Agency in Vulnerable Families
Reply to P. J. Miller
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 10550286 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Esther C L Goh (0000-0002-0235-2363, National University of Singapore, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2017 |
| Volume | 62 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 187-190 |
| Publication date | 2017-02-16 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Social Work (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0037-8046 • E-ISSN: 1545-6846 |
| Publisher | Oxford University Press (OUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1093/sw/swx013 |
| PMID | 28204791 |
| OpenAlex | W2589050322 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 8 |
My article “Vulnerable Families as Active Agents of Their Own Change Process: A Bidirectional Perspective” (Goh, 2015), published in this journal, focused on the importance of the strengths perspective (Saleebey, 2013), which guides social workers’ interactions with clients from vulnerable families. I argued that the strengths perspective primarily operates at the ontological level but requires additional specific mid-level conceptual tools regarding human agency and the relationship context of human agency to effectively translate theory into practice. Attention was drawn to social relational theory (SRT), which has an ontological position compatible with a strengths perspective and offers ideas that may guide the understanding of processes underlying the clients’ actions as change agents and those of social workers empowering relationships with clients. In her Points & Viewpoints response to my article, Pamela Joy Miller (2016) raised a number of critiques, including the usage of the term “ontology”; the absence of new insight, but rather merely proposing “positive social worker–client relationship” as the way to increase clients’ agency; and that the illustrative qualitative data showed a violation of conventional understanding of professional boundaries between social workers and clients. I would like to respond and to clarify each of these three points raised by Miller (2016). Contrary to Miller's (2016) suggestion, SRT does provide some useful directions for research and practice with vulnerable families
Agency (philosophy · Context (archaeology · Epistemology · Miller · Perspective (graphical · Political science · Social science · Sociology · Viewpoints · Computer Science · Homelessness and Social Issues · Mental Health and Patient Involvement · Psychology · Social Psychology · Social Work Education and Practice · Social Work
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |