Galician Medical Journal. 2015; 22(1)

133

N.H. Yatsyshyn The Right to Imperfection as an Important Part of Identity Formation Carpathian Center for Human Reproduction, Ivano-Frankivsk, Ukraine Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ivano-Frankivsk, Ukraine Ivano-Frankivsk National Medical University, Ivano-Frankivsk, Ukraine Abstract. The article highlights the basics of social work as an independent discipline. The possibility of students’ perfection by education and their “right to imperfection” were discussed; the correlation between rights and duties was investigated. Keywords: social work, education, personality. Social policy of the country today is very important nowadays. It is largely implemented in social work. What is the aim of the social work? First of all it includes regulations of legal and economic relations of the individual and society, providing each person with the help and support in dealing with emerging problems, overcoming obstacles to self-realization and self-affirmation. However, we can not argue that the main content of social work is only to help the individual, support him, provide social security, since social work is also one of the most important and most difficult instrument of social control. The roots of social work go back to bible times. In those times it included charity, religious duty, humanitarian system services to those in need. Nowadays social work is a profession that requires special training. Specialists’ training is based on complex subjects. Future social workers require knowledge of psychology (general, developmental, pedagogical, social, legal, and labor), pedagogics, medicine, law, sociology. Сonstitutive idea of education and training in the current context of social work is based giving the students the possibility to take an active part in the pedagogical process. The basis of this idea lies in individualism itself being inherently interested in independence. From this point of view the right to imperfection can be seen as the right to determine indepentently a person’s own drawbacks. In this sense sovereignty lies not in the elimination or compensation for weaknesses, but in their recognition. Each student has the opportunity to individually and consciously change their lives. Modern pedagogics focuses on the human perfection. The student, like any person, is an imperfect a living being, but he or she exists in the stage between drawbacks and improvements. This means that education is manifested in anthropological responsibility for drawbacks and goes beyond its limits in terms of improvements. These thoughts can be found in works of Rousseau, Froebel, Kant. Their ideas are not related to pedagogical concepts and theological implications aimed at reaching the highest level and orientations for the perfection. However, pedagogics focusing on unlimited human improving model encounters problems when faces the “imperfect” people, especially students. Along with modern desires of unlimited human domination, the call: “The right to imperfections” has sounded louder recently. The idea of the “right to imperfection” seems to be the moral law, which is legitimate only in the human context. Its premise is recognition of differences. Imperfection right implies that students and their surround should pay attention to what has caused their differences, and if they depend on their moral, physical abilities and properties. Perfect portrait of modern man based on such criteria as success achievement, career, competition, rationality and the desire for power, good health, activity, improvement, gives rise to the definition of “inferiority” as a deviation from regulatory concept of all the people.

Galician Medical Journal. 2015; 22(1)

134

Thesis provided in this case claim inferiority to include limiting cultural norms. The student is not only “actually” inferior being, but he or she defines the culture of educational activities. Does the right to imperfection mean the right to education? Does the right to imperfection explain right to make mistakes? Education is an exact example of a fundamental right, which is associated ab inito with a positive primary responsibility. If the concept of moral rights is based on duty, excluding accepted hypothetical or categorical duties, the duties are substantially derived from the rights addressed to the interests and needs of individuals. There is no point in speaking about duty when integrity of another should not be violated if the other is not interested in its integrity. Thus, rights and responsibilities are not always symmetrical. Thus, the rights of teachers do not correspond to the symmetric duties: duties not to harm, ensure care and support and to ensure a high degree of attention, affection and care. Based on anthropology of interests and needs teachers should ensure the conditions to their students under which they could be safe and happy. Students must have own outlook, sense of responsibility and commitment to the future difficult activity. References 1.

Zverieva I.D. Social work / social pedagogics (conceptual and terminological dictionary). Kyiv.

Etnosfera. 1994; 119. 2.

Man and Economy: Socioeconomics. Manual. Prosvita. 1996; 336.

3.

Tsirkin S.Yu. Handbook of psychology and child and adolescent psychology. Saint-Petersburg. 1999;

4.

Neiko Ye. M., Skrobach N.V., Yatsyshyn R.I., Neiko N.V. The moral and psychological foundations

752. of students’ education. Archiv klinichnoi medytsyny. 2005; 1: 90-92.