R: CHILD-MALTREATMENT-RESEARCH-L digest 1353

["Oddone Virginio" <oddovir@xxxxxxxxx>]

Linda,

        the pattern you depict is the same not only among CPS workers (and
their equivalent in other countries), but of ALL "practitioners" in any of
the therapeutic professions. It is strange that it occurs in professional
areas whose operators are expected - and ought - to be very rational,
evidence-based etc.. I do find it here in Turin, not only among our
equivalent of CPS workers and judges dealing with children problem, but
among doctors as well, and in far away areas: for instance, when trying to
change existing, age-old informed consent practices among the orthopaedics
of the Traumatological Hospital of which I'm the medico legal consultant.
What is most absurd, is the fact that such resistances occur even when one
is trying to offer greater protection not just to the "client", but also to
the specific operator (in my latter case, the orthopaedic surgeon).

Courage too is another issue. There is a beautiful american expression I'm
often quoting in my courses: "Stand up and be counted". It seems that even
in your area it is still an exception instead of a rule.

Virginio.


****************************

Virginio Oddone, MD
V. A. Avogadro 6
10121 - Torino (Italy)
e-mail: oddovir@ipsnet.it
----- Original Message -----
From: PFONNER, LINDA <14D691@dfa.state.ny.us>
To: Child Maltreatment Researchers
<CHILD-MALTREATMENT-RESEARCH-L@cornell.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 4:32 PM
Subject: RE: CHILD-MALTREATMENT-RESEARCH-L digest 1353


> As a trainer of CPS workers in CA, I see the issue somewhat differently. I
> find an incredible resistance to look at the research. Social workers as a
> group want to make clinical judgments, very often based in myth and
clinical
> lore rather than guided by research. Workers have told us, " we don't want
> to hear the statistics, or the citations, just tell us how to do it." When
> confronted with bias in decision making, rather than look at their
decision
> making process, they frequently become defensive. When research does not
> support current practice, they do not want to engage in a process of
> challenging "the way it has always been done" but complain about
supervisors
> not letting them, administration not letting them, public pressure not
> letting them - anything but taking personal responsibility for change.
Last
> year  NASW published an article in a newsletter stating that social work
as
> a profession was becoming marginalized because we are not allowing
research
> to guide our practice. Stress and burnout is an issue, but personal
> responsibility is too. I remember a class in which social workers went on
> and on about how impotent they felt - (they sounded like battered women -
> except they had far more choices) Whenever anyone in the class suggested a
> course of action that would involve some personal courage, or commitment
to
> do anything other than whine about it, they were met with such statements
as
> " Oh, but my supervisor would become very angry if I did that." Social
> worker attitudes do impact how they treat clients, but if they are
unwilling
> to take risks, to implement change, to show courage in the face of
community
> pressure, how can they expect their clients to make the massive changes we
> demand with far fewer resources than we have.
>
>  Niki Delson at Delson-Kokish Associates, P.O. Box 476, Trinidad, CA 95570
>
> I have to point out that most of us (in the USA, at least) work for county
> or state governments as civil servants; we have absolutely no right to
alter
> policy or law.  At the worker level we are impotent to make change in
> policy; all we can do is deal with the structure we have as best as we
can,
> and that knocking our heads against that stone wall is the usual cause of
> worker burnout and resignation.  Yes, we can attempt to lobby our
superiors
> and the legislature...but when would we sleep?  Yes, we feel helpless.
> Local, state and federal law rarely make good social work practice.  And
> regardless of how altruistic the profession is, as a whole, as individuals
> we have legitimate and significant interests in job security and continued
> employment so we can care for our own families, too.  Not too many of us
are
> going to buck the system very hard if it means risking our careers.  The
> changes we ask our clients to make are demonstrably for their own benefit;
> in the most dramatic cases, the carrot is that they will get their
children
> back.  To learn how to not be a battered spouse, how not to maltreat your
> children...these are not actions that offend community standards.  When we
> make unilateral changes in our practice, violating policy, we risk losing
> our jobs.  The comparison at the end of your post does not hold.
>
> As far as workers not wanting to deal with the studies and
statistics...I'm
> college educated, although not in social work.  I have a BA.  You can
> publish all the statistics and articles you want; I can't implement them
> alone.  There are far too many articles published in a year for anyone to
> have read them all; how do I decide, by myself, which ones I should read,
> and, of those, which ones I should use?  And what good does it do our
> community if I do it, but the other 80 CPS investigative workers and the
> dozens of workers in Children's Services don't?  These decisions need to
be
> made at the administrative levels.
>
> Linda R. Pfonner
> Child Protective Services
> 478 Main Street, Suite 321
> Buffalo NY  14202-4103
> 716-858-8803
> 14D691@dfa.state.ny.us
>
> Those who would give up essential Liberty,
> to purchase a little temporary Safety,
> deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
>        ---Benjamin Franklin
>                  The Papers of Ben Franklin, ed. L. W. Labaree
>
>
> > ----------
> > From: Child Maltreatment
> > Researchers[SMTP:CHILD-MALTREATMENT-RESEARCH-L@cornell.edu]
> > Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2001 12:01 AM
> > To: Child Maltreatment Researchers
> > Subject: CHILD-MALTREATMENT-RESEARCH-L digest 1353
> >
> > <<Message: Microsoft Exchange Message>>
> >
> >     CHILD-MALTREATMENT-RESEARCH-L Digest 1353
> >
> > Topics covered in this issue include:
> >
> >   1) Re: measuring stress levels child welfare workers (who cares!)
> > by "vernon brooks carter" <vbrooks@nh.ultranet.com>
> >   2) Re: Domestic violence effects on parenting
> > by "Anna Hagemeister" <AHAGEMEI@che.umn.edu>
> >   3) RE: Who cares?
> > by "J. Randall Webber" <rwebber@chestnut.org>
> >   4) Re: measuring stress levels child welfare workers (who cares!)
> > by revoredux <praxis1@home.com>
> >   5) FW: Instruments to measure stress
> > by "Hill, Sean" <shill@co.greene.oh.us>
> >   6) RE: CHILD-MALTREATMENT-RESEARCH-L digest 1352
> > by "PFONNER, LINDA" <14D691@dfa.state.ny.us>
> >   7) In Critical Demand: Social work in Canada
> > by revoredux <praxis1@home.com>
> >   8) chat with Dr. Bruce Perry
> > by "Niki Delson" <niki@delko.net>
> >   9) RE: measuring stress levels child welfare workers (who cares!)
> > by "Niki Delson" <niki@delko.net>
> >  10) Re: measuring stress levels child welfare workers (who cares!)
> > by MariaR1947@aol.com
> >
>