Social Service delivery in Singapore is currently undergoing what one might call a realignment of spirit (as opposed to a cosmetic facelift). There is a concerted state led effort towards reorganising and recalibrating social services to ensure quality service, whilst at the same time establish key benchmarks for family service centre social workers to aspire to. This shift represents the emphasis for social workers to focus on social work. Social work as it should be practiced, and social work as aligned to the proficiencies expected of one armed with a 3-4 year degree from a reputable university.
This version of social work defines 3 main activities that undergird practice: Case management, Group work and Community work. The first two activities are clearer in the sense that they focus on supporting behavioural and situational change for vulnerable populations such as ex-offenders, youths, women affected by abuse, etc. These are two activities that have been practiced regularly in Singapore.
It is the last activity (which is the focus of this article) that may cause confusion: What exactly is Community Work? Could it be an extension of group work, where instead of working with a closed (or open) group of 12 persons with addiction issues, we work instead with an open group of 50 - 100? Most likely not. Does it involve working with the grassroots leaders and residents' committees? Would it involve social action?
When pondering these questions I am compelled to think about the reasons for these confusion.
The community as an extension of a group
One thought is that generally we probably have been conditioned to think about the idea of a "community" as an extension of a "group". In this case, one might be prone to use group work skills and activities to a community, which is inherently problematic, as group work is generally more effective for a group of 12 - 20 individuals, and the practice of giving everyone a voice, may be onerous if you are working with a community of over 100 individuals.
But if you looking at community work from this perspective, one would probably surmise that you would be using alternative and innovative means to support change, e.g. the use of collective practices, and social media. Another problem stemming from this perspective is that one might wonder what exactly is the target of change: individual experiences of vulnerabilities and distress, or environmental structures that oppress and maintain these vulnerabilities?
Community Work as grassroots related activities
Singapore's grassroots movement is very much a state led activity to engage the public in building a civic society and increase resident participation in community bonding activities (Vasoo, 2001). The term "Community Work" has long been synonymous with the Grassroots under the wing of the People's Association. Within this definition, the community worker can range from the passionate grassroots volunteer to the People's Association staff working at the community centre, who are geared towards the common goals delineated above. The community worker, as Popple (1995) puts it, is an open occupation where persons from varying disciplines and training can be involved in it.
There would then need to be further thought into what role then would social workers play in the context of this version of community work. Should they play a key role in organising community planning and locality development (Rothman, 1968, cited in Mehta (2004), or would these endeavours be better led by local volunteers? Hence problems arise as to whether grassroots movements in the RCs could be best able to represent the local populations, as they have frequently been criticised as being too politically aligned. There would then be concerns about how this would impact social action, which is the third characteristic of Community Work, which is geared towards helping disadvantaged populations address power imbalances in society.
Community Practice as Social Action
Social Action presents itself as a bottom up approach where civil society is mobilised to pressure the state to seek changes in policy, and legislation (Dixon, Hoatson, & Weeks, 2003) This definition would be anathema to the social discourse in Singapore. State run programmes may interfere with the autonomy of community practitioners to champion social causes, where professionals may be decried as "handmaidens to state oppression" (Hoatson, 2003). This version of community work may be better left in the hands of independently run human rights activists and organisations.
An alternative perspective to social action (and probably more palatable here), is a partnership model with the government (Weeks et al, 2003) in terms of community planning and locality development. One might argue then that the key players in this model would then be the local population representatives.
So... in conclusion, what exactly is community work? I have probably confounded more than clarified in this post (though perhaps that was my intention). I would guess that the bottom line is that, as social workers, we have to be clear about mission of the profession, i.e. to address the needs of the vulnerable. At the community level, this can take the form of outreach and community analysis, and raising issues with the government either by social action or partnerships. Community work I feel is less an extension of group work (which in essence seeks to address individual change at the microsystem levels), but more of addressing community issues such as power imbalances and increasing awareness of social issues such family violence in more localised communities. Community Work locally would then have to revolve around rigorous needs assessment and case trends analysis. As social workers, we have to strategise the best possible means to achieve this change through means of careful negotiation and fighting the right battles. Singapore may not yet be ready for social action as practiced in other contexts, but change is happening.
Another issue is that so far, none of the community work examples I read about seem to fit into the proposed locality based client-referred community work model we are looking to develop. Community work models that I am familiar with are located more in the upstream of outreach, asset building and community awareness building models.
A reflection point for me is to further delve into more conversations surrounding this issue. I will end this post with a quote derived from an Australian text (Australia being my second home for this year):
"Community Practice... involves the conscious application of principles, strategies and skills to build and maintain a sense of community, both as an end to itself and as a vehicle to achieve social, economic, political and cultural change. Community practices encompass community development, community organising, local and neighbourhood development, social action and community action, public advocacy, social movement, campaigns and mass mobilisation." (Dixon et al, 2003: 5)
References
Dixon, Hoatson, & Weeks (2003). Sharing Theory and Practice. in Weeks, Hoatson, & Dixon. Community Practices in Australia. Pearson.
Mehta (2003). Methods of Social Work Practice. in Mehta, K. & Wee, A. Eds. Social Work in Context: A Reader. Marshall Cavendish.
Popple, K. (1995) Analyzing Community Work: Its theory and practice. Buckingham: Open University press.
Vasoo (2001). Community Development in Singapore: New Directions and Challenges. Asia Pacific Journal of Political Science. 9 (1)
Comments