Practical wisdom is a necessary virtue for social workers. We explore the nature of this virtue and one possible element of facilitating its development in social work students who are seen as beginning learners of virtue. The pertinent ethical reflections can be stimulated by employing practically feasible guidelines which are Aristotelian in structure and which are not predominantly outcome oriented. We emphasize the need for slowing down the decision-making process. Creating ‘meticulous thoughtfulness’ is the first step on the path of (...) facilitating the cultivation of practical wisdom. The beginning learner of virtue struggles to figure out the core aspects of a situation and good judgements seem rather fragile. Developing practical wisdom entails that one understands increasingly the gravity of social work situations and the role that ethics plays in them. Therefore, we emphasize the need to deliberate a case thoroughly. Failing to do so could imply damages to clients and to social workers. We will consider the contents and systematic order of the guidelines with which a deep reflection process could be initiated, one which through repeated use can result in practical wisdom. The main focus is on the process of reflection not on the outcome. (shrink)

The present article shifts the focus and burden of whistleblowing away from an individual to the collective and argues for the necessary incorporation of whistleblowing into an ethical infrastructure in institutions of higher education. The authors argue that institutions of higher learning should be understood as collective agents bestowed with ethical responsibility which obliges them to act in an ethical manner. The fundamental principle guiding the ethical practice of all higher-learning institutions should be a culture of voice because conscientization – (...) the purpose of education – necessitates dialogue to emerge. However, this culture of voice is not self-evident in institutions of higher learning and transpires in the harmful ways in which some of these institutions react to the disclosure of their problematic practices by whistleblowers. In light of this, the authors propose that one should not expect individuals to assume a whistleblower role; it is the higher-education institution’s ethical responsibility to create an infrastructure which integrates channels for critical engagement with problematic practices and supports a culture of voice. This infrastructure should consist of four fundamental elements: whistleblowing’s enablement, whistleblowers’ protection, the correction of problematic practices, and the recognition of the whistleblower’s action. (shrink)