Beyond the dichotomies of cultural and political relativism: arguing the case for a social justice based ‘global social work’ definition

Abstract

The Social Work World Congress in Melbourne in 2014 will discuss a new internationally agreed definition of social work. The present definition, passed by the International Federation of Social Work in 2000 and the International Association of Schools of Social Work in 2001, is being reviewed because of its strong commitment to social justice. In this article I argue that this commitment is vital and that, furthermore, it has enabled practitioners to act in ways that are ethical and supportive of marginalised and oppressed groups in the face of assault from political parties, media and the state. The debate over a new international definition of social work reveals the conflictual and contested nature of social work – as a practice that is necessarily ‘political’ within oppressive and class-divided societies. A failure to acknowledge this has, in the past, led some social work organisations and practitioners to act in ways that are oppressive and supportive of existing power relations at the expense of poor and marginalised people. The debate about the international definition of social work, therefore, is vital for our understanding of the nature and role of social work in the present world.

Practising social work in a ‘stateless state’; an exploration of the views, experiences and practice of children and family social workers in the West Bank and East Jerusalem

“…Secondly, the significance of broader political and structural aspects of social work emerged as a central theme, which was highlighted by all interviewees. This resonates with epistemological debates about defining social work theory and practice (Ioakimidis, 2013). As it was not the intention of the authors to undertake a politically driven piece of research we tried to let the data set "speak for itself".…”

Shifting the Ground in Nepali Social Work

“…Given this backdrop, Nepali social work cannot afford to be politically neutral and conservative in fulfilling its commitment of social justice and the emancipation of the indigenous and oppressed people. Further, Nepali social workers need a closer look to analyse imperialistic aspects of global and international social work and must employ humanistic, democratic, and justice values to excel a bottom-up participatory rather than a top-down professional model that acknowledges and develops alliances with 'right holders' (i.e., beneficiaries and clients; Ioakimidis, 2013;Tanaka, 2011;Yadav, 2017a).…”

The global social work definition: Ontology, implications and challenges

“…Equally so, the extent of socialist-collectivist implications in the new definition is not clearly articulated, for instance how far along the collective path the new definition proposes travel. These uncertainties can infer the development of an ‘eclectic definition that could be interpreted in various convenient ways’ (Ioakimidis, 2013, p. 196). However, we believe that certain shifts in thinking and power are clearly apparent and that the extent of these changes is what requires more critical discussion and debate.…”