Ethical Analysis of a Humanitarian Support Worker’s Dilemma

Introduction

In this paper, a case study will be analysed with the involvement of a humanitarian support worker facing a moral dilemma. The family of asylum seekers, including two young children who are struggling to cope with the financial constraints revolve around this case study. The father of this family was previously employed in a cash-in-hand job at a restaurant, but during the COVID-19 lockdown period, he lost his income source. This family is at risk of becoming homeless as they have limited access to government assistance. The humanitarian support workers have access to supplementary funds but must determine to provide financial assistance to this family. Because they know that it may impact their ability to help others. This analysis will apply the ethical theories of Act Utilitarianism and Universal Ethical Egoism to this case.

1. Dilemmas Presented by the Case Study:

This case study presented a major dilemma that the family was involved with. The family that consists of two young children, due to their inability to pay rent, is at risk of homelessness. According to Tarrant et al. (2022), the cash-in-hand job of the father of the family is the only source of income but during the COVID-19 lockdown period leaving them economically vulnerable. In government assistance programs such as the Community Assistance Support Program or the Asylum Seeker Assistance Scheme, the family is ineligible. These programs are normally available to asylum seekers. In the financial hardship, this limited access to support aggravates them. The support worker must determine relevant ethical frameworks and codes of conduct, especially those who govern the provision of assistance and support to vulnerable people, for their decision-making. By presenting the facts and context of the case study, this section lays the foundation for the ethical analysis that includes the specific dilemmas faced by the humanitarian support worker in their working field.

In the current context, the support staff need to adhere the related codes of ethics and conduct, especially within the context of Australian professional standards. The Australian Association of Social Workers Code of Ethics should be considered as the major and focusing on the principle like social justice. It also respects human rights and promotes well-being of people. Moreover, the Australian Community Workers Association Code of ethics also helps to guide the conduct of community people. It emphasizes on integrity, well-being of clients and professionalism.

2. Application of Ethical Theories:

A. Universal Ethical Egoism:

Universal Ethical Egoism advanced that individuals should role in their own self-interests, encouraging their own well-being without considering other interests (Kaddour et al. 2023). The theory is considered as self-interest as the foundations of making ethical decisions as well as helps in advocating persons to give prioritize own welfare and respect equal pursuit of self-interest of others. This case study, appeal to Universal Ethical Egoism can contribute to engaging the humanitarian support worker's primary focus on their agency’s resources and interests over the well-being of the clever searching family. The strengths are to safeguard the interests and resources of the humanitarian organization and also ensure the sustainability and efficacy of the agency’s flexibility to help create a broader range of asylum seekers (Freeman 2020). Its weakness is abandoning the important needs of the unsafe family, certainly leading to homelessness and hunting. Also be may fight with the responsibility to help those suffering.

B. Act Utilitarianism:

Role Utilitarianism evaluates the responsibility of actions based on the principle of establishing the greatest overall happiness for a wide number of people (Crisp 2019). The key components of the theory are hedonistic calculus, consequentialism, principle of utility, contextual assessment and flexibility. In this case, the humanitarian support worker should consider the complex of offering financial assistance to the asylum-seeking family. The strengths are to offer instant relief to the family, and stop potential homelessness and suffering.The weakness is that it may exhaust limited resources, beneficially minimizing the agency's capacity to help others. Also, it needs careful thought of the long-term outcome to resource proper allotment.

In consequence, the ethical analysis of this case study illustrates that both Universal Ethical Egoism and Act Utilitarianism offer a clear outlook on how the humanitarian support worker can contribute to the family’s financial crisis. While Universal Ethical Egoism primarily focuses on agency resources and interests, Act Utilitarianism can contribute to enhancing overall happiness and reducing instant suffering. The final decision needs to balance these ethical theories and reflect on the broader ethical framework of humanitarian help and support.

1. Application to the case: Act Utilitarianism highlights and enhances overall happiness. In this field, the humanitarian support worker can help to provide financial support for the family (Schäffner 2020). The primary goal is the instant well-being of the family.
2. Strengths: This Act strength is to offer instant relief to the family, and reduce potential homelessness and suffering. Also lines up with the principle of enhancing overall happiness by providing the needs of the family.
3. Weaknesses: There’s the risk that issuing resources to prevent the asylum-seeking family may convey the agency’s limited resources. It is essential for a thoughtful examination of the long-term outcome related to resource allotment.
4. Result for Stakeholders: By providing support to the asylum-seeking family, their instant facing is reduced, and the risk of homelessness is prevented (Tomasello 2020). This benevolent act pressures the agency’s resources, which could potentially have an inference for its future capacity to support other Asylum seekers.

Considering the Stakeholders Impacted by the Case Study:

1. The Humanitarian Support Worker: Universal Ethical Egoism may provide a sense of duty to safe ground agency resources, whereas Act Utilitarianism may encourage empathy and compassion, persuading the support worker to focus on the family’s urgent needs (Grunwald 2023).
2. The Asylum-Seeking Family: Universal Ethical Egoism forces them at risk of homelessness and suffering, while Act Utilitarianism ensures their instant relief and enhances their well-being.
3. The Humanitarian Agency: Universal Ethical Egoism protects agency resources but may request censure for neglecting a family in need, whereas Act Utilitarianism preserves the agency’s carrying reputation but may pressure its resources.
4. Other Asylum Seekers Receiving Support: Universal Ethical Egoism may benefit them by protecting resources for future support, whereas Act Utilitarianism for a short time reduces support for others but gestures the agency’s ability to instant relief.

Balancing Ethical Frameworks:

The ethical solution to this dilemma can be found by balanced approach which draws upon the strengths of both Universal Ethical Egoism and Act Utilitarianism while also addressing their weaknesses. There is the need to account for the family’s vulnerability, the ethical principles that guide a humanitarian worker and the resources of humanitarian agency.

Immediate Assistance, Collaboration and Advocacy:

It is important to provide the asylum-seeking families with financial help to elevate them from the condition they are currently in. Act Utilitarianism’s strength is in its focus of prevention from suffering and immediate relief. The core principles of humanitarianism are providing help to those in distress. For resource limitations, there can be collaborations among the humanitarian agencies and advocacy for improved government assistance. In this way, the agency can reduce its financial burdens and focus more on assisting the asylum seekers.

Resource Management, Ethical Training and Regular review and Adaptation:

Universal Ethical Egoism’s strength lies in its concern for the agency’s long-term sustenance and resource management. Therefore, there needs to be a transparent and clear resource allocation planning which would include replenishing of funds through fundraisings and grants. The staff should have ethical training and guidelines for resource allocation and prioritizing vulnerable cases. There should also be a system of regular review and adaptation of the resource allocation plan to account for the change in circumstances. This would help the agency prioritize most vulnerable cases providing a long-term sustenance and remain ethical yet flexible.

Strength in Synthesis:

As stated by De Chesnay andAnderson 2019, as a society, we need to stand up for the vulnerable and unite to help them to get the basics. By synthesizing the strengths of both Act Utilitarianism and Universal Ethical Egoism, there can be a balance found between immediate assistance and resource management. With the help of Act Utilitarianism’s strengths, there can be an alleviation of vulnerable families who are suffering and needs immediate help and attention. Universal Ethical Egoism’s strengths in resource management safeguard’s the agency’s sustainability and ability to help other asylum seekers in the long term.

Result for Stakeholders

The Humanitarian Support workers can act in accordance with the ethical principles of humanitarianism while fulfilling their duties to manage resources responsibly. As stated by Ahmed et al. (2019), it is vital to ensure that the resources are allocated properly to ensure the long-term sustenance of the funds which will help many vulnerable families. Since operations in this field is uncertain in nature, one needs to keep some funds aside. If this is properly taken care, the asylum-seeking families will receive immediate and proper care which will prevent homelessness and suffering. The Humanitarian agency also can strike a balance between its ethical responsibilities with resource management and preserving its long-term capacity to support others. Other asylum seekers can continue to receive support without much disruptions.

Conclusion

This study analyses a complex ethical dilemma faced by humanitarian support workers. A balance can be achieved by synthesizing the strengths of Act Utilitarianism and Universal Ethical Egoism. This will result in the overall well-being and sustenance of the families seeking support. Ultimately it highlights the importance of adapting, collaborating and ethical training to help navigate the issues and dilemmas while staying committed to the overarching goals of suffering alleviation and providing support to those who need it. This can be done with passion, resource management and aligning oneself with the core of the humanitarian principles.

Are you struggling to keep up with the demands of your academic journey? Don't worry, we've got your back! Exam Question Bank is your trusted partner in achieving academic excellence for all kind of technical and non-technical subjects.

Our comprehensive range of academic services is designed to cater to students at every level. Whether you're a high school student, a college undergraduate, or pursuing advanced studies, we have the expertise and resources to support you.

To connect with expert and ask your query click here Exam Question Bank