Research undertaken on service users from the 1970s onward shows a remarkable consis- tency in what service users value from social workers (Mayer and Timms 1970; Rees 1978; Winefield and Barlow, 1995). Social workers are valued:
G for their ability to listen;
G for engaging empathically with service users; G for being clear about what they can and cannot do; G for providing basic and effective help.
For example, a literature review of research undertaken by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation’s Older People’s Steering Group (2004) found that:
The forms of support or services which older people valued concerned negotiating the ordinary things in life – relationships, learning in later life, transport, housing, contact – ‘being comfortable’, having ‘that bit of help’ (Older People’s Steering Group, 2004, p1). However, what service users value from professional social work and what sometimes is provided does not always tally. Social workers can sometimes inhabit a provider ideology which limits service user’s options. Beresford and Croft (2001, p300) criticise such an ide- ology which they argue leads to:
G restrictions on the rights of people who use them; G institutionalisation;
G an emphasis on social control; G widespread abuse and neglect; G shortcomings in standards;
G failure to ensure equal access and opportunities.
Virtually all our respondents wanted some advice and someone to listen, and when they did get this they were enormously appreciative. It also appeared to work. One couple, for example, where the father had only managed to elicit advice and support over the tele- phone about their teenage daughter, said it had made all the difference. The young woman (aged 13) herself stated that things were now better because they had all sat down as a family to talk about difficulties. Another mother with two late teenage children felt alone and needed some help and advice: she appreciated the short burst of help and, although critical overall about the provision, liked the fact that the social worker was very clear about her role (Leigh and Miller, 2004).
70
Such an approach subverts the needs of service users to the requirements of social work- ers and the organisations which employ them. This leads to an entrenchment of organisational and professional values which marginalises the rights of service users to a responsive service. Professionalism in this view has for too long limited what was available to service users through what was considered professionally expedient. Professionalism in this sense is closely associated with the concept of ‘welfarism’ (Froggett, 2002). This reflected a commitment to the provision of universal welfare services, defined, adminis- tered and delivered by professionals which ignored service users’ definitions of need, leading to a ‘one size fits all’ approach. Delivering welfare services resembled the mass production of consumer goods infamously associated with car manufacturer Henry Ford who is rumoured to have said, Any customer can have a car painted any colour that he wants, so long as it is black.
Welfarism institutionalises a hierarchical relationship of social worker and client with power residing with the social worker using their professional expertise to decide upon client need. This expertise encapsulated a strong professional identity clinging tenaciously to expert power arraigned against social work clients and other professions to limit chal- lenges to their professional status (Asquith, et al., 2005).
This view of professional social work is now more or less discredited. Service users have become more vocal in their demands to have their needs recognised, stimulating a debate as to what constitutes professional social work. In Scotland, for example, Asquith et al. (2005) have begun this debate by focusing on the professional identity of social workers. They observe that pressures upon this identity have come from the move away from direct work with service users and the requirement to fulfil a more limited organisational func- tion within local authority social work departments. This has been reinforced by the requirement to work across agencies, for example with health and education profession- als. They suggest that social work organisations may no longer be necessary in their present form. Similar processes have begun in England where the requirement for greater partnership, working in adult care with health and child care with education, is leading to new organisational structures such as Children’s Trusts.
Do we now need a different kind of social work service from that devised in the sixties? Is social work best provided by local authority social work departments – or would service users be better served by a strong professional social work element within education, health and other agencies?
From the leadership perspective the distinctive identity of the social worker may well be threatened by increasing integration with other services. This does not necessarily indicate that professional social work will cease to exist. But it will be all the more important for social work to clarify and consolidate its professional identity in the world (Adapted from Asquith, et al. 2005).
71
Comment
Apart from these attributes that we would expect of a professional social worker there is something more about a profession which takes us beyond the competency of the work that professionals do. Friedson (2001) constructs an ideal list of attributes which encom- passes both competence and wider social and political attributes of professions. These are: G specialised knowledge;
G power to organise and control own work; G sole legal power to offer a service;
G only fellow professionals can supervise and scrutinise work; G dedicated to service of the public.
As Friedson (2001) argues, these attributes are only ideals and as such the reality contains positive and negative characteristics. As identified in Chapter 1 the behaviour of some social work professionals does not live up to the ideal. Professionals may collude together to protect their status and income from the encroachment of others. Social workers, like other professions, are increasingly subject to pressure from service users and the state (see Figur 4.1). On the one hand the state has introduced both tighter control through the use of service targets and a greater use of the private sector in the provision of services. On the other hand service users are demanding a greater voice in the planning, organisation and delivery of services.
Social work as compared with other professions is less independent of state control and is therefore more vulnerable when faced with pressure from the state. These differences can be attributed to wider social and political factors which the work of Larson (1977) and Abbott (1988) identify well.
Make a list of those attributes which you would expect a professional social worker to have. Here is my list (not exhaustive) – how far is yours different?
G Knowledge of social problems – understanding of poverty, discrimination and its effects on different groups.
G Knowledge of individual problems – child development, mental health. G Possession of appropriate skills, e.g. communication skills.
G Motivation to help people in constructive ways. G Sound value base that informs their practice.
Larson:
Abbott:
Social work therefore is in a different position from some of the professions analysed by the two writers above as they focus mostly upon more traditional professions, for example doctors, lawyers, etc. Social work’s history is different and is not comparable to those tra- ditional professions. In essence, social work as part of the ‘caring professions’ is mandated by society to perform certain activities which it is hoped will lead to the general well-being
72
Looks at the historical process by which a limited group of occupations strategically increased their social status as against other occupational groups to gain a monopoly in the marketplace. Thus professions gain economic advantage for themselves by restricting the supply of practitioners and striving for a favoured place in society in terms of the respect and influence afforded to them. Thus a profession gains status or loses it by its ability to control the market for its skill and the extent to which it is then respected by wider society.
Looks at the way occupations gain and maintain the control over specific occupational activities. This is viewed through the division of labour in which different occupational groups compete over control of different occupational activities and how they maintain their own social and official boundaries. Thus the ability of a profession to maintain its status relies on maintaining this strict division of labour. He points out that ‘professions’ (i.e. what members of such professional groups and others normally call professions) develop when jurisdictions become vacant; groups of expert workers convert their work and knowledge into a currency. They present their work as expertise different from other expert work. In turn they can claim an expert status beside other expert groups (occupa- tions, professions).
Social work
State Market
73
of individuals and the society within which they live (Hugman, 2005). But this social mandate is under increasing pressure as noted above by pressures from the state and serv- ice users. Service user groups have mounted formidable criticism of social workers, for example the disability movement has successfully criticised the welfarism of social services in reinforcing ideas of dependency on service users. The state, largely as a response to some well publicised cases which impute neglect on behalf of social workers, has increas- ingly introduced legislation to require more partnership working with other professionals (DfES, 2004). When social workers have tried to develop their own critical practice through anti-oppressive approaches they have been opposed by those groups who wish to control and punish those whom social work seeks to empower. Throughout the 1980s and 1990s the tabloid press ran a number of stories which purported to expose the ‘political correct- ness’ emanating from so-called left-wing councils and social work departments (Franklin, 1999). In 1987 an unheard of rise in the diagnosis of child abuse involving some 121 chil- dren who were compulsorily separated from their families led to a major inquiry into the methods used to diagnose children suspected of being abused and the subsequent handling of procedures to remove children from their homes. The subsequent report (Butler-Sloss, 1988) criticised the way suspected child abuse was diagnosed and the lack of inter-agency cooperation.
Such pressure had a significant effect with the appointment of a lawyer, Jeffrey Greenwood, as chair of Central Council for Education and Training in Social Work (CCETSW) in 1993. He declared his commitment to equal opportunities, but also pledged to rid social work training of ‘politically correct nonsense’. This led to a revision of training policy where explicit orientation to such politically charged references to race and anti- racism were dropped (Mclaughlin, 2005). The focus upon social work and its presumed mistakes at this time highlights the relative weakness of the social work profession to resist efforts to limit its professional discretion, but also reveals the nature of accountabil- ity in social work.
Accountability
To be a professional social worker is to be accountable. Accountability means that as social workers we are prepared to be open to the scrutiny of others for our actions, be prepared to accept praise and blame in equal measure and be prepared to explain our actions. Social workers’ accountability is not necessarily transparent. Is social workers’ primary accountability to service users, to the wider community who provide the resources for social work or to their employers? To be accountable involves:
G explaining one’s actions; G justifying one’s actions;
G admitting one’s actions may have been at fault; G countering unjustified criticism.
On a personal level, accountability requires social workers to be open to criticism which can be threatening to one‘s self-esteem, whether criticism is justified or not. But to be a professional requires the worker not to personalise this criticism and understand it as an aspect of the professional role to develop ethical practice. Being accountable not only involves the passive sense, it requires an active engagement in which the social worker
may seek to counter unjustified criticism. Practically, being accountable involves social workers keeping case records, attending case conferences, writing case reviews, attending court, giving evidence and writing court reports. All of these actions place the social worker under public scrutiny, and calls practitioners to account.
Comment
In addressing the practical issues of accountability we need to consider the following: G How far did Caroline prepare? Did she read the appropriate research and allow enough
time to write a thorough report? Often social workers are pressured by their managers to take more work than they can cope with. It is essential that Caroline learns to be more assertive with her manager if this happens. By Caroline managing her time and not over- burdening her caseload she will be able to be more thorough in her report writing. Likewise Caroline must plan for the day in court. She will then have time to prepare herself for any questions asked or consider what might be the appropriate dress for the occasion. G How far did Caroline practise? Did she go through any information she may want to
present in advance? If there are legal issues involved, she should ensure her familiarity with them and reflect how the court might respond. Researching the practice issues and making sure she is prepared enables her professional persona to flourish in any public forum. When she is on public show not only the content of her communication is scruti- nised but so is her general demeanour. How she presents and handles herself in public reflects upon her professionalism and is a part of her professional accountability. Ultimately her practice is designed to provide the service user with the maximum repre- sentation through the effective employment of her professional knowledge and her personal engagement in court.
If Caroline presents negatively by being inappropriately dressed, lacking knowledge of the case and being poorly informed, she is signalling her unprofessional approach. If she presents as too casual in her demeanour, can she be trusted, particularly if she appears hesitant and unable to give a clear account of the case? This will therefore reflect on the person, i.e. both Caroline and the service user, and risks any case she might be involved with.
74
Brian’s social worker, Caroline, has written a pre-sentence report for the Youth Court. Because of the pressure to complete the report on time, Caroline did not check the grammar before sending it to the court. Although she made some recommendations on Brian’s behalf, this was unsupported by research or other evidence. The magistrates remark on the poor grammar used which made parts of the report hard to follow. Unfortunately, to compound the situation further, Caroline attended the court in a pair of jeans which she did not have time to change out of as she had been working with a group of young offenders on a playgroup scheme.
On the face of it these may seem fairly minor infractions and ones which Caroline would not repeat if she could choose, or could she?