Category: Just Society

Pierre Trudeau once said, “The past is to be respected and acknowledged, but not to be worshipped. It is our future in which we will find our greatness.” As one of Canada’s greatest politicians Pierre Elliott Trudeau was the 15th Prime Minister of Canada, serving from 1968-1979 and 1980-1984. Trudeau served through the October Crisis, the Quebec referendum, and the patriation of the constitution. In the time before he served there were many civil rights and inequality issues in this country towards women, the LGBTQ community, french Canadians, the indiginous peoples and many more.

Trudeau believed in the idea of a “just” society. Trudeau’s vision of a “just” society was one where no one would be discriminated against and where people belonging to any minority group would have the same rights and freedoms as anyone else. He believed that these rights must be protected for all and not be influenced by the majority. What Trudeau did in the pursuit of a just society touched many, if not all Canadians and he did what he said and made significant changes towards this cause. His prospects of Canada became what he had hoped for and many of these have lasted up until this day. Pierre Trudeau’s position as the Prime Minister truly changed Canada and moved us closer to a “just” society politically, legally and socially,

First of all, Trudeau made a difference politically in the years he was in office as he fought for the rights of women and kept Canada united as a country. At the time, women were beginning to see equality; in 1900 women were given the same legal rights as men, in 1916 women were given the right to vote, and in 1967 women were recognized as persons under the law but women were still excluded from many positions in the government and large companies and still had trouble finding employment. He made a difference as he appointed Canada’s first ever woman Speaker of the House of Commons, Jeanne Sauve, in 1980. He showed that women were equal to men under any job and this created new opportunities to women for roles such as in the government that were usually under the power of men. Also, when Trudeau lost the election of 1979 and Joe Clark became the Prime Minister of a minority government, he had little connection to Quebec and this created problems. The Parti Quebecois led by Rene Levesque brought up the referendum which was to be held in 1980. Due to loss of confidence, Joe Clark was voted out of office and Pierre Trudeau was voted back in in February 1980. The thought of referendum created issues but Truduea believed Canada should be united and a “just” society would help. Instead of Canada breaking apart he promised to change federalism that included the equal rights of the French people. The French people believed his words and the chance of Quebec’s sovereignty was voted out by 59.56% and Canada stayed one country.Altogether he influenced change in women’s rights and stopping the separation of Quebec from Canada.

Trudeau changed Canada to be a “just” society legally by introducing the first Charter of Rights and Freedoms and he created bilingualism in Canada. As said before Trudeau wanted Canada to be equal in every way, he promised to make Canada bilingual. Trudeau was bilingual himself as he originated from Quebec. Before 1969 English was the only language on court documents, and English was the official language however, our country was built on two languages and these should have been recognized for the people who spoke these languages. He passed the Official Languages Act which created equal status for French and English speaking Canadians in court. And most importantly, he also created the first Charter of Rights of Freedoms of 1982. Before 1982 Canada was still governed by Britain. Canada was becoming its own country and the next step was to be officially granted sovereignty from Britain. As said before Pierre wanted Canada to be fair and unite Canada as one country and by creating the Constitution this gave ownership of Canada into its own hands and gave Canadians legal civil and democratic rights. Furthermore, Pierre Trudeau’s society was “just” legally as he made Canada bilingual and transferred the control of Canada over to our own hand.

Pierre Tredau impact Canada legally and politically and socially, he stood up for the rights of aboriginals and the LGBTQ community. Although Canada had been realizing the horrific actions of residential schools and the mistreatment of the First Nations, their voices were still not being heard. Pierre Trudeau brought attention to this matter and proposed to create a paper proposal, to put an end to the Indian Act. He created the White Paper Proposal. Pierre Trudeau integrated the First Nations into Canada’s new society and once said that he wanted First Nations to feel free to join the rest of Canada politically and economically as we are all equal. Finally, Pierre Trudeau’s most famous quote on his thoughts of the LGBTQ community, “The state has no business in the bedrooms of the nation.” Pierre Trudeau was raised a Roman Catholic and being anything other than heterosexual was frowned upon. He rose from what was being said in his society growing up and adjusted to the new society. This shows how he was open-minded and respected everyone. His words made people realize that any ones person business no matter what sexuality they were are all equal. Together with his activism on aboriginal rights and LGBTQ advocacy he greatly impacted the social society in that time period continuing to justify his “just” society.

In conclusion, Pierre Treudeau made significant progress towards making Canada a “just” society by addressing inequalities facing many large minority groups across the nation. He had once said that the future is where we would find our greatness and his actions pushed us towards the greatness we experience today and we are still continuing in this direction. Throughout Trudeau’s time of influence he affected Canada positively, he achieved and accomplished many goals. In the course of his time as Prime Minister, Trudeau worked hard to keep Canada united, convincing Quebec to avoid separatism. Trudeau was admired and loved by the young and old because he improved the nation by passing equality and democracy laws and acts. The “just” society once seemed too good to be true but Pierre Trudeau made it happen through his belief that the nation would succeed as a united front.

What makes a just society? This question has been subject to scholarly and political debate for millennia and, in many regards, still is. However, in a contemporary and liberal context, the concept of justice includes – relatively uncontroversial – at least a foundation of representative democracy, the rule of law and principles such as equality, accountability, and non-arbitrariness. These principles are embedded in democratic constitutions across the world and in a plethora of international law treaties obliging sovereign states to ensure a separation of power, equality in citizenry and accountability, lawfulness, and adherence to rule of law in governance. These core tenants enable not only what has become synonymous with a ‘just society’ but also the societal trust needed for the kind of economic proliferation that has served liberal democracies well. For the purpose of this post, these principles will be considered traditional pillars of a just society.

If these liberal and democratic principles are ‘what makes a just society’, the question is rather how to make a just society? History illustrates that enshrining rule of law, rights, and principles of equality into law is insufficient. Justice can only exist in practice. While the proclamation of a civil right is certainly a step forward, it remains the practical experience of a right that defines its existence and conformity with the ideals of a just society. Rights must be effective, not illusory. Timely instead of outdated. And while this is obvious – even a truism in the context of legal scholarship – it remains the core democratic challenge in many states across the world, including some of the most advanced democracies. In particular, however, this is the case in countries of the Global South. Young democracies, such as South Arica and Brazil, with high aspirations and modern constitutions, but with fragile institutions, systemic corruption and, as a result, societal mistrust, which corrodes the judicial, political, social, and economic institutions installed to change the course of the country once and for all. If these young democracies are to become more ‘just’, constitutional rights must become effective rights, which require compliance and accountability across all institutions.

This transformation includes a swath of challenges that are all under increasing pressure due to global developments. As humanity enters an age of new geopolitical power structures led by the anti-democratic powerhouse of China and the continuous rise of nationalism and tribalism in Western politics, and perhaps most importantly, the unprecedented levels of inequality that continue to rise on a global scale, notions of justice are under constant pressure to fit political agendas – several of which appear incompatible with our traditional notion of justice. Moreover, as the developed world enters the fourth industrial revolution – a digital age which appears to favor the few and leave the masses behind – democracy, redistribution of wealth, and the rule of law can no longer rely on the same liberal sentiments that formed our current world order in the late twentieth century. Citizens of the Western world appear to be losing the very political power that led to the quid pro quo embodied in the social contract of a Western twentieth-century society. As such, what we today consider fundamental pillars of justice cannot be taken for granted and must instead be subjected to a continuous process of revitalization, dialogue, and improvement.

This is exactly what just society is about for me. With the challenges as a backdrop and the promotion of equality and rule of law as a destination, the just society is an ambitious and necessary step towards reinforcement and revitalization of the fundamentals of justice.

As a legal and human rights scholar, the global developments sketched out above challenge not only the core notion of human rights but also the underlying liberal principles that enabled the proliferation of human rights in the first place. Democracies are not democratic without the rule of law and cannot prosper without some level of social and economic equality. These are foundational aspects of a just society and, accordingly, a core focus of just society. A project, which aspires to promote equality and rule of law in young democracies through dialogue and teaching, but also aims to approach the ‘fundamentals’ of a just society in recognition of the fact that in order to make societies more just, contemporary ideals and notions must continuously be subjected to a process of interdisciplinary criticism and scrutiny.

Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was 35 years old when he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1964. He was the youngest person to have received it at that time. This grand achievement was in recognition of his efforts to end racial segregation and discrimination in the United States – entirely through nonviolent means. Dr. King’s inspiring message uplifted social consciousness and advanced his movement beyond civil rights to include human rights globally. Every January since 1986, the US has observed a national Martin Luther King Jr. holiday.

One marvels that despite the rage and violence King faced, he embraced nonviolence as the most effective way to end injustice. In his book “Stride Toward Freedom” he states that his commitment to nonviolence was in seeking not to “defeat or humiliate the opponent, but to win his friendship and understanding.” At another time, he said, “Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.”

What precious building blocks these ideals are for making a kinder, gentler society. In considering how I might contribute to this kind of world, I’ve found it helpful to know that God is divine Love itself, and our true identity is God’s spiritual image and likeness, the very expression of Love. Injustice appears to be a normal part of life from a material sense of ourselves, but everyone’s real, spiritual nature is loving and lovable, like our divine creator’s. Of course, not all thoughts and actions we encounter are in line with this spiritual truth, but nobody is destined to do wrong, or incapable of reform.

I saw this when confronting social injustice in my work as a college professor and mentor-supervisor to student teachers in different school settings, where the inequity in educational resources between rich and poor school districts was startling. In one particular district, the children came from economically disadvantaged homes. I knew from experience that these children would require a level of instruction that was active and hands-on in order to engage them in learning the material.

At times, when I encountered teaching that didn’t engage the students or give them a fair chance, I prayed for God’s guidance. I trusted that the attributes of divine Love – justice, mercy, and wisdom – were in operation and would be manifested in the experience of the children in God’s own way.

One time I supervised a teacher who’d worked in schools with vast resources, and now was working with these students. His teaching was by rote and not engaging, and when I challenged him on this, I sensed that he had low expectations of this group of children. To me, this was an example of social injustice and educational inequality playing out in the classroom.

I prayed to see that each child was truly spiritual and complete as a child of God, reflecting divine Mind’s intelligence. I also knew that each individual is receptive to this truth. As I did so, I was guided to offer to help the teacher drastically adjust his lesson plans. As a result, he ended up consistently and joyfully applying his own creative concepts to his teaching, and the children happily responded. What a difference! The transformation was quite deep. After he finished this placement, he let me know how much this experience had helped him, and he even asked me for teaching references.

There is no doubt that since the 1960s, good progress has been made in reducing discrimination; however, there’s more to be done. No matter where in the world we live, or what our background is, we can let an understanding of God as Love and of everyone as Love’s reflection inspire our words and deeds. In this way, we can contribute to the work of building a just society as the norm for all.

Canada racial discrimination

In the whole historical process of British North America and Canada, the policy towards indigenous peoples has always been promoted in two contradictory goals – ‘protection’ and ‘assimilation’, correspondingly, there have always been two kinds of policies. On the one hand, the government believes that the best way to protect the interests of indigenous peoples is to separate them from Canadian society; on the other hand, it is in favor of assimilation – supporting their placement of them among nonindigenous people, eliminating special protection measures and legal status, and finally turning them into ‘civilized groups’ like white Europeans.

From the beginning, the civil rights granted to indigenous peoples are based on the premise and vision of the elimination of national identity. Therefore, this kind of civil rights is discriminatory, instrumental, and incomplete, so it is meaningless. In addition to a very small number of people who have the will and meet the conditions to apply for citizenship, most of the indigenous peoples’ tribes and groups have no access to any citizen’s treatment and legal protection, but also face deprivation, assimilation, discrimination in economic, cultural, identity and other aspects, and have no human rights as a Canadian citizen.

“Boarding school”

In trying to exterminate Indian culture, the most notorious and sinful measure is to set up a so-called “boarding school” for Indian children, which is self-help by the federal government and sponsored by the Christian Church and specializes in exterminating Indian culture. In 1892, the Indian Act Amendment officially authorized the establishment and management of Indian boarding schools. In order to protect Indian children from the harmful influence of their families and from growing up in barbaric countries, the act stipulated that Indian children aged 5-16 must attend boarding schools. According to statistics, between 1870 and 1970, as many as 150000 Indian children were forcibly delivered. Nowadays, when Canadian look back at the “boarding school” event, all of them feel ashamed for what their government have done.

Anything changed?

In 1968, the newly elected prime minister, Pierre Trudeau, was determined to realize his ideal of building a just society. Trudeau is determined to achieve the full equality of civil rights of indigenous peoples as other Canadians.

Pierre Trudeau

The government will take the following steps to achieve this framework: first, to propose to the parliament to repeal the Indian law, while taking the necessary legislative measures to enable Indians to control their land and fight for their rights; second, to suggest that the provincial government should take over the responsibility to Indians as it does to other citizens in the province, and the taking over will be accompanied by federal funds to the provincial government Transfer, these funds are usually provided by the federal government to Indian projects, and the amount of funds can be increased if necessary; third, provide a large number of funds for Indian Economic Development (as a temporary measure); fourth, terminate Indian Affairs and this part of the Northern Department’s work function related to Indians and transfer the remaining responsibility of the federal government’s Indian projects to other departments The appropriate federal department. In addition, the government will appoint a Commissioner to consult with the Indians to study and propose an acceptable procedure for determining claims.

Trudeau also acknowledged that this transformation process ‘is a difficult choice for Indians, because on the one hand, they realize that if they enter the society as full citizens, they will obtain equal legal status, but on the other hand, they also risk losing some traditions, some cultures, and even some basic rights. In view of this, he said that they will not be forced to Accelerate the process. After the publication of the white paper, the Indians fiercely opposed it. Indian organizations thought it was an attack on their culture and land, a legal means to destroy a nation and its culture, the chief Indian of Alberta pointed out in a protest letter

The attitude of Indian

After the publication of the white paper, the Indians fiercely opposed it. Indian organizations thought it was an attack on their culture and land, ‘a legal means to destroy a nation and its culture, the chief Indian of Alberta pointed out in a protest letter believe that the white paper and a just society are contradictory.’ Another chief said that ‘Mr. Trudeau’s reference to a just society should be based on mutual respect, consideration, understanding, integrity, and good faith, but this policy does not reflect this at all, and actual equality cannot be separated from differential treatment.

In addition to cultural reasons, there are also economic and social reasons for Indians’ opposition to the white paper oriented by ‘just society. According to the Hawthorne report (1966-1967), the per capita income of Indians with legal status is $300, while that of all Indians is $1400; the per capita annual income of Indians is $1361, while that of all Indians is $4000. The average social assistance dependency of Indians is 36%, and the total is 3.5%. The former is more than 10 times higher than the latter. In 1970, 52% of men and 14% of women in Canada earned more than $6000 a year, compared with 24% of Indian men and 5% of women. In terms of education, according to the Hawthorne report, 92% of the twelve-year schools in 1951-1962 did not graduate; in February 1969, only 5% of the 12th-grade Indian students in Saskatchewan schools were in school and only 3% in Northern Saskatchewan. In terms of living conditions, at the end of 1967, more than half of Indian families in the reserve lived in low-standard houses, most of which were short of water or without sanitation, while the national average rate of low-standard houses was only 9%. In terms of health care, the average life expectancy of Indians was only 34.71 years in 1963, while that of Indian women was 33.31 years, compared with 60.5 years for whites and 64.1 years for women. Almost double the difference.

Such a great disparity in economic, social, and educational development levels makes Indians distrust the white government and the enthusiasm of the society for building a civil society with equal opportunities for all. They don’t believe that the white-dominated government will provide them with ‘equal and comprehensive’ opportunities to participate. They don’t believe that Indians who give up their ethnic identity and culture will become as ‘prosperous and rich’ as white Canadians. In the eyes of many Indians, the so-called equality of citizens in the white paper is just a cover. Its real intention is to assimilate and absorb Indians into Canadian white society by means of citizenship.

Suggestion

At present, it seems that neither the federal government of Canada nor the indigenous peoples should be confined to the classic theory, governance mode, and appeal mode of citizenship or national self-determination, but to seek the balance between them, based on the protection of autonomy and national development and social governance. The federal government should guarantee the autonomy of indigenous peoples according to law, and at the same time, implement flexible policies to indigenous peoples, and increase support for their infrastructure, economic development, and social services. If indigenous peoples can benefit from the social and economic development policies and reduce the development gap with other Canadian peoples, this will relieve their predicament and self-governance ability Both improvement and sustainable development are very beneficial.

The Merici Mentoring Program is a volunteering program that runs for over 2 years and goes through years 9 and 10. It is a partnership between Merici College and Black Mountain School that has been running for around 10 years. In year 9, the mentors go to Black Mountain School once a week for a semester and work with the students there. In year 10, Black Mountain students come to Merici College where they complete tasks with their mentors around the school. These tasks teach them and provide important skills essential in the workplace. Both the Merici students and Black Mountain students develop a diverse range of skills such as communication, organization, sustainability, and time management. The program provides opportunities in tasks ranging from cooking, cleaning, gardening, office work, and maintenance of sports equipment.

The mentoring program helps give people with different abilities the opportunity to learn about ways that they can contribute to Australian culture. To be a contributing Australian these skills that they are exposed to allow for students to be self-sufficient as they will be able to cook, clean, and grow their own fruits and vegetables but also work for a living to earn an income using these skills. They will learn essential skills that will allow them to manage basic paperwork. When earning, the students contribute to the Australian community by working for local businesses, paying taxes, and exposing the broader community to develop their patience and tolerance towards those with special needs. One of the most significant Catholic social teachings focuses on human dignity and the common good within society. This program allows a two-way partnership that focuses on the common good within society. A key feature is exposing those with different abilities to work alongside with those that are less likely to be disadvantaged in the workforce.

The Merici mentors gain key skills that allow patience, tolerance, and mental change allowing us to be more accepting of those with disabilities. It is catholic tradition to treat all human life with equality and consider it sacred, giving it a sense of dignity. This is a call to action, create a community and social system that resonates with this value. This program breaks down the traditional value and structure system to exclude and discriminate those living with disadvantages. The Merici Mentoring Program helps create a more just society as it is inclusive of all and provides equal opportunities for those that are disadvantaged. A just society is where people’s essential human rights are attained and it is also a concept of fair and just relations between the individual and society. We, as a society, should not judge people because of their uncontrolled disabilities. This links in with tolerance and acceptance of others, specifically the Merici Mentoring program/ Black Mountain School. When the Merici students go to Black Mountain students they are exposed to the reality of what the BMS students experience on a regular basis. They get an understanding of what the students are feeling and get to see the world through the Black Mountain student’s perspective. Getting to know the Black Mountain students allows the Merici students (who can also be representing society) to understand and accept the Black Mountain students for who they are instead of judging them by their disabilities.

This will make the Merici students/society have a more just/fair opinion on others. To make a just society, it requires a strong sense of community and joint responsibility. One of the Catholic Social Teachings, the common good, to create a just society where people work together to improve the welfare of others in our society and make sure that we all have equal rights. Another catholic teaching is solidarity we are accepting of all regardless of nationality, race, ethnicity, economic status, and ideological ideas. We are loving and accepting of our neighbors regardless of gender and love one another as our own. This program runs over a 2 year period allowing relations to develop between the Black Mountain and Merici students, creating a larger sense of community. This time frame creates a deeper understanding and awareness of the depth of the Black Mountain student’s abilities. “Follow my example as I follow the example of Christ” (1 Corinthians 11:1) Jesus leads his life through example. His action and conduct have been followed by many through the centuries.

This program has been running for nearly 10 years and is a clear example of mentoring by example. The program has stood the test of time and continues to draw those with a sense of belonging to expand our sense of community broader than Merici College. “Whatever you have learned or received or heard from me, or seen in me—put it into practice” (Philippians 4:9a) As the scriptures tell us time and time again, the stories of working together building a strong sense of community through acceptance and tolerance of all, we at Merici college have done the exact same through this mentoring program. We have put into practice a program that has continued to exist and helped the lives of so many, both the Black Mountain and Merici students, offering independence and a strong sense of social justice for all. The mentoring program is an invaluable learning tool that provides hands-on experience of the disadvantaged and advantaged community in Canberra. As highlighted earlier on, the benefits of the mentoring program outweigh the negatives. This partnership benefits students in a peer-support model of practical work experience. The Merici students gain an opportunity to act as mentors which is a lifelong skill that is at the core of Merici values. My earliest experiences in the Merici Mentoring program was very challenging and confronting. This has allowed me to become a more resilient and strong individual. I have greater acceptance and understanding of those that are disadvantaged by a disability and have been provided with an opportunity to expand my experience and the way in which I react to it. I consider my strengths of tolerance and acceptance to have been strengthened through this experience and I welcome the challenges to come in my near future.

For my senior capstone paper, I will be discussing several key items. First I will be discussing my vision; my view on a social worker’s responsibility to contribute to a just society, my strengths related to those views, any knowledge or skills I need to develop to meet that responsibility, and the mechanisms I will use for self-evaluation in my future career. Following that, I will discuss my understanding of generalist social work practice and the ways in which my curriculum has contributed to that understanding. Finally, I will apply my understanding and interpretation of generalist social work practice to a specific issue: the misdiagnosis of trauma and mental illness as it pertains to Social Service intervention.

As social workers, we are taught to hold steadfast to six core values—one being social justice. Social workers strive to promote equal opportunity and social change on behalf of vulnerable and oppressed individuals (National Association of Social Workers, 1990). So if social workers are told that (as a whole) they must exist within these parameters, it begs the question: What makes a society “just”? This is where I think it is important to define what it actually means for a society to be “just”. According to Robert Waelder, it has been known since ancient times that justice is the “foundation of any kingdom” (1966). Furthermore, it is important to note that—societally—the term justice is one that people have similar definitions of equity, fairness, and something that can be deemed morally right. There are three basic principles that seem to sum up exactly what makes a just society; the Positive Law, the Social Good, and the Natural Right (Rawls, 2013). Positive law is a law that is created by the people (government authority), not principles that are universal in society—for example, those written in the constitution. The Social Good means promoting the “social good’ or justice within the society. The Natural rights are individuals within a society’s “moral obligation” to judge human actions and uphold the law (Rawls, 2013). As a social worker, I am able to contribute to the ideal “just” society by following all three of the aforementioned basic principles. In regards to Positive Law, social workers are advocates for all people, especially those vulnerable and oppressed. For example, from a human rights perspective, when dealing with housing deprivation, food inequality, or access to health care for people experiencing homelessness, social workers need to be able to communicate with and advocate for clients at all levels—including local government (Dibbets & Eijkman 2018). This speaks to the idea that, as a collective, we as social workers are able to promote social good in many ways. The Future Families case study, which was conducted in 2010 in South Africa was put into place in order to see the role of social workers in promoting socio-economic equality. Future Families offered care to families and children affected or infected by HIV/AIDS. Social workers in the community provided support groups for the families and provided information about immunizations, tuberculosis, financial planning, vocational planning (addressing child protection), economic strengthening, HIV education and prevention, and health education. These support groups and the information they possess is “passed on to families to equip them to create their own future in more effective ways” (Lombard & Twikirize 2014), hence promoting the social good. The Natural Right, for social workers, is our moral obligation/mandate to report. When we are not on the job, we are no longer mandated reporters by law, yet we all maintain a moral obligation inside of ourselves to do what is right and report anything against the law.

Turning the focus now to me, I would like to touch on the strengths I possess that can contribute to the “just society” I’ve described. These include patience, creativity, and honesty. My incredible level of patience will prove useful when working with local government officials and legislation. Especially when I am working toward dismantling laws that are racially or socioeconomically biased. Laws do not change overnight. The process is time-consuming and arduous. Throughout this program, I have learned that rushing anything turns out poorly for all parties involved, especially when working with clients and trying to advocate on their behalf without seeming short-fused or negative. Creativity is equally as important because when it comes to promoting social good, being able to think on my toes and maintain multiple approaches or solutions will ensure best practice. There are so many ways social workers can promote social justice and I think it is crucial to adapt to our clients and communities—being creative allows me to do just that. Possibly the most important piece of the puzzle, though, is practicing honesty. People experiencing trauma are eager to find people who they can trust. However, they are the quickest to pick up on who is telling them the truth versus who is cushioning their trauma with white lies. Lying never works.

Although I do have some strengths that can contribute to a just society, there are a few skills—and a wealth of knowledge—that I admit I need to gain in order to fully meet this responsibility. Unfortunately, I do not have a vast knowledge of the specific legislation that affects my future clientele. I regularly read the news to gain more insight, but it is something I will need to learn more about on a client-to-client basis before I am able to fully fulfill the responsibility to contribute to a just society. Another skill that I need to develop more is setting boundaries. Throughout my years in the program—even as early as my first field placement—my boundaries have greatly increased; but, it is still something I struggle with and I will definitely need to work on. Luckily, I will be attending graduate school immediately following graduation, so my knowledge will continue to expand and I will continue to work with clients and become accustomed to the short-term yet deeply personal relationships that I will create with my clients. I believe that in this specific skill area, practice makes perfect.

According to Harry Ferguson, with the Social Work Department at the University of Birmingham, self-awareness assisted social workers in their mission to be ethical and helpful. Through self-awareness, they were often able to remain more composed in certain moments, compared to their counterparts (2017). It is evident that self-awareness and reflection are very important to being a competent and overall good social worker. However, the only self-reflection I have done thus far in school has been discussing situations with my field supervisor or professors and reflecting on them to determine what I can do next time. Due to this lack of practice, I wanted to find a tool that I might use in my future schooling, internships, and career in order to make my self-reflection more rewarding. One tool I found is Gibbs’s reflective cycle. His cycle consists of 6 stages that lead an individual through self-reflection. It starts with a description: What happened? Next, describe your feelings: What were you thinking and feeling? Following that, you must evaluate yourself: What was good and bad about the experience? Then you analyze the situation: What sense can you make from this? Finally: What else could you have done, is there an action plan if this arose again/what would you do? (Sicora, 2010). This process can be done individually or in supervision, but the article does recommend to do self-reflection with others because, “the less alone the practioner is, the less he is exposed to frustration from failures that occasionally occur and could lead to burnout” (Sicora, 2010). This cycle covers all areas of reflection and helps an individual plan for the next steps. I believe it is a vital part of promoting social justice by the first start with oneself.

Generalist social work allows individuals to achieve the goals of social work, through a multileveled approach. According to the text, Generalist Social Work Practice: an

Empowering Approach, “generalist practitioners acknowledge the interplay of personal and collective issues, promoting them to work with a variety of human systems-societies, communities, neighborhoods, complex organizations, formal groups, families, and individuals to create changes that maximize human system functioning” (Miley, OMelia & DuBois, 2017). This quote discusses how generalist practitioners work at the micro, mezzo, and macro level to ensure the well-being of their clients. The micro-level intervention focuses on working with clients individually, in families, or in small groups. For example, some social workers may work on changes to improve parenting skills or improve an individual’s social and physical surroundings to promote a family’s overall functioning (Miley, OMelia & DuBois, 2017). Mezzo-level intervention promotes change in task groups, teams, and organizations. For example, workers can work directly with schools to address policies that may be affecting their clients negatively (Miley, OMelia & DuBois, 2017). The macro-level intervention addresses issues within the community, institutions, and society. At this level, generalist practitioners work to achieve change through organizing and planning within the community, community education, and even policy change and social action. For example, a worker may lobby for increasing the city’s budget for police protection (Miley, OMelia & DuBois, 2017).

Social workers need to be competent in both individual and community problems (micro and macro) to be able to best serve their clients. Because generalist practice practitioners are able to integrate both levels of intervention, social workers who are knowledgeable in generalist practice are able to address all problems, individual or societal (Mullin & Roy, 2016). In a study done by Julie Welch on Is Imagery Rehearsal Treatment an Effective Intervention for Anna’s Nightmares? she was able to show how the integration of micro and macro level knowledge were used to address and solve the issue of Anna’s nightmares and anxiety. Anna is a 5-year-old female who was placed in foster care after her infant brother was found unresponsive in his crib, and was later found dead from suffocation. Anna was placed in foster care and was eventually placed for open adoption. At the time of the report, Anna was experiencing nightmares that disrupted her sleep and caused anxiety during the day, following supervised visits with her birth mother. Anna was diagnosed with PTSD and was to complete a 10-week grief and loss group for children and was enrolled in cognitive behavioral therapy. Both interventions were put in place to decrease her nightmares and anxiety. The results showed that over time, Anna did have more restful sleep and had a decrease in daytime stress. In conclusion, Julie determined that it is important to know and acknowledge that children who have gone through something traumatic, may have distressing nightmares and anxiety. Julie, with her knowledge in generalist practice and knowing the effects of trauma on children, knew that a single system study would not work in Anna’s case. With her background knowledge, she was able to determine the best intervention strategy for Anna, a combination of individually focused therapy and a grief group for children, which eventually led to a reduction in both of Anna’s symptoms (Welch, 2016).

To me, being competent in generalist social work practice is a must for all social workers. To fully understand our clients and their situations, we have to view our clients within their environments. The generalist approach does just that, they take not only the individual client into account but all of the clients surrounding systems. We are affected daily by what goes on in our systems, so why shouldn’t we be considering all of our client’s systems and how they play a role in their daily functioning? “The view of generalist social work is like the view through a wide-angle lens of a camera. It takes in the whole, even when focusing on an individual part” (Miley, OMelia & DuBois, 2017).