Social work is a contested tradition, torn between the demands of social governance and autonomy. Today, this struggle is reflected in the division between the dominant, neoliberal agenda of service provision and the resistance offered by various critical perspectives employed by disparate groups of practitioners serving diverse communities. Critical social work challenges oppressive conditions and discourses, in addition to addressing their consequences in individuals’ lives. However, very few recent critical theorists informing critical social work have advocated revolution. A challenging exception (...) can be found in the work of Cornelius Castoriadis (1922–97), whose explication of ontological underdetermination and creation evades the pitfalls of both structural determinism and post-structural relativism, enabling an understanding of society as the contested creation of collective imaginaries in action and a politics of radical transformation. On this basis, we argue that Castoriadis’s radical-democratic revisioning of revolutionary praxis can help in reimagining critical social work’s emancipatory potential. (shrink)

Contemporary moral philosophy has different approaches to provide justice and equality to groups that are traditionally discriminated on the grounds of gender, religion, age, sexual orientation, etc. On the other hand, functionally diverse (disabled) people have had a parallel approach to their discrimination, excluded from mainstream diversities. Including functional diversity and the diversity model in modern recognition and redistribution theories, as another human diversity, provides an extended ethical approach: diversity ethics. This general framework also includes other fundamental ideas for equality (...) such as human fragility, social domination logics, self-respect and auto-recognition. Diversity ethics provides sound foundations to defend justice and equality for all human diversities and an alternative to other approaches that broaden the moral community, excluding some humans, like Peter Singer’s ethics. (shrink)

Evaluation reports, along with development studies literature suggest that development practice is often failing to enact espoused participatory, empowering and gender equitable approaches or to achieve these espoused goals. Mainstream development theories are underpinned by values and beliefs about what is good and what "ought to be". In this study I explore the influence of values on the development practice of Cambodian practitioners working in non-government organisations in rural Cambodia. Development practitioners are the major conduit of community based development assistance, (...) but little is known about how their values impact their day-to-day practice, and influence their moral and political choices. In the study I used ethnographic methodology, guided by feminist principles. The research was conducted with individuals and groups of experienced, mostly Cambodian development practitioners. Data were collected in four phases through in-depth and semi-structured interviews, focus group discussions and observations of practice. I examine the (in)congruity between practitioners' espoused theories and values and those demonstrated by their practice. The findings reveal that the values are not essentially different but are prioritized differently. The espoused values are consistent with those of the international development discourse, all of which are premised on a belief in human equality. Theories and values inferred from actual practice reflect hierarchical underpinnings. In the Cambodian context this is consistent with socio-cultural values and the hierarchical order of society. However, as expatriate research participants and the literature attest, this incongruence is not particular to Cambodian practitioners. The study reveals practitioners give higher priority to fulfilling the tasks necessary for the achievement of their NGOs' planned outputs and organisational imperatives than to the facilitation of participatory and empowering processes. At the same time, the enactment of some development values is in tension with certain socio-cultural norms and practices. Practitioners are challenged to make desirable development values explicit and identify how to operationalise them in the lived social, cultural, political and economic context. (shrink)

This paper examines whether social workers and other direct service practitioners can find utility in ethnomethodology despite or even because of the policy of “indifference”. Garfinkel, the father of ethnomethodology, sets out “ethnomethodological indifference” to insist that EM studies do not supplement, formulate remedies, develop humanistic arguments, or encourage discussions of theory. While at first blush such limits on EM might appear to be a barrier for most social workers this paper argues against first impressions. It is argued that EM (...) provides an important redirection for social work practice and research. Additionally, it is proposed that by approaching EM through Dorothy Smith’s Institutional Ethnography social workers can bridge Garfinkel’s quest for haeccities with extended social relations and actual courses of actions to find congruence between EM and accomplished professional practice. (shrink)