ABSTRACT
Professional codes and statements on values and ethics commonly draw on universal approaches. Previous chapters have identified the major ‘components’ as the ethics of duty to principles based on human reason (deontology) and the ethics of consequences (especially utilitarianism). The ethics of character (virtue ethics), it has been noted, may also provide a basis for thinking about what it is to be a good social worker, child care worker, youth worker, community worker and so on, but is not as easily codified. It is also the case that these approaches are brought together so that elements of each inform everyday practice (see, for example: Beauchamp & Childress, 2009). Nevertheless, the key point is that all of these approaches are universal, both in their assumptions and in their implications. Yet at the same time, as noted in Chapter 1, ethics is the explicit deliberation about moral values and these cannot be assumed to be universal. As has already been shown through hypothetical case situations and other discussion, people differ in many ways in the things that they think are the most important aspects of life and, in some respects, they may disagree quite profoundly. So approaches to ethics that fail to take account of such differences could be seen as insufficient to deal with the complexities of social and cultural diversity.
