Read the case study provided below, then write a 2000-word response that showcases your emerging integrative practice approach. In the essay, explain how you would intervene to address the issues presenting in the case scenario, paying particular attention to the following:
- Specialised knowledge (including theories) that you would apply
- The social policy context, and how it shapes your responses
- Constraints that may be imposed by the agency within which you work
- How your personal and professional values shape your response
- Ethical issues (including ethical dilemmas) that you would need to consider
- Constraints imposed by the field of practice you are working in, and the client group(s) that you are engaging with Social work tools or methods that you might apply
Case study:
You are a social worker employed by Services Australia through the graduate employment stream (see https://www.servicesaustralia.gov.au/social-work-stream-national-graduate-program). You can position yourself in either of the following three roles when responding to the case study:
A Centrelink caseworker responsible for assessments and interventions in relation to income support entitlements, wellbeing and safety
A team leader responsible for the supervision and training of a team of Centrelink Customer Service officers
A policy advisor working on policy changes related to Centrelink services and income support
The following case scenario is from: Lancaster, K., Seear, K. & Ritter, A. (2017). Reducing stigma and discrimination for people experiencing problematic alcohol and other drug use. A report for the Queensland Mental Health Commission. National Drug and Alcohol Researc Centre, University of New South Wales & Monash University. https://ndarc.med.unsw.edu.au/sites/default/files/ndarc/resources/Reducing%20stigma%20and%20discrimination%20for%20people%20experiencing%20problematic%20alcohol%20and%20other%20drug%20use.pdf
Joel is 44 years old. Joel moved to Queensland in the late 1990s when his ex-partner decided to move north with their daughter. Joel has two other children with his current partner, but the relationship has been a bit of a rollercoaster. Joel feels like he struggles to fit into the “normal world” and was diagnosed with adult ADHD when he was in his thirties. Joel uses cannabis regularly and methamphetamine occasionally. Joel will use for a few days and then go for weeks at a time without using, and feels that he has control over his use. Lately, Joel has had some good support from a GP who made him feel that he wasn’t a hopeless case, and took the time to listen. It is rare for Joel to feel like someone is willing to help him. Joel was very close to his grandfather who had brought him up for nine years when his Dad wasn’t around. Joel’s grandfather was dying, so Joel went to Centrelink to make an application to access a bereavement payment so he could travel to see him before he died. Joel’s application was refused on the basis that his grandfather wasn’t his immediate family. Joel was very distressed and felt like Centrelink wasn’t taking his application seriously even though he was providing proof of his grandfather’s illness. While the application was being discussed, the worker at Centrelink said “Where do you spend your money? You’re putting it up your arm.” Joel was already feeling very low and upset, knowing that his grandfather was so ill. He was angered by the worker’s insinuation that he wanted the money for drugs and refused to leave the Centrelink office. Eventually they let Joel use the phone to call his grandfather at the hospital. They only spoke for a few minutes. That was the last time Joel got to speak to his grandfather, who died soon after.
Joel never made a formal complaint about the worker’s comments. He was too distressed. He never went back to that particular Centrelink office, though.
Joel is angry about how he is treated at services that are meant to be providing support for people who need it: “They’re supposed to be helping poor people that are in those circumstances. You know what I mean?”