The Sage Handbook of Social Constructionist Practice. Группа авторов
creativity and ingenuity find a home in social constructionist thinking and it is applying these ideas in our lives that justifies and encourages us to continue to nurture and develop those ideas. These performances of social constructionist practices provide verification of the importance of those ideas in our world. The world is made better by social constructionist thinking if that thinking spurs actions. The performances of social constructionist thinking outlined in this section underwrite the importance of social constructionist ideas now and into the future. If we hope to continue the evolution of social constructionist thinking in a skeptical world, the products of that thinking need to proliferate.
Social constructionist thinking does not predict an end or a completion – it is always unfinished, worthy of more reflection, and capable of re-direction. This helps us to create pathways to respond to uncertainty and challenges that cannot be foreseen, an indispensable resource in contending with what may lie ahead.
12 Social Construction and Social Work Practice
Stanley L. Witkin and Christopher Hall
The overall aim of this chapter is twofold: first, to inform readers about fundamental tenets of social work practice and their congruence with social constructionist positions and concepts, and second, to illustrate how social constructionist concepts have informed (or could inform) different social work practices. Although social workers are a significant provider of services across a range of social issues, they have not been highly represented in the social constructionist literature. Therefore, this chapter addresses this lacuna by describing how social construction does and can influence social work practice.
The chapter begins with a discussion of how social work practices are inclusive of, and differentiated from, other practices, for example, group work or psychotherapy. Following this exposition, we discuss similarities and differences between social work and social construction, for example, the meaning of ‘social’. This is followed by illustrations of how social constructionist concepts are (and have been) used to inform social work practice issues such as cultural competence and practice approaches addressing a range of issues. These illustrations will be gleaned from the existing literature (e.g., Witkin, 2012) and from Chris Hall's own practice.
The Profession of Social Work
Social work as a profession emerged in the early 20th century. Like other professions, social work is characterized by professional education requirements, mission and goal statements that express its benefits to society, self-regulation through a code of ethics, professional organizations that promulgate and oversee professional requirements, and a specialized body of knowledge. This last characteristic has been a source of contention between those who would and would not grant social work full professional status. The basis for this disagreement is that social work has historically drawn from a number of disciplines given its broad range of activities and inclusive view of human functioning. Although such comprehensiveness may be viewed as a strength, the perceived absence of an integrative theory and unique knowledge base has been used to argue against social work's professional status (e.g., Larkin, 2006). Social work has a distinctiveness: a contextual view of human behavior, a social justice mandate, and marginalized and oppressed groups as its primary constituency. Once again, however, opinions vary on the degree, the nature, and the importance of its distinctiveness depending on one's orientation and interests. Social work's distinctive qualities will also vary depending on whether the focus is on its written mandates or how it is practiced, that is, what social workers do. Social work also portrays itself as a socially progressive profession primarily through its written positions on social justice and human rights, race and ethnicity, poverty, and social change. In contrast, the profession is relatively intellectually conservative. By this we mean that its research and analyses largely reflect modernist perspectives. This conservatism seems related to social work's historical struggle to achieve legitimacy and status in the academy and the more recent neo-liberal trends that have become ascendant in academic institutions. Most illustrative of this conservatism has been the dominance of positivistic assumptions in practice and research reinforced by the priority placed on acquiring external funding for research. Therefore, although we will provide illustrations and examples of how a social constructionist orientation can influence social work practice, this should not be taken to mean that such an orientation is representative of practitioners or academics. This situation exists despite the congruence of social constructionist and social work perspectives and ideas, as we will discuss.
What is Social Work?
Similar to the question, ‘What is social construction?’, social work resists a simple, straightforward definition. Social work's contextual inclusiveness of persons and environments, its myriad practices, ranging from psychotherapy to social advocacy, its strong foundation of values and ethics, and its pluralist theoretical base, eludes succinct definition. Every such effort is inevitably partial, underrepresenting the complexity and comprehensiveness of social work practice.
As social constructionists know, a case can be made for not having an authoritative definition; for example, its static nature and the dangers of calcification, over-simplification, and the silencing of alternative viewpoints (Witkin, 2012). On the other hand, such definitional vagueness for a profession like social work leaves it vulnerable to misunderstanding and stereotypes such as the portrayal of social workers as altruistic do-gooders without expert knowledge or skills. Such representations generate a climate in which it is difficult for social work to establish its professional legitimacy.
A question that arises in relation to the ‘What is …?’ question is whether social work practices differ from practices of other professions. To put it another way, does ‘social work’ function as an adjective when placed (grammatically) in front of practice or research (Witkin, 1998)?1 The answer, from our perspective, is yes and no. There are some practices such as therapy, group work, or research that can look very similar. Sometimes however, the use of a common language for practices can conceal features that differentiate them. For instance, social work's person and environment orientation leads practitioners to address social issues even when engaged in individual-oriented practice like therapy. A good example of this is provided by Wulff and St. George (2012), who in the context of family therapy, address social issues of violence and feminism. While practitioners in other fields (e.g., psychology) might do something similar, for social workers this is more a professional mandate than a supererogatory act. A similar argument could be made for social workers’ mandate to serve marginalized populations rather than a focus on the ‘worried well’ (Specht and Courtney, 1995). Of course, this does not mean that all social workers actually practice in these ways; however, it is how the profession represents itself.
We turn now to an exploration of the congruencies and incongruencies between social work practice and social construction. We also point out how social work might benefit from a more social constructionist perspective.
Social Work and Social Construction: Convergence and Divergence2
Given the prominence of the word ‘social’ in social work and social construction, it would be reasonable to assume a high degree of congruity and commonality. Although there is considerable overlap in the issues that social work and social construction address, social work takes up these issues via a values and political position, whereas social construction tends more toward philosophical, especially epistemological, rationales (e.g., Hacking, 2000). In this section we enumerate and discuss some of the important areas common to both. Readers should keep in mind that while the following issues are presented individually, they are interrelated.
Valuing Multiple Perspectives and Voices
Both social work and social construction value diversity of perspectives and beliefs. For social work, advocating for those who hold marginal views and amplifying silenced voices is necessary in order to move toward a pluralistic, more equitable social order. ‘[S]ocial workers believe that it is important for those who are silenced – for whatever reason – to have a voice. We also tend to believe that those who are marginalized in society have a perspective that is valuable