This article will examine one possible framework for understanding research vulnerability and how social workers can better understand the complex interplay between vulnerability and capacity to consent. Using this enhanced understanding of individuals and their environments to focus on potential vulnerabilities, opposed to blanket approaches to assessing vulnerability which largely restrict research access, has the potential to ethically expand the scope of research involvement. Due to these factors, social workers are uniquely positioned to understand the complex nature of vulnerability and the multidimensional ways in which it can manifest with minors across all research types, not just social, behavioural, or service use studies. Thus, research on/with vulnerable populations is central to the efficacious practice and development of applicable social work theories for better advocating for, treating, and understanding those in the greatest need and considered at-risk ( Gelberg et al. However, it is not enough for social workers to consider the implications of action or inaction-both practitioners and researchers are part of a multi-generational reiterative process of implementing new and innovative ways of making the world a better place for oppressed and disenfranchised populations who find themselves broadly labelled as “vulnerable populations” ( Frohlich and Potvin 2008). This reflection largely concerns the vulnerable populations’ social workers encounter on a daily basis coupled with the field’s aim of making a difference in the community. Jane Addams wrote, “Action is indeed the sole medium of expression for ethics ( 1902).” These words, written over 110 years ago, still ring true today, and are a mainstay within the growing field of social work ethics.
0 kommentar(er)
