At the Crossroads of Care and Identity: The Lived Realities of Black Male Clinical Social Workers

Background and Purpose:
Black male clinical social workers (BMCSWs) remain underrepresented in the mental health workforce, despite their critical role in advancing culturally responsive care. Existing research has largely overlooked how BMCSWs construct professional identities and navigate the unique intersections of race, gender, and clinical practice. This study addresses two research questions: (1) How do cultural and contextual factors, including social media use, shape the professional practices and engagement strategies of BMCSWs? (2) How do BMCSWs manage self-perception, navigate workplace dynamics, and develop trust and communication in professional settings? The study responds to calls for equity in behavioral health by examining how BMCSWs experience and respond to systemic challenges, particularly in the context of digital engagement and occupational segregation.

Methods:
This qualitative study used a phenomenological approach guided by the Framework Method. Data were collected through six virtual focus groups with 21 licensed or license-eligible Black male clinical social workers across the U.S. Participants were recruited through convenience sampling. Focus groups explored participants’ experiences in clinical practice, licensure processes, social media use, workplace dynamics, and identity formation. Thematic analysis incorporated both inductive codes drawn from participant narratives and deductive codes informed by intersectionality theory, occupational segregation theory, social learning theory, and the Black Perspective. Demographic data were also collected to contextualize findings.

Results:
Three major themes emerged: (1) Strategies from Tokenizing to Empowering Black Male Clinicians, (2) Navigating Professional Identity, Career Growth, and Systemic Barriers, and (3) Leveraging Social Media for Advocacy, Professional Identity, and Engagement While Managing Boundaries and Risk. Participants described balancing authenticity with professionalism in predominantly white spaces, often encountering tokenization while simultaneously being sought after for their cultural insight. Experiences with licensure challenges, underrepresentation, and racialized gatekeeping were common. Mentorship, especially from other Black clinicians, was seen as a crucial buffer against burnout and isolation. Participants also shared that their personal and cultural identities enhanced therapeutic engagement, especially with Black male clients. Social media was used for advocacy and visibility but also presented risks related to surveillance, ethical concerns, and professional vulnerability.

Conclusions and Implications:
BMCSWs offer critical insight into the complexities of providing mental health care while navigating systemic racism, occupational exclusion, and evolving digital norms. Their strategies for advocacy, identity negotiation, and client engagement demonstrate resilience and innovation. These findings suggest a need for systemic changes in clinical supervision, licensure pathways, and workforce development to support the recruitment, retention, and advancement of BMCSWs. Additionally, implications extend to ethics education and social work curricula, which must address the emerging role of social media in professional practice. This study contributes to a deeper understanding of the lived experiences of BMCSWs and provides a foundation for future research, policy reform, and culturally responsive practice in clinical social work.