In response to:
Bourassa, J. (2009). Psychosocial interventions and mass populations. International Social Work, 52(6), pp. 743-755.

It seems to me that Bourassa comes from a more clinical framework and has seen it as a part of her practice to work toward the reframing of social work methodology. While her critiques of a more medical approach (i.e PTSD) are valid, I feel that the leadership perspective of social work has already moved beyond this place. I wonder though if this conversation would hold more relevancy (and potentially challenge?) with a clinical group of students? Or if the focus of University of Calgary's program has moved away from this over the last few years?

This article raises further questions for me about the role of the individual/family/community in social change. Where is the best place for support? When is it best to support each various grouping? In the context of a disaster, how do we prioritize 'needs' (physical, psychological) without overlooking something based on our 'outsider' lens?

In my understanding at this point, creating, facilitating and maintaining a space for community members (collectively and individually) to maintain dignity through having purpose (and coming to their own understanding of meaning) through rebuilding is essential. Instead of 'facilitating', those working within the context of a disaster situation should focus on opening and holding space for community members to emerge and engage as leaders. What does this mean in the context of emergency provisions? How to hold a balance between service provision (shock treatment) and practice that empowers? How can we break down divisions so that all options include and are based upon principles of empowerment and capacity? So many questions here....

Sometimes I feel that as academics we can lose our way in rhetoric. Clinical, leadership, community development, each practice is triumphed above the others. I strive in for a practice of wholism - and while labels can be helpful in understanding and defining this I continue to ask myself what does wholism mean to me? Right now it means seeing the whole (PIE - Person in Environment -, maintaining a perspective of 'spirit', and opening to 'not knowing' and instead to 'listening'). It is a balance to both 'listen' and 'act', and one that I learn new lessons from each day.

Oppressed people, insecure and with a weak spirit,possess little vision for their future, in effect saying, “What do Iwant? I don’t know: Tell me” (Smith et. al 1997; Smith 1995).

One of the students in our class posted the attached article to our Blackboard discussion in the Tools for Social Change course. I appreciate the approach of the article, and its emphasis on the process of development behind the technologies. No technology nor intervention could work in a situation where people have become imbued with oppressions.  As Friere writes, ‘once oppressed, the mind is lost, the spirit is broken and the body is tied’ (Pedagogy of the Oppressed).  

Oppression can take the form of a deep hatred for self and other. Over the last few years I have worked with women who have been in abusive relationships. In the last session that I participated in, a woman verbally attacked another woman for staying with her abusive partner. This situation brought internalized oppression to a new level for me.  Internalized oppression continues the divide, breaks solidarity and defaces self-efficacy. Where can the cycle be broken? What can be done about internalized oppression within the context of ‘development’ (‘transformation’???) work? What does it mean to work toward capacity, resilience and self-efficacy?   How can this work be started so that it moves from the inside, out?

These questions seem to be at the core of social work practice. In truth, perhaps there is no correct response, only questions, a commitment to presence and the importance of the action/reflection cycle.  Again, I take from the Smith and Marin article when they state;   

“ “Outsiders” can work with “insiders” to generate a hopeful energy, while asking simultaneously important questions about the synergistic negative effects of toxins, malnutrition, beliefs of the “evil eye” and isolation on the health and creativity of local people over time. There is no breakdown or step-by-step recipe for this type of iterative, evolving humanistic work that combines serious inquiry with determined action and loving compassion.” (p.1).

How do we balance ‘serious inquiry’ (questioning) with ‘determined action’  (which seems to imply a sense of directionality). These qualities seem opposed to one another, and yet each seem important to the process. 

No answers here – but more questions. But then again, perhaps questions do become the answers when asked with presence, commitment, and a mind open to learning?

Yesterday, almost out of the blue, a seed planted in early September produced a shoot. This practicum finding business is hard work! A friend of mine has become closely affiliated with UNHCR - USA out of Washington.  I had asked her to look into practicum possibilities for myself and one of my classmates (Musa), and had not heard back for all of these months. Yesterday she called, and said that she had had the chance to speak to someone who is the ED of UNHCR - USA. She gave me this person's personal email, and asked me to contact him for further information! Excitedly, I spoke to Musa, and we strategized about the best way to make and maintain contact with the organization. On Friday afternoon I sent an email introducing ourselves, and asking the contact if he had any further resources or information that could be of help to us. By Friday afternoon, I had received a long, thoughtful and lovely email from the person containing 10 direct emails of UNHCR staff in Washington, Ottawa and Geneva. Wow!!

Musa is going to move forward in contacting these individuals in the hopes of seeking a practicum with them. I am happy to be able to be a part of this connection for him  - as I so hope that Musa is able to find a way to connect his passion with a practicum. It seems clear to me that he is so meant for work with the UNHCR as his life and pursuit of social work come from his involvement with this agency.

As I think about Musa I find myself wondering where my passion is - what is the work that would manifest my life experiences, and allow me to offer the most? I know that this work has something to do with working with women and children (maternal health, childbirth, reproductive health) and that I am passionate in working with prevention, promotion and support of health and well-being. I have tried to be on the intervention side of work and I found it difficult and draining. So what does this mean in the context of an international practicum this summer? What skills do I hope to gain?

-       Direct skills in facilitation/work with women and children
-       An understanding of what ‘women's empowerment program' might mean
-       Some skills that are transferable and useful to women (micro-credit? Maternal well-being, food sovereignty)
-       Skills in translating from the grassroots level to policy level
-       Skills in organizing, supporting programming aimed at women's groups

I am appreciating our work in Thursday night's class with Ary. I feel that I am gaining the skills to be able to express where my skills are and what I can bring to the table as a Social Worker (and everything else that I am!) Before this course I had some fear about expressing my underlying concern that as a  Social Worker I felt that I did not have a valuable skill set to use in International work. I can't set bones, or provide clean water.... So what can I do? This question has become particularly relevant in the context of the tragedy in Haiti. I so want to be able to ‘help' - and yet what does this really mean? What skills do I have? What does it really mean to be of assistance?

In our class, Ary is encouraging us to think of ourselves as the advocates of ‘process', particularly of the ‘human process'. What does this mean to me? That I assist in facilitation, connection making and relationship building. I seek to understand (or at least see) underlying conditions and contexts. This is certainly a part of what International Social Work means - what else can it be for me?

In reading Chitereka's article "Social Work Practice in a Developing Continent: The Case of Africa" I found myself reflecting on the role of social work as a whole. While Chitereka raises many valid arguments about the colonial framework of Social Work in Africa, I think that his points are also important when applied to a wider scope of Social Work practice - including Canadian practice.  Typically social workers have been used or co-opted as agents of state control. I would argue that modern day social workers often play oppressive, and controlling roles especially in the fields of child welfare and health care - although oppressive practice is certainly not limited to these areas. Chitereka's article suggests the following question to me: how can we broaden our practice globally to encourage non - oppressive work? How can we work collaboratively, to liberate and engage local populations. What communities should we work within (this is a question that we need to each answer individually)? Is it possible to see beyond our cultural and political blind-spots? How can we mitigate our blinders if we can not remove them all together? As a whole how do we shift paradigms and make ourselves and the work that we do relevant, engaged and powerful? How can we shift from being agents of control to agents of empowerment (re-empowerment, co-empowerment?)

I certainly do not agree with Chitereka's definition of social work as a "professional approach to ameliorating social problems". What about prevention, community building (referred to in the most beautiful way last night as common-unity building) and health promotion? We must shift toward the building of that which is positive, while noting our challanges. Yes, this change is implied in the shift toward a social development paradigm, and yet is a paradigm shift enough to make the changes that we need? I think it is beyond framework - we need a re-envisioning of what social work means. We have to step beyond defining ourselves based on oppressive institutions and ask ourselves (and more importantly the communities within which we work and live) how we can best be of service. Social work can be a practice of humility and service, but this requires letting go of ‘should's' and instead asking those around us ‘what' and ‘how'.