Practicing Licensed Social Work Requires Dedication and Focus on Ethics

/in /by

Becoming a licensed social worker can be a challenge and a blessing. As a profession, licensed social workers are uniquely poised to do good in every situation. They embody the idea they will not harm, not only their clients but to the public at large and their profession.  

The idea of obtaining a license issued by a governmental body to practice social work, or any other profession, has encountered significant opposition in recent years. Some practitioners opine that licensure in every state in which a social worker wishes to practice is a bar to employment and a restriction upon their mobility as a human. They also observe that licensing requirements do little to benefit the profession of social workers and the clients they serve.

Conversely, some social workers maintain that licensing in every state of practice serves the greater good and, in turn, protects the practice of social work as a profession, and the practitioner as well.

Becoming a social worker is no small feat. Studies are rigorous and take a substantial amount of time to complete. Additionally, there are licensing exams that must be taken — and passed — before practicing.

Rarely does the social worker’s career path encounter resistance and adversity from time to time. Practicing social work is demanding, and the demands of the profession will change a social worker’s career trajectory from time to time. Fortunately, the Code of Ethics for Social Workers is in place to guide social workers who might become entangled in the stresses of social work and could make a critical error.

Of course, the Code of Ethics is not a suggestion about how a social worker should act. The Code of Ethics is a legal obligation. The Code of Ethics protects the public from unscrupulous or unqualified social workers. The Code of Ethics also helps maintain a minimum standard of practice so that clients feel safe and derive the intended benefits of working with a social worker.

Social workers should feel protected in their profession. Licensing helps in this regard. Licensing ensures that only qualified individuals perform the duties of a social worker. The profession receives protection from unqualified people passing themselves off as social workers who would have no accountability to a licensing authority and the profession as a whole. Holding a social worker license lends credibility to the practitioner and helps maintain the integrity of the practice as a whole across the state.

Social workers’ licensing requirements primarily serve as a method to protect vulnerable populations from undue influence and harm. Social workers are in a position to influence the decisions of their clients and can affect their clients’ lives negatively. For example, a social worker who is overwhelmed by the demands of the job could fall into the trap of substance misuse, which could lead to attendance problems and financial difficulties.  If that occurs, then the quality of care will suffer.

If you are a social worker who has encountered personal difficulties, then you should proactively address the issues before the licensing board initiates disciplinary action. Social workers should rely on their network of co-workers and tap into the valuable resources they have at their disposal to rectify any burgeoning difficulties before the licensing board takes corrective measures to prevent further public harm while preserving the faith and trust people instill in the social worker profession.

Social Worker Licensing Defense Attorney

Kansas Professional Licensing Attorney Danielle Sanger focuses her law practice on representing professional licensees who are under investigation or are facing licensing discipline in Kansas or Missouri. Call Attorney Sanger for an appointment today at 785-979-4353 to learn how she could help you today.

Self-Representation in Professional Disciplinary Proceedings is Dangerous

/in /by

Acting as one’s own attorney appears to be an effective manner to save money when facing professional licensing discipline. Many people reason that no one but themselves could represent their best interests. The license is theirs, and they will fight to the bitter end to prove that they are right. Frequently the self-represented person wants to argue general principles of fairness rather than the finer points of state or federal law. Fairness plays a considerable role in our system of justice, but ethereal notions of fairness might not overcome an allegation that the licensee violated a disciplinary rule.

The plan rarely goes as devised. To be sure, people act as their own lawyers every day in courts all across America. Even when faced with the prospect of spending a lifetime in prison, some individuals want to get their day in court and to have their voices heard. The right to do so is theirs, provided they are competent.

People represent themselves in other legal settings as well. Self-represented, or pro se, litigants defend themselves against allegations in family courts, civil courts, and administrative proceedings as well. Some litigants will file claims on their behalf, with the belief that they are saving money.

There’s a reason the adage that “you get what you pay for” exists. Courts do not bend the rules to accommodate self-represented litigants. At first blush, one could think that the pro se litigant is entitled to deference and relaxation of the rules. Doing that creates two justice systems. People often complain that the “rich” get one system of justice, and the “poor” experience something less. However, permitting the self-represented litigant to eschew the rules and procedures because they choose not to hire counsel creates the stratified legal system people loathe.

Pro se litigants have one advantage, slight though it might be. The rules of legal ethics prohibit a lawyer from taking advantage of an unrepresented litigant simply because the person lacks legal training. However, people also get themselves in deeper trouble by failing to see the forest for the trees. Self-represented litigants tend to focus on one finer point contained in the allegations while ignoring the reality that there are broader issues that must be countered.

Hiring a trained and experienced professional licensing attorney to represent you against allegations of wrongdoing or unprofessional conduct before a licensing authority is the only way to protect you and your family from the harmful effects of professional discipline. The notion holds true even if the allegation of professional misconduct is a relatively minor issue.

Professional licensing authorities consider past transgressions when meting discipline. Therefore, no issue before a licensing board is too small to hire a lawyer. Hiring an attorney will help you understand all of the permutations of the situation and also consider the larger picture. Lawyers are trained to contemplate and analyze the ramifications a particular disposition will have in the future.

For example, a pro se defendant might think that private censure is a beneficial disposition for an allegation of professional misconduct. It could very well be, but what happens if there are additional allegations in the future? Then the disciplinary board will look less favorably on the licensee, and the penalty for the second case could be more severe because of the disciplinary action taken in the first instance. However, hiring an attorney to represent you in the first instance could have given you a chance to evaluate other options, including advocating for a dismissal, which the licensing authority could not use against you in later proceedings.

Talk with a Professional Licensing Attorney about Your Options

Professional disciplinary defense attorney Danielle Sanger represents professional licensees in Kansas and Missouri. Attorney Sanger has dedicated her practice to defending the rights of hardworking people who deserve a second chance.  Call Missouri Professional Licensing Attorney Danielle Sanger at 785-979-4353 to learn more about how she could protect your livelihood.

Missouri Professional Licensing Attorney Discusses Considerations Regarding Disciplinary Action: How to Know When to Fight the Charges or Negotiate a Favorable Disposition

/in /by

Developing effective strategies for defending against allegations of professional licensing misconduct begins with a thorough analysis of the facts and circumstances. Without a comprehensive understanding of the claims and the factual underpinnings for them, then there is no practical method of devising a winning defense strategy.

Understanding all of the facts after conducting a complete investigation will uncover the strengths and weaknesses of the government’s case, i.e., the licensing authority, as well as the viability of defending against the case at a full hearing on the merits. Sometimes a thorough investigation reveals that the best option is to negotiate a favorable disposition of the action. In other instances, the better option is to fight until the bitter end.

An experienced professional licensing attorney has numerous considerations to analyze before advising a client on the possible outcome of the disciplinary action. Any attorney representing a client has the duty imposed upon him or her by the ethics of the legal profession to advise his or her client about all of the possible avenues the litigation could take and the potential outcomes of each avenue. The attorney must further advise his or her client about the benefits and pitfalls of each choice.

An inexperienced attorney might stop there and allow the client to consider the pros and cons of each decision and remove himself or herself from the analysis. Dumping the decision all on the client is not advocating; it is scapegoating. The client must make the ultimate decision in the end. However, the effective advocate will talk through each scenario and the permutations to flush out the best potential outcome.

The seasoned professional licensing attorney will evaluate his or her client’s tolerance for risk before advising the client on a particular defense stratagem.  Some clients might want to “roll the dice” and see what happens after a full hearing. Other people are more cautious and need to reduce their exposure to harm. The more risk-averse clients might feel that negotiating a favorable disposition is more advantageous than risking it all after a hearing.

The “gambling” types do not always benefit from litigating the complaint on its merits. Similarly, the risk-averse might not achieve the best result from negotiating a resolution. The question that necessarily follows is: how do you know what to do?

Naturally, the answer is never an absolute certainty. The professional licensing lawyer must advise her or his client entirely and answer all of the questions that the client might have at the time. No one is necessarily bound to a course of action once a decision is made on a defense strategy. Sometimes a hybrid approach is the best option.

An experienced professional licensing attorney might seek your permission to negotiate the best disposition possible. Your licensing attorney could negotiate with the prosecuting attorney and arrive at an agreement that is in your best interest. If there is no agreement to be had, because, for example, the prosecuting authority wants you to admit to wrongdoing to achieve a favorable outcome and you do not believe you did anything wrong, then you would need to evaluate the situation. In that instance, defending the case until the end might be the best option. For others, they might consider licensing discipline to be a business decision and accept the best option that allows them to continue working in their chosen profession without significant penalties.

Discuss All of Your Options with A Trusted Professional Licensing Advocate

Kansas and Missouri Professional Licensing Attorney Danielle Sanger has a well-earned reputation as a trusted advocate for professional licensees. You could rely on her experience and expertise to guide you through a difficult and challenging juncture in your career. Call Attorney Sanger today at 785-979-4353 to find out more.

When Allegations and the Court of Public Opinion Collide

/in /by

A recent report appearing in the Kansas City Star is troubling on many levels. The report details allegations filed in a lawsuit in which a medical assistant who worked at a medical facility suffered sexual harassment at the hands of a physician employed by the practice. The allegations contained in the complaint, if proven true, are disgusting and disturbing.

The online news article discussing the allegations continued in the lawsuit presumes that the doctor is guilty of the claims and questions why the relevant licensing authorities have not suspended the doctor from practicing medicine. The reporter for the Kansas City Star acknowledged that the doctor, who was the subject of the litigation, remained in good standing with both states in which he held licenses to practice as a medical doctor.

The reporter’s opinion on the matter brings to light a common misconception held by the public, and the reporter does little, if anything, to alter a prevailing opinion. Conversely, the reporter’s opinion is quite clear and feeds fuel on the firestorm created by the story. The reporter holds the opinion the doctor must be guilty because a woman made the allegations and, therefore, the doctor should be suspended from practice immediately irrespective of the whether the licensing authorities have initiated disciplinary proceedings.

The allegations paint a very vivid picture, and the picture is not pretty. The female medical assistant who filed the civil action alleges that the male doctor made sexual advances and touched her in a sexually suggestive way in the office and front of her colleagues. The suit alleges that the management of the medical practice did nothing to defend the woman.

The despicable behavior continued according to the allegations in the suit. The doctor made even more aggressive advances by holding her hips and pressing his body into her buttocks. Another employee saw what transpired, and that person contacted the organization’s Human Resources department and reported the offensive, even criminal behavior.

The physician is not employed by the company any longer. There was no information on whether the police were looking into criminal charges. The female medical assistant did not deserve to be treated that way; no one does. She did the right thing by suing the practice and the doctor.

The writer of the article assumes that the facts alleged are real, and therein lies the problem. What if those allegations are false or exaggerated?  The facts continued in the report appear to be convincing and even compelling. After all, who would go through the hassle of fabricating such vile behavior?

Therein lies the problem strictly from a licensing point of view. The doctor is entitled to defend against these allegations before the licensing authority and in civil court. The licensing authority must find credible evidence before rendering discipline against the doctor. The licensing authorities in issue should not, and cannot, rely solely upon the uncorroborated factual allegations contained in a complaint about money damages as grounds to discipline the doctor.

There are two overarching reasons why licensing authorities cannot rely on the facts contained in a civil action to summarily discipline any professional licensee. First, there is no standard of proof to allegations in a civil complaint. Therefore, the complainant can state whatever she wants without retribution. Also, the doctor has no opportunity to conduct discovery or cross-examine the witnesses bringing the complaint. Second, the doctor has constitutional protections that guarantee a fair hearing. The court of public opinion might disagree. However, professional licensees have a right to have complaints adjudicated by a fair and neutral magistrate. Some might argue that it is putting form over function. Notwithstanding, due process guarantees fair hearings even though the licensee might not deserve it.

Aggressive Defense for Professional Licensees

Missouri Professional Licensing Defense Attorney Danielle Sanger provides a vigorous defense to all professional licensees facing discipline in Kansas and Missouri. Call 785-979-4353 to find out more.