aspect is doing so at significant risk. The open systems theory, a new response to the traditional systems also take groups as unique entities. Therefore, every other team must design its internal systems according to its needs. Consistent research indicates that traditionally structured companies/organizations have had a hard time trying to fit in within rapidly changing environments.
Some researchers have invested their time in discerning the all-important concept of psychology. M.F Dollard and A.B Bakker in their paper on psychosocial safety climate in the work environment. The two writers envision a working model that correctly factors the psychological needs in the workplace. Critical among these requirements is the need to cater to the health of the employees. Safety, especially in the mechanized environment, is another top priority for employees. One, an organization has the obligation of ensuring that their premises are full of clean air, free from excessive noise and away from environmental eyesores such as garbage sights. Provision of a facility meeting all these requirements transforms the environment into a clean place. Ultimately, the worker operates with a free mind and can execute their tasks in peace. This is the first duty of ensuring that the workplace can harbor productive individuals.
Another critical perspective covered by I/O and shared by Daher, N, is how organizations can create a culture that may translate into innovation. In reality, many organizations overlook the importance of a standardized culture and the effect rendered to an organization. However, some organizations such as Google have sustained a path of innovation mainly due to cultivating a culture that supports such. The best strategy towards fostering creativity is operating in an outward format. In this scenario, workers are encouraged to think beyond the organization but come up with solutions that fit within their entity. This technique can be replicated across every hierarchy level in the body. The catch, however, is that leaders in such an object must be honest, sincere and actionable to walk the full journey of incorporating this as an organizational cycle. The leaders must themselves inculcate that culture to facilitate sufficient motivation that can be taken up by the rest. Otherwise, integrating a positive culture in an organization is not an easy affair given such values as consistency; productivity and a high level of motivation are required.
M.Wnuk introduces another critical dimension in this debate of Industrial and organizational psychology. The psychologist says that an organization must condition its systems in such a manner as to award satisfaction to all employees. How can this do? In a conceptual revelation done with a dose of organizational economics, Wnuk says that the company/entity concerned must first profile the needs of its stakeholders. One, is the company providing the best remuneration rates in its sector? The pay must not be done in block format but must be aligned to the qualifications, competency, and productivity of a worker. Periodical bonuses awarded by performance can be introduced. Such amenities as paid leaves, sustained training retreats, cups of coffee and lunches may seem like luxuries, but their resultant effect on work happiness and satisfaction can work wonders for the company. Also, the management of the company must, itself, apply an aura of sanctification and confidence in their jobs. They can also, positively, influence the workers by exhibited excellent communication and being at ease while working. Leaders can also listen to the issues raised by their employees in a passionate but bi-partisan attitude. Sincerity must also be employed in solving work challenges relating to workers.
References
Mattner, S., Ehrlich, C., Chester, P., Crompton, D., & Kendall, E. (2017). Self-determination: what do people who experience severe mental illness want from public mental health services?. International Journal Of Integrated Care, 17(3), 50. doi: 10.5334/ijic.3162
Mental Health America. (2019). Position Statement 36: Self-Determination Initiatives. Retrieved from https://www.mentalhealthamerica.net/positions/self-determination
Piltch, C. (2016). The role of self-determination in mental health recovery. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, 39(1), 77-80. doi: 10.1037/prj0000176
Taylor, E., Perlman, D., Moxham, L., Pegg, S., Patterson, C., & Brighton, R. et al. (2016). Recovery Camp: Assisting consumers toward enhanced self-determination. International Journal Of Mental Health Nursing, 26(3), 301-308. doi: 10.1111/inm.12227
