As social workers we need to have sensitivity to people’s needs in relation to culture, gender, sexuality etc in the care plans we make for them. However, we must also have an ability to identify and focus on the main elements of their presenting problems. Lack of material resources such as housing and money are likely to be a major issue in a large percentage of people we see as social workers. If this does not feature in assessments then there is something wrong.

If I were to say this in my place of work I know for certain that I would be accused of racism and homophobia/transphobia. So I don’t. Cowardly yes, self preservation also yes. I agree with all those contributors who point out that these days social work is a blancmange of psudo psychotherapy.

In a culture of “personal truths” and social work practice portrayed as individual trauma and distress tying to alleviate material conditions of clients is seen as mechanistic and a tad irrelevant. Social work now is uniformed psychotherapy. Not many manage it well but most see it as their core function. We’ve gone from making sure homes are warm and have sufficient food to feeling affronted if we are asked to do benefits reviews and financial assessments. And that is the difference now between the training and the motivation of pre-degree social workers and the target led practice of the academic ‘professionals’ who laugh at people like me who qualified in 1983.

It’s struck me for some time that its significance in social work practice has progressively declined considerably over the years since I entered the profession in 1973. Logically, this is odd given how obvious it is when working on the “front line” that poverty and deprivation are relevant factors across almost the whole spectrum of problems embraced by our profession. Today’s SW’s should not need the welter of research evidence about the link between poverty and social problems to justify and so encourage them the take the issue into account in their work. As some respondents commented, a full and proper assessment cannot ignore the role played by poverty where it is present. Of course there will be instances where it is not a factor, but that should also be acknowledged for consistency of practice, to demonstrate this essential matter has been considered.

In my first post as a social worker in Manchester, the financial circumstances of the people we were helping was one of the first issues we were expected to prioritise in assessment. If people were not working their benefits position was carefully checked to make sure they were receiving all eligible benefits, work which included liaison with the benefits agency, and if necessary, support and representation at tribunals. An important part of this poverty alleviation activity also included approaching charities for additional help, which could be financial or material eg home necessities including for example domestic appliances. Easing financial problems, especially for families presenting for all kinds of help ( we were “Generic SW’s” in those days ), was often the key to beginning to restore people’s independence, and so improve lives. After all, put very simply, the purpose of social work is to help people to have better lives. At the time, the City of Manchester invested heavily in establishing an anti-poverty infrastructure consisting of what were known as “Welfare Rights Officers”, who were usually based in social services offices, giving the SW’s ready access to specialist advice and practical assistance to help them to be as effective as possible in tackling poverty. It worked very well, but sadly it has withered away.

Amen to that

It’s too easy to blame managers, believe me I work under one who struggles to make a cup of tea so not a fan of them by any means, but they reflect the priorities set by the likes of SWE ‘standards’ and supported by self serving lobbyist of BASW and the it’s ilk. We are all responsible for letting all this happen. While strategic managers were deciding the parameters of how we should be as social workers those who were supposed to be our advocates, PSWs, Practice Educators and so on, were prattling on about irrelevancies like CDP, undefined and Social Worker of the Year nonsense The new fad is AI and our supposed leaders are salivating about ‘new’ ways of working without understanding the implications beyond ‘quicker’ report turnarounds and keeping quite on the staff reductions they can’t wait to implement. So I don’t blame managers at all. They are doing what they are meant to do unapologetically. It’s time rather than hiding g behind them social workers did what they are trained to do too. One of which is knowing the impact of poverty on daily life. Keeping quite about the poverty you see on visits makes you more of a manager than a social worker.

They do in adults services. We really shoukd be moving away from two tier social work. If we are a profession, and we aren’t, then all of us should be valued as social workers not just the genies who rescue children and valiantly safeguard families.