The profession of social work necessitates a commitment to social justice. Social workers provide services for individuals, work to meet needs, advocate for causes, etc. As Scanlon and Longres (2001) state, however, social justice is not viewed entirely in the same way across the spectrum of social workers (p. 444). After reading these articles about social justice I thought more in depth about how the philosophy of social justice affects the practice of social work, whether individual rights focused or group rights focused.
Pelton (2001) discussed how group rights focused justice violates social justice in that it furthers discrimination since it tends toward people receiving services based on their group affiliation rather than based on their need (p. 434). Due to the nature of group affiliation, this can lead to certain people being put into “currently fashionable groups” (Pelton, 2001, p. 436), which brings up the question concerning individuals not in the currently fashionable groups. I would hope that the social work profession stands on the principle of justice, rather than reflect the sentiments of the general public. Yet I think that sentiment can play a part in services being provided to people by nature of peoples’ consciousness of the needs of a particular group of people. Scanlon and Longres (2001) were getting at this point when talking about groups-based justice leading to cultural competence, which helps people by seeing things from their point of view and understanding their group history (p.443 ).
In my opinion, the ideal application of groups-based justice would be more appropriate in the context of a group of people rallying together in order to pursue justice for themselves. The grouping together is their choice. Hence, when an individual seeks a social worker, they are coming to receive services rather than coming to be identified with a group and it is not for the social worker to put them into a group and administer services, but to see them as an individual and whereby administer services. However while hardly any opportunity for an ideal application exists, the cases where groups of people cannot effectively pursue justice for themselves are many. Hence social workers enter into the picture as advocates.
While wrestling with how the principle of social justice is reconciled in the context of groups-based or individual-based rights, the example of refugees kept coming to my mind since I have done some volunteer work with them in the past. Let’s say a social worker decides to advocate for improved education for Burmese refugee youth in Austin. These individuals do not have the means to advocate for themselves at this point. Taking into account Pelton’s (2002) comment on the benefit of advocating for group-blind policies (p. 202), the social worker would do well to advocate for these youth as individuals who are not receiving adequate educational provision instead of as Burmese refugee youth. However, the situation of these refugees is not well-known to policy-makers and educators and so they need to be informed about this particular group’s background or else they would never be aware that educational resources need to be developed and made available to these individuals.The social worker would seek to increase the consciousness and sentiment towards the plight of such individuals. In this example, the advocating of social justice for a group supports social justice for the individuals. If not, group-blind policies could lead to the needs of certain individuals going unnoticed. Whether we like it or not, social justice is not administered evenly or thoroughly into every policy-making system or social services institution because people are not altogether aware of every injustice and so raising awareness and sentiment does enter into the picture .
The argument for rights of groups based on cultural competency still posed a problem for me in other ways. I think that cultural competence cannot be limited to simply knowing the cultures of certain ethnic groups. If one is going to be culturally competent, then they would have to have an awareness of all peoples’ backgrounds and histories. There are many people who do not fit into these groups, such as multi-cultural people. One cannot group these people into a certain membership because there are numerous characteristics that come into play. I suggest that being culturally competent can mean knowing the background of cultural groups, but knowledge of groups should not be the structure of our competence. This comes from listening to the individual and understanding where he/she comes from, which would mean using the skills that we as social workers are taught in the first place. We are taught to listen to individuals, not categorize groups and administer services accordingly.
Social workers are out to help individuals, and individuals can be in groups. At best, I feel that it is very possible for group-based rights to support and further individual rights and that’s what it should be for. At the same time we must remember that we are not immune to categorizing individuals and we must seek to fore-go any methods in our practice that would make it more likely for us provide services based on group membership rather than needs. It is good for social work education to discuss these factors of how the principle of social justice plays out in the profession and how our own efforts to bring justice to certain individuals and groups can inadvertently further discrimination. Social work education needs to acknowledge the conflicts of the principle of social justice and the practice of social work, not only due to the reality of working within systems of injustice but also the reality that social service practices and methods themselves have been and could be contributing to injustice and discrimination. The points raised in these articles can remind us as social workers that we ultimately are here to promote justice for all individuals rather than for the furthering of a profession. The profession exists because individuals have needs, so hopefully furthered injustice or discrimination would not occur because of the profession’s practices . Social work has not operated under a system of perfectly administered social justice. However, acknowledging these mistakes and the possible flaws in the system along with discussing the practical steps in finding solutions in such situations is essential for effective social work education.
References
Pelton, L.H. (2001). Social justice and social work. Journal of Social Work Education, 37(3), 433- 439.
Pelton, L.H. (2002). Reply to Richard Holody. Journal of Social Work Education, 38(1), 201-203.
No comments:
Post a Comment