Social Work and Poverty

Attitudes and Actions

Monica Dowling

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2019
• Print ISBN: 9781138345706
• eBook ISBN: 9780429794896
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Social Sciences
• Subtopic: Social Work
• Index: Social Sciences

First published in 1999, this much-needed volume powerfully re-evaluates attitudes to the 'deserving and 'undeserving' poor and aims to investigate social workers' attitudes and actions towards poverty issues, social service users who have needed financial help and to question whether learning about poverty is an integrated part of social work students' training and social workers' in-service training. Monica Dowling has experience of being a social work student and social worker, as well as a social work teacher and researcher. In an age when increasing numbers of undergraduate and postgraduate students are unemployed and living on benefits, Dowling reveals the true picture of the people who end up on the poverty line, reconnecting social work theory and practice.

1

The relationship between social work and poverty

This chapter defines the concepts of poverty and social work as they will be used throughout the book and traces the past and present connections between poverty and social work. It is suggested that although there is a historical, factual, objective relationship between poverty and social work, there is also a subjective interactive relationship between social workers and those in poverty which is based on professional traditions, the casework model, and social workers' own attitudes and actions. These attitudes and actions are influenced by social workers' training and personal backgrounds and the larger political environment.

Relevant to the relationship between poverty and social work, and therefore also included in this chapter are an analysis of the relationship between the income maintenance system and the functions of social services departments, and a summary of the issues concerning social workers as providers of income maintenance and as advocates/advisers on income maintenance matters.

A definition of poverty

A 'poverty line' which divides those who are poor from those who are not poor could be useful in defining what percentage of the population are poor. However there is a continuing debate about where such a 'poverty line' should be set and to what extent poverty is relative to the society in which it exists (Oppenheim and Harker 1996, Townsend 1979). There is no official UK government 'poverty line' but two sources of government information are Low Income Families statistics and Households below Average Income statistics, both derived from the Family Expenditure Survey. Households below average income (HBAI) statistics are the government measure of low income while 50 per cent of average income is used by CP AG, the European Community and international studies as a measure of poverty. However households are the unit of definition rather than the family or individual and such a statistic does not relate income to the minimum rates of benefit specified by Parliament. Other methods of measuring poverty and some would say inequality include: the level at which 40 per cent of the population receive less than 15 per cent of the income of the country (Todaro 1994); those spending less than half of the country's national average expenditure (EEC 1991); or the real income of the poorest fifth (Townsend 1991); or tenth of the population (Johnson and Webb 1991).

Although the government has not provided HBAI statistics by region, a number of deprivation indicators show that Northern Ireland still ranks as one of the poorest areas in terms of unemployment, income and reliance on income support. The 'North'/ 'South' divide of the 1980s appears to have become less of a divide in the 1990s with the disproportionate effect of the recession on the South East in the early 1990s (Oppenheim and Harker 1996). However Pond (1989) and Townsend (1979) and Oppenheim (1991) point out that even greater divisions in terms of income and wealth can exist within regions.

Information on women and poverty was particularly relevant to the research as many of the social service users with financial difficulties interviewed and observed were lone mothers on income support. Women from poor relief days up to the present time have always been at greater risk of poverty (Glendinning and Millar 1992). Oppenheim and Harker (1996) estimate from 1995 social security statistics that 59 per cent of adults supported by income support are women. Nine out of ten lone parents are female and 1,097,000 lone parents were reliant on income support in 1994. Over half were dependent on income support for several years and 658,000 had been on income support for two years or more (DSS 1995). As Millar and Glendinning (1992) note women's risk of poverty as compared to men's is concerned with access to income, time spent on generating income or resources and the transfer of these resources within households.

Poverty statistics give a quantitative perspective, but they do not reveal the intricacies of poor peoples' lives. Poverty can be of a temporary or long term nature (Walker 1991). It can mean that those who feel themselves to be poor are not accepted as such and that those who are on benefits and considered poor may be earning unofficially (Jordan, James, Kay and Redley 1992). Poverty may involve feelings of despair and depression which can exacerbate any financial difficulties.

Initially the definition of poverty for the purposes of this book was based on an income at or below income support levels. However income support levels are such a low level of income that few people can manage to survive on these benefits alone. This calls into question any objective definition of poverty which does not allow for human motivation, intervention, frailty or manipulation. Thus the approach to poverty used throughout the book will suggest firstly that there is no objective measure of poverty that is consistent for all times and places:

Measuring poverty must always be relative, since what it is measuring is a social product which changes both over time and from one society to another. The point at issue simply becomes what it is relative to (Novak 1988, p.21).

Secondly that the poor are now poorer in relation to the wealthy than they were in 1979 (see Chapter 2). Thirdly, a 'poverty line' may be a necessary quantitative means for measuring poverty in the population as a whole but does not allow for the individual needs of people like Mrs Dixon (see Chapter 2) who are on the margins of poverty but do not necessarily see themselves in that way.

As Oppenheim (1990a) notes on behalf of the Child Poverty Action Group (CP AG):

We also take account of those people living just above each of these poverty lines - those living on the margins of poverty. It is important to hold on to the idea of such a margin, since people living on low incomes usually find that their income fluctuates, slipping between poverty and an income close to poverty. We describe anyone living between 100 per cent and 140 per cent of supplementary benefit or between 50 per cent and 60 per cent of average income as living on the margins of poverty.

Balloch and Jones' (1990, p.2) study Poverty and Anti-Poverty Strategy defines poverty as lack of money, lack of resources and lack of control and quotes The Archbishop of Canterbury Faith in the City (1986):

Poor people ... are at the mercy of fragmented and apparently unresponsive public authorities. They are trapped in housing and in environments over which they have little control. They lack the means and opportunity - which so many of us take for granted - of making choices in their lives.

While the stranger is present before us, evidence can arise of his possessing an attribute that makes him different from others in the category of persons available for him to be, and of a less desirable kind - in the extreme, a person who is quite thoroughly bad, or dangerous or weak. He is thus reduced in our minds from a whole and usual person to a tainted and discounted one. Such an attribute is a stigma (Goffman 1990, p.2).

Poverty falls within the realm of 'stigma'. It is not being poor that is a stigma, but the social perception of the attribute which deems it a stigma. Goffman (1990, p.4) suggests three types of stigma: physical 'stigma deformities', 'tribal stigma of race, nation and religion' and 'blemishes of individual character'. Thus the poor are perceived by the non poor as having more character defects than the rich, hence the 'culture of poverty' thesis. Stigmatising the poor has cultural, political and historical traditions which cannot be easily avoided by the individual (Novak 1988, Waxman 1988, Dean 1991).

Poverty can be understood as a special type of stigma which attributes to the poor a status of being less than human. It has taken various forms at different historical stages: branding in the fourteenth century (De Schweinitz 1961, Pound 1973); being driven into workhouses in the nineteenth century (Novak 1988, Waxman 1988) and being labelled as part of 'the underclass' and treated accordingly in the late twentieth century (Murray 1990).

Blaming and stigmatising the poor is convenient for the more well off for it absolves them from any moral responsibility towards solving the problem of poverty. Galbraith (1996) indicates that the latest punitive welfare reforms in the US are the result of the majority of the population who are working and solvent, no longer caring about the plight of the poor. As Waxman (1983, p.69) comments,

The sociological study of poverty and the poor should include, it is argued, not only the behaviour of the poor themselves, but also the nature of the relationship between the poor and the non poor, specifically the perceptions and the definitions the non poor have of the poor...

At any particular time in any society, each individual will have their own preconceptions of what constitutes poverty. Most people have an un-thought out emotional response as to whether an individual measures up to their own internal view of what a poor person should be like. In the same way we might have an immediate feeling of 'inappropriateness' if we see a black/female/older/ disabled person in a situation where we are not expecting to see such a person, so a person we define as poor who has a good standard of decoration in their house, a computer or a car may evoke a similar response. Prejudging takes place continuously, which helps us to make sense of the world in some situations, for example if someone is coming towards us holding a knife in a threatening manner. However the ease with which prejudgements are made about the poor is why poverty awareness is just as important as disability, gender, race or age awareness.

The subjective nature of poverty and its relationship to stigma suggests that objective measures only partially explain the phenomena. They do not explain the interactive effect of individuals on each other which can affect micro and macro policy outcomes.

Definitions of social work

Some social workers in the field work defined social work as the casework relationship, some students saw social work as 'sticking plaster - we act as sticking plaster without actually tackling and doing something'. Social service users talked about caring people or busybodies. Generally there was confusion and uncertainty among all three researched groups about what social work was, whether social workers were actually doing social work and if not, what they should be doing instead.

Quantitative responses to the first national opinion survey into attitudes towards social workers appeared to show the public as less muddled than those more intimately involved with social work. Forty three per cent of 994 respondents replied (broadly) that they helped people in need of help, 37 per cent that they advised on and sorted out people's problems, and 3 per cent saw them as 'busybodies' or 'interfering people'. When people were asked what social workers should do as part of their job, about three quarters said that social workers should investigate the needs of disabled people and 64 per cent that they should help poor people get their rights. Helping people with their emotional needs ranked third (54 per cent) and statutory tasks a poor fourth (32.5 per cent). However the public did not appear to see personal social services as a service appropriate for all sections of the population - only 8 per cent of the 994 respondents interviewed, had discussed a problem with a social worker compared to 12 per cent for CAB workers and doctors who were top with 29 per cent (Gallup 1981).

Some authors have argued that social work is a particularly subjective and individualistic type of work which is prone to different interpretations while Pincus and Minahan (1977, p.43) define the purpose of social work as:

(1) to enhance the problem solving and coping capacities of people; (2) to link people with systems that provide them with resources, services and opportunities; (3) to promote the effective and human operation of these systems; and (4) to contribute to the development and improvement of social policy.

CCETS W, the body that regulates social work training, has defined social work as

...an accountable professional activity which enables individuals, families and groups to identify personal, social and environmental difficulties adversely affecting them. Social work enables them to manage these difficulties through supportive rehabilitative, protective or corrective action. Social work promotes social welfare and responds to wider social needs promoting equal opportunities for every age, gender, sexual preference, class, disability, race, culture and creed. Social work has the responsibility to protect the vulnerable and exercise authority under statute (CCETSW 1991, p.8).

These definitions would appear to allow ample opportunities for social workers to be supportive of individuals with financial difficulties. However there is a longstanding debate concerning how much of the professional role of the social worker should be concerned with alleviating poverty. Although there is evidence to link poverty and social work traditionally and theoretically, the connections between poverty and social work are also subjective, ambiguous and complex.

Definitions of welfare rights

'Welfare rights' has been used to describe a wide range of activities as well as a set of ideas. Holman (1973a, p.358) defines the concept quite narrowly as being 'the entitlement of low income persons to statutory, financial or material provision of services', whereas Cohen and Rushton (1982, p.l) widen it to include the action of advocacy which they define as 'acting on a client's behalf and representing her interests to outside organisations'. For the purpose of this study I wish to borrow Fimister's (1986, p.l) definition of welfare rights as being:

... rights to income, with particular reference to social security and other cash welfare benefits, and to directly related issues such as fuel disconnections.

Within this definition Fimister includes advocating for people's rights, being concerned with the relief of poverty and also the prevention of poverty through campaigning for 'clear, adequate and enforceable non-means-tested entitlements'.

In relation to social work, the CCETSW Curriculum Development Group on Welfare Rights in Social Work Education notes (1989, p.8) 'Welfare rights for social workers is regarded as an orientation to helping and a practice skill rather than a body of knowledge'. However, welfare rights is an important

skill that appears neglected in social work training and in practice (Becker 1997).

The origins of the relationsh...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Dedication
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• Figures and tables
• Acknowledgements
• Preface
• Foreword
• Introduction
• Chapter 1 The relationship between social work and poverty
• Chapter 2 The restructuring of welfare
• Chapter 3 Methodological perspectives
• Chapter 4 Social work students and social work education
• Chapter 5 Social work students' attitudes to poverty
• Chapter 6 Social workers’ attitudes and actions in relation to poor social service users
• Chapter 7 Social service users with financial difficulties – their responses
• Chapter 8 Social work, poverty and social exclusion
• Appendix 1
• Appendix 2
• Appendix 3
• Appendix 4
• Bibliography
• Index