Based on your research of the 1864 Poor Laws, The Elizabethan Poor Law of 1601 created parish-based poor relief and introduced the concept of less eligibility to deter people from relying on charity. The Poor Law Amendment Act of 1834 focused more on the able-bodied poor and introduced harsh conditions in workhouses. The Home Assistance Act of 1947 introduced more assistance for vulnerable groups like the elderly, disabled, and single parents after WWII (Smith 87). Three current policies related to the Poor Laws are as follows: Welfare reform in the 1990s introduced work requirements and time limits for cash benefits, reminiscent of the emphasis on less eligibility in the 1601 and 1834 laws (Cahn 23). Child support policies aim to reduce public expenditure by requiring non-custodial parents, usually fathers, to provide for children. This is similar to the focus on fathers named in bastardy clauses of the Poor Laws. Restrictions on immigrants’ access to public benefits today echo settlement laws from the Poor Laws residency requirements.
Three barriers to service are Structural barriers like lack of services in rural areas, inaccessible buildings, or services not available in a native language. As CEO, I would require providers to offer translation, expand rural outreach, and improve facility accessibility. Economic barriers like service costs, taking time off work for appointments, or reliance on unreliable public transit. I would advocate for employment policies supporting health/social service appointments and subsidies for transport access. The stigma around seeking mental health care, addiction treatment, and public benefits. I would support anti-stigma campaigns and strict confidentiality policies. Theoretical underpinning: The social ecological model recognizes that barriers can exist at multiple levels – individual, interpersonal, organizational, community, and policy. My solutions will aim to reduce barriers across these levels.
Opportunity theory states that poverty results from a lack of economic opportunity, often due to discrimination, segregation, poor education, or labor issues. Culture of poverty theory argues that the behaviors and values of the poor perpetuate poverty across generations through familial and community socialization. I subscribe more to opportunity theory because it locates the causes of poverty in external structural factors rather than blaming impoverished individuals. Discrimination and lack of access are ongoing barriers that must be addressed through policy.
The dialectical process proposes that competing societal forces contribute to change and progress over time. The thesis is the mainstream force, and the antithesis challenges it, synthesizing a new mainstream force. The recent growth of remote work due to COVID could be a dialectical shift, with traditional onsite work as the thesis growing technological capacity enabling remote work as antithesis, resulting in the new synthesis of hybrid remote/onsite work models. As an employee, I witnessed a dialectical shift when traditional top-down management was challenged by more participatory and collaborative leadership styles incorporating staff input, resulting in positive changes in my organization’s culture and policies.
Social problems develop when a condition is defined as problematic, widespread, harmful to society, and changeable through collective action. Racism refers to institutional practices and cultural assumptions that enforce racial inequity and disadvantage racial minority groups. Classism refers to attitudes and practices that enforce class-based privilege/disadvantage determined by socioeconomic status, family lineage, networks, cultural capital, and access to power.
From a narrow definition, where only those with the most severe symptoms were diagnosed as autistic, to current recognition of this condition in terms of a broad spectrum. The more comprehensive specification indicates that many milder forms of autism are now viewed as problematic for those who have been diagnosed, a reflection of changes in how society views the concepts of disability and normalcy. Racism and ableism played roles; indeed, autistic traits that were more palatable among the privileged in society became increasingly medicalized for minorities.
Yes, the heart of empathy, genuineness, and unconditional positive regard from ASK makes effective client relationships possible. With an open, non-judgmental attitude toward clients of varying backgrounds, building up trust and rapport is easier. When evaluating needs, good listening and questioning skills allow well-understood client situations and perspectives. Knowledge of community resources aids client referrals and practical support.
A bureaucracy is an organizational structure of specialized, hierarchically divided tasks under the supervision of regulated systems. Essential functions include efficient administration of duties, uniformity and standardization in procedures, and recording everything you do. Dysfunctions include rigid rules leading to goal displacement, misuse of power, and resistance to change. Joined together, the bureaucracies play an essential role but must have supervision and flexible application to meet people’s needs rather than form ends.
I learned about social constructionist frameworks for understanding social problems, intersectionality in research, and global social work models. This knowledge will help me approach client and community issues holistically while considering multiple dimensions of identity and disadvantage. System theory sees society as interconnected elements working to maintain equilibrium, whereas conflict theory focuses on power imbalances benefiting dominant groups. I align more with conflict theory’s recognition of discrimination and institutional oppression contributing to social problems.
Work Cited
Smith, Steven Rathgeb. The Transformation of Charity in Post-revolutionary New England. Northeastern UP, 2003, p. 87.
Cahn, Naomi R. “Poor Support / Supported Children: The Intersection of Child Support and Welfare.” Yale Journal of Law and Feminism, vol. 29, no. 2, 2012, pp. 21–53.
write