Some Questions we've been asking:
Our goal as radical social workers is to challenge the "profession" of the social work. Working to help clients is not enough, we must also work for substantive change. What distinguishes us from mainstream social workers are some of the questions that we ask. Here are some questions that our group has been thinking about:
It's been suggested that the real problem faced by most people who receive social services is poverty, and other issues are just symptoms of that overriding issue. If this is true, what can we as social workers do to address economic disparities?
In what ways do social workers play a role in social control, allowing unjust social and economic structures to be perpetuated by ameliorating their worst effects? How can we avoid doing this?
The movement for professionalization is resulting in social workers becoming increasingly middle class. Does professionalism distance us from our clients and hurt our ability to serve them effectively? What are some ways to overcome the class disparities between ourselves and our clients?
How can we effectively work in solidarity with our clients rather than advocate for them?
In what ways do "professional services" provided in response to community needs actually decrease the capacity of the communities themselves to meet those needs?
Social services are increasingly funded on a per-client basis, and require demonstrable outcomes. The community development and social transformation work we like to advocate often has no identifiable "client". How can we build institutional support for this type of work? What methods can we use to document outcomes?
What does good radical practice look like? How is it different from conventional good practice?
