Most of the moral distress in current literature stems from the health professions research whereas social work scholarship lags behind. This issue seeks to bridge this gap by exploring in a critical way the moral conditions and ethical praxis of social workers in different national, institutional, cultural and political contexts. It also contributes to the general discussion of moral distress by highlighting how moral distress is experienced (if it is experienced) and managed in the context of the profession. This means that the articles here pay special attention to the evolving contexts for social work practice and, in light of the profession’s value base andmoral commitments, how social workers manage these in the day-to-day arenas of practice (especially Wilson, this issue). In the spirit of Jane Addams (1907), who reminded us from the beginning that ‘the sphere of morals is the sphere of action’ (pp.66), this collection of articles describes the ways in which social work confronts the moral crisis and challenges characteristic of this critical historical stage of the profession. The articles presented in this issue illustrate how social workers circumnavigate within the troubled waters of the unethical institutional environments of the era in order to preserve their moral integrity. They clarify social workers’ challenges at different levels of practice with individuals, families, community, and policy practice from a variety of national contexts. They convey the conflicts and dilemmas of frontline workers as well as the impact of neo-liberalism and new public management (NPM) practices on how social workers identify, frame and resolve ethical concerns, especially in government and non-profit practice settings in times of austerity and retrenchment. This context focuses on individuals as a source of fault and intervention while obscuring social, systemic factors; rote practices that undermine professional discretion, relationships building, and responding to actual and self-determined goals; and accountability that prioritises quantifiable and market-based markers over real assistance and change. The issue, comprised of nine articles, addresses the central role of social work education, supervision, and ethics awareness development in preparing future social workers to identify and manage ethical conflicts that arise from a mismatch between social work values and organizational/institutional settings. Together these articles shed light on how social workers address ethical conflicts that arise from tensions between social work values and organisational goals and priorities in different practice settings and workplace environments. In her study of criminal justice social workers in Scotland, Jane Fenton describes how new contexts for social work education and practice contribute to internalisation of neoliberal norms and values that undermine ethical practice by impeding social workers’ ability to recognise ethical concerns in the first place. Such workplace contexts further hinder ethical practice by making it harder for social workers who do identify such concerns to summon the moral courage to act upon them. Social workers’ increasing atomisation, dwindling access to appropriate social work supervision, and bureaucratic imperatives inhibit reflexive practice and dialogue with peers and clients. The neglect of the moral content of actions, and internalisation of the neoliberal ethos, can lead to adoption of managerial, bureaucratic and technical practice

中文翻译：

---

社会工作实践中的道德冲突：挑战与机遇

当前文献中大部分的道德困扰来自于卫生专业的研究，而社会工作奖学金则落后。这个问题试图通过批判性地探索不同国家，机构，文化和政治背景下社会工作者的道德条件和道德实践来弥合这一差距。它也通过强调如何在职业环境中经历（如果经历过）和如何处理道德苦恼来促进对道德苦恼的一般性讨论。这意味着，本文中的文章特别关注社会工作实践的不断发展的背景，并鉴于该职业的价值基础和道德承诺，社会工作者如何在日常实践领域中管理这些问题（尤其是威尔逊， ）。本着简·亚当斯（Jane Addams，1907年）的精神，他从一开始就提醒我们“道德领域是行动领域”（第66页），该文章集描述了社会工作如何面对道德危机并挑战这一职业关键历史阶段的特征的方式。本期发表的文章说明了社会工作者如何在那个时代的不道德制度环境的动荡的环境中回避，以维护他们的道德正直。他们阐明了社会工作者在来自不同国家背景的个人，家庭，社区和政策实践的不同实践水平上所面临的挑战。它们传达了前线工人的冲突和困境，以及新自由主义和新公共管理（NPM）做法对社会工作者如何识别，构架和解决道德问题的影响，特别是在紧缩和紧缩时期的政府和非营利性实践场所。在这种情况下，关注个人是过失和干预的来源，同时又掩盖了社会，系统性因素；死记硬背的做法会破坏专业判断力，建立关系以及对实际和自我确定的目标做出反应；和问责制，优先考虑可量化和基于市场的标记，而不是实际的援助和变更。该问题由九篇文章组成，涉及社会工作教育，监督和道德意识发展在准备未来的社会工作者识别和管理由于社会工作价值观与组织/机构环境不匹配而引起的道德冲突方面的核心作用。这些文章共同阐明了社会工作者如何解决在不同实践环境和工作场所环境中社会工作价值观与组织目标和优先事项之间的紧张关系引起的道德冲突。简·芬顿（Jane Fenton）在苏格兰的刑事司法社会工作者研究中，描述了社会工作教育和实践的新环境如何促进新自由主义规范和价值观的内部化，从而通过首先阻碍社会工作者认识道德问题的能力破坏了道德实践。这样的工作场所环境使确实确定了此类问题的社会工作者更加难以召集采取行动的道德勇气，从而进一步阻碍了道德实践。社会工作者的雾化越来越严重，越来越少获得适当的社会工作监督，和官僚主义的命令阻碍了反思性练习以及与同伴和客户的对话。忽视行为的道德内涵以及新自由主义精神的内在化，可能导致采用管理，官僚和技术实践