Re-writing the “rules of engagement”: Using critical reflection to examine ableist social work practice
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.11157/anzswj-vol33iss1id822Keywords:
Critical reflection, social work, ableism, neurodiversityAbstract
INTRODUCTION: Normative beliefs and practices reaffirm a hegemonic construction of human ability that legitimises the socio-cultural status quo. This disenfranchises people with diverse abilities who are excluded from this construction whilst simultaneously normalising the structural inequality and oppression that they experience. Helping professions such as social work often provide support to people who are disadvantaged by these social structures. However, practitioners within these fields are not immune to the influence of socio-cultural norms, therefore it is essential for them to reflect on the ways in which they might reproduce them within their practice.
APPROACH: This article outlines my experience of using critical reflection as a research methodology to examine an incident from my practice. Deconstruction and reconstruction methods were used to analyse the normative assumptions within my construction of this incident.
REFLECTIONS: The deconstruction analysis revealed how assumptions about impairment within my account of the incident were underpinned by ableist discourses. Reconstructing this through a neurodiversity lens enabled me to generate new insights around the anti-oppressive potential for using a pluralistic approach that undermines hegemonic constructions of ability.
CONCLUSIONS: By critically reflecting on this incident, I realised the importance of challenging normative assumptions when practising within neoliberal contexts where socio-cultural hegemony is amplified.
References
Armstrong, T. (2015). The myth of the normal brain: Embracing neurodiversity. AMA Journal of Ethics, 17(4), 348–352. doi:10.1001/journalofethics.2015.17.4.msoc1-1504
Bathje, M., Lannoye, M., Mercier, A., & Panter, K. (2018). A review of occupation-based life skills interventions for adults with neurodevelopmental disorders. Occupational Therapy in Mental Health, 34(2), 165–180. doi:10.1080/0 164212X.2017.1360168.
Bayliss, P. (2009). Against interpretosis: Deleuze, disability, and difference. Journal of Literary & Cultural Disability Studies, 3(3), 281–294,305. doi:10.1353/jlc.0.0023
Bigby, C. (2012). Social inclusion and people with intellectual disability and challenging behaviour: A systematic review. Journal of Intellectual and Developmental Disability, 37(4), 360–374. doi:10.3109/13668250.2012.721878
Burgers, C., & Beukeboom, C. (2016). Stereotype transmission and maintenance through interpersonal communication: The irony bias. Communication Research, 43(3), 414–441. doi:10.1177/0093650214534975
Chomsky, N., & Foucault, M. (2011). Human nature justice versus power: The Chomsky/Foucault debate. Souvenir Press.
Coleman, R., & Ringrose, J. (2013). Deleuze and research methodologies. Edinburgh University Press.
Daley, A. (2010). Reflections on reflexivity and critical reflection as critical research practices. Affilia, 25(1), 68–82. doi:10.1177/0886109909354981
Den-Houting, J. (2019). Neurodiversity: An insider’s perspective. Autism, 23(2), 271–273. doi:10.1177/1362361318820762
Dinishak, J. (2016). The deficit view and its critics. Disability Studies Quarterly, 36(4), 5. doi:10.18061/dsq. v36i4.5236.
Douglas, J., & Bigby, C. (2018). Development of an evidence-based practice framework to guide decision making support for people with cognitive impairment due to acquired brain injury or intellectual disability. Disability and Rehabilitation, 1–8. doi:10.1080/09638288.2018.1 498546
Edwards, C., & Imrie, R. (2003). Disability and bodies as bearers of value. Sociology, 37(2), 239–256. doi:10.1177 /0038038503037002002
Ellem, K., O’Connor, M., Wilson, J., & Williams, S. (2013). Social work with marginalised people who have a mild or borderline intellectual disability: Practicing gentleness and encouraging hope. Australian Social Work, 66(1), 56–71. doi:10.1080/0312407X.2012.710244.
Ellem, K., & Richards, K. (2018). Police contact with young people with cognitive disabilities: Perceptions of procedural (in)justice. Youth Justice, 18(3), 230–247. doi:10.1177/1473225418794357
Fook, J., & Gardner, F. (2007). Practising critical reflection: A resource handbook. Open University Press.
Foucault, M. (1974). The order of things: An archaeology of the human sciences. Vintage Books.
Garrett, P. (2010). Examining the “Conservative Revolution”: Neoliberalism and social work education. Social Work Education, 29(4), 340–355. doi:10.1080/02615470903009015
Gray, M. (2010). Moral sources and emergent ethical theories in social work. British Journal of Social Work, 40(6), 1794–1811. doi:10.1093/bjsw/bcp104
Gwilym, H. (2018). Social work, neoliberalism and authoritarianism: An analysis of the policy document “Regulating Social Workers.” Critical and Radical Social Work, 6(3), 407–413. doi:10.1332/20498601 8X15388226259290
Hallahan, L. (2010). Legitimising social work disability policy practice: Pain or praxis? Australian Social Work, 63(1), 117-132. doi: 10.1080/03124070903515458
Haney, J. (2018). Reconceptualizing autism: An alternative paradigm for social work practice. Journal of Progressive Human Services, 29(1), 61–80. doi:10.1080/10428232. 2017.1394689
Haney, J., & Cullen, J. (2018). An exploratory investigation of social workers’ knowledge and attitudes about autism. Social Work in Mental Health, 16 (2), 201–222. doi:10.1080/15332985.2017.1373265
Hyslop, I. (2018). Neoliberalism and social work identity. European Journal of Social Work, 21(1), 20–31. doi:10.1 080/13691457.2016.1255927
Ivanov, M., & Werner, P. (2010). Behavioral communication: Individual differences in communication style. Personality and Individual Differences, 49(1), 19–23. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2010.02.033
Krcek, T. (2013). Deconstructing disability and neurodiversity: Controversial issues for autism and implications for social work. Journal of Progressive Human Services, 24(1), 4–22. doi:10.1080/10428232.2013.740406
Leveto, J. (2018). Toward a sociology of autism and neurodiversity. Sociology Compass, 12(12), 1–17. doi:10.1111/soc4.12636
Lollini, A. (2018). Brain equality: Legal implications of neurodiversity in a comparative perspective. New York University Journal of International Law and Politics, 51(1). http://nyujilp.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/ NYI102.pdf
Masataka, N. (2017). Implications of the idea of neurodiversity for understanding the origins of developmental disorders. Physics of Life Reviews, 20, 85–108. doi:10.1016/j.plrev.2016.11.002
May, W. (1980). Doing ethics: The bearing of ethical theories on fieldwork. Social Problems, 27(3), 358–370. doi:10.2307/800254
McGee, M. (2012). Neurodiversity. Contexts, 11(3), 12–13. doi:10.1177/1536504212456175
Mladenov, T. (2015). Neoliberalism, postsocialism, disability. Disability & Society, 30(3), 445–459. doi:10.1080/09687 599.2015.1021758
Morley, C. (2008). Developing critical reflection as a research methodology. In P. Liamputtong & J. Rumbold (Eds.), Knowing differently: An introduction to experiential and arts-based research methods (pp. 265–280). Nova Science.
Morley, C. (2012). How does critical reflection develop possibilities for emancipatory change? An example from an empirical research project. British Journal of Social Work, 42(8), 1513–1532. doi:10.1093/bjsw/ bcr153
Morley, C. (2014). Using critical reflection to research possibilities for change. British Journal of Social Work, 44(6), 1419–1435. doi:10.1093/bjsw/bct004
Morley, C. (2016). Promoting activism through critical social work education: The impact of global capitalism and neoliberalism on social work and social work education. Critical and Radical Social Work, 4(1), 39–57. doi:10.133 2/204986016X14519919041398
Muskat, B. (2017). Celebrating neurodiversity: An often- overlooked difference in group work. Social Work with Groups: Group Work Stories Celebrating Diversity, 40(12), 81–84. doi:10.1080/01609513.2015.1067131
O’Connor, M. (2014). The National Disability Insurance Scheme and people with mild intellectual disability: Potential pitfalls for consideration. Research and Practice in Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 1(1), 17–23. doi: 10.1080/23297018.2014.908815
Oerther, S., & Oerther, D. (2018). Pierre Bourdieu’s theory of practice offers nurses a framework to uncover embodied knowledge of patients living with disabilities or illnesses: A discussion paper. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 74(4), 818–826. doi:10.1111/jan.13486
Oliver, M. (2013). The social model of disability: Thirty years on. Disability and Society, 28(7), 1024–1026. doi:10.108 0/09687599.2013.818773
Owens, J. (2015). Exploring the critiques of the social model of disability: The transformative possibility of Arendt’s notion of power. Sociology of Health & Illness, 37(3), 385–403. doi:10.1111/1467-9566.12199
Parker Harris, S., Owen, R., & Gould, R. (2012). Parity of participation in liberal welfare states: Human rights, neoliberalism, disability and employment. Disability & Society, 27(6), 823–836. doi:10.1080/09687599.2012. 679022
Pease, B. (2009). From evidence-based practice to critical knowledge in post-positivist social work. In J. Allan, L. Briskman, & B. Pease (Eds.), Critical social work: Theories and practices for a socially just world (2nd ed., pp. 45–67). Allen & Unwin.
Phutela, D. (2015). The importance of non-verbal communication. IUP Journal of Soft Skills, 9(4), 43–49. http://search.proquest.com/docview/1759007009/
Purcell, E. (2014). Oppression’s three new faces: Rethinking Iris Young’s “Five Faces of Oppression” for disability theory. In S. Asumah & M. Nagel (Eds.), Diversity, social justice, and inclusive excellence: Transdisciplinary and global perspectives (pp. 185–206). State University of New York Press.
Sarrett, J (2017). Interviews, disclosures, and misperceptions: Autistic adults’ perspectives on employment related challenges. Disability Studies Quarterly, 37(2), 6. doi:10.18061/dsq.v37i2.5524
Singh, G., & Cowden, S. (2015). The intensification of neoliberalism and the commodification of human need – A social work perspective. Critical and Radical Social Work, 3(3), 375–387. doi:10.1332/20498601 5X14417170590709
Spies-Butcher, B., & Chester, L. (2014). Marketisation and the dual welfare state: Neoliberalism and inequality in Australia. The Economic and Labour Relations Review, 25(2), 185–201. doi:10.1177/1035304614530076
Wallace, J., Pease, B., Noble, C., & Henrickson, M. (2011). Neoliberalism and Australian social work: Accommodation or resistance? Journal of Social Work, 11(2), 132–142. doi:10.1177/1468017310387318
Wiegmann, W. (2017). Habitus, symbolic violence, and reflexivity: Applying Bourdieu’s theories to social work. Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare, 44(4), 95–116.
Young, I. (2014). Five faces of oppression. In S. Asumah & M. Nagel (Eds.), Diversity, social justice, and inclusive excellence: Transdisciplinary and global perspectives (pp. 3–33). State University of New York Press.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
By completing the online submission process, you confirm you accept this agreement. The following is the entire agreement between you and the Aotearoa New Zealand Association of Social Workers (ANZASW) and it may be modified only in writing.
You and any co-authors
If you are completing this agreement on behalf of co-authors, you confirm that you are acting on their behalf with their knowledge.
First publication
By submitting the work you are:
- granting the ANZASW the right of first publication of this work;
- confirming that the work is original; and
- confirming that the work has not been published in any other form.
Once published, you are free to use the final, accepted version in any way, as outlined below under Copyright.
Copyright
You assign copyright in the final, accepted version of your article to the ANZASW. You and any co-authors of the article retain the right to be identified as authors of the work.
The ANZASW will publish the final, accepted manuscript under a Creative Commons Attribution licence (CC BY 4.0). This licence allows anyone – including you – to share, copy, distribute, transmit, adapt and make commercial use of the work without needing additional permission, provided appropriate attribution is made to the original author or source.
A human-readable summary of the licence is available from http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0, which includes a link to the full licence text.
Under this licence you can use the final, published version of the article freely – such as depositing a copy in your institutional research repository, uploading a copy to your profile on an academic networking site or including it in a different publication, such as a collection of articles on a topic or in conference proceedings – provided that original publication in Aotearoa New Zealand Social Work is acknowledged.
This agreement has no effect on any pre-publication versions or elements, which remain entirely yours, and to which we claim no right.
Reviewers hold copyright in their own comments and should not be further copied in any way without their permission.
The copyright of others
If your article includes the copyright material of others (e.g. graphs, diagrams etc.), you confirm that your use either:
- falls within the limits of fair dealing for the purposes of criticism and review or fair use; OR
- that you have gained permission from the rights holder for publication in an open access journal.
