We recognize that there are social workers who conduct critically important work every day. It is also apparent that the boundaries of social work as a profession are unclear (Hill, Fogel, Donaldson, & Erickson, Citation2017). We also know that there is a smaller subset of social workers, degreed and often licensed professionals, who engage in practices that may fall beyond those fuzzy borders. These workers’ practices would not receive universal acclaim and, in some instances, might appear highly questionable. That said, some of these practices seem to have proponents among social work scholars (e.g., Benn, Gioia, & Seabury, Citation2009; Raheim & Lu, Citation2014). The question we focus on here is that Should social workers be engaged in these practices? A useful historical marker is the work of Specht and Courtney (Citation1994) who provided a comprehensive examination of mission drift in the field. In the first chapter of their volume they asserted that “[w]e believe that social work has abandoned its mission to help the poor and oppressed and to build community” (Specht & Courtney, Citation1994, p. 4; cf., Chernus, Citation1995). They conclude with a “proposal for a community-based system of social care” which sounds similar to the recent Community Led Support approach undertaken in the UK (Bown, Carrier, & Jennings, Citation2017, p. 152).
Our goal here is to provide some evidence to inform reconsideration of Specht and Courtney’s work as well as subsequent contributions. Over the past 15 years, we have gathered examples of “ideas” and “activities” associated with social workers as examples of possible deviations from the mission of social work (for a masters level program evaluation course in social work). Pignotti and Thyer explored multiple facets of these phenomena in a very systematic fashion (e.g., Pignotti & Thyer, Citation2009a, Citation2009b, Citation2012, Citation2015; Thyer & Pignotti, Citation2010, Citation2015, Citation2016). Just as Specht and Courtney, as well as Pignotti and Thyer likely concluded, it would be difficult if not impossible to arrive at an estimate regarding the prevalence of these ideas and activities across the entire profession. We would agree with such a conclusion. We will present data that are not only informed by the aforementioned authors but also that offer a slightly different view of these phenomena by focusing on ideas and activities that appear to go beyond the fuzzy boundaries of typical practice.
A recent set of Internet searches (July–September 2017) confirmed some elements of our prior list of examples and added many new listings (see ). How were these searches conducted? Because we were looking for practitioner web sites and there is no specialized database for that purpose, we employed a series of Google searches using search strings like (MSW or CSW or ACSW or RSW or LCSW or LICSW or LMSW) and (some term like healing or angels). In addition, we used content that we discovered in some of those results as one might when doing snowball sampling or reference harvesting in systematic reviews. In addition, we scanned a few conference web sites (e.g., https://www.ep-conference.org/learning-labs-2017) and practitioner directories (e.g., http://www.saratogaintegrativepractitioners.com/). We did not specify a-priori inclusion criteria as one might in a systematic review. Given the preliminary nature of this effort we used what one might characterize as a Justice Stewart Potter decision rule: we knew what was questionable when we saw it. Obviously readers may disagree.
Table 1. Practice Examples Associated with Social Workers Including Related URL Links (N = 418).
Some of the entries in are specific interventions, some indicate previous training of the provider (e.g., certifications or degrees), some specify offers of training for others, others are guiding philosophies or conceptualizations and still others refer to equipment. URLs are provided for the examples that turned up early in our searches. The authors re-checked each entry within in December 2017 prior to publication. A few sites were eliminated as they were not functioning and some new sites that turned up in this process were added. The volatility of the Internet means that we cannot guarantee that a site will be functioning when you read this. In that our focus was on the existence of these phenomena, some practitioners show up multiple times in the list as they described more than a single phenomenon on their site. If any of the listed practitioners, or readers, think an example should be removed from or added to our list, please email the lead author.
Our assumption is that the list in is unfinished. It is not an estimate of the overall prevalence of these practices in social work over this 15-year period. It is a descriptive array that provides an example of each of these phenomena appearing on the Internet. We think that these entries suffice to move this discussion forward. There may have been no others to locate or there may have been many more examples. By the time you read this, some of these social workers may have abandoned these activities. Conversely, others will have not. Some of these social workers may be highly trained and competent in delivering these techniques they are promoting. Maybe more of these interventions have been and/or continue to be included in MSW curricula than we realize. It might be the case that some of these practitioners have been encouraged by pro-spiritual and/or pro-religious faculty (cf., Kvarfordt, Sheridan, & Taylor, Citation2017). Perhaps some of these entries in are simply phenomena we have never heard of because of our own narrowness. Some of the practices in might conceivably represent cultural sensitivity rather than professional deviance. Maybe some of these interventions have a rigorous evidentiary basis or maybe they do not despite claiming that status (cf., Gambrill, Citation2016). It could be that Advanced Integrative Therapy can successfully prevent and treat cancer (http://www.aitherapy.org/wp/training_for_therapists/schedule-and-registration/other-seminars/) or perhaps it is associated with greater risk of death (e.g., Johnson, Park, Gross, & Yu, Citation2017).
Given that many readers may have heard the admonition that we should listen to practitioners in the field to improve the quality and relevance of our teaching, perhaps you should consider including one or more items in in your upcoming courses. Have one or more licensing bodies seen examples of these activities and concluded that they are acceptable? What about professional organizations? For example, NASW-NYC was offering a CE workshop on Brainspotting in September 2017 (http://www.naswnyc.org/event/Brainspotting). Will the field look more like if the micro-credentialing fad takes off in higher education (cf., Young, Citation2016)?
Maybe you can fit more angels on the head of a pin than we imagined and some of these interventions will become core elements of social work in the future. Perhaps one or more of these phenomena will completely replace prior conceptualizations and/or interventions in the social behavioral sciences. Perhaps these practitioners will lead the field to greater intellectual diversity and allow social work to better fulfill its “mission to help the poor and oppressed and to build community” (Specht & Courtney, Citation1994, p. 4), or maybe…
We began by asking if social workers should be engaged in these practices. If your answer is no, then what will you do about it?
References
- Bown, H., Carrier, J., & Jennings, Y. (2017). What works in community led support? Findings and lessons from local approaches and solutions for transforming adult social care (and health) services in England, Wales and Scotland. Retrieved from: https://www.ndti.org.uk/uploads/files/What_Works_in_Community_Led_Support_First_Evaluation_Report_Dec_17.pdf
- Chernus, L. A. (1995). Social workers: Fallen angels or mere mortals? Clinical Social Work Journal, 23, 375–382.
- Gambrill, E. (2016). Is social work evidence-based? Does saying so make it so? Ongoing challenges in integrating research, practice and policy. Journal of Social Work Education, 52:(sup1), S110–S125.
- Gant, L., Benn, R., Gioia, D., & Seabury, B. (2009). Incorporating integrative health services in social work education. Journal of Social Work Education, 45, 407–425.
- Hill, K., Fogel, S., Donaldson, L. P., & Erickson, E. (2017). State definitions of social work practice: Implications for our professional identity. Journal of Evidence-Informed Social Work, 4, 266–279.
- Johnson, S. B., Park, H. S., Gross, C. P., & Yu, J. B. (2017). Use of alternative medicine for cancer and its impact on survival. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 110, 1–4.
- Kvarfordt, C. L., Sheridan, M. J., & Taylor, O. (2017). Religion and spirituality in social work curriculum: A survey of Canadian educators. The British Journal of Social Work, 47, 1–19.
- Pignotti, M., & Thyer, B. A. (2009a). Use of novel unsupported and empirically supported therapies by licensed clinical social workers: An exploratory study. Social Work Research, 33, 5–17.
- Pignotti, M., & Thyer, B. A. (2009b). Some comments on energy psychology: A review of the evidence: Premature conclusions based on incomplete evidence? Psychotherapy, Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 46, 257–261.
- Pignotti, M., & Thyer, B. A. (2012). Novel unsupported and empirically supported therapies: Patterns of usage among licensed clinical social workers. Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy, 40, 331–349.
- Pignotti, M., & Thyer, B. A. (2015). New age and related novel unsupported therapies in mental health practice. In S. O. Lilienfeld, S. J. Lynn, & J. M. Lohr (Eds.), Science and pseudoscience in clinical psychology (pp. 191–209). New York: Guilford.
- Raheim, S., & Lu, J. J. (2014). Preparing MSW students for integrative mind–body-spirit practice. Clinical Social Work Journal, 42, 288–301.
- Specht, H., & Courtney, M. (1994). Unfaithful angels: How social work has abandoned its mission. New York: The Free Press.
- Thyer, B. A., & Pignotti, M. (2010). Science and pseudoscience in developmental disabilities: Guidelines for social workers. Journal of Social Work in Disability and Rehabilitation, 9, 110–129.
- Thyer, B. A., & Pignotti, M. G. (2015). Science and pseudoscience in social work practice. New York, NY: Springer.
- Thyer, B. A., & Pignotti, M. G. (2016). The problem of pseudoscience in social work continuing education. Journal of Social Work Education, 52, 136–146.
- Young, J. R. (September 26, 2016). Online “micro-master’s” programs extend their reach. Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from: https://www.chronicle.com/article/Online-Micro-Master-s-/237836