Effects of Trauma

Part 1

a. How have you applied understanding of global interconnections of oppression and human rights violations to social work clinical contexts?

Within the clinical context, we have implemented awareness campaigns and educational interventions to alert and inform individuals regarding human rights like health equality. One would assume that people are aware of their health rights, but the shocking thing is that most people are unaware of health equality. All citizens should expect the same health care level and health services regardless of economic, race, or sexual orientation (Davis & Reber, 2016). However, due to a lack of information, many disadvantaged people are okay with the minimal health services they receive. The people who visited the clinic received the awareness campaign well, and most of them were surprised regarding their health rights. However, we had to inform them they also needed to advocate for themselves and push for better health services whenever they visited a health facility.

Advocacy was done by giving the community members information about what they should expect regarding health services (Davis & Reber, 2016). With the information we offered, the members could petition for better services from their leaders and push for policy changes. Educational interventions involved gathering community members to inform and educate them about the various health services they could receive at the institution and the benefits. Using health education, we managed to increase the number of patients seen at the clinic and improve community members mental health. Low-income areas suffer the most when it comes to the availability of health services, and our goal was to assist those living in those areas in pushing for better services through advocacy. By educating them on services they should be receiving and minimum care requirements, we empowered them with the knowledge they need to petition their leaders to increase services or change policies. We guided the community leaders on how they can perform advocacy and offered them materials they can use when they meet or to get the leaders attention.

Part 2

After reading the Elena Hernandez Reasonable Progress and Lack of Reasonable Progress case vignettes, Compare and Contrast the differences in the cases. View the Pathways to Permanency Power Point slide and explain where each case vignette falls.

In the reasonable case, Elena is working hard to ensure she can be reunited with her children, and they can start living together. However, in the lack of reasonable progress case, Elena struggles to overcome her addiction, but she keeps relapsing, making it hard for reunification with her children. Sadly, the caseworker is forced to consider the current caregivers for permanency, which could push Elena to further addiction when she no longer has an option of being reunited with her children. The reasonable case indicates Elena is meeting all the required milestones, and she is working hard to try and be reunited with her children. Though it takes longer than she expected, Elena continues to follow the guidelines and stays sober. Her drug tests return negative, and she is prepared to have her children home with her. The best is that Elena overcoming her drug addiction comes from within herself, and it was not forced on her, making the desire to change easy and long-term.

The lack of reasonable progress case points to a situation where a mother wants reunification with her children but is not working towards reunification. There is a disconnect in that Elena wants to have her children with her at home, but she struggles to meet the requirements of DCFS. It seems she does not understand her decisions impact on her life and that of her children. More should be done for Elena, like understanding why she keeps relapsing when moved to outpatient treatment. Elena is not making substantial progress leaving the children in limbo, and a decision must be made. The good thing about both cases is that DCFS believes Elena is committed to reunification with her children. Elena has gained enough skills to mother the children, and DCFS recognizes the efforts made by Elena. Unfortunately, she fails to make reasonable progress in critical areas, making it hard for her to be reunited with her children in the lack of reasonable progress case.

The children have settled with their respective foster placements and are making good progress in both cases. The only difference in the cases is how to handle their permanency placement. For the reasonable progress case, permanency leans towards reunification with the mother. While in the lack of reasonable progress case, permanency leans towards their respective foster placements. Considerations are being made on the mothers suitability and how she will impact the lives of the children in the lack of reasonable progress case. Concurrent planning differs because children are the center of attention in the case, and their best interests must be considered when determining what is best for them. With Elena making good progress and meeting all her goals, the caseworker deems her fit to be reunited, and there is a push for unsupervised visits, which will lead to the mother and children reuniting. However, the outlook is different when Elena fails to meet her goals. The caseworker is forced to look into how best the children can thrive and what is the best environment and care for them.

The reasonable progress case falls under the cases with high potential for reunification. Considering that Elena has made good progress and is meeting all her DCFS goals, her case has the potential for reunification. In the court session, she might be given unsupervised visits with her children. Provided she continues meeting her goals and keeps away from negative influences like William Smith Sr., Elena will be reunited with her children soon.

The lack of reasonable progress case falls under the concurrent planning. Elena is progressing in certain areas and relapsing with her addiction, leaving her children in limbo. The caseworker has to decide on what is best for the children, and they are leaning towards concurrent planning due to Elenas behavior. Sadly, Elena might worsen once concurrnt planning is done because her drive to be reunited might be the only hope she has left in her life.

Part 3

1. Why do you think adoption is difficult for families?

Adoption is difficult for families due to the separation that occurs. It is not easy to let go of a loved one regardless of the underlying circumstances (Rolock et al., 2021). Bonds are...

…These symptoms could be the key to offering effective treatment. There have been cases where a patient presents with symptoms similar to those of two disorders, making treatment difficult because it is unclear what condition they should be treated for. Also, a patient can fail to fit into the set of the predetermined diagnostic characteristics for a disorder. In such cases, we need to perform a cross-cutting symptom measure to establish the vital symptoms to initiate treatment.

When an individual presents with symptoms that meet the diagnostic criteria for more than one disorder, it becomes difficult to determine their underlying disorder. Diagnostic comorbidity seems to be the norm rather than the exception. Therefore, we should have a way of uncovering the vital symptoms so we can imitate treatment. A clinician is stuck wondering if the patient has multiple mental disorders or if they have one disorder being given numerous diagnoses. These questions can make it challenging to treat a patient because we cannot determine the best course of action. The cross-cutting symptom measure provides a brief questionnaire that is easy for a patient to fill and clear-cut. The questionnaire can be administered at the start and as treatment progresses to monitor effectiveness. Considering it is a short questionnaire, its administration is simple and can be completed at multiple intervals depending on the stability of the patients symptoms.

World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0)

We need to look at a patient from a wholesome perspective. We usually tend to look at the diagnosis and fail to consider the patients ability in different aspects of their life. The WHODAS 2.0 pushes for the analysis of the various aspects of a persons life to determine the best assistance they can be given. When offering treatment, we should consider the persons ability to perform duties at home, school, work, and other social areas. When diagnosing regular patients, it is easy to say they cannot perform certain activities due to a restriction caused by the disease. However, diagnosing a disability in individuals is quite different because we must consider the impact the condition has on the functioning of the person. A disability measure allows us to identify the needs of the individual, match treatment and interventions, set priorities, measure outcomes, and effectiveness, and allocate resources.

Diagnosis and assessment of disability are vital as they can predict factors that the disease label fails to, like service needs, level of care, condition outcome, length of hospitalization, work performance, social integration, and effect of the condition (Saltychev et al., 2021). There have been six domains have been captured to determine the level of functioning: cognition, mobility, self-care, getting along, life activities, and participation. These domains focus on the ability of a patient to perform activities in those areas. Identifying a difficulty in a particular area indicates a disability, and the patient should be accorded the necessary assistance for effective treatment. Using WHODAS 2.0, we can determine the impact of a health condition on the patients functioning. The measure can be used to design and monitor the effects of health-related interventions. Measuring disability can be complex because it affects how a person interacts with their environment. A patient might need special needs to help them…