Assessment and Relationship

Biestek (1957) called this principle of self-determination, which underscores the importance of each person to make his or her own decision (as cited in Furlong, 2003, p. 178). In effect, this principle forms the cornerstone of a social worker’s role while carrying out an assessment or formulating a case. Based on Ruthie’s case study, the appropriate model of assessment to use would be the systemic approach. Dean and Poorvu (2008) noted, A systemic perspective focuses specifically on the systems in a client’s life such as the family, workplace, church, or community (p. 600). In the case of Ruthie, it is important to focus on her family since the systems in a family can affect the functioning of an individual. In addition, her background indicates that her upbringing and her life as an adult have influenced her ways of life. Therefore, the systematic model is the appropriate assessment model to use in Ruthie’s case. Lowe (2004) noted that the systemic model is crucial in understanding the interactive processes (as cited in Dean Poorvu, 2008, p. 600). In line with this, a systemic model that focuses on family systems is useful for understanding Ruthie’s case it will enhance the capacity of the social worker to learn about the family systems that led to Ruthie’s behavior by assessing her family. … Bisman and Hardcastle (1999) identified the importance of pursuing a theory in order to explain confusions experienced in life (as cited in Bisman, 1999, p. 241). In this case, it is crucial to draw a pattern of Ruthie’s life in order to assess her behavior and provide solutions to her behavior. Bisman (1999) noted the ability of different social workers to assess the same client using various theories and models. In this regard, Ruthie’s case requires the systemic model of assessment since understanding her family’s development and her transitional life cycles will provide an understanding to her behavior. In addition, this model is the most appropriate since a multigenerational genogram will be important in Ruthie’s assessment. In support of a systemic model, Dean and Poorvu (2008) noted that the model focuses on observable and external patterns as well as articulated stories (p. 600). In this case, Ruthie’s family patterns and story provides a basis for the use of this model during her assessment. Furthermore, Dean and Poorvu (2008) indicated that the model focuses on a client’s story during the assessment. For Ruthie’s case, her story is crucial in designing a genogram that will help a social worker carry out the assessment. Besides, it is evident that Ruthie’s case is problem-saturated. For this reason, Dean and Poorvu (2008) indicated that a problem-saturated case, like the one for Ruthie, requires assessment by the systemic model since the model helps the client replace it with stories of strength and resilience (p. 600). In effect, strength and resilience are two properties that Ruthie requires in order to move her life forward and become more productive at work. Consequently, these two