Social work最新文献

Current and persistent racialized inequalities in the United States raise important research questions investigating the social structures and systems that underlie racist outcomes. Consequently, social workers are called to centralize race and racism in their research agendas and utilize critical race theories and methodologies to examine institutional racism. This study investigates the extent to which critical race frameworks are utilized in mainstream social work research. The researchers conducted a content analysis of three top-ranked mainstream social work research journals (N = 407) to determine the extent to which critical race theories and methodologies are utilized for the investigation of institutional racism. Findings demonstrate a dearth of critical investigation into issues of race and racism in mainstream social work research as well as the underutilization of critical race frameworks. In conclusion, researchers argue for a critical shift in mainstream social work research through utilizing critical race theoretical frameworks and methodologies.

Given renewed attention to racial equity in the social work profession, the authors suggest the use of counternarratives, an established tool of critical race theory, as an accessible method to challenge racism and examine privilege in social work education, practice, and research. Counternarratives use the technique of storytelling to elevate the lived experiences of marginalized individuals and communities and invite the listener into critical reflection about dominant, privileged discourses. The ultimate goal of counternarratives is the achievement of racial equity. The authors provide context about how counternarratives can align with social work education, practice, and research, and then use specific, illustrative examples from their own work to bring this method and its application to life. The authors also share their own processes of reflection and dialogue across disciplines and social locations in the use of counternarratives. The reflections of an experienced social justice educator provide additional insights on the use of counternarratives in the field of social work.

This study aims to examine whether social work services can improve migrant children's social engagement during the COVID-19 pandemic in urban China. Valid questionnaires of 416 migrant children in Guangzhou were obtained as the samples. Two regression models were employed to analyze the factors associated with social engagement. The results show that during the pandemic, migrant children with higher self-efficacy, higher community social capital, and better social inclusion tended to have higher social engagement. Among the three dimensions of social capital, only community social capital has a significant positive effect on migrant children's social engagement. The degree of social inclusion of migrant children affects their social engagement. Social work services are beneficial to promoting the social engagement of migrant children. The research has implications for the practice of child social workers. First, it is important to cultivate migrant children's self-efficacy to promote social engagement. Second, social workers should build the social capital of the communities where migrant children live to promote the social engagement of this group. Third, social workers should strengthen support for migrant children's learning during the COVID-19 pandemic.

In the United States, abortion is safe and common, but highly stigmatized and frequently targeted by legislation that aims to restrict access. Numerous obstacles impede access to abortion care, including logistical barriers like cost and transportation, limited clinic availability, and state-mandated waiting periods. Accurate abortion information can also be hard to access. To overcome these barriers, many people seeking abortion turn to anonymous online forums, including Reddit, for information and support. Examining this community provides a unique perspective on the questions, thoughts, and needs of people considering or undergoing an abortion. The authors web scraped 250 posts from subreddits that contain abortion-related posts, then coded deidentified posts using a combined deductive/inductive approach. The authors identified a subset of these codes in which users were giving/seeking information and advice on Reddit, then engaged in a targeted analysis of the needs expressed in these posts. Three interconnected needs emerged: (1) need for information, (2) need for emotional support, and (3) need for community around the abortion experience. In this study map the authors reflected these needs onto key social work practice areas and competencies; taken alongside support from social work's governing bodies, this research suggests that social workers would be beneficial additions to the abortion care workforce.

On June 24, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court voted to overturn Roe v. Wade, concluding that the Constitution of the United States does not confer a right to abortion. The court's decision in Dobbs immediately introduced challenging ethical issues for social workers who serve people who become pregnant. Key questions concern social workers' ability to protect clients' privacy and confidentiality, documentation protocols, and client abandonment. In addition, social workers must be concerned about the possibility that they are at risk of being named in licensing board and ethics complaints, lawsuits, and criminal court indictments because of their work with people who seek abortion-related information and services. The purpose of this article is to provide an overview of the Dobbs decision; discuss compelling ethical issues facing social workers who work with people who seek reproductive health information and services; present guidelines to assist social workers who face ethical dilemmas related to reproductive health services; and highlight the critical importance of ethics-informed social work advocacy related to reproductive health.

Few studies have analyzed the existence of homogeneous groups (profiles) in burnout and engagement among professionals, and none in social workers. This study with 448 social workers from Spain mainly examined their profiles in burnout and engagement and the characteristics of each profile in relevant job-related variables. Cluster analyses yielded four distinct profiles: the first, Burned Out, showed high burnout and low engagement; the second, Engaged, exhibited the inverse pattern with low burnout and high engagement; the third, Both, displayed simultaneously high burnout and high engagement; the fourth, Neither, showed low burnout and low engagement. The profiles also differed greatly in work-related variables: job demands (i.e., workload and work--family conflict), job resources (i.e., support from supervisor and coworkers), personal resources (i.e., psychological detachment and relaxation), and outcomes (i.e., intrinsic job satisfaction and intent to leave). The findings support interventions, individual and organizational, tailored to the characteristics of different groups to boost engagement and decrease burnout and turnover.

At a time when anti-LGBTQ+ legislation is on the rise in more than a dozen states across the United States, social work providers and researchers must be acutely aware of the ways in which their practice may unintentionally invalidate the identities of LGBTQ+ youth. Concurrently, language used in the LGBTQ+ youth community to describe both sexual identity and gender has moved away from monosexual and binary labels toward nonmonosexual and nonbinary descriptions. The adoption of such language, in practice and in research, is a simple step toward combatting invalidation in the social work field. This commentary explores the expansion of identity labels through the lens of a study conducted across four leading LGBTQ+ agencies in New York and New Jersey with youth and staff. Authors review data that demonstrate the evolution of labels and argue that adopting these terms in practice and research will have fruitful and affirming effects on access to care, treatment attrition, and the design and quality of research in and for the LGBTQ+ community. This shift in language must be comprehensively addressed to ensure that practice and research continue to adopt and advocate for ways to affirm LGBTQ+ people, particularly given the recent onslaught of anti-LGBTQ+ legislation.