Radical Social Work

Hilde Bloemen, in International Encyclopedia of the Social &

Behavioral Sciences (Second Edition), 2015
Traditions from the 1970s
From the 1970s, radical social work or the ‘old’ radical social
work approach focused mainly on Marxist social theories. It
criticized the capitalist system and traditional social work and
launched a call for changes that enabled social work to
change capitalist society, favor the working class and
eliminate its pathologizing approach to individuals needing
help. Social work practice, i.e., casework, was criticized
because of its individual approach perpetuating the social
order, to promote instead, community work as a collective
approach (Bailey and Brake, 1975; Dominelli, 1990; Fook,
2002; Ferguson, 2008). The aim was not to eliminate
casework, but to raise awareness of its deficit approach to
service users (Dominelli, 1988). This awareness and the
simultaneous coming together of critical social workers,
service users, students, and academics was of vital
importance. Within the current or ‘new’ radical social work,
sociocritical theories provide a theoretical frame alongside
social and sociological theories. Initially, critical theory was a
tradition of thinking (‘theorizing’) referring to Marx and Hegel,
while emancipating itself from this tradition. A core principle of
critical theory is analyzing society holistically (relationships
and systems) rather than as a collection of individuals. It
focuses on structural power relations and models of
domination while seeking structural change, and encouraging
positive ideals (Laermans, 2009). Within this tradition
dominant power relations are analyzed, giving social workers
and clients/service users the opportunity to develop critical
awareness for undertaking critical social work practice
(Mullaly, 2001; Fook, 2002; Ferguson, 2008).
Radical social work since the 1970s has been a strong
movement. Rather than disappearing, it finds roots in
emancipatory social movements concerning women's
rights and the oppression of specific social groups on the
basis of ‘race,’ ethnicity, disabilities, age, and sexual
orientation (Dominelli, 2002c). Radical Marxist theories of
social work practice were critiqued for not having models for
practice (Dominelli and McLeod, 1989). Neoliberalism from
the 1990s marked a shift in the political climate and required
engagement with professionalization and managerialism.
Instead of equality and solidarity, contemporary politics focus
on the strength of the individual and the idea of the free
market (Hoogerwerf, 2001) and impacts adversely on what
social workers can do (Dominelli, 1996, 1997). Also
psychosocial discourses from the 1970s alongside Rogers'
client-centered practice continue to promote human potential
and growth (Payne, 2005).
In the first decade of the twenty-first century, radical or critical
social work prevails again. Environmental- and climate
movements, as well as anticapitalist, antiglobalist, and antiwar
movements predominate, given the global crises (Dominelli,
2009, 2012; Ferguson, 2008). Under the influence
of postmodernism and social constructionism of the 1990s,
critical ideas have prospered and led to the reformulation of
Marxist social work, utilizing critical theories of society, and
the practice of empowerment and advocacy (Payne, 2005). A
keystone of the radical, structural or critical approach is the
focus on social structures and ‘not blaming the individual
victim’ for problems (Fook, 2002). These approaches do not
take the social order for granted.
Radical social work, the critical movement of social workers in
the 1970s, occurred rather moderately in Flanders. Most
social workers focused more on the external and societal
causes of the problems their clients faced. Accordingly, social
workers engaged in the battle to tackle and change these
societal causes, rather than accept that problems would be
solved on an individual level (Verzelen, 2005). Societal
critiques illustrate the highly unequal distribution of resources
and chances to purchase economic, political and cultural
goods (income, power, knowledge, status). These critique
produced alternative and politicized social work, social action,
education (awareness), and social work. Politicized work is
primarily structural and environmentally based, and entails a
collectivization of the issues instead of their individualization.
Characteristic of this perspective is social workers' preference
for client choice and their activation through externalizing
societal and social problems instead of internalizing them
(Snellen, 2002). The dominant attitude of social workers is
that they show solidarity with the client, that they struggle
against the internalization of social problems, and that they
fight structural causes, not least, within their own institutions.
The conflict within their own social work organizations is
addressed by paying attention to the role their
superiors/managers have in limiting clients in the interest of
reproducing their power as owners and/or managers siding
with the ruling interests (Verzelen, 2005).
The emancipatory approach takes this societal critique a step
further. Society is not just a combination of external problem-
causing factors. It is also within the person, a factor of one's
identity. This identity is reproduced by the processes
of socialization and patterns of human interaction. Discipline
and the power to discipline are general societal phenomena
which occur both within societal institutions (state, capitalism)
and interactions occurring on the microlevel (Snellen, 2002).
According to Snellen (2002), emancipatory work (cf the
empowerment-approach from the 1990s), aims to help people
to control their own lives, discover their own possibilities, have
their voices heard, and fight situations of inequality and
oppression. When taking on the problem/situation, their focus
lies with the client, as an involved ‘expert’ actor. Now, more
than ever, social workers have to immerse themselves in the
causes of people's problems, working informally and being
with or deeply involved in poor people's situations, and acting
to improve situations and make their work matter (Van Riet
and Wouter, 2002).