There are three assignments; each is 1 page. Please remember the highlighted section is the assignment questions. Also, each assignment should include references plus permalinks. Make sure to read to have a better understanding. This is week one, and these three classes have up to 8 weeks. Next week's assignment will be more than 12 pages. I hope you have an expert available
One page assignment, please reference should include a permalink. The assignment should be no less than 250 words excluding references words. Also, no words from the assignment material should be included in the 250 words Module 1: Leveraging Social Work Practice and Policy (graded) Jansson (2018) lists four rationales for advocacy. Select two rationales. Provide an example of how you have leveraged policy, using each of these rationales to assist a client, family member, or yourself. Remember the four rational are: Ethical Rational, Analytic Rational, Political Rational, and Electoral Rational Module 1: Introduction Table of Contents Welcome to Module 1! Our Social Work practice standards dictate the need to understand policy, leverage policy in service of our clients, and when possible help craft policy to benefit vulnerable groups and communities (Council of Social Work Education [CSWE], 2016). As social workers, we must apply our knowledge of how contextual factors, such as demographics, diversity, difference, communities and personal histories impact the client's ability to access a wide array of essential services (i.e., housing, food and cash benefits, education, and employment programs). All social service programs funding is connected to policies that dictate who qualifies for the services and ultimately, who will benefit from those services. Hence, the critical relationship between social work practice and social policy. Week one, Leveraging Social Work Practice to Advance Social Policy. In week one, we explore the reasons that rationale social workers use when they choose policy advocacy as a path to social justice. We will discuss how the existence of unfair circumstances for vulnerable groups foster's the need for social worker advocacy. For social workers, participation in policy advocacy begins with our passion for a social issue we feel is detrimental to our clients. Who are typically from disenfranchised, oppressed and often powerless populations. To farther our understanding of why social workers choose to advocate for specific social issues, we will examine the Jansen four rationales for policy advocacy. Ethical, analytic, political and electoral. The development policy is a rigorous process that requires specific actions to move the policy from a concern about a social issue of the social service, to a policy that can be presented to stakeholders, special interest groups and government officials, as a legitimate piece of legislature. With the ability to positively impact vulnerable individuals, families and communities. To that end, we will thoroughly review Jansen's eight task policy making approach and discuss how it can be used to advance our work as social work practitioners and advocates. Social work advocates must possess specific competencies or skills to execute eight policy making tasks. We will review and discuss the Jansen four policy competencies and styles. Analytic, political, interactional and value clarifying. Your enthusiasm and participation in week one's discussions are paramount to the shared learning experience. Please complete all week one required readings and be prepared to engage in lively, mutually respectful discussions, on how the course concepts apply to contemporary and perhaps controversial social issues. Let's begin our week one collaboration for our MSW513 learning journey. [BLANK_AUDIO] Module 1: Readings Jansson, B. S. (2018). Becoming an effective policy advocate: From policy practice to social justice. Brooks/Cole. · Chapter 2: Articulating four rationales for participating in policy advocacy. (pp. 31-67). · Chapter 3: Obtaining skills and competencies for policy advocacy. (pp. 100-140). Optional Reading: Council on Social Work Education. (2016, November). Setting priorities, serving the nation: A shared agenda for social work education. https://www.cswe.org/Advocacy-Policy/Policy-Agenda/Articles/A-Shared-Agenda-for-Social- Module 1: Leveraging Social Work Practice and Practice Table of Contents Social Work Advocates The role of an advocate and change agent is a fundamental responsibility of all social workers. Both roles are needed to leverage policy to foster social justice. Client advocacy occurs on the micro (interactions with clients and their families), macro (local, state, and federal) and mezzo (organizations and communities) (Jansson, 2018, pg. 32) levels. Jansson (2018) provides four typologies or Rationales for Participating in Policy Advocacy. These four rationales are the ethical rationale, analytic rationale, political rationale, and electoral rationale. Explore each rationale below by using the slider. Transcript Diversity, Contextual Factors and Policy Four Rationales Drag the slider horizontally to learn more about the Four Rationales. Ethical Rationale Ethical advocacy is foundational to social work practice. The rationale for advocacy is grounded in the promotion of social justice. Ethical issues are ones that are “morally objectionable” and reprehensible to those who want equal rights and fairness for all (Jansson, 2018, p. 35). Ethical advocacy is done because it is simply the right thing to do! What kinds of inequalities are morally objectionable and therefore require advocacy based on ethics alone? This type of advocacy is meant to combat disparities related to inequality, oppression, underrepresentation, and discrimination that leads to restricted opportunities and feelings of powerlessness. Inequalities and injustices span a myriad of social issues, demographics, diversities, and differences. Social issues include, but are not limited to homelessness, healthcare access, poverty, mental illness, unemployment, racism, immigration status, sexism, and discrimination against the LGBT community. Ethical advocacy imagines a better tomorrow for the society. Social work advocacy for ethical issues is twofold for the client: (1) empowering the client to advocate for him/herself, and (2) respecting the clients right to autonomy or self-determination. According to Jansson (2018), there are four distinct types of ethical reasonings considerations that social work should utilize when engaging in policy advocacy: · Deontologists focus on ethical dilemmas, compromise, and consensus. · Utilitarian considerations are research and solution focused. · Relativists analyze how cultural factors and personal histories shape policy. · Practical considerations focus on the pragmatic implications, including costs, logistics, and feasibility policy. What type of social issues have the most significant ethical reasoning considerations for social advocates? Analytic Rationale Analytic reasoning uses a utilitarian approach. It is an evidenced-based practice or evidence-based policy approach (Jansson, 2018, p. 52). The analytic rationale is research and science, focused on treatment, medical, and clinical providers. For example, bicycle helmets, motorcycle helmets, and seatbelts are the law today because research proved that they save lives. Research on medication and clinical approaches influenced policy on how mentally ill are treated, and therapeutic treatment is delivered. Research can be manipulated to negatively impact policy for vulnerable groups of the population. A contemporary example of the research manipulation is the Flint Michigan water contamination crisis. The Flint government officials contracted researchers that were willing to state that the water was safe when the levels were indeed toxic. The erroneous research findings led to no policy action, resources, or funding. As a result, the Flint residents, a traditionally, poor, and most minority population became very ill from the water contamination. Children and adults became very sick from ingesting and bathing in contaminated water. Almost five years later, and the crisis persists for the low-income families that are forced to continue living in Flint. While, the government is making some attempts to fix the water supply, and policy is being developed, after being sued by many advocacy groups, the residents of Flint Michigan have the lasting effects of illness and death (Seville-Riordan, Rappleye & Connor, 2016). Effective January 2016, President Donald Trump approved the Michigan government’s request for a declaration of emergency but denied the request to declare the crisis a major disaster (Michigan.gov, n.d.). Is the Flint Water crisis an ethical or analytic advocacy issue? What is the best approach to inform policy to help the residents of Flint, Michigan? Political Rationale A social work advocate that uses the political rationale wants to make a significant impact on the highest number of people. The social worker who uses this approach may want a state or national policy promotion. To successfully execute such a significant endeavor, the social worker must work with individuals, communities, special interest groups, stakeholders, government officials, politicians, and legislators. These efforts require the advocate to combine ethical and analytic efforts to draft a comprehensive policy proposal and inform policy reform. Like the analytic rationale and the ethical rationale, depending on the individual or group, the policy can harm the target population. For example, conservatives who are pro-life are opposed to Roe vs. Wade, while liberals want to maintain the federal regulations and policies (Lemieux, 2019). Opposing views on several issues, including but not limited to controversial issues like prison reform, mental illness, and immigration policy. Social workers using a political rationale for advocacy, do not just do it for the client base; they use it to advance policy for the profession. Examples include regulations on licensing, accepted treatment modalities, and payment for services. How can social workers ensure that politics does not take precedence over client needs for responsible policies? Electoral Rationale The electoral rationale requires full participation in the political process. While the political rationale advocacy approach requires one to be at the peripherals of the political process, the electoral process is a true deep dive into the political process. This approach requires formal affiliations with specific political parties (Democrats, Republicans, and Independents). Affiliating with a party means that one must take into consideration if one is in the minority party or the majority party (Jansson, 2019). The majority party, holds all the power, making it very difficult for the minority party to have any progress when it comes to advancing policy. Some argue that using the electoral rationale means that one must set ethical considerations and sometimes analytical reasoning aside, in support of party affiliation (Jansson, 2019). Given, the current trend of bipartisan politics, the argument against electoral advocacy as a primary method of advocacy may seem more problematic than any other time in history. Do the potential benefits of electoral advocacy outweigh the potential drawbacks of bipartisan politics? Diversity, Contextual Factors and Policy Micro, mezzo, and macro levels of social work practice, all require the considerations of specific contextual factors for individual clients, families, groups, and communities. Micro policy advocate seeks to help individual client's access and secure specific services with specific programs. Micro advocacy may include challenging eligibility requirement to get one's client special consideration or review for those services, which could be for several social issues, including but not limited to housing, cash or food benefits, and health insurance. Mezzo policy focuses on local groups, community, and organizations. For example, perhaps a local county's social welfare agency finds that their eligibility requirements have restricted the number of clients who can take advantage of their services. The agency applies analytic rationale, to research the problem and come up with logical solutions that adjust the agency's eligibility requirements and service gaps; thus, allowing for a greater number of community residents to receive services. Macro-level