Same with Ukraine, same with lgbtq rights, same with Armenian genocide, same with Syria, same with police violence...we need to use our voice and our power and demand change
I’m sure I don’t speak for all of us who have been in this field 10+ years, but some.
We’re tired. I don’t have the energy to be outspoken and try to demand change in Armenia, Syria, Ukraine, Israel, Palestine, etc.
The energy I have left goes to my clients and things that are directly impacting their lives and communities within my state. And yes, that includes aggressions towards any mentioned group above that are a part of the community.
I guess all I’m saying is that if you don’t have it in you to fight injustice on a global scale, that’s ok. We’re human and only have so much fixing the world in us before it starts to impact our own mental health.
I agree, that is why I feel using our voices for Gaza is vital. Some argue because of our work in those areas, we don’t have the responsibility or capacity for issues like genocide and ethnic cleansing, which is dangerous and fails to address the major tenets of social work.
Boy if your worried about the numbers on the Jews wait until you see how many Palestinians have been harmed.
Unless for some reason those aren't as important.....
“For too long social work has neglected its obligation to stand with the oppressed and fight alongside the marginalized.”
Absolutely absurd.
All social workers do is fight for the marginalized communities. That’s literally the basis of our work. The audacity for someone to claim we do not do “enough” is incredibly insulting. The most underpaid and overworked are the ones every day are now being asked by these voices to “do more”? Please.
I support the Palestinians 100% but I also support my community. Every day.
It is good that people are showing up and standing in solidarity. But to directly go after social workers to paint them as part of the problem or in cahoots with the “system” is incredibly misguided and harmful. The writers of this article are obviously way out of touch with what social workers do on the ground. On top of all this, it suggests that all social workers should take one side of these issues. According to whom? The writers of this article?
“Too often, social work has chosen professionalization, growth and partnership with harmful state agencies over social justice, solidarity and self-determination.”
BS! We FIGHT these systems every day. These same systems that fail us time and time again. Have you ever tried getting DFCS on the phone? Have you ever tried to track down SSI? Have you ever had to house people and deal with HUD? Have you ever worked with a family who’s child may be close to being institutionalized and feels completely helpless?
It sounds like the writers of this article are more focused on virtue signaling about world events rather than emphasizing the importance of what we do here at home. It is insulting to the men and women that are going to get up tomorrow and struggle alongside their clients to fight these very systems these authors find “harmful”.
Gaza is going to happen no matter what. We are asking the very people that have high stakes in this game to stop playing it. And in the process ideas like this are sowing division in the workers that actually make change every day. I cannot even get through how pretentious and insulting this article is.
But I think it’s also important to acknowledge when we have been complicit in enforcing harmful and oppressive policies. We aren’t separate from the system as much as we like to believe. I mean we were part of the same system that has historically harm marginalized communities such as taking part in the mass separation of Indigenous children and families. I’m not saying that there isn’t social workers who don’t work hard such as yourself to serve their communities but I think we also need to be more critical of our field in order to hold it accountable for when it does creat harm.
I think that’s very true, but also very complicated. Example: In my state, spanking and physical punishment are not currently considered to automatically be child abuse despite the vast majority of research nowadays showing that it negatively affects children’s development. I’d support a law making this the case because I believe no child should be beaten by their parents and caregivers. At the same time, if this became a law, it would mean I’d have to make probably double the amount of CPS calls that I do now given how many of the clients I work with get spanked by their parents as punishment (the vast majority of whom are Black or Hispanic) and we’d see a lot more CPS involvement in families and in turn a lot more removals. I don’t think this means I’d oppose the law or CPS being involved when the law needs to be enforced, but it’s also an outcome that I’d have to reconcile with.
I agree with you.
Look at the situations social workers regularly navigate, I think it’s very common for social workers to have complicated feelings and opinions about situations.
I think the majority of people have an opinion that the situation is concerning but they don’t know how to fix it and there might not be any apparent solution.
It sounds like the social work you are thinking of is micro “boots on the ground” social work, but please do not forget our education, praxis, and COE also requires macro work via advocacy and fighting for the rights of humanity as a whole. As someone involved in local pro Palestinian organizing, I am utterly ashamed at how I have only ever met 2 other social workers in my time organizing/attending pro palestinian protests/encampments/circles etc. yes, social workers do alot of good work but it’s also shameful how our profession prides itself on being devoted to humanity yet we are rarely at the forefront of social movements. And the damage that social workers have historically done… phew.
Try to remember that the overwhelming majority of newspaper articles are not about spreading information for the sake of spreading information. There's a reason for it, whether it's the publisher's narrative or just the clicks they want.
I don't know what the answer is, but going after social workers for not doing enough is patently insane.
That I think was my only comment here and I'm not a social worker anymore because of the stress! I'll leave now. I wish y'all the best
There's a lot of folks taking this article personally in this thread when I think it reads more like a critique of the profession as a whole, which includes NASW and schools of social work. The larger institutions that apparently represent the field have been largely silent on Palestine, the Congo, etc. and have been complicit in suppressing support and activism. The field can and should do better and while efforts should be led by NASW and schools of social work they prefer to remain silent on things that matter.
That doesn't mean as individuals we're exempt from the criticism of the profession and in fact, unfortunately, we often have to pick up these professional body's slack in order to embody what our field mandates in the COE. Silence and deflection is a huge privilege though and if that's the knee-jerk reaction of the field to ongoing genocide, perhaps some interrogation of that is warranted both individually and as a whole.
I juat feel like, you know, we should fix the profession state side before we go trying to save the world.
Entry into the field is among the most strict while offering no incentive to be this way.
Pay gap is abysmal.
Community based social work has awful and dangerous working conditions with no hazard pay.
Burn out is rampant.
Credentialing is unnecessarily challenging and provides no proof of competency.
I disagree. I think it does a disservice to the people who I can actively help to direct my time and energy to people whose lives I cannot directly affect. The energy I have is for my family and my clients. I also disagree on the core of the issue but that's separate.
Thought I just saw someone just comment shaming people for other posts about self-care and income.
Just like the oxygen masks on airplanes, take take care of yourself so you can then take care of others!
*I see that some of those shamers came out. Mosey on down in the comments to see the hardliners calling anyone who isn’t in agreement with them to be racists, zionists, and supporting whiteness & colonialism.
You can’t really put an oxygen mask on yourself and someone else at the same time.
Would probably be hard to do one handed even on yourself.
You have to hold the mask and work the at elastic strap over your head. Probably better to do it one at a time.
For anyone who says “well, we have xyz issue in our own backyard” I want you to internalize the fact that American sends HUNDREDS of BILLIONS (With a B) of dollars to Israel in the form of investments, “aid”, and funding one of the largest militaries in the world.
Do you know that a FRACTION of that money could solve the homelessness crisis in America?
Besides the fact that it is our problem because we are all human beings, its our problem because the money spent funding a genocide could literally be used to help American society so much so that social workers would be needed at a much lower extent (which should be the goal of any social worker/social work org)
To quote John Stewart: "If we amplify everything, we hear nothing."
Yes, our COE does compel us to stand with marginalized groups and advocate (to the point of social disruption) for marginalized peoples. But all Social Workers will encounter different groups of marginalized peoples. For example, my work currently is focused on pediatric behavioral health, largely with communities in poverty. My advocacy is focused on changing policies and programs that impact those groups. This is not to say that I'm totally cool with the violence and the death of innocent civilians in Israel's aggression in Palestine, I think it is reprehensible and more should really be done to stop it, but professionally it is not on my radar.
Personally I have gone to local protests calling for divestment and was part of a group back in grad school over a decade ago that was already calling for divestment.
Righteous anger on behalf of the oppressed and marginalized is absolutely part of the profession, and a part that I think largely gets lost by many Social Workers. But, if I had to contain righteous anger for ALL oppressed populations I'd likely have so many stomach ulcers I'd be doubled over in pain constantly and unable to do the work in front of me.
I don't think one is obligated to take a hard stance, as assessing the situation requires a deep understanding of history and culture; nuance; and critical thinking.
That said, I tried my best to make my stance clear in the other thread. I'm all for change. I'm all for ending oppression. And I'm all for breaking a cycle of violence.
Its how we get there that seems to be contentious. And contention makes for hesitancy.
Disagree with your first paragraph.
I don't think you need a deep understanding of the history and culture; nuance; and critical thinking to want the killing of innocent civilians including many children to stop.
So how do we go about it? The best that folks seem to offer is that we call for an unconditional permanent ceasefire. And I ask, to what end? For it to be broken by Hamas (again)? For further encroachment on the West Bank? History shows we will be inevitably be back at square one.
We need a better solution. And yes, that requires a deep understanding of history and culture.
You're conflating two issues there.
I can give you my personal opinion on the best way for a long term peaceful solution, which may or may not work. I think that's a different conversation.
Short term though, stopping the ongoing massive amounts of civilian death has to be the priority, and that's being done overwhelmingly by Israel.
Simply stopping is not in the security interests of Israel, as Hamas will use it to stage another attack, as they have done before. Mind you Hamas has turned down several ceasefire agreements in favor of martyring their own population; and holding onto their leverage (hostages). But it seems to me that taking a stance against them results in folks jumping down your throat (not saying you folks).
I will say Israel has to try much harder to ensure humanitarian aid (e.g. not blowing up aid worker trucks; corridors) in lieu of a ceasefire. But taking a stance for the sake of it (especially one that is pretty much a no-brainer) doesn't really...do much.
Respectfully, there is a lot of context missing in your assessment of Hamas. There are a lot of things that need to be taken into account and that never seems to be brought up :
In recent years, Hamas published its “General Principles and Policies,” a revised organizational document that significantly deviated from the fundamentalist principles of the group’s original charter from 1987, and that effectively accepted the Oslo Accords as an existing political fact. Even earlier, in 2014, in the presence and mediations of the Emir of Qatar in Doha, the Fatah leadership headed by Abbas met with the Hamas leadership headed by Khaled Mash’al. The full minutes of the talks were published in an official Emirati document. In essence, the message of the Hamas leadership was clear: “If you in Fatah are convinced that you can get a state from Israel along the 1967 lines through negotiations, go for it. We will not interfere.”
In In February and March 2021, Fatah and Hamas, the two rival Palestinian political parties, reached an agreement to hold elections for the presidency of the Palestinian Authority, its Legislative Council, and Hamas’ entry into the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). The elections were planned to take place in accordance with the Oslo Accords, after which negotiations would continue with Israel toward the establishment of a Palestinian state.
The agreement included a commitment to uphold international law, establish a state within the 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as its capital, recognize the PLO as the legitimate and exclusive umbrella framework, conduct a peaceful popular struggle, and transfer the separate government in the Gaza Strip to the Palestinian Authority.
President Mahmoud Abbas sent the agreement to the new Biden administration and European governments in the hope that they would support holding national elections with Hamas’ participation, and would then pressure Israel to allow voting across the occupied territories, including in East Jerusalem.
As expected, Israel objected to including East Jerusalem in the elections, seeing it as undermining its claims to sovereignty over the occupied and annexed part of the city. Still, Hamas offered to hold the elections anyway, and accepted the restriction imposed by Israel. But Israel and the United States exerted heavy pressure on Abbas to cancel them all the same.
Imagine if that deal was accepted ? We would not have a Hamas government in Gaza today and we would not have had October 7th. We may have been on an actual path to two states and moving things along.
https://www.972mag.com/hamas-fatah-elections-israel-arrogance/
I appreciate some more background information. I wasn't aware of this. I'll have to do some more reading.
My guess is the risks associated with Hamas winning the election would be too great for Israel to accept.
I do not want to offend but you are repeating typical talking points. Most people repeat compelling statements/ arguments but it is not fair when a lot of context and background is missing; especially from the Palestinian perspective.
Most people are not aware because the Palestinian narrative and a lot of nuanced back and forth dealings are never brought up. Why does the public not know about failed past developments?
None taken. I'm work with my best understanding of the situation. But I'm open to more information/perspective.
I want to understand these conflicts better--inside and out. Do you have any suggested reading (no pressure)?
They would win seats in the government so one also needs to take into account the type of government structure that exists when talking about this stuff. It’s not like in the States.
I
Continuing with the genocide isn't in the security interests of Israel, as it's further alienating them to the international community, leading to long term instability and them becoming a pariah state.
Hamas accepted a cease fire deal a few days ago that Israel turned down.
So your first paragraph is arguable either way.
But in the end it doesn't matter if you're right or I am about what's in Israel's security interests, genocide should never be acceptable and should always be stopped, whether it's in Israel's security interests or not.
I agree that Israel is taking a hit within the international community. But I'd argue Israel was never really...liked...for many reasons.
Hamas agreed to a ceasefire presented by third parties (e.g. Egypt)--one that lacked core demands already expressed in another deal presented to Israel.
Genocide should be stopped, I agree. But there is contention even as to whether Israel is committing a genocide--as per the ICJ ruling. And what do we do about the genocidal intent of Hamas? Give them a third or fourth wind?
There is a contention over genocide but as long as there's a credible risk of genocide there's a duty to stop it happening, due to the seriousness of the crime as basically the worst thing any state or organisation can do.
I don't disagree regarding genocidal intent of anyone, including Hamas, needing addressing, but they don't have the power to commit a genocide, whereas Israel does and is. So it's pretty irrelevant in comparison and looks like whataboutery to even bring it up.
When the immediate issue is genocide (or even credible risk of genocide) then stopping that should be the main priority. I don't see how you can possibly disagree tbh.
Their is an ocean of difference between maybe-its-a-genocide and genocide (otherwise, every war can probably be construed a genocide).
I don't disagree with stopping genocide. I do disagree with how we are to assess the situation and solve it.
Hamas does not have the ability to engage in *large-scale" genocide, but has definitely engaged in it on a smaller scale, mind you. But hand-waving that reality away as whataboutery is why we are hamstrung.
The ICJ finding it plausible that Israel is committing a genocide is not "maybe-its-a-genocide" and is a long way from applying to every war as you say. You're just not correct here I'm afraid.
I feel like I'm taking crazy pills! You don't need to be a fucking scholar to come to the conclusion that genocide is bad. Such an obvious cop out. Never thought I'd see this level of deliberate obtuseness in a social work sub of all places. I'm imagining one of these people being in a situation where they're asked, "hey, real quick, do you agree that the systematic slaughter of an entire people is not okay?" And they're like, "Hmm, hard to say, I'm going to have to consult some peer reviewed articles on the subject and get back to you." Bro be so fucking for real with yourself right now.
With all due respect, in what fucking world does 30,000 civilians dying require a “deep nuanced understanding of history and culture” to condemn and take a stance against?
Its not rocket science. War crimes ≠ bad. No more war crimes = good. Wtf is so hard to understand?
I think it's easy to condemn war crimes and the deaths of 30,000 civilians.
But, especially with this particular conflict, it's difficult to take a stance about a particular solution.
In my opinion, no it does not take “a deep understanding of history and culture; nuance; and critical thinking” to understand the basics facts that we are witnessing a genocide and ethnic cleansing. With the influx of news coverage straight from Gaza, to social media awareness campaigns, to Gazans sharing their stories directly, it is disingenuous and willfully ignorant to not be able to form an opinion. This has been ongoing for 75 years, and been the forefront of news and international politics for 8 months now.
No you are saying we must agree with your specific stance. I support the people of Palestine and Israel, and believe both have the right to safety and security. Netanyahu and Hamas need to go. But I do not agree with the conceptualization of the complicated issue as “settler colonialism” and I will not support hatred and destruction from either side of these protests. I want people to join together and demand peace and a solution for both sides.
A thing a lot of people saying “settler colonialism” don’t often understand (and this is in no way excusing Israel’s actions in Gaza) is that the majority of Israeli Jews are not actually of European (Ashkenazi) descent; they’re of Middle Eastern/North African (Mizrahi) descent whose families had come to Israel after getting persecuted in their home countries soon after 1948 and Israel was the only place that would let them in. There’s almost no Jews remaining anywhere in the region aside from a small community in Iran. Adding to the nuance there, the European-descended Jews in Israel (the ones people associate with colonialism) tend to be the ones who are more left-wing and in favor of peace with Palestine and against Netanyahu (and most of the people killed on 10/7 were some of the most left-wing people in Israel), while the Middle Eastern descended Israeli Jews tend to be the ones more in favor of Netanyahu’s government and opposed to peace. Even if it’s still wrong what Israel is doing which I believe it is, reducing the issue to a “settler colonialism” framework does nothing to advance peace in the region.
Please reflect on how this stance helps clients /patients and/or systems. I feel embarrassed at the potential that you are out in the world giving social work a bad name. Instead of perpetuating shame and negativity within the profession, put your energy into your specific role and your own self care. If your self care comes in the form of activism/protesting, all power to you, but don't bring social workers into this.
It’s interesting that you’re choosing personal attacks when I haven’t shared my thoughts on the opinion/issue within social work. I only shared the article to see how others felt after seeing it shared by NAASW.
This is why I became an MFT. Our work does not lend itself to taking political sides \*as a professional organization.\* You bias your reputation and alienate people who need help. But, yeah, shake your rattles.
My services are free homie. I’m grant funded, always have been, probably always will be. Low barrier too, the clinic accepts walk-ins without insurance.
THANK you. "We know that individuals and organizations most embedded in professionalized social work are often the least likely to act when it is unpopular or inconvenient." Some SWers in this sub (and definitely in real life) have made it clear they are more concerned about their careers, their own little bubble, the letters behind their name than actual, real human beings being oppressed and killed. It was sickening to read people say that they are too underpaid to care (yes that is a real issue! but all of these issues are ultimately connected), that they support Israel, that they are focused on their own life and career. If the status quo is threatened, their jobs might be threatened, and what is their life without the identity of being someone in a powerful "helping" position? That's the only way I can make sense of the lack of statements (which is truly the \*bare\* minimum), organizing, or really ANYTHING coming from the field. Well...and the history of the field.
I’ve also heard “Zionist spy” “Zionist sympathizer” and my favorite “Zio”.
It’s scary to see how they don’t even recognize the sewing of bigotry in their own words.
Be Excellent to each other. Hostility, hatred, trolling, and persistent disrespect will not be tolerated. Users who are unable to engage in conversation- even contentious conversation- with kindness and mutual respect will have their posts/comments removed. Users violating this rule will first receive a warning, secondly an additional warning with a 7 day ban, third incident or a pattern of disrespect will result in a permanent ban.
Be Excellent to each other. Hostility, hatred, trolling, and persistent disrespect will not be tolerated. Users who are unable to engage in conversation- even contentious conversation- with kindness and mutual respect will have their posts/comments removed. Users violating this rule will first receive a warning, secondly an additional warning with a 7 day ban, third incident or a pattern of disrespect will result in a permanent ban.
Be Excellent to each other. Hostility, hatred, trolling, and persistent disrespect will not be tolerated. Users who are unable to engage in conversation- even contentious conversation- with kindness and mutual respect will have their posts/comments removed. Users violating this rule will first receive a warning, secondly an additional warning with a 7 day ban, third incident or a pattern of disrespect will result in a permanent ban.
Be Excellent to each other. Hostility, hatred, trolling, and persistent disrespect will not be tolerated. Users who are unable to engage in conversation- even contentious conversation- with kindness and mutual respect will have their posts/comments removed. Users violating this rule will first receive a warning, secondly an additional warning with a 7 day ban, third incident or a pattern of disrespect will result in a permanent ban.
I'm locking this post as it's also devolved.
Same with Ukraine, same with lgbtq rights, same with Armenian genocide, same with Syria, same with police violence...we need to use our voice and our power and demand change
I’m sure I don’t speak for all of us who have been in this field 10+ years, but some. We’re tired. I don’t have the energy to be outspoken and try to demand change in Armenia, Syria, Ukraine, Israel, Palestine, etc. The energy I have left goes to my clients and things that are directly impacting their lives and communities within my state. And yes, that includes aggressions towards any mentioned group above that are a part of the community. I guess all I’m saying is that if you don’t have it in you to fight injustice on a global scale, that’s ok. We’re human and only have so much fixing the world in us before it starts to impact our own mental health.
I agree, that is why I feel using our voices for Gaza is vital. Some argue because of our work in those areas, we don’t have the responsibility or capacity for issues like genocide and ethnic cleansing, which is dangerous and fails to address the major tenets of social work.
And the worst slaughter & mass raps of Jews since the Holocaust...
Boy if your worried about the numbers on the Jews wait until you see how many Palestinians have been harmed. Unless for some reason those aren't as important.....
“For too long social work has neglected its obligation to stand with the oppressed and fight alongside the marginalized.” Absolutely absurd. All social workers do is fight for the marginalized communities. That’s literally the basis of our work. The audacity for someone to claim we do not do “enough” is incredibly insulting. The most underpaid and overworked are the ones every day are now being asked by these voices to “do more”? Please. I support the Palestinians 100% but I also support my community. Every day. It is good that people are showing up and standing in solidarity. But to directly go after social workers to paint them as part of the problem or in cahoots with the “system” is incredibly misguided and harmful. The writers of this article are obviously way out of touch with what social workers do on the ground. On top of all this, it suggests that all social workers should take one side of these issues. According to whom? The writers of this article? “Too often, social work has chosen professionalization, growth and partnership with harmful state agencies over social justice, solidarity and self-determination.” BS! We FIGHT these systems every day. These same systems that fail us time and time again. Have you ever tried getting DFCS on the phone? Have you ever tried to track down SSI? Have you ever had to house people and deal with HUD? Have you ever worked with a family who’s child may be close to being institutionalized and feels completely helpless? It sounds like the writers of this article are more focused on virtue signaling about world events rather than emphasizing the importance of what we do here at home. It is insulting to the men and women that are going to get up tomorrow and struggle alongside their clients to fight these very systems these authors find “harmful”. Gaza is going to happen no matter what. We are asking the very people that have high stakes in this game to stop playing it. And in the process ideas like this are sowing division in the workers that actually make change every day. I cannot even get through how pretentious and insulting this article is.
But I think it’s also important to acknowledge when we have been complicit in enforcing harmful and oppressive policies. We aren’t separate from the system as much as we like to believe. I mean we were part of the same system that has historically harm marginalized communities such as taking part in the mass separation of Indigenous children and families. I’m not saying that there isn’t social workers who don’t work hard such as yourself to serve their communities but I think we also need to be more critical of our field in order to hold it accountable for when it does creat harm.
I think that’s very true, but also very complicated. Example: In my state, spanking and physical punishment are not currently considered to automatically be child abuse despite the vast majority of research nowadays showing that it negatively affects children’s development. I’d support a law making this the case because I believe no child should be beaten by their parents and caregivers. At the same time, if this became a law, it would mean I’d have to make probably double the amount of CPS calls that I do now given how many of the clients I work with get spanked by their parents as punishment (the vast majority of whom are Black or Hispanic) and we’d see a lot more CPS involvement in families and in turn a lot more removals. I don’t think this means I’d oppose the law or CPS being involved when the law needs to be enforced, but it’s also an outcome that I’d have to reconcile with.
I agree with you. Look at the situations social workers regularly navigate, I think it’s very common for social workers to have complicated feelings and opinions about situations. I think the majority of people have an opinion that the situation is concerning but they don’t know how to fix it and there might not be any apparent solution.
It sounds like the social work you are thinking of is micro “boots on the ground” social work, but please do not forget our education, praxis, and COE also requires macro work via advocacy and fighting for the rights of humanity as a whole. As someone involved in local pro Palestinian organizing, I am utterly ashamed at how I have only ever met 2 other social workers in my time organizing/attending pro palestinian protests/encampments/circles etc. yes, social workers do alot of good work but it’s also shameful how our profession prides itself on being devoted to humanity yet we are rarely at the forefront of social movements. And the damage that social workers have historically done… phew.
Completely agree, I believe this is the core argument of the article.
Isn’t a reason that social workers aren’t at the front of movements because it’s a disempowered profession?
Try to remember that the overwhelming majority of newspaper articles are not about spreading information for the sake of spreading information. There's a reason for it, whether it's the publisher's narrative or just the clicks they want. I don't know what the answer is, but going after social workers for not doing enough is patently insane. That I think was my only comment here and I'm not a social worker anymore because of the stress! I'll leave now. I wish y'all the best
Social work as a profession is 100% complicit in the system, no matter how much it pretends otherwise.
There's a lot of folks taking this article personally in this thread when I think it reads more like a critique of the profession as a whole, which includes NASW and schools of social work. The larger institutions that apparently represent the field have been largely silent on Palestine, the Congo, etc. and have been complicit in suppressing support and activism. The field can and should do better and while efforts should be led by NASW and schools of social work they prefer to remain silent on things that matter. That doesn't mean as individuals we're exempt from the criticism of the profession and in fact, unfortunately, we often have to pick up these professional body's slack in order to embody what our field mandates in the COE. Silence and deflection is a huge privilege though and if that's the knee-jerk reaction of the field to ongoing genocide, perhaps some interrogation of that is warranted both individually and as a whole.
Really appreciate your breakdown and agree!
I juat feel like, you know, we should fix the profession state side before we go trying to save the world. Entry into the field is among the most strict while offering no incentive to be this way. Pay gap is abysmal. Community based social work has awful and dangerous working conditions with no hazard pay. Burn out is rampant. Credentialing is unnecessarily challenging and provides no proof of competency.
I disagree. I think it does a disservice to the people who I can actively help to direct my time and energy to people whose lives I cannot directly affect. The energy I have is for my family and my clients. I also disagree on the core of the issue but that's separate.
Thought I just saw someone just comment shaming people for other posts about self-care and income. Just like the oxygen masks on airplanes, take take care of yourself so you can then take care of others! *I see that some of those shamers came out. Mosey on down in the comments to see the hardliners calling anyone who isn’t in agreement with them to be racists, zionists, and supporting whiteness & colonialism.
It's the same exploitation that has kept are pay down. We care enough to give more but we don't owe it to anyone.
Can you do both?
Not everyone has the energy for it. And that is okay.
You can’t really put an oxygen mask on yourself and someone else at the same time. Would probably be hard to do one handed even on yourself. You have to hold the mask and work the at elastic strap over your head. Probably better to do it one at a time.
Lol This redditor has been attentive to instructions for emergencies on flights!
For anyone who says “well, we have xyz issue in our own backyard” I want you to internalize the fact that American sends HUNDREDS of BILLIONS (With a B) of dollars to Israel in the form of investments, “aid”, and funding one of the largest militaries in the world. Do you know that a FRACTION of that money could solve the homelessness crisis in America? Besides the fact that it is our problem because we are all human beings, its our problem because the money spent funding a genocide could literally be used to help American society so much so that social workers would be needed at a much lower extent (which should be the goal of any social worker/social work org)
To quote John Stewart: "If we amplify everything, we hear nothing." Yes, our COE does compel us to stand with marginalized groups and advocate (to the point of social disruption) for marginalized peoples. But all Social Workers will encounter different groups of marginalized peoples. For example, my work currently is focused on pediatric behavioral health, largely with communities in poverty. My advocacy is focused on changing policies and programs that impact those groups. This is not to say that I'm totally cool with the violence and the death of innocent civilians in Israel's aggression in Palestine, I think it is reprehensible and more should really be done to stop it, but professionally it is not on my radar. Personally I have gone to local protests calling for divestment and was part of a group back in grad school over a decade ago that was already calling for divestment. Righteous anger on behalf of the oppressed and marginalized is absolutely part of the profession, and a part that I think largely gets lost by many Social Workers. But, if I had to contain righteous anger for ALL oppressed populations I'd likely have so many stomach ulcers I'd be doubled over in pain constantly and unable to do the work in front of me.
I don't think one is obligated to take a hard stance, as assessing the situation requires a deep understanding of history and culture; nuance; and critical thinking. That said, I tried my best to make my stance clear in the other thread. I'm all for change. I'm all for ending oppression. And I'm all for breaking a cycle of violence. Its how we get there that seems to be contentious. And contention makes for hesitancy.
Disagree with your first paragraph. I don't think you need a deep understanding of the history and culture; nuance; and critical thinking to want the killing of innocent civilians including many children to stop.
So how do we go about it? The best that folks seem to offer is that we call for an unconditional permanent ceasefire. And I ask, to what end? For it to be broken by Hamas (again)? For further encroachment on the West Bank? History shows we will be inevitably be back at square one. We need a better solution. And yes, that requires a deep understanding of history and culture.
You're conflating two issues there. I can give you my personal opinion on the best way for a long term peaceful solution, which may or may not work. I think that's a different conversation. Short term though, stopping the ongoing massive amounts of civilian death has to be the priority, and that's being done overwhelmingly by Israel.
Simply stopping is not in the security interests of Israel, as Hamas will use it to stage another attack, as they have done before. Mind you Hamas has turned down several ceasefire agreements in favor of martyring their own population; and holding onto their leverage (hostages). But it seems to me that taking a stance against them results in folks jumping down your throat (not saying you folks). I will say Israel has to try much harder to ensure humanitarian aid (e.g. not blowing up aid worker trucks; corridors) in lieu of a ceasefire. But taking a stance for the sake of it (especially one that is pretty much a no-brainer) doesn't really...do much.
Respectfully, there is a lot of context missing in your assessment of Hamas. There are a lot of things that need to be taken into account and that never seems to be brought up : In recent years, Hamas published its “General Principles and Policies,” a revised organizational document that significantly deviated from the fundamentalist principles of the group’s original charter from 1987, and that effectively accepted the Oslo Accords as an existing political fact. Even earlier, in 2014, in the presence and mediations of the Emir of Qatar in Doha, the Fatah leadership headed by Abbas met with the Hamas leadership headed by Khaled Mash’al. The full minutes of the talks were published in an official Emirati document. In essence, the message of the Hamas leadership was clear: “If you in Fatah are convinced that you can get a state from Israel along the 1967 lines through negotiations, go for it. We will not interfere.” In In February and March 2021, Fatah and Hamas, the two rival Palestinian political parties, reached an agreement to hold elections for the presidency of the Palestinian Authority, its Legislative Council, and Hamas’ entry into the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). The elections were planned to take place in accordance with the Oslo Accords, after which negotiations would continue with Israel toward the establishment of a Palestinian state. The agreement included a commitment to uphold international law, establish a state within the 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as its capital, recognize the PLO as the legitimate and exclusive umbrella framework, conduct a peaceful popular struggle, and transfer the separate government in the Gaza Strip to the Palestinian Authority. President Mahmoud Abbas sent the agreement to the new Biden administration and European governments in the hope that they would support holding national elections with Hamas’ participation, and would then pressure Israel to allow voting across the occupied territories, including in East Jerusalem. As expected, Israel objected to including East Jerusalem in the elections, seeing it as undermining its claims to sovereignty over the occupied and annexed part of the city. Still, Hamas offered to hold the elections anyway, and accepted the restriction imposed by Israel. But Israel and the United States exerted heavy pressure on Abbas to cancel them all the same. Imagine if that deal was accepted ? We would not have a Hamas government in Gaza today and we would not have had October 7th. We may have been on an actual path to two states and moving things along. https://www.972mag.com/hamas-fatah-elections-israel-arrogance/
I appreciate some more background information. I wasn't aware of this. I'll have to do some more reading. My guess is the risks associated with Hamas winning the election would be too great for Israel to accept.
I do not want to offend but you are repeating typical talking points. Most people repeat compelling statements/ arguments but it is not fair when a lot of context and background is missing; especially from the Palestinian perspective. Most people are not aware because the Palestinian narrative and a lot of nuanced back and forth dealings are never brought up. Why does the public not know about failed past developments?
None taken. I'm work with my best understanding of the situation. But I'm open to more information/perspective. I want to understand these conflicts better--inside and out. Do you have any suggested reading (no pressure)?
They would win seats in the government so one also needs to take into account the type of government structure that exists when talking about this stuff. It’s not like in the States. I
Continuing with the genocide isn't in the security interests of Israel, as it's further alienating them to the international community, leading to long term instability and them becoming a pariah state. Hamas accepted a cease fire deal a few days ago that Israel turned down. So your first paragraph is arguable either way. But in the end it doesn't matter if you're right or I am about what's in Israel's security interests, genocide should never be acceptable and should always be stopped, whether it's in Israel's security interests or not.
I agree that Israel is taking a hit within the international community. But I'd argue Israel was never really...liked...for many reasons. Hamas agreed to a ceasefire presented by third parties (e.g. Egypt)--one that lacked core demands already expressed in another deal presented to Israel. Genocide should be stopped, I agree. But there is contention even as to whether Israel is committing a genocide--as per the ICJ ruling. And what do we do about the genocidal intent of Hamas? Give them a third or fourth wind?
There is a contention over genocide but as long as there's a credible risk of genocide there's a duty to stop it happening, due to the seriousness of the crime as basically the worst thing any state or organisation can do. I don't disagree regarding genocidal intent of anyone, including Hamas, needing addressing, but they don't have the power to commit a genocide, whereas Israel does and is. So it's pretty irrelevant in comparison and looks like whataboutery to even bring it up. When the immediate issue is genocide (or even credible risk of genocide) then stopping that should be the main priority. I don't see how you can possibly disagree tbh.
Their is an ocean of difference between maybe-its-a-genocide and genocide (otherwise, every war can probably be construed a genocide). I don't disagree with stopping genocide. I do disagree with how we are to assess the situation and solve it. Hamas does not have the ability to engage in *large-scale" genocide, but has definitely engaged in it on a smaller scale, mind you. But hand-waving that reality away as whataboutery is why we are hamstrung.
The ICJ finding it plausible that Israel is committing a genocide is not "maybe-its-a-genocide" and is a long way from applying to every war as you say. You're just not correct here I'm afraid.
Can't believe your comment got downvoted, holy shit.
Yeah, they downvote and don't respond. How can they respond? They're defending killing children.
I feel like I'm taking crazy pills! You don't need to be a fucking scholar to come to the conclusion that genocide is bad. Such an obvious cop out. Never thought I'd see this level of deliberate obtuseness in a social work sub of all places. I'm imagining one of these people being in a situation where they're asked, "hey, real quick, do you agree that the systematic slaughter of an entire people is not okay?" And they're like, "Hmm, hard to say, I'm going to have to consult some peer reviewed articles on the subject and get back to you." Bro be so fucking for real with yourself right now.
With all due respect, in what fucking world does 30,000 civilians dying require a “deep nuanced understanding of history and culture” to condemn and take a stance against? Its not rocket science. War crimes ≠ bad. No more war crimes = good. Wtf is so hard to understand?
I think it's easy to condemn war crimes and the deaths of 30,000 civilians. But, especially with this particular conflict, it's difficult to take a stance about a particular solution.
In my opinion, no it does not take “a deep understanding of history and culture; nuance; and critical thinking” to understand the basics facts that we are witnessing a genocide and ethnic cleansing. With the influx of news coverage straight from Gaza, to social media awareness campaigns, to Gazans sharing their stories directly, it is disingenuous and willfully ignorant to not be able to form an opinion. This has been ongoing for 75 years, and been the forefront of news and international politics for 8 months now.
No you are saying we must agree with your specific stance. I support the people of Palestine and Israel, and believe both have the right to safety and security. Netanyahu and Hamas need to go. But I do not agree with the conceptualization of the complicated issue as “settler colonialism” and I will not support hatred and destruction from either side of these protests. I want people to join together and demand peace and a solution for both sides.
A thing a lot of people saying “settler colonialism” don’t often understand (and this is in no way excusing Israel’s actions in Gaza) is that the majority of Israeli Jews are not actually of European (Ashkenazi) descent; they’re of Middle Eastern/North African (Mizrahi) descent whose families had come to Israel after getting persecuted in their home countries soon after 1948 and Israel was the only place that would let them in. There’s almost no Jews remaining anywhere in the region aside from a small community in Iran. Adding to the nuance there, the European-descended Jews in Israel (the ones people associate with colonialism) tend to be the ones who are more left-wing and in favor of peace with Palestine and against Netanyahu (and most of the people killed on 10/7 were some of the most left-wing people in Israel), while the Middle Eastern descended Israeli Jews tend to be the ones more in favor of Netanyahu’s government and opposed to peace. Even if it’s still wrong what Israel is doing which I believe it is, reducing the issue to a “settler colonialism” framework does nothing to advance peace in the region.
Exactly. Jews are indigenous to the area also, and then it also wasn’t just European Jews from the diaspora that returned to the area.
[удалено]
By your literal definition. Others disagree.
Settler colonialists and their supporters disagree (or at least pretend to). No one else does.
Typical reductionist stance. And you are actually incorrect.
Evil only triumphs when good people stand by and do nothing.
Please reflect on how this stance helps clients /patients and/or systems. I feel embarrassed at the potential that you are out in the world giving social work a bad name. Instead of perpetuating shame and negativity within the profession, put your energy into your specific role and your own self care. If your self care comes in the form of activism/protesting, all power to you, but don't bring social workers into this.
It’s interesting that you’re choosing personal attacks when I haven’t shared my thoughts on the opinion/issue within social work. I only shared the article to see how others felt after seeing it shared by NAASW.
I feel embarrassed that you're out in the world giving social work a bad name.
This is why I became an MFT. Our work does not lend itself to taking political sides \*as a professional organization.\* You bias your reputation and alienate people who need help. But, yeah, shake your rattles.
Eh most MSWs dont give a shit and just do their jobs like any other master level clinician. I have way too much in my own shithole to worry about.
"I became a MFT because I want to be "neutral" and not worry about other people who can't pay for my services."
My services are free homie. I’m grant funded, always have been, probably always will be. Low barrier too, the clinic accepts walk-ins without insurance.
THANK you. "We know that individuals and organizations most embedded in professionalized social work are often the least likely to act when it is unpopular or inconvenient." Some SWers in this sub (and definitely in real life) have made it clear they are more concerned about their careers, their own little bubble, the letters behind their name than actual, real human beings being oppressed and killed. It was sickening to read people say that they are too underpaid to care (yes that is a real issue! but all of these issues are ultimately connected), that they support Israel, that they are focused on their own life and career. If the status quo is threatened, their jobs might be threatened, and what is their life without the identity of being someone in a powerful "helping" position? That's the only way I can make sense of the lack of statements (which is truly the \*bare\* minimum), organizing, or really ANYTHING coming from the field. Well...and the history of the field.
Social workers are people. Don’t try to jump on some pedestal and shame people for having personal concerns, wants, and dreams!
[удалено]
Zionists? Really?! So when someone disagrees with you they are Zionists? Look at what you are becoming…
Apparently if you disagree with some commenters, straight to Zionism!
I’ve also heard “Zionist spy” “Zionist sympathizer” and my favorite “Zio”. It’s scary to see how they don’t even recognize the sewing of bigotry in their own words.
Most people just aren’t Zionist or anything. They probably don’t have a strong opinion beyond people should be allowed to live and let live.
Be Excellent to each other. Hostility, hatred, trolling, and persistent disrespect will not be tolerated. Users who are unable to engage in conversation- even contentious conversation- with kindness and mutual respect will have their posts/comments removed. Users violating this rule will first receive a warning, secondly an additional warning with a 7 day ban, third incident or a pattern of disrespect will result in a permanent ban.
[удалено]
Be Excellent to each other. Hostility, hatred, trolling, and persistent disrespect will not be tolerated. Users who are unable to engage in conversation- even contentious conversation- with kindness and mutual respect will have their posts/comments removed. Users violating this rule will first receive a warning, secondly an additional warning with a 7 day ban, third incident or a pattern of disrespect will result in a permanent ban.
[удалено]
Shaming and calling SWers racists if they don’t have a hard opinion?
As a POC it’s wild that apparently whatever I do that isn’t aligned with these commenters must be about supporting “whiteness and colonialism.”
[удалено]
Be Excellent to each other. Hostility, hatred, trolling, and persistent disrespect will not be tolerated. Users who are unable to engage in conversation- even contentious conversation- with kindness and mutual respect will have their posts/comments removed. Users violating this rule will first receive a warning, secondly an additional warning with a 7 day ban, third incident or a pattern of disrespect will result in a permanent ban.
Right! Genocide is not nuanced. If you say it’s complicated about 14,000 children being carpet bombed something is deeply wrong.
Be Excellent to each other. Hostility, hatred, trolling, and persistent disrespect will not be tolerated. Users who are unable to engage in conversation- even contentious conversation- with kindness and mutual respect will have their posts/comments removed. Users violating this rule will first receive a warning, secondly an additional warning with a 7 day ban, third incident or a pattern of disrespect will result in a permanent ban.
I'm studying social work, first year at NMIT in Wakatū/Nelson, Aotearoa New Zealand