News

Are social work values under threat from structural change and how important are those values to workers and users, asks Polly Neate.

Even social work's most eager critics would agree that it has values. They might describe those values in hostile or distorting terms; indeed, they might think values are precisely what is wrong with social work. But it's obvious to any observer that values are central to the profession.

If you can't put your values into practice you don't lose them. But you do become unhappy and unfulfilled.

As social care faces significant change yet again, possibly involving the dismantling of social services departments, there are fears that if social workers aren't already unhappy and unfulfilled, they will be. Performance management, dire staff shortages, inadequate resources, increasing demand, continued carping by the media all add to the pressure on values.

But have social services departments really been the cradle of civilisation, in social work terms? Or have they isolated social work from the public, other professions and national political influence? Chris Davies, director of social services in Somerset, thinks they are guilty of all that and more. "The existence of social services departments has made us lazy about our skill base and value base. As we move into multidisciplinary departments we have to work harder at being clear about what we stand for. If we are clearer, it can lead to more recognition of our values. Social services departments could have led to the profession losing ground, as people have got their identity from their department not from the profession."

With the advent of the General Social Care Council and the Social Care Institute for Excellence (Scie), social work is perhaps readier than ever to disentangle from social services. If these fledgling organisations can penetrate workers' cynicism and exhaustion and convince them that they'll promote the best of social work, perhaps professionals can step neatly off the good ship social services straight onto firm ground. If they merely enforce standards set from above, social work will be in trouble.

No wonder there is concern about whether social work values are under threat. But many social workers don't have time to get the job done, never mind analyse their beliefs while they're doing it. When you ask them to stop and think about their values, you hear a lot of anger.

Davies says anger and frustration are understandable. He says professionals today who want to base their work on the values he shares - "starting where the client is, working at the client's pace... countering the sort of disadvantage that most of our clients start off with. And helping people develop their own strategies for that" - face greater difficulties than in the past.

Although Davies supports greater emphasis on performance and standards, he accepts it has drawbacks. "I don't think we have succeeded in getting the balance between managerialism and an appropriate professional role for social work staff. We have to make sure that creative, strong-minded social workers with clear values and skills can feel fulfilled and comfortable in the new climate. I do believe it can be done but we're not there yet."

Having strong values means you can lose touch with those who don't share them. If that is most of the population, you end up with an out-of-touch profession - even if it is in the right. The positive side of a focus on standards, Davies believes, is that it values efficiency and practical help.

"It is no good being wonderful with people if you don't turn up for appointments, write letters and so on. We mustn't tolerate disorganisation and inefficiency. We mustn't be arrogant about the value base. Social workers mustn't just say 'We have got our values and the rest of the world must understand us'."

If social work's values are explained in a way that "demonstrates their functional importance", Davies believes, they will survive. "The community will choose. For example, you could have people assessed and care managed by people trained in an administrative style. The question is, is that what we want for people who are facing major life crises? Or do we want someone who has the human relations skills to help the client find the right way forward?"

Many social workers feel that first option is just what their colleagues in the health service want - and quickly. But there is a triangular relationship between social care, health service, and service user. In that triangle, Davies says, "we can make powerful alliances with users, who prefer the social model to the medical model."

And with the clear user-focus of Scie, which will determine "what works", the user-social care alliance could be decisive, despite the political clout of health service priorities.

Jane Campbell, chairperson of Scie, is clear about some points that will be music to social workers' ears: "I want to make sure that the fundamental principles in the user movement are applicable generally to social care. Values have been lost in the administrative model in the late 1990s. With health on board those values could be swamped by administration, lack of resources, and the clinical model." She says she's there to make sure that doesn't happen.

But she's not there to make things cosy for social workers. Her own values spring from the user movement. "You can liberate children at risk and older people, for example, using the same principles as the disability movement. We all face negative stereotypes, we all suffer from the fact that our environments put us in the situations we are in. The individual trauma must not inform everything."

So no room for cosy assumptions that if social workers did more counselling, things would be OK. Moreover, Campbell says: "It's dangerous if social workers complacently see themselves as guardians of the social model. Most social workers don't actually understand the social model of disability. It took me about eight years to get my head around it, and I'm a disabled person!"

Campbell says she would not feel comfortable, as a user, with "a lot of social work values". She wants to help develop "an emerging set of values drawing on the best of social work and the best from users".

So what is the best of social work? "The best social workers who have worked with me have worked to find the solution to my various needs and have facilitated me and helped me find my own identity. That is a specific skill."

It does sound remarkably close to Davies's formulation of social work values, as long as his warning against arrogance and self-indulgence is heeded. Campbell is also keen on an alliance between social care professionals and users, though her emphasis is different: "Together, we're strong. Singly, social work isn't. Scie needs to make partnership with users available as we go into the multidisciplinary world. Social care will be swamped otherwise. They can't do it without us."

The danger is that this new formulation of values will not only be too challenging for many social workers but may, as Davies warns, founder on the rocks of pragmatism in the face of financial and staffing shortages.

Ian Johnston, director of the British Association of Social Workers, recently presided over a revision of BASW's code of ethics. He says there was a debate between those who believe the ethics are sacrosanct, and those who see them as aspirational but not always achievable. "For example, there should be an unconditional commitment to the people you're working with. But you can't do that. There's a tendency in society to value overbearing and dictatorial people, those who talk a lot and know all the answers, and to undervalue listening and those who don't claim to know better than those they work with."

In the struggle of Scie, BASW and others between idealism, albeit perhaps framed in a new way, and pragmatism, the end result matters. For values are fundamental to social work. As Davies says: "It's harder to define social work by its knowledge base and skills than other professions. It relies on its values to define it."

Whether that fact can become the profession's strength, rather than exacerbating its weakness, remains to be seen. There is cause for optimism.

BASW code of ethics at www.basw.co.uk

'Sometimes i feel angry'

Michael Smith (not his real name) is an approved social worker. He has been in social work for four years, and an ASW for one year.

"My values are about noticing that people are prevented from participating in society and wanting to address that somehow. It's not true that younger social workers like me are not ideologically motivated. I'm not against everything Tony Blair says, if that's what you mean. But if being ideologically motivated is about trying to redress imbalance in society, then I totally believe in that.

"When I started practising I realised that some people I work with are incredibly prejudiced. Not social work colleagues, but from the bottom to the top in health. I recently arranged training, which just prompted a lot of snide comments from people. Sometimes I feel angry, sometimes I just think, oh sod it, who cares.

"The new Mental Health Act looks set to step on everyone's values. I can see myself being put in the position of having to lock someone up when I don't believe in it. Also I'll be in a more policing role.

If nurses take over the social work task it may be better in terms of finding placements, but it will be much worse for making sure they are the right ones and people are listened to. You have to have an understanding of people's home lives and a tolerance of the variety and diversity of life, and I just don't think they have that."

'A lack of ideology'

Nigel Evans works in an old-age psychiatry team in a London hospital. He came into social work four years ago after a 20-year career making documentaries.

"A whole generation, now in their late 40s and 50s, had a completely different experience of politicisation. Thatcher's children, aged under 35, are not driven by a social conscience. My fellow students on my social work course were not in it because of beliefs in a just society. Add the fact that social work has turned into care management and you realise the profession is going to wither on the vine for a lack of ideology. It has nothing to recommend it if it isn't going to get back to respect for the individual and their suffering, pain and disenfranchisement. If your agency isn't about that, what can you do? That's what nobody wants to talk about.

"Experienced people are leaving because they are sick of sitting in front of a screen brokering for services. As my progression is evaluated by what's on my computer screen, for the next nine days before it's looked at I'm going to put stuff on the screen. They are not going to talk to my clients or to me, they are going to look at what bullshit I'm putting on there."

'Recruitment is difficult'

David Emery manages supported living schemes for Mencap and is deputy manager of a residential home for adults with learning difficulties.

"I am motivated by supporting people to achieve their optimum level of independence in the community. There has definitely been progress in the time I have worked in this area - four or five years. For example, [service users] are undertaking more meaningful education.

"There are two types of staff: those who come to care for people and those who want to motivate and encourage. I'm among the latter.

"Recruitment is difficult. Stacking shelves in Tesco pays more but people can't believe the responsibility they get here. "The current team have all had completely different jobs - the law or retail, for example. That doesn't jeopardise our values, though. In fact, people saying 'I'd love to care for people' can bring problems; those with a background in residential care.

"We have just had someone start who was an air steward and straight away everything's fine. It's about people's outlook on life. You can teach the skills but not the values."

'Values are under threat'

Jane Andrews (not her real name) is a care manager working with older people.

"The job is now about getting the best service that we can for people, within the restrictions we have to work in. When we did our training we had a different view of what social work was. But we have to work within the system rather than stick with our values, which are not strictly relevant to the work. It's 'patch them up and move them on'.

"Our values are under threat but we don't think about it much because we are on a bit of a treadmill. Whole weeks can pass when you don't see anybody because you're stuck in an office.

"Our values aren't shared by those in power. It's just about survival. I have been in social work four years and it has changed a lot. For people who came in before community care, their job is unrecognisable. A lot of staff have excellent relationship skills, but they go under with the paperwork. I still fight for small victories, such as finding funding for something specialist.

"In a year or two we'll all be working for care trusts. I'm not keen on working in the NHS because I've seen the way they work in hospitals. In relation to older people, the medical model seems horrific. I don't know anybody here who wants to work for the NHS. But maybe we can be agents of change there."