3 Chapter 3 – HOW DO SOCIAL WORKERS CONSIDER THE ENTIRE ECO-SYSTEM WHEN SEEKING SOLUTIONS?

This chapter supports Module 3 in which you will:

• Reflect on your own reactions to the complexity and ambiguity when applying a systems perspective in practice. Including the unclear “responsible party” and the most appropriate intervention level or type;
• Identify your agencies’ policies on voter registration.

********************************************************************

For this module, you’ll watch Brave New Films’ Suppressed and Sabotaged. The film will build on discussion we’ve had in class about how rights can be limited by building more friction into a system — or bringing everything to a halt. You can imagine it as if you are walking down a hallway. If the doors are wide open, you can readily go through. If they are partially shut so that you have to work very hard to get through, will you? Or will you decide to go back and not go through the door? This is super simplistic and doesn’t take into account lots of nuances like — how much time you have to get through the door, is there a line of people waiting to squeeze through and each one takes time because of the door’s design. How many squeeze through only to be told they don’t belong there? What stories do they tell others then after their experience with a door built to keep them out?

Sandler, et al discuss Humphreys’ “three-legged stool” of voter engagement. As you think about this article, pay attention to the tables for each leg of the stool — voter registration, regular voting, and basing voting decisions on self-interest. The authors identify impediments to and activities that encourage each leg to happen. What impediments do you relate to? Which activities can you see being implemented in the agency you work for or one you’ve done a practicum with?

According to the literature review in this article, some social workers feel they should not be encouraging the three-legged stool — though many will argue that policies and programs should be better for the people we serve. However, that limits possibility for our clients now, especially since research shows that when people vote there are individual good outcomes (feeling better about oneself, a sense of empowerment, and some other things). It certainly limits the possibility of bigger scale change as we’ve seen in our materials so far. For further development on this idea, see the little lecture in this module.

************************************************************

Read: 

• Sandler, A.; Hylton, M.; Ostrander, J.; Smith, T. (2020). The three-legged stool of voter engagement. Critical Social Work, 21, 2, p.41-56. https://doi.org/10.22329/csw.v21i2.6463 .

 Watch:

• Suppressed and Sabotaged: The Right to Vote by Brave New Films (2022) https://vimeo.com/701017482/c5d78fdbd1
• Read through this study guide and think about/answer these questions as you reflect on the film: https://www.dropbox.com/s/hpsq6khl9o4t1fq/Guide_Discussion_Suppressed_2022.pdf?dl=0
  • How do the experiences in the film compare to experiences you’ve had when voting?
  • What long-term effects can voter suppression have on everyone, not just marginalized communities?
  • What do you think communities can do to prevent what happened in 2018 from happening in future elections?
  • Name some things you can do whether in your community or across the country to help expand the “we” in “we the people”?