MSW 532 Week 5 Where E. Lives Conflict Case Example

Social Work with the Aging and Their Families Chamberlain University Free custom sample in 24 to 48h

This MSW 532 Week 5 sample paper studies a family conflict over whether E., 84, should stay home with aides or move to assisted living. Chamberlain MSW 532 (MSW-532), Social Work with the Aging and Their Families, presses Master of Social Work (MSW) students to place a constraint under every position. The case shows the daughter's housing tied to E.'s income, the son's distance from emergencies and the second spouse's own illness, keeps E.'s words apart, maps alignments and the silence of a grandson, names the house money under both positions, records each child's fear, dates three actions and explains what the worker declined, using Bowen theory.

CourseMSW 532 Social Work with the Aging and Their Families
Week5
Paper typeFamily conflict case study
LengthAbout 540 words, 5 pages
FormatAPA 7 student paper
SchoolChamberlain University
ProgramMaster of Social Work (MSW)
UpdatedOctober 2026

Free sample paper for MSW 532 Week 5

1

Family Conflict Case Study Over Where E. Should Live: A Constraint Under Each Relative's Position, E.'s Own Account Kept Apart, Alignments and Silences, the Money Nobody Names and Actions With Dates

Student Name

Chamberlain University

MSW 532: Social Work with the Aging and Their Families

Instructor Name

Month Day, Year

What this page is doingThe title puts a constraint under every position and keeps the older person's account separate, which is how this case study avoids taking a side.
2

Family Conflict Case Study Over Where E. Should Live: A Constraint Under Each Relative's Position, E.'s Own Account Kept Apart, Alignments and Silences, the Money Nobody Names and Actions With Dates

Positions, Each With a Constraint

D. wants E. to stay home with paid aide help. Constraint: D. lives in E.'s house, and its costs are paid from E.'s income. S. wants E. to move to assisted living near S. Constraint: S. is 90 minutes away and cannot respond to a weekday emergency; S. also manages the accounts and sees the cost of aides rising. M. wants no part in the decision. Constraint: M. is 79, has heart failure and has said M. cannot be a caregiver.

What this page is doingPlacing a constraint under each position shows the conflict as competing pressures rather than character flaws.
3

E.'s Account, Kept Apart

In two conversations, E. said, "I want to die in this house." E. also said, "I don't want my daughter wearing herself out." When asked which mattered more, E. said, "Both." E.'s account belongs to E. and is not an average of the children's.

Alignments and Silences

D. and E. are aligned on staying home. S. and M. talk by phone weekly and S. reports M. agrees with S.; M. has not said so to anyone else. Nobody has asked the grandson, who has the most flexible hours. In family systems terms, the conflict between D. and S. is being carried partly through M., who is pulled into a role M. has declined (Kerr & Bowen, 1988).

The grandson's silence matters because the grandson has the most flexible hours of anyone in the family and has never been asked to take on a regular task. Asking the grandson is one of the few options that adds care without adding money.

What this page is doingRecording who has never been asked points to a resource the conflict has hidden.
4

The Money Nobody Names

If E. moves, the house will likely be sold to pay for care, and D. would have to find somewhere to live. If E. stays, E.'s income pays for aides and D.'s housing continues. Neither child has said this. It sits under both positions.

What this page is doingNaming the money that sits under both positions is what makes the conflict discussable.
5

What the Worker Did

Met with E. alone on October 12. Met with D. and S. together on October 16, by video for S., with E. present for the first half. Asked each to say what they feared would happen under the other's plan. D.: "I'll be homeless." S.: "Dad will fall and lie there for hours." Both fears are realistic.

Actions With Dates

1. October 23: an occupational therapist visits the house to check whether E.'s falls can be reduced without a move. D. carries about 30 hours of care a week while working, a pattern national caregiver surveys find common (AARP & National Alliance for Caregiving, 2020), so the visit also looks at what would lighten D.'s load.

2. October 30: S. to share E.'s monthly budget with D. and the worker.

3. November 6: a family meeting with E. to review aide costs against assisted living costs, with a mediator from the county's elder mediation program.

What the Worker Declined

The worker declined S.'s request to tell E. that assisted living is necessary, and D.'s request to tell S. to stop pressuring. Both would have placed the worker in the triangle.

References

AARP & National Alliance for Caregiving. (2020). Caregiving in the U.S. 2020. AARP. https://www.aarp.org/ppi/info-2020/caregiving-in-the-united-states.html

Kerr, M. E., & Bowen, M. (1988). Family evaluation: An approach based on Bowen theory. W. W. Norton.

MSW 532 Week 5 instructions, in plain terms

The family conflict case study opens with positions, each short, and puts a constraint under every one: where the person lives, what they pay or depend on, how far away they are. Keep the older person's own account separate from the children's positions rather than averaging them. Map alignments, who sides with whom, and silences, who has not been asked. Name the money nobody mentions, which often sits under every position. Describe what the worker did and set actions with dates. Close with what the worker declined to do, since refusing a role in the conflict is part of the work. Avoid deciding which relative is right.

How the MSW 532 Week 5 example is put together

The positions section gives D.'s wish for home care with her housing dependent on E.'s income, S.'s wish for assisted living with his distance from emergencies and M.'s wish to stay out because of M.'s own heart failure. E.'s account quotes two wishes held together. The alignment section shows D. with E., S. reporting M.'s agreement and the grandson never asked, citing Kerr and Bowen (1988). The money section names the likely sale of the house. The worker's section records separate and joint meetings and each child's stated fear. Three dated actions follow, and the final section explains declining both children's requests to take their side.

Where the points sit in the MSW 532 Week 5 rubric

The case study loses most when it takes a side, describing one sibling as caring and the other as controlling. Faculty look for a constraint under each position, which turns character judgments into competing pressures. Credit goes to keeping the older person's account separate, mapping alignments and silences and naming the money that sits under the conflict. Actions with dates show the work moved. Saying what the worker declined to do demonstrates understanding of triangles. Theory should explain a pattern in this family. Sources need APA entries, and family members should be identified only by initials. A grandchild or neighbor who has never been asked counts as a silence worth recording. Faculty also look for the older person's words quoted rather than summarized.

MSW 532 Week 5 help: mistakes that cost points

Case studies most often lose points by describing personalities instead of constraints. Another common problem is treating the older person's agreement with one child as settling the matter. Some papers never mention the house or the inheritance, which is usually where the conflict lives. Others list recommendations with no dates. If your case is about an inheritance or a will, the same frame applies: positions with constraints, the person's own account, alignments, money and dated actions. A case study built this way for your family will end with a role the worker refused and why. Keep the older person's account in its own section.

Get a MSW-532 Week 5 example written to your instructions

Send the case study instructions with the grading rows and the family material your section attached, and a custom example is written to them and returned inside 24 to 48 hours. The first one is free, built on the relatives your case names and on the constraints it actually gives each of them.

More MSW 532 papers and MSW samples

MSW 532 Week 5 questions, answered

Do I have to say which sibling is right?

No, and a paper that does has answered a question the assignment withheld. What earns marks is holding the positions apart, showing what each rests on, and describing what the worker did inside the disagreement. Where the case supplies a decision that has to be made anyway, say who has the standing to make it and what that still leaves unsettled.

My section's case is really about an inheritance. Is that in scope?

It is, and leaving it out weakens the analysis. Write what each relative stands to gain or lose from the outcome as a fact about their position, sourced to the case, and stop there. An accusation needs evidence the assignment has not handed you, and a paper making one has moved into the territory of the reporting week.

The man agrees with one of his children. Does that settle it?

It settles what he wants, which is a great deal, and settles nothing about what the others will do. Record the agreement, say what he is entitled to decide for himself, then keep describing the arrangement, because the daughter whose hours the plan depends on has still not agreed to give them.

Where can I find a free MSW 532 Week 5 sample paper?

A complete MSW 532 Week 5 family conflict case study about where an older parent should live is posted here, with margin notes on constraints and money.

What money sits under the conflict in the MSW 532 Week 5 sample?

The house: a move would likely mean selling it and the daughter losing her home, while staying keeps her housing but relies on her unpaid care, and neither child has said so.