The world of social work is one that has fully embraced the concept of respecting the cultural identity of the clients that we serve. I don’t think there is anybody who could argue this is a bad thing.
Except that the issue of respect in relation to religion is something I have been struggling with for some time. I am an atheist, a few months ago I may have referred to myself as agnostic out of politeness, but the scales have finally fell from my eyes. I find the notion of belief in God, from whichever religious viewpoint you view the deity, as only slightly more credible than the belief in horoscopes.
Please don’t misunderstand me. I have no problem with Christians, Muslims or any people who follow a religious creed. I actually regularly see a pastor in our trust for guidance that I don’t mind being referred to as spiritual.
But returning to the point of the respect. If I go and see a client who structures her life rigorously around her horoscopes and another on the teaching of the Quran or the Bible should I give equal respect to both of these belief systems?
If both of them truly believe that their life is ordered that way and they are not harming themselves or others in the process I will certainly tolerate that. But I find it difficult to hold the views of the religious person above those of the hososcope reader, furthermore I can't help but feel asking me to respect it is a little much.
What do others think.
Asking you to respect some of the lifestyle choices of many service users can be difficult but we have to do it. It's not our job to make a judement on the specifics of a persons religion one way or the other only to look at the potential risks and act acordingly. In many ways you are at an advantage as your atheism means you dont have your own religion that may effect how you see the choices of other faiths. I dont think many social workers suffer from this issue at all, but nice to know you can respect all the faiths equaly. And respect in the workplace is very different from respect in your heart. I have worked with sex offenders and i have to respect their right to voice their views and be non-judgmental during my work with them, but i challenge anyone to feel that respect in their hearts. Its a very difficult issue.
"We speak, and the word goes out beyond us, to consequences and ends which we had not conceived of." - Gadamer
I see it as respecting the person as a person. I may agree or disagree with their beliefs, and the way they live their life, but that does not need to stand in the way of both showing and feeling respect for them as a person.
They might even be right in what they believe!
I can't respect any religion - I can respect that religion is important to other people.
Why because a delusion affects many, must we waste time and energy accomodatting it? If your reason for doing 'good' is because you will get your reward in 'heaven', then that isn't exactly alturistic is it?
I personally believe in the Great Tea Pot and 'So help me Tetley ' if i see anyone abusing crockery or putting tea bags directly into the cup, I will adopt a superior inflexible attitute and picket their workplace (remembering to bring a flask!). x
This is a fascinating debate that revolves around the core of liberal democracy as a political culture. The simple answer within the context of this profession is that you have no choice but to respect the beliefs of others as it is a foundational value for social work practice and is codified into practice. A couple of interesting points philosophically and theologically though - atheism is not the absence of a belief system that gives one privileged access to objectivity (in other words atheists can get at truth better somehow), we all come with a point of view or set of beliefs. It is also unsurprising that someone without a specific commitment to a faith system should struggle to respect it personally. You can only really respect persons anyway. I for one don't respect opinions that suggest child abuse is ok, or that people of an Asian or African ethnic origing should be re-patriated (whatever that means), or that it a wife is property to a husband. There are many people and some cultures that would espouse these views. I DO NOT respect them and I am a social worker. If it comes up in my work I will listen then respond; my response would be simple: you are wrong.
Judging from the tone of your original post you're in a similair position to me but your stance is significantly watered-down. Compared to my views on religion you are positively supportive.
Personally I actively disrespect all mythical belief systems including religious beliefs. In this I could fairly be called an 'extreme' atheist. This is particularly so when I hear that senior clergy are once again proposing legal action to fight for their right to discriminate against those they define as 'sinners' - in this most recent case the target group is homosexuals.
However - I am not required to respect religions. I am required (and rightly so) to respect other peoples' right to believe what they like so long as they don't harm others without interference from me. After all, as surfer says - for all I know they may be right (although I doubt it).
So don't inflict this dilemma upon yourself. You've a right to your opinion, just don't inflict it upon others. Who knows, maybe one day religious people will learn the same respect and stop 'spreading the word' to you too although I strongly doubt that as well. Evangelists have never been particularly interested in fair play or live and let live after all. Don't lower yourself to the level of religious evangelists by inflicting your opinions upon other people. Let them believe what they want - it's their right and ultimately one of your business.
Cheers,
Stuart
Visit my blog at http://stuartsorensen.wordpress.com/
Thanks for the contributions. I get the point about respecting the person and not their beliefs. I understand that and I do it. I would never denigrate a client's beliefs.
I guess what irritates me is the demand of certain belief systems to be respected and even worse celebrated. I do object to being asked to celebrate something, EID for instance, I think is just superstitous nonsense.
And I don't understand why religion is afforded this respect while we are able to question other types of views freely without anybody getting offended. We can talk politics or sport and exchange views freely but mention religion and the hurt feeling card is played.
In effect I'm just aggravated that we are now in the 21st century and religion is still with us and looks set to remain forever.
spot on!
I think you have the right idea. Just keep your proffesional hat on and you will be fine. On a personnal level I understand and agree with your assessment of the faithful getting upset over questioning their opinion. But thats all it is, an opinion, feel free to challenge and discuss it as much as you like when your not working. When you are working with clients only challenge when you know you have to.
Pierre - I think many celebrations are cultural things, rather than overly religious. I wonder if you celebrate Christmas, for example? Huge numbers of people do, with little or no acknowledgement of its religious aspects.
I think you will have to live with your aggravation over religion. Have you considered why it has lasted so long, and indeed is resurgent in many parts of the 21st Century world?
Religious belief is a variation on belief per se. I struggle a little with the view of religion as stupid (Dawkins Hitchens etc). A thoughtful postmodern position would ensure that we thought more humbly about what we all think is the Truth in the first place. Any statement made must be believed to be the truth by its author, this would include the statement "I think ... is just superstitious nonsense". I am not aware of any good answers to the questions that religions offer answers or reflections on within a scientific materialist discourse. Of course it is annoying that some people get defensive and touchy about criticism of belief (this is mostly something I would associate with a fundamentalism of any position and I would include Dawkins's materialist fundamentalism). Terry Eagleton (not renowned for his religious beliefs) wrote a book'series of lectures about all this that I would recommend - Faith, Reason and Revolution.
Best that you read...
..this...
...for more info on where forum members stand on some of these issues.
And i think its a hard strentch to ask social workers to truly respect all their clients choices. They can show them respect, and respect there rights and choices, but to truly respect something I think is difficult to ask. I dont respet the idea of faith schools, for example, but thats my private opinion. i would never disrespect a service user for that choice, much like if they supported a different football team than me i wouldnt show them disrespect in my sw role. Being able to measure your respect to a client and manage it is a crucial skill in sw i feel. Plus i have never met anyone who truly respects all choices people make, they may respect their right to make the choice, but not always the choice itself.
I think the issue is respecting the person as a fellow human being. I may not agree with what they believe, but it may (in some circumstances) be right for me to put some effort into understanding why they believe as they do, rather than (secretly) rubbishing their beliefs because they are different to mine.
None of us has arrived at our beliefs "in a vacuum", nor by a purely intellectual process. All of us have beliefs which have been shaped by many factors, and most of us adapt our beliefs over time. It is part of being human, rather than animal or robotic; the ability to respect difference in beliefs is likewise part of being human and should certainly be demonstrated by social workers.
surfer:I think the issue is respecting the person as a fellow human being. I may not agree with what they believe, but it may (in some circumstances) be right for me to put some effort into understanding why they believe as they do, rather than (secretly) rubbishing their beliefs because they are different to mine.
I think your right surfer. Although we dont agree in terms of faith i definatly respect your right to have your own faith thats different from mine. im not sure about the secretly rubbishing part.....i mean its not secret its private and seperate from work.
I love this debate! No, really. I am really heartened to hear social workers of different persuasions and beliefs making the effort to think about this. As a culture we have moved on along way from the positivism that characterized modernity (excuse the philosphical discourse) most (though not all) call this condition postmodern. The most defining dynamic of this cultural (and therefore collectively psychological) condition is doubt and uncertainty about 'metanarratives'. In a nutshell this means all big over-arching explanatory stories, in particular the ones proclaimed by a broadly scientific worldview, no longer have the authority. Anyway, apologies for the pre-amble, the point being that this should present us with a more open and respectful context for handling difference; hopefully we engage critically and acknowledge that belief always plays a part in how we think and do. Fundamentalism is in many ways a reaction against this. Faith is, of course, believing what we can't see (somewhere in the Bible NT); materialism is believing only what we can see.
Well I am out of my depth a little here when we get to philosophy but here goes. I think there is a value judgement inherent in the use of the term materialist when describing what I would call rationalism. I don’t think that is believing only what we can see. It is more believing what we can see together with the view that other things may well exist but reserving judgement until they can be positively proved. All of which makes us sound very cold, clinical and joyless which is not the case.
I don’t think there are any people who are more inquisitive and desperate to learn about the world and be wrong. I find that so much more rewarding than the bland one note argument that a supreme being is responsible for every thing. Removes the need to think..
I am not devoid of the concept that some religion is important to some people’s lives and gives their lives meaning. In some ways I can see the attraction of believing I will live forever. It’s a comforting thought and I have no desire to take that away from people.
As many people have said on here and I repeat now I respect the person and their right to believe what they wish providing it does not harm other people. In much the same way that I can see that homeopathy and crystal healing have no scientific basis if people wish to pay through the nose to experience the placebo effect then good luck to them. I just object to the unearned respect (and some of you will know I am quoting Dawkins now) that they have in our society.
I am not aware that religion is held with much respect in our society anymore. This would be proven by sunday bums-on-seats statistics (5%?). It is worth seeing religion and faith as different subjects (as one of the posts said). I also note that ,
"a supreme being is responsible for every thing. Removes the need to think..a supreme being is responsible for every thing. Removes the need to think.."
This is one particular view of God, there are others, notably that a supreme being (God) is not in fact responsible for everything but that human agency means we as grown ups are responsible for our own mess. Most religions will give a pivotal place to God in a more general scheme of meaning and creation, and also resolving or playing a lesser or greater part in resolving the mess.
I don't think you are cold and clinical and I also don't buy the view that scientific enquiry and religious/faith conviction are not compatible. This would involve a kind of war of fundamentalisms both trying to lay claim to absolute truth.
Syncrat, did you take into account the practising Jews, Muslims, Sikhs, Wiccas etc.? Religion is not just Sunday bums on seats because that would only take into account Christians. If anything, that's partly where the clash between the various ethnic groups arises. Various ethnic groups have a different approach to religion than many of the White British. That's also part of where I think Victoria Climbie was failed by people that just did not factor in the child-witches and spirit possession thing as a genuine, strong belief - everybody has their own truth and you may disagree with it but you have to work on the premise that for the said person it is valid and you need to predict their behaviour on their values, not yours. I spoke to Social Work students and I could not believe how little attention is paid by the Unis to religion and traditions as part of a person's identity., eve though that might place that person on a completely different ontological position to you. Social Workers are no encouraged to learn about these and genuinely factor them in assessments. Some say "oh you can't do that, it's racist" In most forms religion and traditions are just a token question that nobody really bothers to explore.
RP: Syncrat, did you take into account the practising Jews, Muslims, Sikhs, Wiccas etc.? Religion is not just Sunday bums on seats because that would only take into account Christians. If anything, that's partly where the clash between the various ethnic groups arises. Various ethnic groups have a different approach to religion than many of the White British. That's also part of where I think Victoria Climbie was failed by people that just did not factor in the child-witches and spirit possession thing as a genuine, strong belief - everybody has their own truth and you may disagree with it but you have to work on the premise that for the said person it is valid and you need to predict their behaviour on their values, not yours. I spoke to Social Work students and I could not believe how little attention is paid by the Unis to religion and traditions as part of a person's identity., eve though that might place that person on a completely different ontological position to you. Social Workers are no encouraged to learn about these and genuinely factor them in assessments. Some say "oh you can't do that, it's racist" In most forms religion and traditions are just a token question that nobody really bothers to explore.
I think you have hit on something important here, especially in today's multi-ethnic, multicultural, multi-faith British society. It is vital for SWs to have some understanding of backgrounds, beliefs and practices which they may well come across, but which are very different from their own; else it is all too easy to make wrong judgments.
I am an atheist but that is my personal belief, or there lackof. My view is that it could be quite disempowering to belittle or not understand the significance of someone's religion. It depends on the individual but if it brings more meaning and happiness to their lives then surely our role would be to help them as much as possible to explore that. Only when things become dangerous e.g. abuse or dangerous practices should the SW intervene in these matters I think. I can fully understand how belief in something greater than ourselves can help many through troubled times.
In the words of the great Dalia Lama, the whole purpose of religion is to facilitate love and compassion, patience, tolerance, humility and forgiveness. That I respect.
If at first you don't succeed, redefine success.
That's a lovely thought and for many people I believe that is absolutely the case. I personally don't know a religious person who is not a likeable person. But I do think there is a flipside to religion when in the wrong hands and it can be summed up in the following quote.
'Without religion you would still have good people doing good things and bad people doing bad things. For good people to do bad things you need religion'
It is nearly 400 years since the Lancashire witches were burnt. I class myself as Open now when filling in forms because I think there are lots of things that can't be proven one way or the other. Paganism is rooted in the feminine whereas most other religions are perceived as being male dominated so maybe that's why Wicca and other such religions are re-emerging. Maybe after 400 years witches are beginning to be less fearful. Religion shouldn't be about fear or superiority should it?
My father was a Humanist and did more to help other people for no other reason than they needed help than most people I have ever known. He had huge respect for people with their differing belief systems. He just felt that no one was better than anyone else and I try to believe that too
My authority [ Staffordshire] discriminates in favour of Catholic children by allowing their parents a choice of two schools and thus a free bus to the school of their second choice. This certainly peeved me when i had to pay for my children to go on the bus to our second choice.
It's hard I know ...but you have to try.....go on
All people, the contributors of this forum included, are capable of both good and bad actions. Religious and secular ideological structures may limit or encourage one of the other. Generally a desire to be in control (of others) and to acquire power gets in the way. In extreme situations (the worse examples by far being German National Socialism and Russian Stalinist and Leninist Bolshevism ) the most grotesque actions are justified by referral to a higher and greater good.
I've never seen any evidence to suggest that religious people are any more or any less capable of good than any other random person.
The Bible teaches that all human beings are capable of both great good and great evil. However, in reality, most of us commit only rather modest amounts of either, or both!
How true...
After going through several religons and wanting to keep 'Faith' I find that most of the doctrines for the religons seem to just have one thing to say which is 'this is right and the only way'.
I won't start quoting but there are a lot of passages.....
Anything that is called an 'organised religon' is a form of social control. Always has been and always will be. I respect the individual and have always expressed my concern for them (at appropriate moments).
The concern has always been if what every they are believing in is starting to abuse them either through financial, emotional or mental abuse of which there is a lot in all religons. Also segregation and exclusion.
And as a cautionary tale I once worked with an Evangalist in an Ex-Offenders Hostel. She would turn up at 6am and start praying and singing at each of the service users doors. Much to their annoyance and I believe against their right to Peacefull Occupancy, after several managerial words she continued to do it and finished off one night tieing a ribbon around one of the clients bottles of Vodka and telling them that the power of god would not allow them to become drunk through drinking it. As you can imagine the clients then downed the bottle and started to 'kick off' through out the house and with other residents.
When she was eventually told to stop by the Area Manager she denounced us all as Devils and quit her job.
Extreme..... Yes
Over Zealous..... Yes
Misguided....... Yes
Also while I'm on a rant when ever someone uses the ' the ......... teaches us' quote. If you had not learnt the lesson for yourself in the first place you shouldn't quote!
I also think that believing in something can be good is also a falicy in the fact that the person is defering the blame. I've met several users and ex users of Alcholics Anonymous who have said that it was easier to blame the one power than themselves for the situations they got themselves into.
Religon....... Not a good idea.
Belief....... If its needed but understand you do what you do because you want to.
Faith.......... What we all need to end the days hard toil.
JBD: After going through several religons and wanting to keep 'Faith' I find that most of the doctrines for the religons seem to just have one thing to say which is 'this is right and the only way'. I won't start quoting but there are a lot of passages..... Anything that is called an 'organised religon' is a form of social control. Always has been and always will be. I respect the individual and have always expressed my concern for them (at appropriate moments). The concern has always been if what every they are believing in is starting to abuse them either through financial, emotional or mental abuse of which there is a lot in all religons. Also segregation and exclusion. And as a cautionary tale I once worked with an Evangalist in an Ex-Offenders Hostel. She would turn up at 6am and start praying and singing at each of the service users doors. Much to their annoyance and I believe against their right to Peacefull Occupancy, after several managerial words she continued to do it and finished off one night tieing a ribbon around one of the clients bottles of Vodka and telling them that the power of god would not allow them to become drunk through drinking it. As you can imagine the clients then downed the bottle and started to 'kick off' through out the house and with other residents. When she was eventually told to stop by the Area Manager she denounced us all as Devils and quit her job. Extreme..... Yes Over Zealous..... Yes Misguided....... Yes
So one case writes off billions of people worldwide!
Misguided?
Misguided? Yes The same as the believers in The Cotton Candy Mountain.
Hard control and as I said in a previous entry, abuse of power etc is always a risk . On the other hand all members of communities need to give consent (faith ones included) to practices rituals etc at some level. You can always leave?! There will always need to be rules or boundaries in groups or communities. The alternative is a hyper-individualism and all the problems that go with that. the issue may be that you don't agree with the ethos or the world view/theology. You left because of that, fair enough... In agreement with surfer though, why do you need to write off all believers everywhere because of your own experience. The main religions (Judaism, Christianity and Islam) also preach generosity and compassion...
I think this thread is running off the point. Fundimentaly a persons choice of faith must be respected by sw, but just like any opinion or decision it should be challenged when appropriate. Religion should be seen as a choice....does that choice cause distress harm abuse suffering or risk? If so then it should be challenged. If not then its a harmless choice and should be respected.
They may preach generosity and compassion, but seldom do they 'Practice what they preach'.
Check out the Roman Catholic Church during WW2 or failing that go back to the days of the Crusades and even today with the anti homosexual diatribe that is spouted off on regular occassion.
As for leaving the religon may I just say that it was not a case of just walking out of a door, I had to come to terms with losing something that I held dear to me for a long time, but as is often said 'once you have your eyes opened to the world you can never close them again!'
I personally struggled with the idea of the 'sheep' mentality which I believe has also been the cause of a lot of discrimination and a main factor in most religons (believe the words of the book or else you will be damned/lost). The preacher can tell you to 'love your neighbour' but as soon as someone has a different opinion/religon they are Satan incarnate.
As for hyper individualism has there ever been a study of it?
Is there any history of it happening? I don't know hence the question.
And just to finish I do not write off individuals that I come in to contact with who have faith/religon for I would not be able to do my job properly, remember this is all just my opinion, I maybe playing 'devils advocate' but I would not force my ideas on anyone else (this is just a chat room, and I have no ministry or congregation!......unless we make a religon out of Community Care).
JBD
Not sure what point you are trying to make? You seem again to be insulting people without reason ("seldom do they 'Practice what they preach'"). I can understand your personal struggles, but many people have been through similar struggles and come to very different conclusions. At the end of the day the real issue is what is the truth about God, rather than how any particular individual feels about this or that religion.
So I take it that as I am not understood I am now Satan incarnate!?!
And I was not trying to insult 'people' just expressing a point about what I have seen through most religons either from personal experience or from the news or have read about. That being that all religons have some fudemental flaws and that you are always asked to follow a set of guide lines that are very contradictory both in theory and in practice. Check out the old testament versus the New Testament. 'God' changes from being the layer to waste of cities to the ever loving teacher and Father.
Some one once said that the 2 topics you should never discuss are Politics and Religon.
If I have offended you.... again surfer I apologise and again I am only putting forward an opinion, nothing more.
Don't be melodramatic!
I am not in the least offended, just trying to see if you want ot make substantive arguments or just express a personal viewpoint.
I disagree with your second paragraph and I don't see any attempt to support your assertions. To say "all religions have some fundamental flaws and that you are always asked to follow a set of guide lines that are very contradictory both in theory and in practice" is a grossly over the top assertion, which you cannot possibly support evidentially.