Power Dynamics and Social Work - Essay Example

Power Dynamics and Social Work Introduction In recent years, there has been greater recognition of the role of social work in addressing critical social issues specially those that concern vulnerable groups such as children, the elderly, cultural or ethnic groups or the socio-economically challenged. Consequently, there has also been a realization of the significance of social workers in the community (Smith & Lipsky 1995). One requirement to support this objective is the development of research regarding the power and impact of social workers in the community. According to George and Wilding (2002), world trends in health and social welfare needs are requiring collaborative approaches wherein social workers assess service requirements, modes of delivery and standards of successes. Considering the degree of involvement and control over outcomes dependent on social workers, it can be concluded that social workers have significant power in the social welfare dynamics. Power Dynamics and Social Work Power Dynamics From the discussions of Dowding (1996), Lipsky (1983), Tew (2006) and Kemeny (1995), it can be inferred that the power of social workers are developed through their professional function, social role and interaction with clients. As a professional, their power is developed from their expertise, knowledge and ascribed powers. Social roles are also a source through traditionally views on their role, influence to social service delivery and operation of social services. Social workers can also support their power through moral persuasion, application of non-violence, personal persuasion o through their relationship with clients. For example, the power of social worker can be traced in cases such as the resolution of a petition for child custody. The social worker evaluates if the conditions the child is in subscribe to minimum requirements and if there is clear and present danger regarding the child’s welfare. Then his authority to inform primary care givers of the concerns and the actions necessary to address them also show the authority of the social worker. Finally, the recommendation to cease custody or not is depended on the evaluation of the officer if statutes have been complied to or not. Commonly, social services are only viewed as a responsibility of the state to its citizens. However, Fried (1988) points out that when responsibility is taken by one party, there is a shift in power to the party taking responsibility in the relational dynamics. Therefore, though one is liberated from taking responsibility, prerogative of management becomes deficient. This is not to say that self-determination or freedom becomes compromised, only that one becomes subject to the other party’s evaluation or opinion. In social service or welfare settings, this may come in the form of compliance to treatment mandates, education programs or conditions to determine and establish an individual’s suitability to care for others or himself as the case may be (Shulman 2006). Use of Power The accomplishment of these tasks is possible through the mandate given to social service workers through legislation or as officers of welfare institutions (Maiter et al 2006). Sakamoto & Pitner’s (2005) research advocate for proactivity in social work. Their opinion is that by utilizing the powers given to social workers effectively, they will in turn empower their clients through social inclusion and participation. Since interventions require actual enforcement, there is a need for social workers to be able to effectively exercise their power. Without the exercise of power, social workers will not have the authority to enforce compliance to statutes or to compel clients to act (Ortner, 2006). George & Wilding (2002) point out that abuse is one of the most critical possible deterrents to public confidence and support for social services. Moreover, since they deal with vulnerable groups, the potential to harm or to deny services is also a concern (Lipsky 1983). In health care settings, Fried (1988) points out that abuse can come in the form of modifying assessment to limit or deny medical assistance or social support for disability. He further points out that the action may not be to impair the service that one party needs but may be in form of having preferences or special consideration by the social worker. In a similar vein, the misuse of power may not be oriented towards the client but may be internally motivated in social workers. Conflicts that arise from personal conflict may impact assessment and delivery of services, particularly in cases where the conflict develop from socio-cultural differences (Hawkins et al 2001). Evaluation of Safeguards Professional Standards Safeguards for social work practice can be internal and external to the profession. The most common system of control for any profession is through professional regulation and practice monitoring. The development standards of practice among social workers is one the primary agendas that George and Wilding (2002) considers as critical to the field. They believe that establishing such standards will be effective that quality service is rendered but also determine the threshold levels of services required by the public. It should be noted that professional standards of practice can be excusive to the profession but is subject to state and industry regulation. The implementation and monitoring of practice through professional standards are defined by membership which in turn is requirement for practice in most states. In monitoring and controlling abuse, professional standards are often used as basis for malpractice or criminal liability. Current standards for forwarding an issue or complaint requires the submission of a formal complaint to the professional organization. Punitive measures range from suspension to forfeiture of license. In today’s context however, professional standards have been geared towards competency monitoring and development rather than curtailing power abuse (Sakamoto & Pitner 2005). Thus, safeguards against abuse in the form professional regulation are considered as basic efforts to educate social work professionals of their responsibility in exercising their powers. Practice, Methodologies and Procedures One of the impacts of reforms and privatization in social work is the institution of operational procedures in the delivery of services. Motivated by the need for compliance for security and insurance, most welfare and health social programs have developed the prescription of requirements (George & Wilding 2002). In contrast to professional requirements, regulations on practice, methodologies and procedures focus on the actions rather than the qualities or qualification of social workers. Though professional standards also focus on practice, the object of these standards, in contrast place liability on actions beyond the context of social work service (Kemeny 1995). Aside from allowing greater basis for criminal liability, these safeguards also serve as criteria for assessment of the quality of service, correction and intervention of practice. In the study presented by Maiter, Palmer & Manji (2006), they point out standards for practice, methods and procedures are used to determine the level of damage in “ruptured relationships” amongst client and social workers. By determining deficiencies in the interactions and relationships of clients with their previous social workers, it was determined that balance of power created tension between the parties. Thus, the use of control on service practice, methods and procedures allows for the resolution of the conflict. Though these measures allow for greater opportunities evaluating the abuse of power based on individual clients, one limitation is the range of prescription for practice, methodologies and procedures (Tew 2006). In such a scenario, the perspective taken to develop the standards can be inhibitive or insensitive to some groups and would likely, by its prescriptive nature, lack flexibility to address issues that fall beyond the typical scenarios. Supervision and Practice, Knowledge and Values Development Education and Knowledge Fargion (2006) sees significant opportunity in education to address deficiencies in social work practice monitoring of power abuse. One avenue that has been utilized is in the education and training of social workers. Smith & Lipsky (2002) see the need to for continuing education and training in particular to respond to social change. Considering the impact of multiculturalism alone, social workers are being challenged not only to develop competencies but to develop new communication channels as well. According to a number of commentaries regarding current social work education in training, though perspectives in practice have evolved, methods of educating social workers, there has been little change in teaching methods. Though is not indicative of the inadequacy of current standards, Sakamoto & Pitner (2005) point out that they may not support changes in social perspectives or perception. Ortner (2006) suggests that educators supervise the exposure and orientation of education and training to ensure that they subscribe to both professional and practice standards while allowing for the incorporation of knowledge and expertise developed in other fields. For example, in the U.K alone, there has been a migration of as much as 10% of social services to internet communications. There should be realization that aside from educating clients on the utilization of these channels, Moon & DeWeaver (2005) highlight the need for social workers have to be educated effectively on the back end operations of the technology and the service. They further point out that such a level of knowledge can only be possible if educational programs and training recognize the concern. Practice Professional and industry interest in monitoring of social work practice highlight how quality of service depend on the delivery and relationship developed with clients. Supervision of social work practice should follow standards and procedures of other social services like health and education but allow for flexibility to respond to the diversity of social work service needs and its clients. One problem that Lipsky (1983) has pointed out in the monitoring and supervision of social work practice is that advantage and prerogative is often skewed in the favor of social workers. Thus, in the event of abuse of power, clients express reluctance to critique or log formal complaints except for extreme situations. Though there is still opportunity to address abuse issues, this does not address unreported an incident which deteriorates the confidence in social workers by clients (Catty et al 2005). In the case presented by Mack & Leiber (2005), practice monitoring and supervision had the potential of limiting conflicts involving race and gender-sensitive settings. They see a correlation on reports of abuse or malpractice to the degree of perceived power perceived of social workers and lack of supervision. Similarly, Lasky & Riva (2006) point out that lack of supervision in practice can develop deficiencies in the management or delivery of services. Their opinion was developed form problems raised regarding the control and abuse related to confidentiality in group therapy interventions. This raised not only the bar on social workers but also their supervision in view of privacy issues. Values Development The area of supervision concern that George and & Wildings (2002) see to become most critical in the near future is with regard to the values of social workers professionally and by practice. Ortner (2006) sees a growing association with the level of social service effectiveness and values formation in social work. The contention is that as social development becomes more dependent on social work delivery, there is greater vulnerability not only for power abuse but also the weakness of corrective or intervening measures. The language alone of social workers can impact potential outcomes for services (Hawkins et al 2001). However, Fargion (2006) that the issue is not limited to the values reflected in services or social workers, there also has to be sufficient support for social workers. Fargion’s research indicated that more than failure of supervision of values development, deterioration can be attributed to work stress and interpersonal conflict. Ortner (2006) points out that one of the challenges in the supervision of values development is its fluidity across cultures and societies. This will then require unique programs however considering the level of diversity in societies today, the range of competencies necessary is often beyond the resources of social service resource frameworks. However, of all the efforts in monitoring the quality of social services and deter abuse of power, values development has the greatest potential. Since values can be utilized as moral and ethical deterrent to power abuse, it circumvents power abuse beyond a professional level (Cohen et al, 2006). Furthermore, it can reinforce professional commitment which can raise professional and practice standards as well (Maiter et al. 2006) Code Conflicts Source and Development In an effort to streamline social services, there has been effort to develop collaborative partnerships in delivering services. However, there have been some conflict amongst professionals due to variance is perspectives, approaches and professional regulation that have not yet been resolved (Moon & DeWeaver 2005). Ortner (2006) considers these conflicts as part of the process of developing social services but at the same time cautions that lack of resolution of these conflicts can diminish accountability and responsibility. In fact, Smith and Lipsky (1995) believe that non-alignment of professional codes can be deliberate to obscure chains of responsibility without diminishing power or control. A common, if not classical, conflict is illustrated by the in accessing socialized health care. Lipsky (1983) notes that criteria for social support are not congruent to medical aid and therefore creates a scenario where in, an individual maybe considered diminished in capacity but not qualified to receive the same degree of medical care. Another example is the contradictions in low-income families. Since the households have income, they do not meet the criteria for socialized health care or are obligated to pay full price for health insurance despite marginal capacity over non-income earning households (Mack et al 2005). Tew (2006) points out that in either scenario, social service workers will not be able to aid their clients to access services that may essential in their ability to maintain jobs or to maintain quality of life standards. Management According to Dowding (1996), the resolution of conflicts in power or responsibility can only be resolved in the delineation of accountability and function. There is a need to delineate clearly lines so that resolution can be managed effectively without compromising the interest of either party or diminishing neither their power nor responsibility over outcomes. Similarly, Fried (1988) suggests the development of institutional collaborations to ease potential conflicts. This entails the study and evaluation of concerned institutions’ program’s rationale, objectives, methods and targeted results. Based on the research of Hermann (2004) the practice of developing welfare and interventions and programs for example can be incorporated effectively to existing programs and require sensitivity to public demands. Shulman (2006) that this requires a collaboration in social services rendered as a means or reinforcement and support. He points out that for vulnerable groups, inconsistencies in the type of services received can diminish success of outcomes individual programs the client is participating in. This is supported by cohort studies in social service and welfare practice and research, particularly those that concern vulnerable groups, advocating collaborative interventions (Catty et al 2006). LaVeist (2007) believes that the need to develop collaborative partnerships in social services can be seen in legislation such as the Health Care Act of 2007. If approved, the bill will address disparities in US state laws regarding health insurance liberalizing access and range of services as well as opening the market to independent service providers. This can be step in resolving in turn disparities in social welfare and health care which Fried (1998) will contribute significantly to the streamlining social welfare services which can lessen clients’ vulnerability to professional discretion or conflicts. Court or Statutory Requirements Legislative and judicial requirements have created some of the most compelling incentives in regulating social work practice. The objective behind current legislation is to define functions, responsibilities and accountabilities to maximize service potentials and competencies. In doing, so social workers and clients alike are afforded the best protection of the law to ensure both their welfares. The development of such legislation allows for the social work services delivery to use client-centered perspectives which empower clients as well as organize delivery of services. One example of such a legislation is the 2000 Children (Leaving Care) Act, replacing section 24 of the 1989 Children Act, provides for the requirements and responsibilities of local authorities supervising young persons either currently under or previously placed under their jurisdiction (Office of Public Sector Information 2008). Though the bulk of the act pertains to the exercise of power over juvenile wards, there also provisions for the limitations of such powers and the states continuing responsibility for young persons subject to their supervision. The act provides for distribution of power over clients not only to mitigate possible abuse but allow for collaborations in treatment and management. Court and statutory requirements in delivery of social services, shift power to clients since services are not dependent on the evaluation or determination of service officers or institutions (Lipsky 1983). At the same time, this supports the execution of service particular at times were there is resistance for clients. In having a third party, whether by judicial action or by execution of legislation, direct parties involved in the delivery of service, the social work service professional and the client, are under the obligation to deliver. There have also been similar efforts to assimilate social services in other fields of services. Educational support legislation such as the US No Child Left Behind Policy ensure access to education through developing sensitivity to social and welfare issue impeding access (Macionis & Benokraitis 2006). Word Designs and Response Frameworks As a socio-technical system, work designs and response frameworks create environment were workers can achieve professional foals, develop efficiency and affectivity and be able to have develop positive relationships and methods for resolution of problems (Fargion 2006). In institutions like social welfare services that operate that are always on demand, communication and resolution of policies and issues alike must be done in real time (Macionis & Benokraitis 2006). At the same time, considering the sensitivity of its clients, there should be consideration for security and privacy to protect and develop confidence and cooperation with services. The hierarchy of command within the group should follow avenues that consider the need form, frequency and the nature of exchanges and relationships as they develop: that people not move in a continuum of level of satisfaction (Tew 2006). The first element that has to be established is policy evaluation and analysis procedures that will allow the organizations to determine the effectiveness and relevance of programs and officers. Stakeholders, social service personal, professional organization, public and related industry representatives, have to be organized into working groups to develop systems of evolution, monitoring and intervention. The institution of the work group will then be followed by the development of operations procedures to address conflicts. This will allow the work group the capacity to become sensitive to conflicts if they do develop as well as the ability to respond and manage issues. Resolution of conflicts is first reserved at service manager level defined either by locale or by nature of service. Upon the determination that complaints or conflicts have just cause, the case will be forwarded to the work group. The work group then analyzes the merits of the concern, using manager’s comments and summary as initial reference. If there is suggestion of criminal or civil liability, the case will be forwarded to judicial courts. In the absence of such qualification, the case will be resolved by the committee applying professional sanction or through dismissal. Conclusion Acting as the primary channel for social services with the community, they are able to assess the needs and impact of services on a humanistic level. However, this has also highlighted the need to develop monitoring systems to ensure professional and ethical standards of practice (Fargion 2006). It should be noted that the power or authority of social workers are not executor in nature but rather create the basis for judicial or public action (Hawking et al 2001).The delivery of social services is indicative of a state’s capacity to deliver essential services, provide welfare and sensitivity to the quality of life of constituents. To fulfill such responsibilities, the state is afforded the power to develop legislation, implement social service programs and institute monitoring and control systems (Ortner 2006). In a similar manner, social workers are responsible ensuring that minimum standards of living are maintained, that services and access channels are adequate and that there is effective communication of needs and service requirements. Therefore, considering the level of control and influence that social workers can have to quality of life and well-being of clients, the concern that the powers afforded them can be abused is with merit. References Catty, J., Goddard, K. & Burns, T., 2005. Social Services and Health Services Day Care in Mental Health: The Social Networks and Care Needs of their Users. International Journal of Social Psychiatry 51: 23 - 34. Cohen, G. D., Perlstein, S., Chapline, J., Kelly, J., Firth, K. M. & Simmens, S., 2006. The Impact of Professionally Conducted Cultural Programs on the Physical Health, Mental Health, and Social Functioning of Older Adults. Gerontologist 46: 726 - 734. Dowding, K., 1996. Power. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Fargion, S., 2006. Thinking Professional Social Work: Expertise and Professional Ideologies in Social Workers’ Accounts of Their Practice. Journal of Social Work, Dec (6). pp. 255 - 273. Fried, B. J., 1988. Power Acquisition in a Health Care Setting: An Application of Strategic Contingencies Theory. Human Relations, Dec(41). pp 915 - 927. George, V. & Wilding, P., 2002. Globalization and Human Welfare. New York: Palgrave Macmillan Hawkins, L., Fook, J. & Ryan, M., 2001. Social workers' use of the language of social justice. Br. J. Soc. Work, Feb(31). pp 1 - 13. Hermann, M. L., 2004. Linking liberal & professional learning in nursing education. Liberal Education, Fall. Retrieved February 12, 2008, from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0NKR/is_4_90/ai_n13787494 Kemeny, J., 1995. Theories of Power in the Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Journal of European Social Policy, Jan(5). pp 87 - 96. Lasky, G. B. & Riva, M. T., 2006. Confidentiality and Privileged Communication in Group Psychotherapy. International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 56(4). pp. 455-476 LaVeist, T. A., 2007. Exploring Health Disparities in Integrated Communities Project. John Hopkins School of Public Health. Retrieved January 30, 2008 from http://www.jhsph.edu/healthdisparities/Research/SWB1.html Lipsky, M., 1983. Street Level Bureaucracy. New York: Russell Sage Foundation Publications Macionis, J. J. & Benokraitis, N. V. 2006. Seeing Ourselves: Classic, Contemporary, and Cross-Cultural Readings in Sociology. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Mack, K. Y. & Leiber, M. J., 2005. Race, Gender, Single-Mother Households, and Delinquency: A Further Test of Power-Control Theory. Youth Society, Dec(37). pp 115 - 144. Maiter, S., Palmer, S, & Manji, S., 2006. Strengthening Social Worker-Client Relationships in Child Protective Services: Addressing Power Imbalances and ‘Ruptured’ Relationships.Qualitative Social Work, June, (5). pp 161 – 186 Moon, S. S. & DeWeaver, K. L., 2005. Electronic Advocacy and Social Welfare Policy Education. Journal of Teaching in Social Work, Volume 25, Numbers 1-2. pp. 57-68 Office of Public Sector Information, 2008. Children (Leaving Care) Act 2000. [Online]. Available at < http://www.legislation.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/ukpga_20000035_en_1> (OPSI) [accessed 11 February 2008] Ortner, S., 2006. Anthropology and Social Theory: Culture, Power, and the Acting Subject, New Ed edition. Duke University Press Sakamoto, I. & Pitner, R. O. , 2005. Use of Critical Consciousness in Anti-Oppressive Social Work Practice: Disentangling Power Dynamics at Personal and Structural Levels. Br. J. Soc. Work, Jun (35). pp 435 - 452. Shulman, L., 2006. The Skills Of Helping Individuals, Family, Groups And Communities, 5th ed. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole Thomson Learning Smith, S. & Lipsky, M., 1995. Nonprofits for Hire: The Welfare State in the Age of Contracting, New Ed edition . Harvard University Press Tew, J., 2006. Understanding Power and Powerlessness: Towards a Framework for Emancipatory Practice in Social Work. Journal of Social Work, Apr (6). pp. 33 - 51. Williams, F. 1993. Gender, Race and Class in British Welfare Policy in ed. A. Cochrane and J. Clarke, Comparing Welfare States: Britain in International Context. London: Sage. Read More