Chris Jones: State Social Work and the Working Class, Macmillan, 1983, £4.95. Mike Simpkin: Trapped Within Welfare, Macmillan, 2nd edition, 1983, £4.95.
[These two books were both published] in 1983. What is clear, however, is that the fragile veil of social democratic ideology which has been the hallmark of the post-war welfare state has been torn apart; the coercive tilt of the state is possible only in its earliest infancy. Already there have been massive reductions in the more benign aspects of the personal social services (for example, in the home-help services and in support for the mentally handicapped and their families). We have seen too an escalation of the controlling aspects of welfare (for example, in the introduction, in the Criminal Justice Act 1982, of a 'curfew' for some juvenile delinquents).
Such trends provoke consternation for socialists working in welfare agencies and pose complex questions both about the aspects of welfare we need to defend and about the kind of alternative social policies we should promote. Only a decade ago social work literature could be more or less divided into two opposing factions. First — and overwhelmingly dominant then as now — an array of consensual and paternalist perspectives on social problems which remain largely unquestioned and still underpin most social work practice. The second and opposing trend saw social work as an unequivocal weapon of class domination and control. The limitation of this approach lay partly in its small number of adherents but also in its exclusive emphasis on the negative aspects of welfare work. Socialist practitioners had to look very hard to find sustenance for any kind of more positive yet critical practice.
Faced with increasing attacks on welfare services, socialists have had to rethink many aspects of their traditional analysis and in the last few years there has been much discussion about ways in which consumers and practitioners can develop oppositional forms from within agencies themselves. The shifts reflect too, as Chris Jones points out, the entry into welfare work of large numbers of people who have a more politicised approach to the job. More recent entrants are likely to have had personal experience of 'oppositional cultures' for example, the women's movement, community action campaigns and student protest. The arrogant confidence and 'noblesse oblige' character of social work has cracked a little and the consequent casting about for new rationales has given rise to an array of literature which attempts to delineate forms of radical [practice] [illegible] a decade ago.
It is on this somewhat contradictory terrain that both of these books make significant contributions. Although they cover similar ground, the issues explored are sufficiently different to make for complementary reading. The greatest strength of Jones' book lies in the attention and detail he gives to the historical antecedents of contemporary social work. In contrast, the force of Simpkin's arguments derives in large part from his own personal experience as a social worker in a psychiatric hospital; his book is much more of an inside view than Jones' (though the latter has been a practising social worker). Simpkin provides us with some powerful ammunition for refuting right-wing and liberal arguments that radical perspectives are unrealistic and fail to take humane account of individual needs and differences.
Jones argues that the state has always had an essentially problematic relationship with social work; it needs social work both to deal with its social 'nuisances' and the economically dependent, and to offer society some kind of testimony of its concern for socially vulnerable groups. His careful analysis identifies those sections of the working class which have been labelled by welfare agencies as 'inadequate', 'feckless' or 'dependent'. Such labels deny, however, the specific material characteristics of groups who have a particularly fragile and weak relationship to the labour market. The elderly and the handicapped are defined as 'dependent' and so, in a capitalist economy devoted to profit, receive inadequate services and resources. Similarly, juvenile delinquents and so-called 'problem families' are deemed to be nuisances because of the financial costs and moral threat they pose the state.
Jones suggests that the state has drawn a 'cordon sanitaire' around social work clients and, by focussing on personal pathology rather than collective oppression, divides them off from other sections of the working class. The twin processes of marginalisation and stigmatisation have acted to blunt the outrage and anger of the working class to some of the most obvious examples of the failures of capitalism to meet human needs. Jones provides a comprehensive examination of the role of social workers in fracturing their clients from a united working class response. Social work's pre-occupation with [individualised] solutions wrests clients from the material and social contexts of their lives. Yet Jones reminds us too of the functionalist trap of denying any possibility of forms of resistance to state definitions and practices. A more active commitment to what he terms 'whistle blowing' tactics is urgently needed; this would help to tear apart the veil of illusion that the basis of client's problems are the products of individual pathology. Similarly, he suggests that social workers should demand and work for a more participatory approach to the provision of welfare services. These are but two of the key elements for a socialist welfare strategy in a period when social democracy is in retreat.
The main limitation of Jones' study lies in its rather narrow conception of class which [illegible] other social categories as race and gender. Recent research has demonstrated, [illegible] to recommend custodial sentences (rather than community-based ones such as probation or community service) for black rather than white youths. Women, moreover, are more often the recipients of social work intervention in their roles as mothers and carers of elderly relatives. Welfare thus often becomes a powerful component of the state's strategy for the social control of black people and women. Analysis of the state's relationship with the working class clients of social work cannot afford to rest on an undifferentiated analysis of class.
Simpkin's book focusses more precisely on the constituents of social work ideology and its attempt to erect pseudo-scientific solutions to what are essentially moral and political problems. [illegible] the possibilities for radical practice [illegible] powerful arguments [illegible] with clients [illegible] of the 1978-9 social work strikes, [illegible] the first edition of his book [illegible] is relevant in this context. [illegible] taught social workers many useful [illegible] building bridges with [illegible] of the movement and forcing [illegible] of their comfortable [illegible] practice. [illegible] he forcibly reminds us of the inequity [illegible] 'caring' relationship [illegible] by material and social oppression. [illegible] is inevitably contracting. A bleak [illegible] Nonetheless, I suspect [illegible] to be proved [illegible].
ANNIE HUDSON is a member of the Socialist Society Co-ordinating Committee and teaches social work at Manchester University.