help wit disc due in 24 hours

combs

0a5582831deff0c7c1792f4809b3d188.pdf

Home >Education homework help >help wit disc due in 24 hours

ial work'l :u alreacly know

the cnd of the lacement, volun- ribe the imp:rct

veen Ms. Gener-

oup take a look olved with. For

a Ms. Advocate

C6rye*rz

SocrAl JusTrcE AND Aovo cACY PnecTrc E

Social tuorkers bar,rc a. prokssional respotrsibility to ntake .. . cboices cutd to participate in the broad,er societal clebate trt resoltrc issu.es c{' social cbctnge. D. Iatriclis, Social Pctliclt

Mara Liasson, repofter for National Public Raclio, startecl a presentation to a NASV PoliticalAction Insritute by clefining her subject.The worcl "politics," she saicl,"comes from1tro1l.s, a Greek worcl meaning cornmu- nitv and /ics, meaning srnall, blooclsucking insects. politics is thus a

clomain of liI'e controlled by a gfollp of people leeching off the rest of us" (Liasson, 1996). Ltnfortunarely for the field of social work and the llnitecl States at large, this facetious clefinition is widely acceptecl.

The belief that politics and thus advocacy is a clirty arena, popu- lated by the worst kinds of people, ancl something that no clecent per- son woulcl want to be associated with, is ali too common in social work. There is, howevet, another view of politics. A political scientist, Harold Lasswell (I936),wrote that politics is the process iry which it is decided "who gets what, u,hen ancl how" (p. 5). pr_ilitics, in this vicw, is simpll' a tool that can be nsecl for good or bacl purposes.

Iteisch and Jani (2012) provide a ser of ideas that infbrm their more-academic approach to understanding the term ,,politics',: they focns on how pou'er dillbrences are created ancl perpetuatecl by insti- tutions, language, and other socially constf,uctecl actions. They also inclucle in their perspective how power affects the allocation of all aspects of the social n elfare entcrprise , fiom worker-client relations to the selection of policies.

A similar, though simplifiecl, version of this clefinition is that poli- tics (or policy making) is "deciding how stuff gets spreacl arotmcl,,,and

So<:t'tt. [t-;s'rtt;I ANI) Al)vocAct PRA<;r'tcc

theunclerll'ingprocessesthatSuppoftthatclecisitlnprogess'Theonly questiotl, then, is rvhether social wofkers (or any othef gfotlp of incli-

vich,rals with common interests) want to help make thesc ciccisious' I1

voll ltre not the clecision maker yourself' then advocacy is tlte pfocess

bv whicir lrlu help make the clecisions on these matters' FormerTexas

stirte senator ancl m;ryor of FortVbrth,Texas' Mikc Moncriet is foncl of

sa,vir-rg that social *',,rko., ancl politicians hlrve a comlnon goarl:to help

p.npf. Barbar;r Mikulski, If'ssetlator from Marvlancl' says"'Politics is

,ir.rpfy social work with power" (Reisch' 1995' p' 1)' If social workers

wzrilt to assist clients, it is imperative that enough of them afe active

ancl capable arlvocates in the policy-making arena to ensure that things

happen. Soci;rlworkersnrustbeinvolveclinaclvocac,vpf'tcticeifclients'

situations afe to improve' If social u'ol'kers do not act as aclvocxtes'

their policy icleas aucl, even rlore importantly' their values w-ill not bc

r.lrrerent"cl in policy-rnaking circles' When social workers engltgc in

".lun.u.y practice , they bring with them specializecl kuowleclgc about

the human conclition ancl a belief that service provision to clients rnLlst

consicler inclivicluals within theil environment' Social workers alstr

waltt to lircus on client strengths, fathef than on pathologV When

social r,vorkers share their knowledge ancl belief.s, clecision makers are

exposecl to a liesh anel itnportant point of view'

Decisionrnakers,.tfeeilcountereclinmanyclifferentplaces.ancl not just in the legislative branch of the Flovernlnent of in the top stmtit

of other org,anizatiol-ls' l)ecisiotl nrakers can be fottncl everpvhere in

organizaticlnsbecattseevenltrw-levelworkerslravetoiiltefpfet ambigttotts regul;ttions, rules, ancl ctlstonls in their place of employ-

ment (Lipskl', 1980). Organizational culture may mitke sotne choices

,.obvitltts,',eveniftheyrunCollnteftoclietrtinterests.'Iheseclecisions

are jttst as appropriate for ach'ocacy pfttctice as is passiug a law'

Becattsc values are sttch ?rn irnpoftant compoilent of social work-

crs' aclvocacy pfactice, it is important to icleutify the source of these

valttes'Tlrenextsectionloo|isatNAS\W'sprof"essionalCocleofEthics toexploretheconncctionbetweenprof.essitlnalresponsibility(as clefinecl in the NASV cocle) ancl advocilcy practice' (-web sites for

otlrercoclesofethicsareprovicleclintlrischapter,sl)iscttssitlrrQttes- tions ancl Exercises.)

Anvt'rc.'rt.t' tN lHt: N,'r'rt

ADVOCACY IN T

According to social

Mar-vatrne N{ahaffeY,

processl is a valtte s'

skills. makes the difl

the best Places to lt

is in thc Code of F

social q'orkers in tk

There are seYel

that inclicirte that b

sional social lvorkr

most cleafl.\'; "Socia

societl'. h'om local

their comtnttnities

acivocate fr-rr livinP

httm;rn neecls ancl

tuml valtles and ins

sociatr irtstice" (NAl

The cocle furt

(a) Social rvo

seeks to e

emPlovmt

basic hun

arl'are of

advocate

rlitions in

tice.

(b) Social w<

pefsons.

oppfesse

(r.04)

T'he cocle a<

(i.{)2: "Social wor

public in shaPir

Socrar Jusrrcr awo Aovocacv Pn,q.crtcr

Sec.6.02).Thus, social workers not only have an obligation to partici- pate actively in advocacy themselves, but also to empower others to do so. Social work administrators have a specific duty along these

lines, too, according to the Code of Ethics:"Social work administrators should advocate within and outside their agencies for adequate

resoufces to meet clients'needs" (NAS\( Sec. 3.07[a]). Despite the specificity and clarity of the Code of Ethics, a histori-

cal concern in the literature is that social workers do not have the skills necessafy to be policy advocates and to encourage others to shape social policy flVolk, 1981). Many blame this situation on social

work education programs'lack of student training in these skills (Ezell,

L993;Haynes & Mickelson,2oo9;Mary, Ellano, & Newell, 199T. Reisch andJani (2012) add a contemporary analysis of the issues

involved in lack of student preparation. They argue that social work educators need to stfess the development of cfitical consciousness

regarding power differentials on policies, promote theoretical per-

spectiyes that emphasize change and con-flict, and question the undef- pinnings of intervention research. Reisch and lani acknowledge that students would be resistant to these measllfes because they often have

limited knowledge about politics, and are perplexed by the strain between an emphasis on social justice and the desire to practice objec-

tively validated social work. Students also lack the skills of conflict management, and so do not want to be active in inherently conflictual afenas.

It is not only students who stay away from politics and training in advocacy, but also others: practitionefs, elren administrators of human seryices nonprofits, afe not flocking to the banner of advocacy.Accord-

ing toAlmog-Bar and Schmid (2o14),"Most studies reveal low levels of advocary, indicating that political advocacy is marginal and limited in scop€. Resources afe not allocated and very few staff positions are

assigned for this plupose" (p.7). Despite the lack of formal advocacy skills training for social work

students and the cuffent low level of advocacy effott that nonprofit human service otganizations put fofth, it is vital to learn how to approach issues relating to the denial of social justice, and it is impor- tant to continue to seek knowledge about advocacy and learn its place in the social work profession.The next s€ction examines what social

Socral JL

workers are tfying to i

the goal of social lust:

seerns to keep socieq

socrAlJUsTrcE SOCIAL '!

The 2008 NASW Code

fession: service, social j

tance of human relatic

description of these va

important to take a clo

is the value that most (

The Code of Ethk

tice " (NAS'W 2008, Ethi(

principle means by dt particulady with and o

als and groups of pec

focused primarily on is

and other forms of so

sensitivity to and knon

diversity. Social worker

services, and resourcer

ticipation in decision n

ciples). The NASW Code r

issues for social worke

The concept of "social

ever, as it means diffet

difficult for social wod to work for social just

Other references are a

stand the term more fi.

The Social Vork as "an ideal condition

same basic rights, prc

benefits" (Barker, 2003,

[uo.o." pnacrlcr

pnly have an obligation to partici- p, but also to empower others to

fave a specific tlury along these

Ithics: "Social work administrators

fle their agencies for adequate

ISW sec. 3.07[a]). fy of the Code of Ethics. a histori- isocial workers do not have the [tes and to encoufage others to

y blame this situation on social ent training in rhese skills (Ezell,

; Ellano, & Newell, I99r. temporafy analysis of the issues

on. They argue that social work ment of cfitical consciousness

ilicies, promote theoretical per-

lconflict. and question the under-

fisch and Jani acknowledge that

feasures because they often have

1ld are perplexed by the strain land the desire ro pl?ctice objec- I also lack the skills of conflict B active in inherently con-flictual

tray from politics and training in P,

eYen administrators of human

Ithe banner of advocacy.Accorcl-

[,Iost studies reveal low levels of Pcacy is marginal and limited in

fro vev few staff positions are

gl skills training for social work 'advocacy effon that nonprofit [h, it is vital to learn how to pf social justice, and it is impor- but advocacy andleatn its place it section examines what social

Socrar Jusrrcr rN ruE NASW Conn or Ersrcs

workers are trying to accomplish with their efforts. Identi$zing with the goal of social justice can help us all overcome the inertia that seems to keep society and our peers stuck in place.

SOCIALJUSTTCE rN THE NAITONAL ASSOCTAfiON OF SOCIAL WORIGRS' CODE OF ETHICS

The 2OO8 NAS\( Code of Ethics sets forth six core values of the pro- fession: service, social justice, dignity and worth of the pefson, impor- tance of human relationships, integrity, and competence. A complete description of these values is beyond the scope of this book, but it is important to take a closer look at the value of social justice because it is the value that most directly encoufages advocacy practice.

The Code of Ethics states, "social workers challenge social injus- tice" (NAS{ 2008, Ethical Principles).The code elaborares on what this principle means by declaring, "social workers pursue social change, particulafly with and on behalf of vulnerable and oppressed individu- als and groups of people. Social workers' social change efforts are focused primarily on issues of poveffy, unemployment, discrimination, and other forms of social injustice. These activities seek to promote sensitivity to and knowledge about oppression and cultural and ethnic diversity. social workers strive to ensure access to needed information, services, and resources; equality of opportunity, and meaningful par- ticipation in decision making for all people" (NASV 2008, Ethical prin- ciples).

The NASW Code explicitly mentions some of the main, concrete issues for social workers who want to work for grcatil social justice .

The concept of "social justice" is difficult to define definirively, how- ever, as it means different things to different people. Making mattefs difficult for social workers who want to follow the code of Ethics'call to wofk for social justice is that the code does not define the term. Other references are aval/iable, however, and step in to help us under- stand the term more fully.

The Social Work Dictionarjt, fot example, defines social justice as "an ideal condition in which all members of a society have the same basic rights, pfotections, oppornrnities, obligations, ancl social benefits" (Barker, 2OO3,pp. 4O4-4O5). Finn and Jacobson (200g), rn The

t-l

SoC]AL JTISTICE AND ADVOCACY PRACTICE DrsrRtnurtvr J

Encycloped,ia of Social Work, give a wide range of perspectives on

social justice. They provide a capsule review of utilitarian, libenarian,

egalitarian, racial contract, human rights, processual, and capabilities

pefspectives.Van Soest (|995) discusses thrce views of social justice:

iegal justice, the first view, is concerned with what a person owes soci-

ety. Commutative justice, the second view, is concerned with what peo-

ple owe each other. Distributive itlstice, the third view, is concerned

with whar society owes its members.The thifd view is the type of social

justice most often discussed in a social work context. The relative

importance of these three types of justice fuels many policy debates'

DISTRIBUTTVE JUSTICE

one of the most impoftant elements of the struggle over social welfare

policy is the difference in interpretation of the term "distributive jus-

ticel, Distfibutive justice "concefns the justified distribution of benefits

and burdens in society. . . .The distribution of benefits and burdens is

a cooperative social process sffuctufecl by various moml' legal' ideo-

logical, and cultural principles" (Iatridis, 1993,p.62).Thus, politics,"the

process of distfibutiflg stuff," is the way that distfibutive justice either

is or is not made a rcaliq; therefofe, the debates of political philoso-

phers deserwe considerable attention from social workers (Reamer'

199D. Allingham (2014) discusses four main theories of distributive jus-

tice.The first, iustice as fairness (associated withJohn Rawls)' consid-

efs any clistribution of goods as if the pefsons with the least get more

of the cuffent distribution in order to bring them up to the level of

others. The second, equality of resources (associated with Dworkin),

indicates that a distfibution is fair if evefyone has the same amount of

fesources from which to live.

The third viewpoint (linked to libertarian theofists), that of com-

mon ownefship, states that a distribution is just if everyone starts off

at the same level but allows for individuals to make voluntary tfansac-

tions that may alter this initial beginning. Finally, the entitlements the-

ory of Robert Nozick defines a just distribution as one that comes

about from voluntafy transfers of resources. In this situation, all

inequality is accePtable.

Although the literature on this tol

section on two of the four approaches

John Rawls and that of Robert Nozick,

damentally opposing. . . . In essence, R

Nozick emphasizes liberty" (Allinghat

Robert Nozick each penned very infl

distributive justice in the early i970s.i

the concePt have Provided a great d

that time.

John Rawls's Views on Distribr

Rawls (1971) asks his readers to imagil

the rules for a societY knowing t

"assigned" different places in society o

ticipants in this thought experiment I

within the rules they develop, but tht

society they are going to be given.Th

ignorance. A person may be assigne<

elite, with many resorrces and privil

with vefy few material resources. Ho

to exist, the rules agreed to have to a

veil of ignorance about one's ftiture a

afglres that people will want to cfeat

if only to pfotect themselves from bei

uation.According to Rawls, this set of

be basecl on two main principles.Th'

son is to have an equal right to the m(

basic liberties compatible with a s

(Rawls, p. 302).This ensures that all a

text of the rules, which are address

principle states that "social and e

arranged so that they are both (a) t<

aclvantaged and @) attached to offict

considerations of fair equality of optr

The second PrinciPle is an esPt

is not seen as an evil in and of itself,

be harnessed for the good of all.An

jjones2

Typewritten Text

jjones2

Typewritten Text

r PRACTICE

fange of pefspectiYes on

lt/ of utilitarian, libertarian,

focessual, and capabilities ree views of social justice:

h what a pefson owes soci-

concerned with what Peo- e thifd view, is concerned

rdview is the type of social york context. The relative rcls many policy debates.

fICE

rruggle over social welfare ithe term "distributive jus-

ied distribution of benefits ofbenefits and burdens is

various moral, legal, ideo-

3, p. 62).Thus, politics, "the

t distributive justice either ebates of political philoso-

t social workers (Reamer,

lheories of distributive jus-

i with John Rawls), consid-

rns with the least get more lg them up to the level of associated with Dworkin), ne has the same amount of

ian theorists), that of com-

s just if eYeryone starts off to make voluntary transac-

Inally, the entitlements the-

bution as one that comes

fces. In this situation, all

Dlstntsuttvr Justrcn

Although the literature on this topic is extensive, we focus in thisa

section on two of the four approaches described byAllingham: that of

John Rawls and that of Robert Nozick,because these arcthe most"fun-

damentally opposing. . . .In essence, Rawls emphasizes equality while

Nozick emphasizes liberty" (Allingham, 2O14, p.4). John Rawls and

Robert Nozick each penned very influential works on the subject of

distibutive justice in the early 197Os.Their different intefpfetations of

the concept have provided a great deal of matefial for debate since

that time.

John Rawls's Views on Distributive Justice

Rawls (1971) asks his readers to imagine that they are going to develop

the rules for a society knowing that people will be randomly ,,assigned" different places in society once the "game of life" begins. Par-

ticipants in this thought experiment must agree ahead of time to live

within the rules they develop, but they do not know what position in

society they are going to be given.This is what Rawls calls the veil of

ignorance. A person may be assigned a position among the wealthy

elite, with many fesources and privileges, or a position among those

with very few material resources. However, for this type of inequality

to exist, the mles agreed to have to allow for the inequality' Given the

veil of ignorance about one's future assigned position in sociery, Rawls

afgues that people will want to cfeate the fairest set of rules possible,

if only to pfotect themselves from being placed into a very difficult sit-

uation.According to Rawls, this set of"the fairest possible rules"would

be based on two main principles.The frst principle is that "each per-

son is to have an equal right to the most extensive total system of equal

basic liberties compatible with a similar system of liberty for all"

@awls, p. 302).This ensufes that all afe tfeated equally within the con-

text of the rules, which are addressed in the second principle. This

principle states that "social and economic inequalities are to be

arranged so that they are both (a) to the gfeatest benefit of the least

advantaged and (b) attached to offices and positions open to all under

considerations of fair equalrty of opportunity" S"awls, p'3O2)'

The second principle is an especially important point.Inequality

is not seen as an evil in and of itself, but rather as a condition that can

be harnessed for the good of all. An example may help illustrate this

SocIAL Jusrtcr exo Alvoc'tcv Pnacttcl

idea:The rules set forth under the veil of ignorance might allow some

positions in society to be more appealing than others; examples for the

former might be those with higher pay' better working conditions' and

so on. In the case of physicians, for example' we wa'nt very capable

pfactitioners because thty m"kt life-and-death decisions that fequire

lonsiderable levels of skill and many years of difficult training. Because

there are a timitecl number of people with the required aptitude and

because the tfaining pfocess is arcluous' members of society may wish

to encoufage those few people with the requisite aptitllde to become

doctors. Furthermore, people who become physicians could earn

morethanothefswithoutbreakingthesecondprincipleiftheyare requiredtousesomeoftheirtimetoassisttheleastadvantagedinsoci- ety. Point b above ensufes, mofeovef, that the position of physician is

open to everyone with the appropriate aptitude and is riot limited by

feasons of face, gender, sociai tlu"' o' other non-merit-based consider-

ations. Rawls'sapproachtodistributivejusticehasconsiderableappeal

to many social workers.Those who have tried to appry his principles

quickly fun into practical difficulties' however' No matter which set of

des is agteed to under the veil of ignorance' even when using Rawls's

two principles, it is difficult to determine whether that structure is "to

the greatesl benefit of the least advantaged" and' therefore' iust' It is

alsoseeminglyimpossible,s/ithoutdrasticinterventions'tokeepthe children of the advantaged from maintaining their eady lead in health,

schooling, and connections'

Robert Nozick's Views on Distributive Justice

A very different interpretation of distributive justice is set forth by

Robert Nozick (1974; in Anarcby, State and Utopia' Nozick argues

that Rawls and others who focus on end-states of patterns of a distrib-

utive pfocess afe wrong' In order to maintain a fair distribution of

fesoufces,therewouldhavetobeacentraldistfibutionmechanism. and there is not. In other wofds' the end-state' or the point at which

people have been assigned their positions and given the rules' is theo-

retically a rather .qttJ Oi't'ibution of economic goods' However' the

distribution is constantly made less equal because people put forth

unequal effon and have unequal skills' and under Rawls's system they

Dtsrntlurtvn Justtt

are paid according to effort and skill'The c

iry is to have government constantly redisl

In a free society, diverse persons con

new holdings arise out of the voluntary e>

sons. There is no more a distributing or

there is a distributing of mates in a socie

whom they shall marry'The result isthe

J..rion, ih"t tht different individuals in

(f{ozick, 197 4, PP' 749 -I5O)'

The ProPosed solution is a Procedt

iustice irwhich "a distribution is iust il

holdings he possesses under the distribut

simplify this theory,"From each as they ct

sen" (Nozick, P' 160;'

An example illusmates his approach

might obiect to a distribution of income

,f."*O a few (such as sports stars) witt

,rr"rry .hoore to buy tickets to football gt

football team makes alatge profit and pa

ick argues that this voluntary ffansfer o

-*yio the few is completely iust and t

through govefnmental action (coercton

point*very strongly when he smtes'"Tax

on "

pu, with forced labof" (Nozick' 19'

inOer Nozick's aPProach' the mair

tice, then, is to set up a way for fait volt

This market should be as unfettered as

ancl followed, any result' no mafier hor

efnment's maior dutY is to ensure th

because enforcement leads to a iust t

political freedom'As long as the rules

iow"O in an election and everyone har

such a free election is just and fair' lt

who should win an election ahead

elected positions fairly-that is' to gi

types of people' Similarly' it is not iust

an'economic distribution is fair by loo

might allow some examples for the

ing conditions, and want very capable

decisions that fequife ficult training. Because required aptitude and rs of society may wish te aptitude to become lhysicians could earn I principle if they are ast advantaged in soci- osition of physician is l and is nor limited by rmefit-based consider-

s considerable appeal o apply his principles lo matter which set of :n when using Rawls's ef that structure is "to d, therefore, just. It is ventions, to keep the lr early lead in health,

nstice

rstice is set fofth by rtopia. Nozick argues : pattems of a distrib- a fair distribution of ribution mechanism, rr the point at which ren the rules, is theo- goods. However, the me people put forth 'Rawls's system they

Drstrunurrvr JusrrcE

arc paid according to effort and skill.The only way to prevent inequal- ity is to have government constantly redistribute wealth.

In a free society, diverse pefsons control different fesoufces, and new holdings arise out of the voluntary exchanges and actions of per- sons. There is no more a distributing or distribution of shares than there is a distributing of mates in a society in which persons choose whom they shall mafty.The result is the product of many individual decisions that the different individuals involved are entitled to make (lrlozick, 197 4, pp. L 49 - L5O).

The proposed solution is a procedural approach to distributive justice in which "a distribution is just if everyone is entitled to the holdings he possesses unde r the distribution" (Nozick, 197 4, p .I 5 1).To simplify this theory"From each as they choose, to each as they are cho- sen" (Nozick, p. 160).

An example illustrates his approach clearly.An end-state theorist might object to a distriburion of income that left many people wirh lit- tle and a few (such as spofrs stars) with much. But suppose that the many choose to buy tickets to football games where the stafs play.The football team makes alatge profit and pays the players quite well. Noz- ick argues that this voluntary transfer of holdings (income) from the many to the few is completely just and that any move to redistribute it through governmental action (coercion) is unjust. He makes this last point very sffongly when he states,"Thxation of earnings from labor is on a par with forced labor" (Nozick, 1974,p.169).

Under Nozick's approach, the main principle to ensure social jus-

tice, then, is to set up a way for fair, voluntary exchanges to take place. This market should be as unfettered as possible. Once the rules are set and followed, any fesult, no matter how unequal, is socially just. Gov- efnment's major duty is to ensufe that eyeryone follows fbir rules, because enforcement leads to a just outcome. The idea is similar to political freedom.As long as the nrles of one-person, one-vote are fol- lowed in an election and evefyone has a chance to vote, the result of such a free election is just and fair. It is not just, however, to decide who should win an election ahead of time in order to distribute elected positions faidy-that is, to give those positions to different types of people . Similady, it is not just to determine if the outcome of an economic distribution is fair by looking at the amount of inequality

Soctar JusrIcE aNo Aovocacy pR,rcrrcr

that ensues'As long as fakrures are folrowed in the marketprace, thedistribution of money that results O ;urr. Comparing Rawls,s and Nozick,s Views The practical imprications of these two intefprerations of the term,,dis_tfibutive justice " are staggering, xori.t,, formulation wourd eriminatemany' if not alr, govefnment efforts at redistribution and wourd returnthe country to a sysrem where charity giving was the onry suppor-t forpeople who coulcr nor eafn t'"i, o-r, riving.This harsh siate of affairswould mean that social work l."tu.,

Inequality wo.rrd ...tuinry increase. It , would be under great duress.

fi .H:i:'".J,T*.:,,jf h*l,d;,T"T:iliTjff :Jtr#* Rawls's view

maybebeyond#lJ,l:T:rff iJ'"#:lf :";Hnfi :::Jliiapptoach is congruent with sociar work varues.The approach focuseson the least advantaged memb.r, of ro.

tlXlfilll;,?*mthepracticatd'rn"dr3,?t:','"lffi rffi :'.*: NAS* c od e of .#!Tl;:x ffi ';"#HTr:i* :?,;gnl:advantagecl members of society.This viel

#i:r,:,#J,:*;:;::*;";:::ffi:::?ln:fl :r:,ffi ::J viewl suppo6s the ";;;;;: :: ::l 1'" "-'"sst social workers : " [The

:siT*H##Tfr :[: Tn:? .ffi ,:lx,fffixT*a

fi: :i: thatredistrir;;;r,:^^^^^^^^^^^^!LT:Hj$:ffi ;:T,T:ff :i,rffi *:m:taged, and populations at risk,,(Iatridi s, 1993, p.6D. Antioppression Framework A more fecent ancl artetnative approach to understancling sociar justiceemerges from the antioppressio" rru*.*ork. young urri oif .rr^ C, qgol ;j:H.ff::"r;iffiT. rheorists ,.,.r, u, Nozrcr ",,Jo*, "lr,o

ur*,.,. accepr,inmosr-#";:!:,ff ffi ff::'jl1T.i,?j'jr#ffi::ffi:rhermore' distributive justice ttr.orist, jownplay

or deny difference,place insufficie't emphasis on rh. ;;; group idendty and believe

in the abiliq, of decisr state that the idea of e ensure fair, equal treatr Sometimes, they argue, must giye way to,,the p

The elements of tf of antioppressive prac aroturd andoppressive become standardized.

B approach,AOp [antioppr ber of social justice orier inist, ffaryist, post-mod constructionist, and-colo sion of oppression and a tlery will be missing, jus Rawls,s and Nozick,s iclea readings on the topic are your thinking concerning justice.

Before delving into ,

stand the concept,,oppres sion happens to social gfi "fluid and often shifting,l Young and Allen,s identifici systemic and structural ph necessarily intentional. Thi social justice advocate to lo sors" and those who are,,d preventing social justice frc extended discussions of wl which provide concrete wa) ginalization, powedessness, face of oppression can over tinctive enough to be namec

E xp loit ation . Exploitat its. Even if the workers are

tphce , tirc

e term"ciis-

J elitliiriltcr :ulcl retttrt-t

sr.rpilort t01'

te of altrairs

:eat ciltress.

ic upproach

idr ttratll' uf

: tnacle tlia{

hntst oi'hir rlch fircttse s

npfo\''e their"

]g tilc (xacf

lear that tilc

s of thc leasl-

platre alri'uiig

Noneti'rtlt"sr'.

rrrkers:" |'fLrc

ctice allLl thc

rurcss ltnd tirc

atc p[{]r'gn"ltrnS

thi: ctisac{v;tn-

I socraI itl$ti{]tl 1 '\tlcn

( l!)o')ti;

vls r'vlttt ;rlg,l'l<,1

:l'nriltilig ;rnd

r makittg. Frtll''

:nl tlil'fr:rcnc:c,

ty'. lnd believt:

I)t:l i Rli1tll'l\ill "li;st tt'tl

in the ;rbilit)' of clecislotl tlr;tkcrs t() acL imirat't'ialh" Yt;ttllg liltd 'A'trlcll

statLi thiit tiic iclca cf r:c1ual tfcatlxLrtlt trcgan as a positive ;rpirro;lch tu

crlrirlt'ctllil,cquai"t*''ot"''trutth'lti{.infl'rc{sLll}llr{iiis{lselttfbrencr:' Sotltetimcs, ttrcv argtlc' iu orclelr tti rcduce opprcssion' eqrtal trcatnretrf

mtist givr.: lva)' f() "thu potitics of diffcrEnce" (\btrng ;rt'nen rillell" p 1 1)'

-tr'he elelllentn tl tl'" alltiollprt:$sive framen'odi anrt fhe ntc:tnirrg

of ittttloppressivc nu*"u" *0" lt'out'l" ticfinecl' 'd"'ell thotlgh itlclts

aionl:ti xllti.opflressive practicc are clecacles olcl' thel' trave not vet

bec0tl* stanciar<lizeetr" tl''i'-'u' (2(X)7) itldicirtrs"'l{attrler' tlran ;t singlc

apprr.rach.A(ll' lantitauf te s$ive L-)racrtical is nll unrbrclllt ncrtrl ltlr a nultlr-

bet tlf sttclatr ittsticc t"ti""t"tt apprtlaches ttl sociel rvork' incirretilr54 l'cnt-

inist. Matxist, post-lLlo(Xeruist' Ilrctigetl<ll-ts' post-$trl-xctrlralist' critkal

coii$t-rtlctii-)ilist, lttrti-coionial at-lcl anti-racist" dp li) '|'fu11-t' in ihis ctisctts-

sjllllrlftllrpressionarrcltlticrppLessiertl.acrltrsicler.atrleanrtlrenttlf"stlt)- tlcti' *'ill hc flrisslng'lt'ni t'*'" no'* it"i thc- carlier sectiiixls re5'-arciin5'"

Ita.rv}s'sarlclNtlzick,,u.t*,,ofclistribtrtil'eiLlstice.Suggestetlnelciitlllnal rcadinp,son1-trtetoXlicareprovicleclattheetttXofttrrischaptcrt(}*:xtcurl r.ourttt.itlkingcotlcernitr"u,thisil-ilp0-ftailttopicot;rch,Ot-.;[q:}'-{.t;l.lxlcia]

ittstlce :'-+'\ {rr}r4t ',rfiri()rlnfess'ion is' "wc neelcx nt} rlll<'ie r-

llefirre dell'ilrg ittto rl'tt"tt ltl-l[i(]ppr(

stattelttaeC(lllccpt,"o1rpressitlc,.,\brmganc!,{llen{199{l)stirtc,..(.}pllfes- slolt happcl.,, 'o

oo'""n' groups" and the existence of sociltl sf,{rl-ll)r ir'

"thtiel atrtl ,'n"'-' nt-'uiti'*' nt*' tlonef-helcsr' real" (p 9)' ()1le il'$trxct {){

\oring anet,Altren's icientilicariou cf opprerssicn is thilt it {)c":Lrr$ thrortg}r

s1'stl':tl-lic ax-ial $trltctllrlll phenolnena-*aspfcts of s('!cicf''\' that iti'c il(.lt

ner:essarilfinten{ional.'fl''iopo'*1"*ct{'vrillLliledintet'vcilatrlcttgcsfht: socral !r-tsticc nclv<>cate to kiot'; treyttncl inelivicltt"t: *lt:.::"thc oPFre's-

scrs" atrcl tltosa r'vho x1'{' "ttrc-) {-lllprcssed" to ltlolt at svsterlric [rat'riers

prevfntlllflsticiltljttsl-icefi.orn.ocingrealizecl.Yttuli"lgat-rrlAlicl.l1"lrtlr.ic{t: txtr:trciecl ,tio"..nnl.,*u tlf *.hat thc,l exit tlre {ivc Ltcrs ol. l)1]1ll-c:l.lirllt,

wxricti;lr.llvitleC]{}{lcfetesia-Yst{)ltlotrijtlrllpprcssilllr:fl}ipic}itati(}tl'11l,Ji- g.illaliztltlon, 4rort'eriessness"

cttltlrtal lmpe;rla{;-sni" lttad vitl[a::trcq::' i'raclr

i'.lcs:ofopllressitxlcail{}ve!'[sptlthers'i"nt"'t*rvavs'iltlttaa':irisciit tinctive enottgh to he namecl ancl cle:'cl'ibecl seperltteh''

E' x2.ltai{{r t iare Exploitation reii:rs

qts. Everl if thc w'ori<crs afe 1'raid' the

to r.lsin54 peolrlc to lnakr p-rof:

a11101111t r-lt gravtlrcl"lt is ts)\t' il-I

Socrlr Jusrtcn auo Aovocacv Pnacrrcs

relationship to the income for the exploiters. Capitalism is the mecha-

nism by which exploitation occufs.

Marginalization. Matginalization occurs when groups are

excluded-that is, kept out of meaningful social participation and rele-

gated to lower social standing.While racial groups are often targeted for matginalization, other gfoups, such as the eldedy, those with mental ill-

ness, women, gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgendered people, as well as many othef gf,oups, are often oppressed using marginalization.

Pouteflessness. Powedessness fefers to the inability to give

orders or make choices, even while being ordered and having choices

made for them by others. Extreme powedessness results in a culture of silence, meaning that those who are oppressed do not speak of their oppression ot, at the most insidious levels of powedessness, do not even know they are oppressed. Indoctrination is used as a method of keeping the oppressed silent: they come to believe that they arc infe-

rior, and that they deserve their place at the bottom of society.

Cultural Imperia.lism. Cultural imperialism is the process of taking the culture that the powerful have and making it the norm.In this way, members of the dominant culture ignore or look down on

nonconformists. People who follow the dominant cultural expecta-

tions make those who do not feel different from and worse than them-

selves.

Violence.Yiolence is an obvious form of oppression. It results in oppressed groups being subject to physical harm at any time and for no reason. News shows tell the tale of sexual violence against women, police violence against blacks and other minority groups, and hate-

motiyated assaults on individuals from nlrmefous ffoups. Thus, one approach to antioppfessive social work practice ana-

lyzes the situation to be addressed using one of more of the types of oppression, and works to ovefcome it or them. Barnoff (2001)

describes the difficulties of implementing this framework in feminist social service settings, but also provides examples of enabling processes.It is important to note that the antioppression framework is

Wuar Ann Socr.u'Wonrrns TnYtNr

not universally accepted at a conc

workers. Tester (2003), for exampk

antioppression framework for socii

ing example of the conceptual and

This debate is still in full swing an

way of viewing the role of social w

WIIAT ARE SOCIAT V ACCOMPLISH W1

It is all well and good to be an advo,

a democratic society needs people t

ment in the process is good. Social

view of the desired outcomes of th(

for social work advocacy are listed

ing client needs, both material and

the minds of social worker advc

should be to "confront discrimint

inequalities" (Barker, 2O03, p. 4o5).^l

der if social workers actually belier

Research by Abbott (1988) in

tently rank higher than other profer

important social work values: resP

responsibility, commitment to indil determination.This is true even for

as compafed to students in other

44), Social work students, at both

high levels of social work idealism'

ments: 'Access to opportunities an

and "social workers have an obligar

communities" (Csikai & Rozensky,

these statements indicate that socii

agfee" with these ideas.

Interestingly, however, Csikai a

the social work students surveYed

with statements such as'hdvocacl and " Social workers' responsibilitier

OCACY PRACTICE

oiters. Capiralism is the mecha_

rn occurs when gfoups afe ul social pafticipation and rele_ ial groups are often targeted for re elder$ those with mental ill_ C transgendered people, as well ed using matglnalization.

rcfers to the inability to give rg ordered and having choices redessness tesults in a culture ppressed do not speak of their Rels of powedessness, do not nation is used as a method of : to believe that they are infe_ the bottom of society.

nperialism is the process of e and making it the norm.In ure ignore or look down on : dominant cultural expecta_ tt from and worse than them_

m of oppression. It results in cal harm at any dme and fof ual violence against women, : minority groups, and hate_ fnefous groups.

re social work practice ana- one or more of the types of I or them. Barnoff (2001) I this framework in feminist des examples of enabling mtioppfession framework is

W'uar Ann Socr,lr Wonrrns TnyrNc to Accol.rprrsH \)rITH Anvocecy?

not universally accepted at a conceptual or pr:.ctical level for social workers.Tester (2003), for example, strongly challenges the use of an antioppression framework for social work practice and is an intefest- ing example of the conceptual and practical debates around the topic. This debate is still in firll swing and can be an important alternative way of viewing the role of social work in advocating for social justice.

WIIAT ARE SOCIAL WORIGRS TRYING TO ACCOMPLTSH WITH ADVOCACY?

It is all well and good to be an advocate:indeed, some might argue that a democratic society needs people to be active simply because engage- ment in the process is good. Social wofk, however, takes a normative view of the desired outcomes of the advocacy process. Many purposes for social work advocacy ate listed in the NAS\( code of Ethics. Meet- ing client needs, both material and emotional, should be uppermost in the minds of social worker advocates. The workers' primary goal should be to "confront discrimination, oppression and institutional inequalities " (Barker, 2OO3, p. 405). This is a lofty goal, and we may won- der if social workers actually believe in these values.

Research byAbbott (1988) indicates that social workers consis_ tently rank higher than other professional groups in their belief in four important social work values: respect for basic rights, sense of social responsibility, commitment to individual freedom, and support for self- determination.This is true even for beginning MS\( gracluate students, as compared to students in othef professional pfograms (Abbott, p. 44), Social work students, at both the BSW and MSV levels, ,,reporr

high levels of social work idealism" in response to the foilowing state- ments: 'Access to oppoftunities and fesoufces should be open to all" and "Social workers have an obligation to advocate for change in their communities" (Csikai & Rozensky, 1997, p. 537).The mean scores on these statements indicate that social work students "agfee" to "strongly agfee" with these ideas.

Interestingly, however, Csikai and RozensV e997) also found thar the social work students sllrveyed had comparatively little agreement with statements such as'Advocacy is the main thrust of social work,' and "Social workers' responsibilities should include active involvement

Soctar- Jusrtcn 'tnl Aovoc'tcv PRactlcn

in lobbying for political change" (p' 53T'Both of these statements had

a meanscore placing them between "uncertain" afld "agtee" on the

scale used. Pethaps riost disturbing for those who see a stfong need

for advocacy practice because of the impact of policy decisions on

social work practice, students in this study indicate considerable agree-

ment with the statement, "Political issues have no bearing on direct

social work practice with individuals" (Csikai & Rozensky' p'53D'

There was a shift in social workefs'attitudes toward poverty and

social action U.t*..n L958 and 1984 (R'eeser & Epstein' 1987)' Sur-

prisingly, respondents in 1984 were more l*'Y o::l t::j:'ve that

poverty was due to stfuctural factors and to be less committed to

activist goals than were social workers in 1968'This shift in attitude

may have two causes: frst, casework and psychothempl h-ud become

the primary social work methods' and' second ' in 1984 there was a

sense of futility about social change due to the insensitivity of Presi-

dent Reagan's administration toward social work concerns'

There has been a long gap in this rype of research' however' so it

is unclear if these findings still hold. Recenr work by Felderhoff, Hoe-

fer, and\flatson (2o14) 'iggt" that the pendulum has swung back to

stfong suppofr ro. foiiri.u1""ction. Resulrs indicate that social workers

in Texas strongly ,ttppo* political activity by the state chapter of the

NASW. An overwhtt-t"g majority (82y') repoft that they are "mofe

likely" or "much more likely" to join or reioin NAS\[ as a result of

NASW's political advocacy' Only 3 percent wefe "less likely" or "much

less likely" to ioin or rejoin as a result of the advocacy efforts by their

professional organization'

In summary, iiufpt"" that social workers believe in social work

values. This finding underscores the importance of social workers

engaging in aOvoclacy pfactice because their beliefs and values are

unique.It is thus important for social workers to rcceive educadon and

,ruini.rg in the how-tos of advocacy pfactice'

EXAMPLES OF ETHICAI ISSUES IN ADVOCACY PRACTICE

Up to now, this chapter has focused on the ethical responsibility social

workers have to udd"" societal and client problems through advo-

cacy and the need to focus on social iustice in their practice' Still' the

Ex'tMPrEs or Ergtc'lr Issurs

ouestions remain, How do these Prin

ir .".t"tntg fair in love' war' and ad

workerc be held to some other stand

Saul AlinskY (1972)' in his clas

argues forcefullY that PeoPle who e:

-Iun, and ends "wind uP on their (

Organizers must use what is avalab

their goals:"He who sacti-fices the m:

u p.clul*t concePtion of 'Personal s

for peopte to be'corrupted'for then

io U. .ttt.erned with ethics onlY I

Thus, if the ends are just and the m

i".ti., no matter what it is' is fair' it

.ff..tt". tactics of the dispossessed

The NASW Code of Ethics n

(1g72)view in Part' but the overall

ers should be held to a higher stant

this point vigorously:"There are pe

,,fy ,tt. means'This is antithetical t

workers the erids and the rneans 1

Put it:If the method You use to art

it e .nO result will be dirty" (Hayn'

Although social workers afe c

tice, the code is often silent on ttt

In addition, there might be sorne '

The verY first sentence ofthe det

"social workers' Primary respons

clients. In general' clients' interc

1.O1).This is immediately followt

ever, social workers' responsibiliq

obligations may on limited occ

clients" (NASV, Sec' 1'01)' RePor

examPle of when loYattY to the c

in. nrut ethical PrinciPle dt

workers must be " contiflually aw

ethical principles' and ethical str

consistent with theml'More sPt

jjones2

Typewritten Text

ACY PRACTICE

). Both of these statements had in" and ,,agtee,,on

the

fr those who see a strong need

Impact of policy decisions on

Exauprrs or ErHrcat Issurs rN Anvocacy pRa<:rrcr

questions femain,.How do these principres opefate in the real word?Is everl'thing fatt tn love, war, "ni adrrocacy pfactice, or shourd socialworkers be held to some other standard of behavior?

saul Alinsky (1972), in his classic essay,,of Means and Ends,,,afgues forcefulry that peopre who €xtensivery debate the morarif ofmeans and ends "wind up on their ends without urry ;;;r,, (p.25).otganizerc must use what is availabreto enable them to accomplishtheir goals:"He who sacrifices the mass good for personar salvation hasa peculiar conception of 'personar salvation,; he doesn,t care enoughfor people to be ,corrupted,for rhem,,(Alinsky, p.Z5),r is appropriareto be concerned with ethics ot ry *rrin there is a choice of means.Thus' if the ends are just and the means are limited to one tactic, thattactic' no matter what it is, is fair. tt is onry the powerful who can theeffective tactics of the dispossesseO J.rnfuir" (Alinskg.

The NAS$fl Cofe of Ethics mal be used ro support Alinsky,s(1'972) view in paft, but the overa' a.rru*. is clear that social work_ers shourd be held to a higher standard. Maryanne Mahrtfeymaintainsthis point vigorousry:"There *. p."ft. *t o tet me ttrat ttre enos lus_ti4/ the means.This is antitheticA to sociat work values. . . . For socialworkers the ends and the means musr Le consistent.Another way roput it: If the method you use to affive at youf ends are [se.c] dirqt thenthe end result will be dirq,,, (Ilaynes A lli"k.lror, , ZOO9, p. 52).

,,.., #lniffl;Jfflworkers are cafled on ro.n*u*e in advocacyprac-

rnacrdition,tr,.r.mifiiT":$Ji:;ffiil:,t1:1ff ;H::*JThe very frst sentence of the detailed ethical standards ,tut., pr"irrry,"sociar wofkers' p'\.ury responsibilify is to pfomote the werfare ofclients. In general, clients, interests *r'prnnury- CNASW 2OOg, Sec.1.01).This is immediately followed, fro_.*r, by the statemenr,,,How_ever' sociar workers'responsib'ity to the rarger society or specific legalobligations may on limited o..rriorr, ,, ctienm"Gqes\xa sec. t.ol). Reporting ;r-Jff;r;T _Ji,:"t::

jo*3l;: example of when loyalty to the .fi.it i, o"

*#f ff L;*::**-cip,edescrio.o1in+:iJilTlJl,}ffi1; ethicarp.,,.ipr.,,ffi :l"Jffi:$;fi "JjTf:;H;""#*? consistent with them." More specifically, iio.iut

workers act honestly

rdy indicate considerable agfee_ ues have no bearing on direct Csikai & Rozensky, p.533). r'?ttitudes toward poverry and (Reeser & Epsrein, 1987). Sur_ rre likely both to believe thar and to be less committed to in 1968.This shift in attitude d psychotherapy had become second, in l9g4 there was a : to the insensitjvify of presi ial work concerns. pe of research, however, so it ent work by Felderhoff, Hoe_ endulum has swung back to rindicate that social workers r by the state chapter of the feport that they are *more rejoin NASW as a result of I were "less likely', or,,much re advocacy efforts by their

kers believe in social work ortance of social workers teir beliefs and values are fs to feceive education and l.

iDVOCACY PRACTICE

thical responsibility social I problems through advo_ in their pracfice . Still, the

2'7

SocIar Jusrtcn awl Aovocacv Pn'tcttcn

and responsibly and promote ethical practices on the part of the

otganizations with which they are affiliated" (I'{ASW 2008, Ethical Prin-

ciples). Honesty is certainly an important element in being effective in

advocacy efforts, but is honesty always the best policy? Is it permissi-

ble to lie if it better accomplishes social work's primary mission to ,.enhance human well-being and help meet the basic human needs of

all people,with particulaf attention to the needs and empowerrnent of

people who are vulnerable, oppressed, and living in poverty" (NASW

Preamble)? There afe no firm answers to these questions,At best we can do

what Jansso n (1994) suggests be done when ethical principles con-

flict: .,Ifi/hen issues reflect important values and consequences' they

should not be resolved impulsively.W'e should feel tugged in different

directions, as if each altemative is serious and cannot be lightly dis-

missed.were we to huriedly resolve such issues,we might later decide

that we had comptomised important values and oveflooked important

consequences" (p. 59). In the end, "reasonable differences of opinion

exist among social workers" (NASW 2008, Sec' 3'10tbl)' Not every

social worker will solve a problem the same way. Neveftheless,"Social

workers should carefully examine relevant issues and their possible

impact on clients before deciding on a coufse of action" (NASV Sec'

3.1otbl). The following afe some €xamples of situations for which there are

no clear answefs, and reasonable social workers may indeed disagree

on how to Proceed.

You are chair of a statewide social work political action commit-

tee.AmajornewspapefwritesadisturbingstofyonMaria Rodriguez, a candidate yorr committee has alteady endorsed for

state senatof in the primary race,which she won.The fepoft says

that she has falsified her academic credentials. Ms. Rodriguez first

denies then aclmits the deception.The committee did not endorse

this candidate based on her academic record, but rather on the

rwenty years of good work she has completed on behalf of low-

income MexicanAmericans in southTexas. some of the members

of your political action committee want to continue as if nothing

has happened: "Her stfong voice is needed in the state senate to

Exa.uPtrs or l

protect against col

fenounce the eadit

from the race altog

best to exPress disi

"She let us down, b

You are asked bY Y

out-the-vote dfive

work with the Leal

are willing to do

should facilitate il

2008, Sec. 5.02).11

vote they want to

as Democratic vot(

candidates than al

ers.When You objr

Democratic candi

sexual minofities antigay. Ms. Smith

religious $ouPS forces to get out c

shouldn't we do t this logic,You are

NASW;which is o

You are a longtim

a political conser

especiallY disagrr

vinced that, desPi

system cteateda

erltitled to Publit from governmer

their children ha

the aid they rec

incentives for thr

not miod havint

most social wo

;ACY PRACTICE

)ractices on the part of the ed'(I{ASV 2008, Ethical prin_

element in being effective in re best policy? Is it permissi_ I work's primary mission to €t the basic human needs of rneeds and empowerment of nd living in poverry,,(NASW

Iuestions.At best we can do tihen ethical principles con- res and consequences, they ould feel tugged in different s and cannot be lightly dis_ issues,we might later clecide is and ovedooked important nble differences of opinion E, Sec. 3.10tbl) Not every le way. Nevertheless,,,Social tt issues and their possible urse of action" (NASW Sec.

luations forwhich there are rrkers may indeed disagree

rrk political action commit_ listurbing story on Mada e has already endorsed for h she won.The repoft says ientials. Ms. Rodriguez first :ommittee did not endorse record, but rather on the

mpleted on behalf of low- xas. Some of the members it to continue as if nothing tded in the state senate to

Exalrpns or EtHtcar Issurs rrv Anvocecy pn,tcttcn

protect against conservatives of both parties!,, Othefs want to renounce the eadier endorsement and ask her to remove herself from the race altogether:"She lied to us!,'A third group thinks it best to expfess disappointment in her, but suppoft her privately: "She let us down, but she is still the bettef of the two candidates.,,

You are asked by your srate NASSI chapter to help otganize a get- out-the-vote drive in your city because you have done similar work with the League ofWomenVoters, a nonpaftisan gfoup.you are willing to do this because you believe that ,,social workers should facilirate informed participation by the public', (NAS$( 2008, Sec. 6.O2).The main organizers are clear, howevef, that the vote they v/ant to get out consists only of registered Democrats, as Democratic votefs are much more likely to vote for Democratic candidates than are members of other parties or nonaffiliated vot- ers. When you object, the organizer explains that Laura Smith, the Democratic candidate, is a strong supporter of equal rights for sexual minorities while the Republican candiclate in the race is antigay. Ms. Smith has also been endorsed by NAS$fl,,The far right religious gf,oups and the Tea pany-types are mobilizing their forces to get out only Republican voters," says the organizer.,,Why shouldn't we do the same for our side?',Although you understand this logic,you are still not convinced that this is €ntirely ethical for NASW which is officially a nonparrisan gfoup.

You are a longtime member of NASIfl and consider yourself to be a political conservative.You believe thar NASW is too liberal and especially disagree with its prowelfare position. you are con- vinced that, despite changes to end traditional welfare, the welfare system created a generation of people who believe that they are entitled to public support. Even with the threat of being cut off from government assistance, some able-bodied recipients and their children have little hope of becoming selFsufficient because the aid they receive from charities and govefnment eliminates incentives for them to seek gainful employment.Although you do not mind having a different opinion about policy compared to most social workefs, you have noticed (starting in gmduate

SocIAL Jusrtcn aul Anvoc'lcv PRacrtcn

school) a tendency for conservative social workers to be frozen

outofsocialcircles.Thisisaproblemforyoubecauseyouwant to keep ofl othef social workers'good side to maintain their refer-

rals, which yotrr practice relies on' Shoukl you remain in the

otganizationand try to change its policies to be more in line with

your values, shouti yot' "*"i" a member of NASW to keep the

good insurance benefits available to mernbers but otherwise qui-

ltty wort against its proposals, or should you give up your mem-

bership because of yottt pttitosophical differences with the organ-

ization?

A client of yours in a nonptofit agency could make good use of a

special fund set aside for Uuying back-to-school clothes'When you

mention this to your supervisoq she agfees but cautions you to

provide only half the allowed amolrnt of funds in order to keep

money available fbr other clients'You believe that special circum-

stances make it vital to assist your client with mofe than half the

amount possible, yet you know that there are limited funds for

this purpose. You are also aware that you are only four months

into your six-month probationary period' Social work jobs as good

as this one afe hardto come by in your small community'Vhat

should You do?

In order to address situations such as the one above in a system-

atic way,first choose which ethical principles are in con-flict' Refer

specifically to the NAS$[ Code of Ethics and other ethical codes that

nl^V "ppfy,

such as those that cover licensed social workers in your

state.Ask which principle, in this situation' is more important' Gather

opinions from other social workefs you trLrst' In the end' you may need

to priofitize one principle over another in order to resolve the con-

flict.

CONCLUSION

Although this lengthy discussion of distributive ittstice may seern

beyond the scope of aclass on advocacy' the reason to include it is sim-

ple: if social workers are going to use advocacy to promote social ius-

tice, theY need to understant

there are different ideas rel

these diffetent definitions h

explore where we stand in t

of Ethics makes clear that et

advocate lbr social iustice' 1

what is meant bY the differ

willing to support the defir

Social workers have i

and a distinctive view of sr

that PeoPle at the bofiom

helped to climb more quic

the ladder. The rest of this book

for these values to be adol

into laws and regulations'I

cacy pfactice'The final ct

lessons from the book'

Suggested Further Re

Allingham, M'(2014)'D This short book might

ested in PhilosoPhY, but it ir

concePtions of distributive it

chaPter has its own chaPte:

theories in a clear waY' It wil

will be well PrePared to dis<

ering with a wealth of knov

Lasswell, H.(1936).Po

Free Press. Althougir this is an oldr

itics. Lasswell, a PsYchologit

aganda techniques, begins t

of influence and the influet

Position'The second chaPt

ishinglY illuminating and ei

Young, I', &Allen, D' (

ton, NJ: Princeton Universi

Y PRACTICE

ncial workefs to be ftozen

t for You because You want

rside to maintain their refer-

Should You remain in the

icies to be more in line with

mber of NASV to keep the

mernbers but otherwise qui-

ould You give uP Your mem-

il differences with the ofgan-

cy could make good use of a

r-to-school clothes'When You

e agfees but cautions You to

rrt of funds in order to keeP

u believe that sPecial circum-

:lient with more than half the

rt there are limited funds for

nt You are onlY four rnonths

:riod. Social work iobs as good

L your small communiryWhat

as the one above in a system-

dnciPles are in conJlict' Refer

:s and other ethical codes that

censed social workers in Your

!ion, is more imPortant' Gather

I trust. In the end, You maY need

er in order to resolve the con-

[on

distributive iustice may seem

cy,the reason to include it is sim-

,duo.r.Y to Pfomote social jus-

CoNCLUSIoN

tice, they need to understand what social fustice really rneans' Because

there are different iol", ,.r"tittg to distributive iustice, and because

these different definitions have significant impacts on policy' we must

explore where *t ""* i"it"' piltro'ophicaidebate'The NASV code

of Ethics makes tttu' ttt"t every social worker has the responsibility to

advocate for social ;tt'iit"' Every social worker must then understand

what is meant nV tftt Oifftrent views of social iustice and be able and

willing to support tt*-Otf*i'itn most in line with social work values'

Social workers nu* *poftant infofmatiofi about client needs

and a distinctive view of social justice. Social workers tend to believe

that people at the bottom of economic and social laddets should be

helped to climb "t;;;t;*t than people who are already higher on

'nt t|fr;.rt

of this book covers the most effective ways ro advocate

for these values to bJ adopted by decision makers and thus translated

into laws and regulations'Each chapter covers one of the steps in advo-

cacy practice' The final chapter surnrnarizes and brings together the

lessons from the book'