Reflective Practice as a tool for organisations

Recently I had the opportunity to work with a corporate client where we discussed Reflective Practice in supervision. It was an opportunity to discuss social work concepts within a corporate structure. Over many years I have worked with organisations discussing conflict resolution or acting as a support when staff were being retrenched or providing therapeutic services. This was the first time though that I had the opportunity to present to a staff member the concept of working at a more in depth level.

There was one particular staff member who was causing some difficulties. The staff member had a sense of entitlement around what he thought could be done and what he believed was within his job description. For some time the organisation had ignored certain behaviours because he was doing the principle work for which he was employed, but he was failing to do some of the more minor tasks which made it difficult for management to report on the activities within his department.

In my experience, organisations generally don’t understand what good supervision should look like. This not only applies to Corporations but also applies in Human Services and Government Departments. For the most part supervision comprises of a set of tasks which were to be met by the employee and moving through those tasks with a manager or supervisor.

This is not supervision this is case management, micro management or activity review or something else but it is not supervision. Supervision is not just the opportunity to reflect on the work someone has completed or not completed but it is an opportunity to reflect with the employee how they are functioning at work. Most managers, and I feel confident in saying “most”, are reluctant to explore anything beyond the work load and the tasks assigned. However the workplace is more than this.

When exploring this recently with the manager I asked him if he knew what “work” meant to this troublesome employee? He could tell me that this staff member had few interests outside work and viewed his colleagues as his “family”. It became evident that the meaning of “work” was extremely significant to him. I wondered how significant it would be for the manager, and “supervision” in particular, to contemplate what “work” meant to this staff member.

The next question which needs to be explored is how, in this new found context, could questions be constructed which gave further insight into why this person chooses to behave in a certain way which would put his employment at risk. It is possible that his application to certain tasks is about building and establishing relationships and anything which doesn't feed that notion is seen as less valuable. We maybe able to see why building relationships are important, they represent “family”, so through a reflective practice model we may find the way to explore the significance of family. It may be possible to understand and therefore explore how this person would feel if they were separated from the “work family”?

By understanding the importance of work and family for this person we may be able to develop a strategy to help them meet the managers needs to have the paper work and other tasks completed.
In essence this process allows the manager to see the employee in a different context which changes the problem solving technique. Solutions when seen from the other persons perspective offer us with an opportunity to develop a win/win. Granted, we have to be a little more creative when we focus on meeting the needs of others as well as our own. Meeting others needs as well as our own is a little more complicated.
What I love about Social Work is the application it offers corporations.

Never Giving Up

Over the past couple of months I have wondered why I continue working to have people heard and regardless of the knockbacks and rejection. I have often wondered about the toll it takes on my emotional and physical well-being.

What I have come to realise is that if I give up on clients I will be giving up not just on them but on everything I believe in. It is important to be true to your beliefs and to those whom you believe in. Change doesn't come about by idly waiting for it. History tells us that those who have brought about social change have had to fight with determination and an ingrained belief that the fight has value and will bring about the required result.

Change is not about getting what you want. It is about changing ingrained beliefs and systems which have remained often impenetrable. It has been important to resist the negativity one receives from other colleagues and to make a stand for the sake of the client. I think many of us give up because the battle wearies us and we would prefer to live a life which is free of the struggles associated with fighting against a system which conflicts with our own values. I fail to see how so many Social Workers can have the same training but yet fail to understand what it is that we do and how working for our clients is based on a simple but not understand standard of social justice.

Yesterday a client called stating that she was feeling bullied by a worker who objected to her attending access with her brother. There were valid concerns about the brothers history of Domestic Violence but there should never have been any concerns about the brothers violence towards the clients daughter. It is this idea that we must categorize, label and place in a box everyone who has acted badly. I fail to understand how berating my client and causing her to distrust her own judgement regarding the welfare of her child is good social work. It is reasonable for someone to have concerns based on his history but it seems more prudent to explore this with the client rather than destroy the relationship with her. This is an example of the lack of empathy, the refusal to engage appropriately that I find extremely frustrating.

The pervading issue is whether this type of social work needs to be challenged? How do you confront it? Is anyone going to do anything about it anyway? Probably not. However, it needs to be challenged for the sake of the client. This, though, presents another problem. That is the isolation and negative impact it has on the client by other workers. I have mentioned in other posts that if I believe that my intervention is damaging to the client then I would need to withdraw. What I have come to realise though is that these days my very presence can present as a conflict for other workers because of the reputation I have developed. Not that this is my desire. I would rather work collaboratively with other workers. The resistance is not of my making - it is a symptom of their belief system, the belief that they will be made accountable for their actions and their failure to accept responsibility for how they behave. I also believe that many Social Workers view criticism by an "outsider" as intrusive and lacking insight. Perhaps this is true. However, when it comes to social work practice I am as well informed as anyone who values their profession and understands the principles from which we work.

So should we give up. The answer is NO. By giving up we are letting our profession down we are being silenced by unjust beliefs and inequity. We are not demonstrating what it means to be a social worker. Above all we are letting our clients down. We have to remain focussed on what it means to be a social worker and for me it is vital that I maintain my integrity by never giving up on my profession.

Mental Health and Patient “A”

While in my car today I happened to turn to a radio station and found myself listening with a great deal of interest to a segment called background briefing. You can listen to the broadcast here.

This is an interesting analyses of the power of the Psychiatric profession and how once in the mental health system a person can become lost, devalued, mis-diagnosed and dehumanised.

It is somewhat scary to hear how the psychiatrists justify what they do. Listen how the profession justify “capacity”. One wonders who has the mental illness.

Please comment on what you think after you have listened to the program.

Discovering adoption

Yesterday I just finished attending a conference at which my wife was presenting. She is the academic so she is the one who is likely to attend a conference and do all the presenting while I tag along as the partner of Dr what’s her name. I am more than happy to be he insignificant other. As always it is an absolute pleasure to support her in the work she does. This time though we had to travel half way around the world for her to deliver a paper to a very small audience. An indicator that they were not interested in what we as Australians are doing. The conference was on “adoption” and my wife was presenting on “fostering”. However it was great to be part of a movement which something to say about an industry which I have never considered to be – well I have just never considered it. It isn’t as if I haven’t heard of adoption but I have never considered in any meaningful way eg what it means to be adopted.

What was discussed was a range of interesting issues such as the cost to adopt and the lack of accountability for the money being charged. That much of what happens in this area is now inter-continental and inter-racial. What does it mean for a white person to adopt a Nigerian child? What does it mean for this child as they grow up? Were they legitimately placed for adoption or were they kidnapped? Does adoption provide a new and better opportunity for a child? What views do I hold which colour my views of adoption?

Before this conference I considered adoption was probably a good thing because it provided homes for kids who were living in poverty or were unwanted by their parents. This may be true but it isn'’t always the case. How do we know what is true and what isn’t? The truth is that we don’t know. There are very few checks and balances that can determine if a child is a legitimate adoptee.

What concerns me is, who are we to judge whether a life in a different country is going to provide a better outcome for the child. Because we may offer a more material and educational environment doesn’t mean that we are have the answer to happiness and that we are going to provide joy and mental well being for a child. Far from it in fact it is more likely that a child living in poverty in some countries is going to be better of mentally than in a western society. For us to assume that we are “saving” these children is a judgement which is not correct. I notice that this notion was raised but wasn’t debated nor is hotly contested. I guess that is because those that have an investment in adoption would find those ideas particularly challenging. It was evident that a reasonable percentage of academics attending this conference were adopters or adoptees – either way their was not discussion on the merits of adoption vs the disadvantage of adoption.

May important questions were raised but none more so than the notion that if large amounts of money are being generated per adoption then how open is this system to corruption. This is like the elephant in the room and certainly no one spoke to this issue. One presentation I attended talked about the amount of money exchanging hands but refused to take a moral stand on this issue. Within this system there is considerable concern for the trafficking of children, the abuse which is likely to take place because of this trafficking. There is virtually no legal authority across borders who can control what happens in other countries.

I doubt that I will take this issue up as I have other child protection issues but when I meet with someone who is adopted I will be better prepared to ask more probing and in depth questions.