When I started working on the topic of power and powerlessness in social work, I did not have many questions. It seemed self-evident that a social worker would be aware of his or her professional power and know how to use it wisely in terms of purposeful work with clients. In a closer examination of the literature, however, power in the context of social work turned out to be a controversial, even problematic topic: There is a lot of talk about power in general - but more silence about power in social work. Therefore, it was necessary to investigate this issue.
In dealing with power, we must also consider its counterpart, powerlessness. Powerlessness always means the absence of one's own power. The fact that members of the helping professions, but first and foremost clients, can feel powerless, helpless, is a recognized and accepted feeling.
The task here must be to find ways out of one's own powerlessness so as not to be at its mercy, to learn to accept it as one's own limits, and to show the client ways to overcome his powerlessness.
Power is rarely discussed; it is pushed away. Power in the social work field is often seen as something negative. "Thus, 'power' is immediately equated with 'abuse of power', with a condition that must be overcome as quickly as possible" (Stiels - Glenn 1996, p. 16). Power is denied.
Assuming the existence of power in social work, and indeed its justification, this thesis will deal primarily with asking why. After defining and explaining the terms, the second chapter deals with possible causes, reasons, their consequences and the problem of the abuse of power.
Powerlessness as the counterpart of power and as a feeling that can be professionally countered by social workers, be it their own powerlessness or that of the client, is addressed in chapter 3.
Concluding theses on possibilities and limits for a responsible use of professional power conclude my remarks in the last chapter.
Table of contents
1. Introduction
2. Power and social work – (not) a contradiction
2.1 Definition of power and conceptual explanations
2.2 Power in social work
2.3 Dealing with power
2.3.1 Power in the self-image of the social worker
2.3.2 Power and responsibility
2.3.3 Abuse of power in social work
3. Powerlessness in social work
3.1 The powerlessness of helping
3.2 Facing powerlessness
4. Concluding theses for a responsible use of power in social work
5. Conclusion
Bibliography
1. Introduction
When I started working on the topic of power and powerlessness in social work, I did not have many questions. It seemed self-evident that a social worker would be aware of his or her professional power and know how to use it wisely in terms of purposeful work with clients. In a closer examination of the literature, however, power in the context of social work turned out to be a controversial, even problematic topic: There is a lot of talk about power in general - but more silence about power in social work. Therefore, it was necessary to investigate this issue.
In dealing with power, we must also consider its counterpart, powerlessness. Powerlessness always means the absence of one's own power. The fact that members of the helping professions, but first and foremost clients, can feel powerless, helpless, is a recognized and accepted feeling.
The task here must be to find ways out of one's own powerlessness so as not to be at its mercy, to learn to accept it as one's own limits, and to show the client ways to overcome his powerlessness.
Power is rarely discussed; it is pushed away. Power in the social work field is often seen as something negative. "Thus, 'power' is immediately equated with 'abuse of power', with a condition that must be overcome as quickly as possible" (Stiels - Glenn 1996, p. 16). Power is denied.
Assuming the existence of power in social work, and indeed its justification, this thesis will deal primarily with asking why. After defining and explaining the terms, the second chapter deals with possible causes, reasons, their consequences and the problem of the abuse of power.
Powerlessness as the counterpart of power and as a feeling that can be professionally countered by social workers, be it their own powerlessness or that of the client, is addressed in chapter 3.
Concluding theses on possibilities and limits for a responsible use of professional power conclude my remarks in the last chapter.
2. Power and social work – (not) a contradiction
At the beginning of this paper, I would like to present four basic theses that I developed during the theoretical discussion of the topic and that are reflected throughout the paper. They also partly reflect the tenor of the literature reviewed. It remains open whether they inspire contradiction in the reader or find confirmation.
1. A misconception of social work leads to denial of professional power.
2. Fear of assuming responsibility in the context of professional power prevents accepting and consciously applying power.
3. Social workers define themselves as powerless (rather than powerful) social workers.
4. Power tempts to abuse power in the everyday work of social workers.
2.1 Definition of power and conceptual explanations
The central aspect of this work will be the handling of professional power in social work. Therefore, it is necessary to establish what the term power means, what associations it evokes. A lot has been written about power, there are theories of power and concepts of power or to speak with the words of Theodor Fontane "that is a wide field...". I have therefore sifted through the abundance of literature on the problem of power in the context of social work, edited it and thus narrowed it down.
Nevertheless, I would like to start with a more general understanding of power as it can be found in the Brockhaus Encyclopedia. The word power here also means force, ability and "...serves first of all to define more closely a social relationship which is characterized by the fact that persons or institutions are able to influence the behavior of other persons or institutions also independently of their will. In this context, power is more unspecific than other relationships of influence such as authority, force, domination, power, persuasion, or coercion" (Brockhaus Enzyklopädie, 1990, p. 672).
The best-known, albeit fuzzy, definition comes from the sociologist Max Weber. According to his understanding, power means "every chance within a social relationship to assert one's own will even against opposition, regardless of what this chance is based on" (Weber 1976, p. 89). It should be emphasized here that Weber understands power as a chance, i.e. a possibility, and leaves open whether this becomes action. Also, he does not make any restriction regarding possible means or criteria of power. Both approaches emphasize unanimously that through power the behavior of other persons can be influenced independently of their will. Furthermore, both definitions assume that at least two subjects belong to the power relationship; the one who possesses power and his counterpart, on whom power is exercised.
Niklas Luhmann, as a systems theorist, understands power rather as a symbolically generalized communication medium and thus means the possibility of selecting an alternative for others by one's own decision and thus reducing complexity (cf. Luhmann 1988, p. 12).
Power is often used synonymously with terms such as violence, domination or control. Words such as omnipotence and state power or striving for power, power struggle and abuse of power usually evoke negative associations and feelings. One thinks of oppression and dominance. On the other hand, power in a positive sense can also mean ability and capability, one can "make a difference by acting". In the sense of the English "power", power is related to strength and energy, or, based on the Latin "potentia", power also means possibility.
Furthermore, forms of power are differentiated in the literature; this leads, for example, to distinctions between power to act, power to define, or power to limit.
How power shapes itself in the context of social work will be discussed and elaborated later in the chapter.
2.2 Power in social work
The question of whether power and social work are not a contradiction in terms may seem justified at first glance. Social work is helping, is supporting. Fiedler speaks of "dialogues free of domination", of " selfless help", thinking "...thus of areas in which power actually has no place" (Fiedler 2002, p. 1).
On closer inspection, according to Fiedler, it must quickly become clear that power does exist in social work. On the one hand, social workers are to a large extent active in organizations and institutions in which structural power is given from the outset (cf. Fiedler 2002, p. 1). On the other hand, he points to the "... power of definition and decision-making (that) social workers have in many areas with regard to their clients" (ibid.).
In Schlüter's book "Sozialphilosophie für helfende Berufe" (Social Philosophy for the Helping Professions), power is understood in a broader sense as a capacity for realization, and social work and power are brought into a direct relationship. Starting from the observation that power can firstly be exchanged with each other, secondly instrumentalized and thirdly structuralized, he leads over to the consideration that social work is thus constantly confronted with the questions of superior power, of power distribution and power control (cf. Schlüter 1995, p. 115). Schlüter goes even further by formulating that social work "at least in its professional form ... owes its very existence to a publicly recognized power imbalance of many kinds ..." (ibid.).
In social work, therefore, one is always dealing with power relations. It exists simply because of the structures in which social workers work, e.g. in the form of the authority or the office. Power also exists in the form of the client. This can be the state, which socially legitimizes the power, or directly the client, who gives power through his order. By demanding help that is due to him, a client also possesses and exercises power.
In particular, power is found in the person of the social worker himself. Social and professional status confers power, but it is primarily the knowledge, experience, and tools with which a social worker acts that empower him or her. For example, if I as a social worker am charged with determining a client's need, I have power in doing so through my existing discretionary powers.
My knowledge of the laws, mastery of diagnostics and methodology, how I conduct and steer consultations or conversational processes, put me in a position of power. Knowing general causes, backgrounds and connections enable me to grasp and assess the client's problem situation, as well as his strengths, resources and limitations.
His need for help gives me power.
All these aspects can lead to an imbalance of power within the helping relationship, between social worker and client, at least initially (cf. Schlüter 1995, p. 116). Already here, in my opinion, the helper is called upon to be aware of his power and the imbalance. On the one hand, in order to transform the dependence of the other person into independence in a goal-oriented way and with the right means, but also in order not to let the relationship become a one-sided relationship of domination, which no longer corresponds to a basic partnership intention (cf. ibid.).
[...]
- Quote paper
- Franziska Brandt (Author), 2005, Dealing With Power in Social Work, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/1190427
-
-
-
-
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
-
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
-
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
-
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
-
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
-
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X.