4.0 Article

Hostile relationships in social work practice: anxiety, hate and conflict in long-term work with involuntary service users

期刊

JOURNAL OF SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE
卷 35, 期 1, 页码 19-37

出版社

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/02650533.2020.1834371

关键词

Social work practice; child protection; involuntary clients; ethnography; home visits; psychoanalysis; emotions

资金

  1. Economic and Social Research Council [ES/N012453/2]
  2. ESRC [ES/N012453/2] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recent research has shown that relationships between social workers and 'involuntary clients' can be characterized by mutual suspicion and even hatred, with hostile relationships often enacted through conflict and resistance, particularly during home visits. Social workers must recognize and tolerate hostility and hate, refrain from retaliating, and demonstrate compassion and care towards service users to improve outcomes.
While recognition that some service users do not want social work involvement has grown in recent years, little research has explored what relationships between social workers and 'involuntary clients' look and feel like in practice and how they are conducted in real time. This paper draws from research that observed long-term social work practice in child protection and shows how relationships based on mutual suspicion and even hate were sustained over the course of a year, or broke down. Drawing on a range of psycho-social theories, the paper adds to the literature on relationship-based practice by developing the concept of a 'hostile relationship'. The findings show how hostile relationships were enacted through conflict and resistance - especially on home visits - and how anxiety and other intense feelings were often avoided by individuals and organisations. Much more needs to be done to help social workers recognise and tolerate hostility and hate, to not retaliate and to enact compassion and care towards service users.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据