Unit 3: Policy and Legislative Contexts of Interdisciplinary Practice
An interdisciplinary practice involves the working together of people in different care services with the purpose of achieving a positive result in a common area of practices. While collaboration is the best approach to the attainment of the social care objectives and goals, the collaborative practice is challenging due to various policy and legislative issues. According to Darlington, Feeney, and Rixon (2005), the collaboration process is ideal as it incorporates four specific elements that make the practice a success. Firstly, it helps in advancing the communication factor where professionals can effectively communicate on the issues affecting the client and provide timely accurate diagnosis and suggest the effective models or approaches to addressing the problem. For example, Sue and Anna used this practice to contact the Child Welfare Ministry and explained Juanita's problem; thus, helping in timely intervention. Secondly, collaboration enhances the knowledge factor as it helps the practitioners use their understanding of the situation to assess and recommend the best framework or procedure for addressing the problem. In addition, this relates to resource factor that aids in saving resources such as time and intervention (Darlington, Feeney, & Rixon, 2005). Indeed, this is evident in the case of Juanita where the social service workers, the caregiver and the ministry respondent combine their knowledge and resources for an effective assistance to the client.
However, collaboration faces specific challenges due to policy and legislative issues. Firstly, human right policies give an affirmative action to women and children in all aspect. Indeed, this gives women an upper hand in childcare as illustrated by Burman (2008) who argues that “women the world over are accorded responsibility for childcare and household labor as well as bearing children" (P. 185). However, conflict of interests between agencies poses a challenge in advancing children welfare. Burman (2008) contends that "the policy level the assumption of common cause or interest on the part of care and humanitarian agencies, that aid given to women would automatically ‘trickle down’ to children” is not always the case (P. 181). Apparently, this is due to the conflict of interest between the agencies as illustrated in the case study. Evidently, the Child Welfare Ministry perceives Sue and Anna as rivals who want to benefit from the government contract whereas their interest is the best care for the child (Marisol). Indeed, the immigrant status of Juanita complicates the scenario due to the discrimination experienced by minority groups. Largely, this is a policy issue that is persistent among other minority groups such as racially minority populations. In the conceptualization of cultural safety, Josewski (2012) demonstrates the experience of minority groups in relation to policy issue and access to public services. Josewski (2012) states that minorities experience cultural risk due to the categorization of their challenges based on specific policies to promote inequalities. For example, Juanita’s hesitance to approach the ministry is due to fear of segregation. Since it is unclear if the family is in the US legally, and the fear expressed by the mother, it is possible that they would face discrimination and exclusion.
Unit 4: Children's Rights and Interdisciplinary Practice
An imperative approach to interdisciplinary practice on children's right should integrate the maturity of the child in making a critical personal decision on care and the legal provisions by the state and international organizations. According to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), “children are entitled to the fundamental rights” (DeLaet, 2012, P. 558). Indeed, Goodyer (2013) argues that an important aspect of children right is the premise of the right to protection and participation. In examining these premises, LeFrançois (2008) perceives participation as a challenging concept due to various issues including the child’s ability to make accurate decisions based on his or her understanding of the problem. He contends that “allowing children to participate in decision making should not be connected to their biological age but instead should be assessed within a supportive environment based on how much understanding they have gained regarding their circumstances” (LeFrançois, 2008, P. 224). DeLaet (2012) shares similar sentiments by asserting that children need special consideration for their care and welfare due to their physical and mental immaturity. Apparently, this is an important aspect of children’s right where they deserve to be cared for by their parents. In particular, children under the vulnerable category, such as disabled, adopted, and refugees, have their rights to care and welfare.
Parenting or childcare falls within the social work and social policy that promote rights-based agenda in parenting responsibilities and social workers adopt a need-based approach. According to Goodyer (2013), “ethical codes of the social work profession (GSCC 2002) require social workers to consider both micro and macro level understandings of people and their problems" (P. 395). Apparently, this involves collaboration with parents and other practitioners to help vulnerable children such as those facing "social exclusion, racism, disablism and ageism” (Goodyer, 2013, P. 395). In their approach to Marisol’s situation, Sue, Ann, and the family services worker uphold the rights of the child which include involving the mother to make decisions for the child. Marisol's condition requires an intervention that utilizes both psychological and social work frameworks while upholding children's right provisions which include the extensive inclusion of the mother to make critical decisions on behalf of the child due to her immaturity.
Notably, working within the frameworks of interdisciplinary practice involving children, families, and caregivers requires the acknowledgment and adherence to the human right provision for each party. It is important to consider the discourse of risk, best interest, and protection of the child by assuming a needs-based approach to ensure the implemented intervention is not only ethical and effective but also within the children's tight domain.
Unit 11: Sharing Information and other Practice Complexities
Practice complexities are common phenomena in multi-agency teamwork due to the diversity and differences in professional beliefs, values, and practice. However, the teams have a positive impact on the professional knowledge and members learn how other practitioners work. As argued by Hall (2005), healthcare professionals have a different professional culture that includes the attitudes, behaviors, values, and beliefs. Indeed, this is evident in the example given by Frost, Robinson, & Anning (2005) where conflicts occur when health care practitioners differ with social workers on the discharge of individuals without considering the resource allocation for housing application. Arguably, the health-based team focuses on the physical wellbeing achieved through medication whereas the social work team centers on the social welfare of the patient/client. Apparently, the case study involving Juanita displays the diverse needs of the family but the similarity of the practitioners hinder the exploration of these issues. Notably, Sue, Anna, and the ministry respondent fall under the social work profession. Nonetheless, the case highlights the issue of immigration which is a complex matter that can assume different approaches. In addition, Marisol condition can be viewed from a social or medical perspective that bringing a complex multi-agency team to address the problem.
Information sharing is an essential aspect in facilitating the attainment of better outcomes for the team. According to Hall (2005), information sharing serves diverse needs which include facilitating creative solutions and promote a positive synergistic influence on the client. However, the professional values in different groups create significant status-quo based challenges concerning the confidentiality of the patient and professional-based regulations on information sharing. Frost, Robinson, & Anning (2005) illustrates that health-based teams are reluctant in sharing information with external agencies. Accordingly, this creates barriers to service provision and require appropriate redress to make services efficient and effective. In the provided case study, such information based barriers are absent due to the professional similarities of the members.

This sample paper was composed by an expert academic writer with years of experience in this field. Charles Ross is a student and works at a custom writing service - https://www.affordablepapers.com/. Charles runs his personal blog and adores all the communication advantages offered by the Internet. Now, Charles offers online tutoring to those who need help with writing.

Burman, E. (2008). Beyond “Women vs. Children’ or ‘WomenandChildren’: Engendering childhood and reformulating motherhood. International Journal of Children’s Rights, 16(2), 177-194.
Darlington, Y. Feeney, J. & Rixon, K. (2005). Practice challenges at the intersection of child protection and mental health. Child and Family Social Work, 10(3), 239-247.
DeLaet, D. (2012). Genital autonomy, children’s rights, and competing rights claims in international law. International Journal of Children’s Rights, 20(4), 554-583.
Frost, N., Robinson, M., & Anning, A. (2005). Social workers in multidisciplinary teams: Issues and dilemmas for professional practice. Child and Family Social Work, 10(3), 187-196.
Goodyer, A. (2013). Understanding looked-after childhoods. Child and Family Social Work, 18(4), 394-402.
Hall, P. (2005). Interprofessional teamwork: Professional cultures as barriers. Journal of Interprofessional Care, May, Vol 19, Supplement 1, 188-196.
Josewski, V. (2012). Analysing 'cultural safety' in mental health policy reform: Lessons from British Columbia, Canada. Critical Public Health, 22(2), 223-234.
LeFrançois, B. (2008). “It’s Like Mental Torture”: Participation and Mental Health Services. International Journal of Children’s Rights, 16(2), 211-227.