Social Work Theory - The Challenge of Cultural Competency

This post contains an excerpt from a paper I wrote for one of my units this semester. Because it shares a great deal of what I personally view as a significant challenge in dealing with social work theory, I felt that it might be an interesting to share. I may, of course, be wrong.

In this paper, we were asked to identify some of the issues and challenges surrounding the use of theory in Social Work. We were then asked to explore one of these issues in more depth and then explore how we would address it. I have omitted the first part of the paper in favour of highlighting the issue I chose to talk more in-depth about: cultural competency and the challenges to presented to a social work with a Third Culture Kid background.

[…]

CULTURAL COMPETENCY 

As the focal point of this paper, I have decided to look into how workers are faced with the continuing challenge of cultural tension and cultural competency. This challenge is of particular interest to me because it does not have a single solution or a permanent fix; this is a challenge that I recognize I will have to address with each client and case that I take on from here on out.

Cultural competency is a developing ideal and is defined by the National Association of Social Workers (“NASW”) as:

…the process by which individuals and systems respond respectfully and effectively to people of all cultures, languages, classes, races, ethnic backgrounds, religions, and other diversity factors in a manner that recognises, affirms, and values the worth of individuals, families, and communities and protects and preserves the dignity of each. (2007, p 11)

Taking this definition, my personal situation compounds the problem of cultural competency to some extent. I was one of many Third Culture Kids (“TCKs”), which are defined by David C. Pollock and Ruth E. Van Reken as individuals who “are spending, or have spent, at least part of their childhood in countries and cultures other than their own.” (2001, p 6) In my case, I am a British national of Chinese ethnicity who has spent no more than five years at a time in various countries in Asia and North America. As a result, this collection of cultural influences has had—and continues to have—a collective impact on my views and values. I am now an Adult Third Culture Kid (“ATCK”), or an adult who grew up as a TCK.

Where a local Australian social worker would have a better understanding of cultural nuance when working with a local Australian client, a worker with TCK background or who is an ATCK would have to be mindful of local Australian culture when practicing in Australia. Even if the ATCK is Australian by nationality, birth, or family culture, his or her time away from Australia will have had an impact on their interpretation of Australian culture even after repatriation. Such individuals essentially become “hidden immigrants,” who are TCKs or ATCKS who have re-entered their home country only to find that they have as a hard time relating to other members of their own cultural group as they do relating to foreign cultural groups. (Pollock & Van Reken 2001) It could be that in their time away, Australian culture had evolved and changed as all cultures do, and they have returned to a culture that has moved on without them. It could also be that their foreign host culture offered alternative value systems or beliefs that the TCK integrated into their own. Regardless, a TCK may return home to find that they are no longer a cultural insider in their country. To ATCKs, all this emphasises the idea that cultural perception is unique to the individual, that it is constantly changing, and that fully understanding a foreign culture (and, indeed, one’s own culture after a period of absence) is not a realistic goal to have.

The issue with cultural competency, then, is that its current form contradicts the lifestyle and understanding that ATCKs have when it comes to multicultural matters. Cultures evolve and understanding them ultimately involves experience rather than research (Johnson & Munch 2009), and owing to their experience, ATCKs are also more willing to recognize that any understanding they have gained of those foreign cultures is always a partial understanding. How then does an ATCK social worker satisfy the need for cultural competency when the profession of Social Work itself defines it in a way that is at odds with an ATCK’s experience?

ADDRESSING THE CHALLENGE

It appears that the contradictions between the NASW’s definition of cultural competency and an ATCK’s inherent understanding of foreign cultures is not dissimilar to observations made by Yvonne M. Johnson and Shari Munch. They identified some key aspects within the definition of cultural competency that actively contradict central social work concepts or oppose current practice. In brief, these contradictions are:

1.    The idea that a social worker can learn about a client’s culture to an effective extent.

2.    When and how to separate the individual from the cultural group of which he or she appears to be a member, which is directly applicable to ATCKs as practitioners as well as clients. This particular contradiction also encompasses the notion that people do not belong to just one cultural group but several.

3.    Respecting diversity while still building on social work’s core stance on self-determination and individual dignity.

4.    The assumption that cultural competence is realistically achievable. (2009)

It stands to reason that it is not practicable to take the stance that you should be able to adequately understand all the cultures you will encounter in practice. It is not feasible to be fully aware of every culture’s traditions and values and belief systems, either. It is also not feasible to create specifically defined labels for each cultural group, as there will always be someone who appears to fit into a group in many ways but does not identify with that single group. (Johnson & Munch 2009) ATCKs understand much of this on a fundamental level (Pollock & Van Reken 2001), and there is extensive literature that supports it. Perhaps the solution here, then, is to maintain an awareness of your lack of cultural competence rather than attempt to establish competence. (Dean 2001)

Therefore, rather than trying to familiarise oneself every tradition, value, ritual, or belief that a cultural group tends to possess, it may be more prudent to focus on developing the skills necessary to practice in a culturally conscientious manner. The ability to put oneself in the client’s situation, for instance, would be an invaluable skill if the worker were able to use it to gain cultural context. While there may be contradictions in the NASW definition of cultural competency, the definition itself highlights that this is a process and not a goal. In this regard, my ATCK background becomes less of a hindrance and more of an advantage. Social work practice now tends to emphasise learning from the client rather than trying to learn about the client, and because ATCKs are already proficient in multicultural communication and cultural empathy, they are well-equipped to take on this perspective on cultural competency. (Johnson & Munch 2009; Pollock & Van Reken 2001)

There is no end to the challenges we may face in Social Work and its theories, and my primary concern is the definition of cultural competency and what it means for my practice as an ATCK social worker. I am unable to relate to local Australians the way a local Australian social worker may be able to, which compounds the problem. Linking the theory of cultural competency to my practice is especially challenging because of all these factors. Addressing all this boils down to whether or not I am able to play to my strengths.

Thanks to my background, I have developed particularly strong empathy, cross-cultural mediation skills, and integration skills. Many of these skills are useful in developing culturally competent practice. I am also aware of how some people just don’t fit into a predefined cultural group, which means that I will be particularly sensitive when it comes to identifying the individual within the cultural group. Addressing this challenge is primarily an attitude adjustment, and with the right mindset and the right approach, I feel that I may find myself very much at home.

REFERENCES

Collingwood, P and Davies, M 2008, ‘Knowledge, theory and social work practice: an easy access approach’ in The Blackwell Companion to Social Work. Blackwell Publishing, Malden, p. 1-8.

Dean, RG 2001, ‘The myth of cross-cultural competence’. Families in Society,vol. 82, no. 6, p. 623-630.

Howe, D 1987, An Introduction to Social Work Theory: Making Sense in Practice, Wildwood House, Brookfield.

Johnson, YM & Munch, S 2009, ‘Fundamental contradictions in cultural competence’, Social Work, vol. 54, no. 3, p. 220-231.

National Association of Social Workers 2007, Indicators for the achievement of NASW standards for cultural competence in social work practice, Author, Washington.

Pollock, DC and Van Reken, RE 2001, Third Culture Kids: The Experience of Growing Up Among Worlds, Nicholas Brealey Publishing, London.

Thompson, N 2005, Understanding Social Work: Preparing for Practice, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke.