| Course | MSW 555 Capstone/Integrative Seminar |
|---|---|
| Week | 6 |
| Paper type | Ethics analysis |
| Length | About 520 words, 5 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Chamberlain University |
| Program | Master of Social Work (MSW) |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for MSW 555 Week 6
Ethics Analysis of T. Disclosing That T. Drives to Work Sober on a Suspended License: A Real Conflict Between Confidentiality and Public Safety, Both Traced to Standards, Everyone With a Stake, Four Options, a Decision With Its Cost and What Would Have Changed It
Student Name
Chamberlain University
MSW 555: Capstone/Integrative Seminar
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Ethics Analysis of T. Disclosing That T. Drives to Work Sober on a Suspended License: A Real Conflict Between Confidentiality and Public Safety, Both Traced to Standards, Everyone With a Stake, Four Options, a Decision With Its Cost and What Would Have Changed It
The Situation
In session 13, T., 34, court-ordered after a second drunk-driving arrest, said T. had driven to work twice in the past week, sober, because the coworker who usually drives was sick and T. would have lost the job. T.'s license is suspended. T.'s release allows me to report only attendance and completion to the probation officer.
The Two Obligations
Confidentiality: the Code protects information shared in professional relationships and limits disclosure to cases of serious, foreseeable and imminent harm or legal requirement (National Association of Social Workers, 2021). Federal rules for substance use treatment records restrict disclosure beyond the written consent (Confidentiality of Substance Use Disorder Patient Records, 2024).
Public safety: driving without a license is unlawful, and T. has a history of impaired driving. The Code also recognizes responsibility to the broader society.
Everyone With a Stake
T., who could lose the job or face jail. T.'s child, who depends on T.'s income. Other road users. The probation officer and court. The agency, whose program depends on courts' trust. Me, as the person who heard it.
Listing everyone with a stake shows that the choice is not only between T. and the public. The child's interest sits on T.'s side; the agency's interest is mixed; other road users are protected most by T. not driving at all, which the backup ride plan addresses directly.
Four Options
1. Report to the probation officer. Not permitted by the consent; no imminent harm since T. was sober.
2. Say nothing and do nothing. Leaves a risk of further unlicensed driving unaddressed.
3. Address it with T. in session: the legal risk, a plan for when the coworker is sick and whether T. wants to tell the probation officer.
4. Consult my supervisor without T.'s name, then decide.
The Decision
Options 4 and 3. My supervisor agreed there was no duty or permission to disclose. In session 14, T. and I made a backup ride plan, a second coworker and a bus route with a 5:40 a.m. stop, and discussed T. telling the officer. T. chose not to.
Its Cost
If T. drives again and is stopped, T. will face consequences, and the court may question the program's value. I accept that cost to keep T. engaged and the consent honored.
What Would Have Changed It
If T. had driven after drinking, or if T. had said T. planned to, the risk would have been imminent and serious, and the analysis would have turned to protecting others.
References
Confidentiality of Substance Use Disorder Patient Records, 42 C.F.R. pt. 2 (2024).
National Association of Social Workers. (2021). Code of ethics of the National Association of Social Workers. https://www.socialworkers.org/About/Ethics/Code-of-Ethics/Code-of-Ethics-English
MSW 555 Week 6 instructions, in plain terms
The ethics analysis takes a situation in which two obligations genuinely conflict. State the facts, including those that make the conflict real rather than an obvious violation. Trace each obligation to a specific standard, code section or law. List everyone with a stake, including people not in the room. Set out at least four options with what each would do. Make a decision, record how it was made, including any consultation, and say what it cost. Close with what facts would have changed the decision. Avoid treating the analysis as a search for the rule that settles it; the point is to weigh obligations that each have a claim.
How the MSW 555 Week 6 example is put together
The situation section reports T.'s disclosure in session 13 of driving sober twice when a coworker was sick, and notes the release covers only attendance and completion. The obligations section traces confidentiality to the NASW Code (2021) and federal Part 2 rules, and public safety to the law and T.'s history. The stakeholder section lists T., T.'s child, other road users, the court, the agency and the worker. Four options follow, from reporting to consultation. The decision records supervision and a backup ride plan with a 5:40 a.m. bus. The cost section accepts the risk of T. being stopped. The final section names drinking before driving as the fact that would change everything.
MSW 555 Week 6 rubric: what full points look like
Instructors grade whether the conflict is real and the weighing is honest. A paper that treats the situation as a clear violation, or as having no cost, loses the most. Credit goes to facts that show both obligations, specific standards for each, a full list of stakeholders, at least four options, a decision with its process and cost and the facts that would change it. Consultation should be documented. Standards and law should be cited accurately in APA or legal form. The client should be described with respect, and the analysis should show why the decision protects the relationship as well as the public.
Common MSW 555 Week 6 mistakes, and how to avoid them
Ethics papers most often slip by choosing a situation that is not a real conflict, so the analysis has nothing to weigh. Another common gap is listing only two options: report or do nothing. Some papers omit the cost of the decision, which makes it look easier than it was. Others forget stakeholders outside the room. If your situation involves a legal duty, state the duty precisely and show how the facts do or do not meet it. An analysis that ends with the specific fact that would have reversed it shows the decision rests on reasons rather than on comfort. Write the options before the decision; listing them afterward tends to leave out the ones you did not like.
Get a MSW-555 Week 6 example written to your instructions
Send the Week 6 instructions with the decision-making model your program uses and a de-identified outline of the conflict, and a custom example is written to those steps and returned inside 24 to 48 hours. The first one is free. The decision you actually took stays yours to defend.
More MSW 555 papers and MSW samples
- MSW 555 Week 1: One Decision, Four Strands Post
- MSW 555 Week 2: Competency Evidence Write-Up
- MSW 555 Week 3: Integrative Case Analysis of V.
- MSW 555 Week 4: Theory to Practice Write-Up
- MSW 555 Week 5: Policy and Practice Brief
- MSW 555 Week 7: Licensure and Development Plan
- MSW 555 Week 8: Capstone Integrative Paper
- MSW 504 Week 6: Developmental Stage Analysis
- MSW 554 Week 6: Front Desk Check-In Audit
- MSW 505 Week 6: Family Treatment Plan
- MSW 553 Week 6: Disconfirming Evidence Memo
MSW 555 Week 6 questions, answered
What makes a good conflict to write about?
One where you were genuinely unsure and where reasonable practitioners would divide. Self-determination against protection, confidentiality against a duty to a third party, and obligations to a client against those to a funder all produce real analyses. Situations where somebody clearly breached a standard are easier to write and much harder to score well on.
Do I have to reach a decision?
Yes, in nearly every version of this assignment. Analyses that map the tension carefully and then decline to resolve it are marked as incomplete, because the profession requires decisions under exactly these conditions. Deciding while naming what the decision costs is what distinguishes a capstone answer from an undergraduate one.
Should supervision appear in the analysis?
Where it happened, yes, and its absence is itself worth noting. Consulting a supervisor is part of ethical practice rather than an admission, and faculty look for it. Record what was discussed and what you did with the guidance, including where you reached a different conclusion, which is legitimate and worth defending.
Where can I find a free MSW 555 Week 6 sample paper?
The complete MSW 555 Week 6 ethics analysis of a court-referred client's disclosure about sober, unlicensed driving is printed on this page.
What would have changed the decision in the MSW 555 Week 6 sample?
T. driving after drinking, or saying T. planned to, which would make the risk serious and imminent and turn the analysis toward protecting others.