Practice Reflexions Vol.3 No.

1 2008 47

Developing a practice framework

AUDREY MATTHEWS

Abstract

This paper will outline the key elements of my professional identity, giving the reader
a portrait of how I will operate as a social welfare worker. My practice framework
includes a discussion of the values of social justice, accountability, transparency and
congruence which I feel strongly about. Included is an evaluation of postmodernism,
systems theory and anti-oppressive theories, three theories which have best informed
my practice, and how these theories were revised, modified or confirmed (O’Connor,
Wilson & Setterlund 2003:217). Issues such as the influence of the medical model in
welfare work and the use of principles similar to those used during the time of the
stolen generation posed a challenge to my practice on placement. I have discovered
my professional identity is shaped by my belief that change is possible and can occur.
I have identified closely with critical social work practice and a reflective approach.

Introduction

Discussing an entire practice framework in detail is beyond the scope of this paper. I
have included some salient aspects of my practice framework which will guide my
future practice. Only after completing a practice framework can I see how each of the
parts are internally consistent. The values I feel strongly about reflect the key
elements of my professional identity. Formal theories which inform my practice share
commonalities with tensions in practice. What is presented in the following
framework is a blue print for future welfare work. Although this reflects common
welfare themes and feelings as expressed in ethical guidelines and handbooks I feel it
is individual to me because I experienced these theories, practices, values and
attitudes in action. Most paradigms of practice were originally presented to me in a
theoretical sense and now I feel I have gained a practical knowledge of these by being
on placement and involvement in social welfare work.

Practice Framework

Values I feel most strongly about

Values are the cornerstone for moral and ethical action in social work. Values guide
and influence our choices, decisions, our relationships with clients and understanding
of situations. Values penetrate all aspects of welfare work including key areas such as
policy and research (O’Connor, Wilson & Setterlund 2003:234; Dominelli 2002:15).
Thinking and revisiting our values is pivotal to good social work because, as social
psychology studies have revealed, our values and attitudes guide our behaviour more
when we think about them (Myers 2005:139).

Accountability is a value I feel strongly about because being accountable as a social

welfare worker is a component of being anti-discriminatory and anti-oppressive. As a
welfare worker I will be working in the public arena and therefore my work will
directly or indirectly affect the wider community. Accountability is valuable because
48 Audrey Matthews

it is linked to broader social and moral accountability (Banks 2002:29). As a worker I

can engage with supervision to ‘practice’ accountability (Banks 2002:34).
Accountability is closely linked to transparency and transparency to congruence, all of
which are important to providing an ethical framework for practice.

Another value I feel most strongly about is often stated in social welfare ethics and
codes. Social justice is a difficult concept to define for it is widely debated
(Commission on Social Justice 2000:53). and yet a very important value which I feel
all social welfare workers should evaluate and determine its part in their practice.
Social justice is so significant in the field of social work because it typifies what the
majority of social work is based on (Clark 2002:38). My understanding of social
justice is that it is simply a concept and what is important about it are the actions
which follow. Social justice implies the notion of equality and therefore social justice
is about reducing or eradicating inequalities wherever possible. Social justice also
involves the fulfilment of basic needs for each citizen. Social justice is about creating
opportunities for equality and entitlement. A socially just world would mean each
individual was of equal worth (Commission on Social Justice 2000:62).

As a social welfare worker I can work towards social justice by being an advocate for
equal distribution of resources: getting involved with social policy and politics to
influence others who have power to make a difference. To promote social justice it is
important to remember that an individual’s civil and political rights should be an
adjunct to (but no more important than) social, economic and cultural rights. As a
social welfare worker I can work towards changing structures which maintain
inequality and injustice (Australian Association of Social Workers 2002:8). This
infers social welfare practice requires ‘top down’ work to obtain social justice, that is,
work which challenges power structures that maintain inequality (Popple 2002:152).
The policies and structures created by those in power affect and control the powerless
and need to be deconstructed to achieve equality. Critical social work is something I
identify with and has become part of my professional identity.

Key elements of my professional identity

I identify myself as a critical social welfare worker because I engage with reflection
and criticality. I feel I can identify with critical social work because of the notion that
change is crucial to critical practice. My goal for my time on placement was to assist
with a change or experience change in a client’s life. I was determined to see this
happen because I have had doubts about the possibility of change. I was somewhat
disappointed when progressing through placement and not seeing change at least over
a short time. Gradually as placement went along I realised that change is gradual
rather than abrupt. I recognised this after being with a worker who was very elated
about a client’s actions which just seemed to me to be everyday normal behaviour.
The worker had observed the change in this client as a significant and important
milestone towards sustained change. I began to see value in the very mundane things
which were changes in themselves and reassured myself that change was possible.
Certainly coming to the realisation that change is possible has been only one of the
challenges I faced during placement.
Practice Reflexions Vol.3 No.1 2008 49

Issues which challenged practice during placement: Points of tension

The Victorian Children, Youth and Families Act (2005) contain a set of “Best Interest
Principles” as part of section ten. The Best Interest Principles are used widely
throughout child protection practice, therefore, becoming familiar with and also
adopting them was crucial to the development of effective practice on placement.
Their use in my practice was originally very challenging. My issue with the Principles
originates from the research and study in relation to Indigenous Australians I have
engaged with while at university. My initial wariness of the Best Interest Principles
was the connection it held to past ideas and actions which were viewed as in the ‘best
interests’ of the child which led to the maltreatment of Indigenous children and
families. The principle of ‘best interests’ in the past contributed to the destruction of
Indigenous people in a multitude of ways (Miller 2007:4). Because of the involvement
in events such as the stolen generation, social work practice has been subject to
accusations of devaluing Indigenous culture. It has also been implied that in the past,
social work engaged in imposing white western ideology in practice (Briskman
2007:12), although, as I have learnt, social work is a developing profession and
modern social work today is a product of past responses to needs (Johnson 1995:19-
20). Overcoming negative feelings about the Best Interest Principles involved finding
where the Principles have built upon and acknowledged the past. There is recognition
of the historical context of the Best Interest Principles and true advancement made
from past mistakes is acknowledged through the collaboration with Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander groups to create a new framework for child protection practice.

Early social work practice has been influenced greatly by the medical model. The
process of engagement still used today, albeit in an evolved form, was originally
shaped by the medical model (Johnson 1995:22). Early child protection work in
Victoria was based on the medical model which saw the cause of child abuse as the
parental psychopathology (Miller 2007:6). Others argue the medical model was
disregarded from social work as early as the 1950s (Johnson 1995:26) Martin
(2003:18) states since the settlement movement social work has shifted back and forth
between structural explanations and individual explanations based on the medical
model, and continues to do so. Traditional approaches to social work are generally
more associated with the medical model and the individualisation of problems, while
critical social work evolved from Marxist theory which proposes structural
explanations for social problems (Martin 2003:24). Adopting a critical and structural
approach to social welfare work has helped me to challenge the notions of individual
pathology brought about by the medical model.

Integrating theory and practice

Integrating theory and practice has been about applying wider concepts to particular
situations. Developing praxis has involved greater reflection and the recollections of
experiences as well as identifying where theory appears to have been operating within
these situations (O’Connor, Wilson & Setterlund 2003:217). Evaluating the links
between my personal plans and what actually occurred was an important step in
seeing how theory relates to practice. Finally I used, as Fook (1996:2) suggests,
critical incident reflection to integrate theory and practice. Critical incident reflection
required me to reflect on critical events which I felt were important to my
development as a social welfare worker. Using reflection has been my primary
50 Audrey Matthews

method; it has proved to be an important asset when integrating theory and practice
(Fook 1996:2).

Using the adaptation of Bogo and Vayda’s Integration of Theory and Practice Loop
(O’Connor, Wilson & Setterlund 2003:218) I begin by retrieving the event. On
placement I participated in visits to many families with violent males as a partner or
husband. With one particular interaction I had with a female client who was in a
violent relationship I noticed a resistant and defensive reaction. The client defended
the violent actions of her partner and resisted any suggestions the violence was
significant enough to change her life. Workers reinforced that the actions of her
partner were affecting herself and her children in a multitude of ways, some of which
are not immediately noticeable.

Reflecting on the effectiveness of work done and identifying values and attitudes is
the next stage to integrating theory and practice according to the loop (O’Connor,
Wilson & Setterlund 2003:218). Workers were able to effectively increase the client’s
interaction and encouraged her to question her partner’s actions through open
questioning and providing information about violence and its effects on her and her
family members. The worker portrayed values of transparency through informing the
client of things which one normally might avoid discussing in a casual conversation.
The worker also challenged any comments by the client that suggested the violence
was acceptable.

Stage three of the Integration of Theory and Practice Loop (Cleak & Wilson 2007:94)
involves conceptualising the event in theoretical terms and therefore it is a step away
from the specifics of the situation and will require me to look into theories, research
and professional perspectives to explain the situation. I would argue the female
client’s reaction could be explained as ‘acceptance mode’ of an oppressive situation
(Dominelli 2002:11). Anti-oppressive theory suggests people react to oppression in
three ways: acceptance, accommodation and rejection (Dominelli 2002:11). I believe
the client was in an acceptance mode because of her original deep denial in and
refusal to believe the violence was harmful to her family. This demonstrated to me
embeddedness in the situation (Dominelli 2002:11). Choosing a theoretical option for
action is the final step to linking theory and practice (Cleak and Wilson 2007:94), in
this case anti-oppressive theory would be a specific option to try. Working to break
down oppression with a client who is experiencing acceptance of oppression involves
revealing and helping the client to see how oppression operates and how it is
continued through their interactions (Dominelli 2002:13).

As part of developing praxis I ‘tested’ my own theories as well as the wider theories
which I have learnt throughout university. I will explain how these theories were
revised, modified or confirmed in the following section (O’Connor, Wilson &
Setterlund 2003:217).

Theories which best inform my practice

Whether we are truly in a period of postmodernity or we are still lingering in the
period of modernity it is hard to deny society across the globe has experienced
changes due to globalisation (Cohen & Kennedy 2000:58; Scholte 2005:4). In a world
with increasing interconnectedness and increasing cultural interactions (Cohen &
Practice Reflexions Vol.3 No.1 2008 51

Kennedy 2000:26) postmodernism seems to hold some validity. Postmodernism and

social work share an uneasy relationship (see Trainor 2002; Pease & Fook 1999) and
at first I felt there was very little room for postmodern ideas in social welfare practice.
In many instances postmodernism appeared to be uprooting all the main ideas of
traditional and critical social work (Trainor 2002:207). Howe (1994:513) suggests
social work is a ‘child’ of modernity, much of what social work represents was
formed during this period. Although, in some aspects, modern social work practices
run parallel with postmodernist and post-structural notions (Howe 1994:523).
Postmodernism shares a commitment to being constantly critical, de-centred, self-
reflexive, as does social work. It is the conflicting and challenging views of
postmodernism that offers social work a reason and grounds for reflection on action
(O’Brien & Penna 1998:186). I understand how important reflection is to good social
welfare practice, and postmodern theories are important because they encourage me to
be constantly scrutinising my actions and choices and I feel this will help me to
maintain a good standard of practice.

When interacting with clients I felt a consciousness of the postmodern idea that we
each construct our own realities. I had to take account of my own interpretations of
the client’s story (Pease 2002:8). Pease (2002:8) suggests postmodernism can, in this
sense, be more empowering as it motivates workers’ accept accountability for their
own interpretations as these will always be different to another person’s interpretation
according to postmodernism. Postmodern theories have allowed me to reconceptualise
power and empowerment (an integral skill in social work) and therefore shape my use
of it in practice to best empower clients (Pease 2002:2). Power, according to
postmodernism, is the product of discourses and is not possessed but exercised.
Conceptualising power in this manner gives hope to powerless groups who have the
possibility to exercise power even if they are unable to possess it (Healy 2005:203).
Postmodernism enabled me to make sense of some ambiguous situations while on
placement. It was terribly confusing when I would go from being a powerful person in
my role with clients and then being a powerless junior worker with other more
powerful workers. I would imagine some parents may feel powerful and in control
with their children when together as a family and then very powerless and vulnerable
when the family unit is separated. Postmodernism explains competing discourses are
responsible for multiple identities, our identity may be conflicting and segmented and
this is because discourses shape our identity in each context (Healy 2005:200-201). I
do, however, agree with some feminist criticisms of postmodernism that fixed
identities and collective identities are important in achieving progressive social
movements (Healy 2005:202).

Systems theory is a socially focused theory which attempts to explain connections

between families and groups (Payne 2005:142-143). Systems perspectives inform my
practice partially because my personal theories are shaped by my family relationships.
In systems theory the family is viewed as an interrelated unit consisting of members
who influence each other through interactions and relationships (Compton & Galaway
1999:29). I understood the concept of families in systems theory more
comprehensively on placement when I received a phone call from a client’s mother.
The client’s mother was wishing to find out the organisation’s plan for her daughter’s
family in order that she could organise her long trip down to visit the family. The
client’s mother soon grew frustrated at the organisation’s inability to give definitive
52 Audrey Matthews

answers. She explained to me she did not normally act like that but was under stress
after hearing her daughter’s children were in foster care. Kaplan (as cited in Compton
& Galaway 1999:29) makes an interesting analogy of a family system and a tuning
fork which goes “When you strike one end, the other end reverberates”. The client’s
mother was feeling the effects of the family system being disrupted at the other end. I
learnt a valuable lesson that families are interrelated and as a social welfare worker
one should be prepared, when taking on one client, to interact and consider how
actions with the individual have a wider effect on the family as a whole. The effect
that changes had to the other side of the family showed me that the wider family can
be a source of strength when they are part of the operating whole. I came to
conclusions such as these through reflection, which has certainly been a strong point
to my practice.

Strengths of practice
I gained confidence and strength from exercising a reflective approach to any work I
did while on placement. Our personal theories always seem to be the most apparent in
our lives and formal theories, in my experience, are generally harder to adapt to
everyday situations. Fook (1996:6) argues a reflective approach is highly regarded as
it facilitates workers’ paralleling practice with formal theory. Effectively, being
reflective has assisted me to ‘join the dots’, that is, link formal theory, research and
practice. I believe a strength of my practice was my ability to inquire and criticise my
actions in order to change and assume accountability (Fook 1996:5). At first I would
find myself reflecting after (positive and negative) events and eventually I would
reflect before, during and after events. I found the more I thought about my actions
and proposed actions the more I could control them to better reflect my values and
theories. Achievement of goals proved more successful if I was reflective at all stages.

Conclusion

I will conclude by mentioning practising social welfare on placement has given me

the missing piece to the theoretical puzzle. Through the process of reflection on action
and reflection in action (O’Connor, Wilson & Setterlund 2003:217) I have pieced
together a logically connected practice framework. I have discovered where
postmodernism and social work connect and how I can use postmodern ideas to
benefit practice. I have experienced systems theory in action and felt firsthand how
welfare work has broader impacts on family systems. A constant critical view of my
values, attitudes and theories is important in ensuring my actions are consistent with
these. The most meaningful aspect of my journey has been the move to the belief that
change is able to be attained and sustained in social welfare practice. For me, without
the possibility of change social welfare practice would be in vain.

References

Australian Association of Social Workers (2002) Code of Ethics. Barton, A.C.T

Australian Association of Social Workers.

Banks, S. (2002) ‘Professional Values and Accountabilities’ in Adams, R, Dominelli,

L, & Payne, M. (eds.) Critical Practice in Social Work Hampshire Palgrave.
Practice Reflexions Vol.3 No.1 2008 53

Clark, C. (2002) ‘Identity, Individual Rights and Social Justice’ in Adams, R,

Dominelli, L, & Payne, M. (eds.) Critical Practice in Social Work. Hampshire
Palgrave.

Cleak, H, & Wilson, J. (2007) Making the Most of Field Placement. 2nd Edition South
Melbourne Thomson.

Cohen. R, & Kennedy, P. (2000) Global Sociology. Houndmills Palgrave Macmillan.

Commission on Social Justice (2000) ‘What is Social Justice’ in Pierson, C, &

Castles, F. (eds.) The Welfare State Reader. Malden Polity Press.

Compton, B.R, and Galaway, B. (1999) ‘The Ecosystems Perspective and the Use of
Knowledge’ in Compton, B.R, Beulah, R. & Galaway, B. (eds.) Social Work
Processes California: Brooks/Cole.

Dominelli, L. (2002) ‘Introducing Anti-Oppressive Theories for Practice’ in Anti-

Oppressive Social Work Theory and Practice. Hampshire Palgrave Macmillan.

Dominelli, L. (2002) ‘Values in Social Work: Contested Entities with Enduring

Qualities’ in Adams, R, Dominelli, L, & Payne, M. (eds.) Critical Practice in Social
Work Hampshire: Palgrave.

Fook, J. (1996) ‘The Reflective Researcher: Developing a Reflective Approach to

Practice’ in The Reflective Researcher N.S.W Allen & Unwin.

Healy, K. (2005) Social Work Theories in Context: Creating Frameworks for

Practice. Houndmills Palgrave Macmillan.

Howe, D. (1994) ‘Modernity, Postmodernity and Social Work’ in The British Journal
of Social Work, Vol. 24, 5: 513-531.

Johnson, L. (1995) ‘Social Work as a Developing Profession’ in Social Work Practice

a generalist approach. 5th edition. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Martin, J. (2003) ‘Historical Development of Critical Social Work’ in Allan, J., Pease,
B. & Briskman, L. (eds.), Critical Social Work. Crows Nest: Allen & Unwin.

Miller, R. (2007) The Best Interests principles: a conceptual overview: Best interests
series. Victoria: Victorian Government Department of Human Services.

Myers, D. (2005) Social Psychology, (8th ed.), New York: McGraw-Hill.

O’Brien, M. & Penna, S. (1998) Theorising Welfare: Enlightenment and Modern

Society. London: Sage Publications.

O’Connor, I., Wilson, J. & Setterlund D. (2003) Social Work and Welfare Practice. 4th
edition. N.S.W: Pearson Education Australia.
54 Audrey Matthews

Payne, M. (2005) Modern Social Work Theory. 3rd Edition. Houndmills: Palgrave
Macmillan.

Pease, B. & Fook, J. (1999) ‘Postmodern Critical Theory and Emanicpatory Social
Work Practice’ in Pease, B. and Fook, J. (eds.), Transforming Social Work Practice.
St Leonards, N.S.W: Allen & Unwin.

Pease, B. (2002) ‘Rethinking Empowerment: A Postmodern reappraisal for

Emancipatory practice’ in The British Journal of Social Work, Vol 32, (2).

Popple, K. (2002) ‘Community Work’ in Adams, R., Dominelli, L. & Payne, M.

(eds.) Critical Practice in Social Work. Hampshire: Palgrave.

Trainor, B.T. (2002) ‘Postmodernism, Truth and Social Work’ in Australian Social
Work, Vol. 55, (3): p 204-213.

Legislation
Children, Youth and Families Act 2005 (Victoria).

Audrey Matthews completed her final year of the Bachelor of Social and Community
Welfare at Monash University Gippsland in November 2008.