I will discuss both the personal and professional prices that influence communal work practice and discuss an especially challenging experience I had developed with two service users who came for counselling where myself and a professional social staff member was to aid the service consumer. The brands of the service users have been altered to ensure confidentiality.
An important thing to discover regarding beliefs in communal work practice, in line with the Central Council for Education and Training in Friendly Work (CCETSW) is the fact that "values are essential to somewhat than distinct from experienced practice. Therefore there may be no such thing as value free communal work practice. Such is the effect of values in sociable work practice that CCETSW lay out six core values, that the university student must show competence in, before she/he can be awarded the Diploma in Sociable Work. The to begin these ideals is: "to recognize and question their own principles and prejudices, and there implications for practice".
It is challenging to discover your own prices, as often they are simply unconscious ideas or views, which can only be challenged or changed, when brought to the mindful level.
Personal, societal, politics and cultural experiences influence the ideals that an individual develops, so that it is important to be alert to these affects. The ideals people hold have an impact on just how they take action and treat other folks, without an awareness of this people can unconsciously respond in what may be perceived as an oppressive and discriminatory way.
Another of the key value requirements of CCETSW 1995, and one, which illustrates one of the dilemmas faced by Social Workers, is: "Promote people's protection under the law to choice, privacy, confidentiality and security, while recognising and handling the complexities of competing rights and needs". (CCETSW 1995). To demonstrate this difficulty here are some is a explanation of a challenging practice I have experienced, throughout a counselling session I had developed with a women whom I shall call Jane. Jane came for counselling because she is at a violent romance. She defined how her husband both bodily and mentally abused her, and that she had a history of maltreatment from handling men. She possessed returned to London from Pakistan where she and her spouse lived, after he had once again abused her whilst she was in the process of deciding whether in which to stay Wales or go back to her spouse in Pakistan. Her spouse has two children from a earlier relationship, for which he has guardianship, although this is not really a particular concern for Jane, for me personally there could be a discord of competing protection under the law. Jane had a right to privateness and confidentiality, however the children had the right to cover. Confidentiality in situations like this ". . . may be breached, where it is demonstrably in the client's interest or where there is an overriding concern for the protection under the law of other people, when for example the behaviour of the client may endanger others". (Social Care Association 1988).
Had my role in this been that of a kid and Family Friendly Worker the rights of the Children would have been paramount. As I caused Jane I became aware of my own principles that have been urging me to protect her, and wanting to encourage her to stay in London. Only by reflecting on my practice did I become aware, I possibly could have grown to be another controlling male figure and overlooked the opportunity to enable her to seize control for herself.
Jane made her decision to come back to her man in Pakistan, I did so not hear from her again for one months, after which time she made another appointment to see me - this time with her spouse who I shall call Costs.
When they arrived to see me and my colleague I used to be aware that I had seen Jane on her own previously and was careful to guarantee the things she experienced discussed were kept confidential, and that I did not unintentionally disclose these to Monthly bill. Jane had told me her story that I needed developed my own picture of Bill, before even interacting with him. Expenses was a large man, very loud and appeared hostile at first, I was a little concerned about the safe practices of Jane, myself and my colleague, for the reason that first assembly. When writing my records after the treatment, and analysing what went on, one of the questions I had of my practice was: What got Expenses done to make me feel threatened? He did not verbally or actually harm me, or make any threats, after representation, I felt it might have been because he was different. Invoice was from some other culture of Pakistani Pataan descent, he was extra tall and a intensely build, and his way of communicating was to shout as that is how he received attention. EASILY were to work favorably and constructively with Expenses, I had a need to act in an anti oppressive and anti discriminatory way, to ensure that he received the same value that clients have the right to, and that I treated him as a unique individual.
According to Egan (1990) admiration means prizing the individuality of service users, encouraging each service customer in his or her search for self applied, and personalizing the aiding process to the needs, functions, and sources of this customer. Effective helpers do not try to make service users over in their own image and likeness. Alternatively, respect will not mean motivating service users to build up or maintain a kind of individualism that is self dangerous or detrimental of others. Egan (1990 pp65)
Having recognised my very own personal prejudices, I could identify more evidently the strengths Costs had also to build on them. This experienced quite an impact on future counselling sessions. Bill respected being paid attention to and respected, his words level decreased and he ceased to listen to Jane which provided her the chance to tell him how she believed. As we progressed the counselling relationship became more of a relationship, we viewed the various ways they communicated, Bill started out to 'own' the violence he had previously rejected and Jane grew in self-confidence, and could share her own needs and expectations. We agreed to set duties and goals each week that allowed them to check on their improvement, which further empowered them.
Empowerment is a term trusted, and often misinterpreted as providing your power to someone else; there are several definitions but this one, I think, represents it well:
It is often assumed by many that empowerment includes taking away the worker's electric power, However, if this is done, it'll of course make him or her less effective and therefore of less value or use. Empowerment is a subject of helping people gain higher control over their lives, supporting them to become better equipped to deal with the problems and challenges they face - especially those that involve wanting to counter or beat discrimination and oppression. (Thompson, 1998b, p9)
To empower is to permit people to increase control of their lives, never to control others, Monthly bill had a need to recognise that by taking control of his life, he also needed to control his behaviour not to control others. Empowering is also helpful in making clients see their problems in the wider socio-political framework as regarding Jane.
-for example, by supporting a woman who has experienced assault at the side of her partner to become aware of the broader communal problem of domestic violence and it's really links with male ability in contemporary society, so that she will not see her own situation as simply an unfortunate development or, worse still, something she's brought on herself (Mullender, 1996).
Through this experience Jane found the confidence to endure Bill, telling him she would only go back to the matrimony if things changed. Bill found a far more constructive way of conversing, he became more open to taking a look at change, and I learned a lot more about my own personal and professional beliefs and their affect on practice.
There are a few theories that explain the development of our own behaviour and principles. Thompson (1993) developed a "Personal computers model". The P level is our thoughts, thoughts, actions and attitudes although an individual may also be shaped by the culture we reside in. The C level is exhibiting the hobbies and impact of contemporary society as reflected in the values and norms we receive during socialisation. Finally the S level is actually the composition of world we live in. Even though we have individual thoughts and behaviour, the individuals we reveal our lives with condition them plus they in turn are designed by the norms and beliefs handed to them by world.
As I have discussed, worth have a significant influence on Community work practice, the personal values we have affect just how we react from birth through to old age, and our principles can change as we develop, both personally and professionally and they can conflict with each other. The core values establish by CCETSW underpin the task and enables Sociable Employees to work within an anti oppressive and anti discriminatory way and these beliefs have changed as time passes and I recommend, will continue to change when necessary in the future. It is vital that Social Individuals have and understanding and knowledge of these values as they have a significant have an effect on on the vulnerable service users they use.