The Impact Gender Has on the Political Engagement of Clinical Social Workers

Background and Purpose:

In the social work literature, there are approximately 40 journal articles, which are mainly descriptive, on the political participation of social workers.  An even smaller number focus on clinical social workers and within these, inconsistencies exist in explaining this group’s political participation (Harris & White, 2013).  This study fills a critical gap in the literature by using a gender analysis and feminist theory to understand the factors impacting clinical social workers' involvement in the political sphere.  This presentation will describe the motivating factors behind clinical social workers’ political engagement and examine how social, political, and economic forces impact female and male social workers. Comprehending why clinical social workers participate in politics can elucidate the factors driving and impeding political participation, which could lead to new tactics and tools to better meet the profession’s ethical obligations.  Further, this new knowledge can inform the educational standards of schools of social work.

 

Methods:

Semi-structured, in-depth interviews were conducted with 23 clinical social workers (ages 28-66 years) in New England.  To participate in the study, social workers had to spend the majority of their time in clinical practice—defined by the Dictionary of Social Work and Social Care—and have an MSW from an accredited program.  The sample was predominantly female (77%) and White (70%). All participants identified as heterosexual, 54% were married, and 32% were affiliated with a religion.  Annual household income ranged from $35,000 to more than $160,000, with 45% reporting incomes between $60,000 to $99,999 and 35% with incomes of $100,000 or more.  Purposive and snowball sampling was used to recruit participants.  Interviews were transcribed verbatim and a five-stage analysis process was conducted with a female co-coder using NVivo software, guided by a critical phenomenological methodology.

Findings:

Several major findings were discovered: a gender gap existed between male and female clinical social workers’ political participation, with most female clinical social workers viewing themselves as unqualified for and unknowledgeable of politics, and possessing low levels of political ambition and confidence to engage in the political process; many female participants described the challenges of achieving a work-life balance between their professional careers and traditional gender-based roles; and most participants found it unethical to intertwine any form of political participation into practice, but acknowledged how policies and laws directly impacted their clients, and their own personal and professional lives.

Conclusion and Implications:

The vast majority of social workers are women. Increased understanding of clinical social workers’ political participation allows educators to adapt explicit and implicit curriculum to include feminism and develop students’ political knowledge, engagement, and efficacy.  Ensuring appropriate attention to civic and political content within foundational courses and better integration in field could enhance students’ political participation.  Equally as important, more equitable agency and social policies need to be implemented to assist women with their work-life balance struggles, which could allow for greater political engagement.  These changes could help address clinical social workers’ perceived limitations, allowing them to fulfill ethical obligations to broader society and confront neoliberal structures impacting practice.