Social Work with Lesbians and Gay Men

Helen Cosis-Brown, Christine Cocker

• Publisher: SAGE Publications Ltd
• Year: 2010
• Print ISBN: 9781847873910, 9781847873903
• eBook ISBN: 9781446245095
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Social Sciences
• Subtopic: LGBT Studies
• Index: Social Sciences

Working with lesbians and gay men is a largely neglected area of social work practice. This book provides social workers and other professionals with an overview of a number of key challenges and concerns that play a significant part in the lives of lesbians and gay men. Despite positive changes in legislation, social work can still fail to meet the needs of lesbians and gay men, and remains a marginalised area in practice, research and teaching. This book promotes an understanding of these issues and proposes ideas for social work practice that are inclusive of lesbians and gay men in assessment and the provision of services.

The book clearly links knowledge and practice and is structured in such a way so that theories relevant to social work practices with lesbians and gay men are covered before specific areas of practice are addressed. Key topics include:

-The historical, legal, policy and theoretical context

-A reappraisal of anti-discriminatory practice

-Religion

-Family and kinship

-Relationship-based social work

-Social work with adults

-Social work and mental health

-Social work with children and families

Throughout the book, the authors encourage the reader to adopt a critical and reflective approach to social work. They present their ideas for effective practice that facilitates the individual and collective potential of lesbian and gay social work clients and carers. The book is essential reading for all qualifying social work students and practitioners working with lesbians and gay men.

1

Overview of the historical and contemporary discourses influencing social work with lesbians and gay men

Introduction

Social work is by its very nature a politically and socially constructed activity. When considering social work with lesbians and gay men it is therefore necessary to locate it within its historical, political and social context as social work tends to reflect the ideological moment. Because social work is a practice dependent on the use of language as one of its key activities/skills in engaging with people, thought needs to be given to how different discourses relating to sexuality have impacted upon social work theory and practice. In this chapter we therefore discuss the historical, social and political context and discourses and ideas that we think are significant to this area of social work practice before we look at the detail of social work with lesbians and gay men.

The meaning of ‘sexuality’ has changed over time. In this chapter we give an overview of lesbian and gay history relevant to understanding the position of lesbians and gay men in the UK. We also examine a number of different theoretical perspectives from psychoanalysis, social constructionism and post-modernism that we argue have been and are currently relevant to social work practice with lesbians and gay men. Historically, some of these ideas have been used as tools to ‘liberate’ and ‘oppress’ lesbians and gay men and therefore a closer analysis is required. The influence of this social, political and theoretical history is then considered in terms of current discourses and the impact of this on social work practice.

A brief overview of lesbian and gay history relevant to social work

Others have recorded the details of lesbian and gay history in the UK (Blasius and Phelan, 1997; Stryker and Whittle, 2006; Cook et al., 2007; Jennings, 2007) and offer a full and interesting commentary. It is not our intention to attempt to replicate such endeavours but rather to note key moments that have impacted on social work (Brown, 1998a).

Chapter 2 notes the development of both criminalising and oppressive legislation towards lesbians and gay men and the development of equalities legislation since the turn of the century. Legislation and social policy initiatives are dependent on their historical context and this is clearly illustrated in this arena.

A key moment in the history of lesbian and gay rights was the event known as ‘Stonewall’ in 1969. Although this took place in Greenwich Village, New York, it had international ramifications. ‘Stonewall’ refers to three days of rioting that resulted from a police raid on a club in Greenwich Village. These raids were commonplace at the time but the resistance that the New York police encountered on this particular occasion was not. This event was important symbolically as it signified the ‘beginning’ of gay pride and lesbian and gay resistance. A subsequent meeting at the London School of Economics arranged by Aubrey Walker and Bob Mellors, both of whom had been influenced by events in America, signalled the birth and development of the Gay Liberation Front (GLF) in the UK. The GLF had an explicit ‘left’ agenda and incorporated both socialist and feminist ideas.

If Stonewall is associated with the radical politicisation of lesbians and gay men and the development of the GLF in the UK in the 1960s, the publication of the Wolfenden Report in 1957 (Wolfenden, 1957) is associated with the development of ‘liberal reformist’ lesbian and gay politics in the UK. This report was the outcome of a Home Office committee’s findings on homosexuality and prostitution. After three years of deliberations the Report recommended the decriminalisation of consensual sex between men over 21. It took another ten years before this was enacted in the Sexual Offences Act 1967 which made sex between consenting men in private legal. The Homosexual Law Reform Society was formed in 1958 to agitate for reform to enable the Wolfenden recommendations to be realised. Another such group, the Committee for Homosexual Equality, was formed in 1969 (changing its name from Committee to Campaign (CHE) in 1971) and was a predominately gay male organisation arguing for equality. Mills et al. describe the CHE as being more ‘respectable’ than the GLF with a tighter structure and a broader political base (2007: 183). The main difference between the CHE and the GLF was that the CHE was both a social and liberal campaigning organisation using more traditional methods whilst the GLF was an organisation associated with left liberation politics:

Within lesbian and gay activist politics, there has always been and there still remains the polarised binary positions of reformism versus liberation; lobbying versus ‘in your face’ direct action; reasoned passion versus raw passion. In Britain, these different positions were held in the 1970s by the Campaign for Homosexual Equality (CHE) representing reasoned lobbying, while the Gay Liberation front (GLF) held the mantle of passionate direct action. (Brown, 1998a: 31)

A similar pattern emerged in the 1990s in the UK with the organisation ‘Outrage’ associated with transformationalist politics, and the political lobbying group Stonewall associated with reformist politics. Brown has argued elsewhere that ‘this is just a particular construction of a set of complex realities’(1998a: 31). However:

Crudely, the ‘reformist’ position argued for equal rights for lesbians and gay men and access to the same rights as heterosexuals, while the ‘transformationists’ argued for the deconstruction of notions of gender and sexuality. (1998a: 31)

We would argue that with the exception of Hicks (2000; 2005a) much of the writing about social work with lesbians and gay men has been within the ‘reformist’ tradition, arguing for equitable treatment rather than the transformation of the accepted orthodoxies associated with sexuality, relationships and the construction of the family. We maintain that for the realisation of social and political change both the radical and liberal positions are necessary.

Outrage was symbolically important as it signified a particular quality of resistance and celebratory politics (reminiscent of some of the GLF activities), responding to a specific historical moment associated with a number of factors. Firstly, a Conservative Government came to power in 1979 and focused attention through a number of social policy debates on lesbians and gay men as symbols of ‘the decay of civilisation’ (see Chapter 2). Secondly, Outrage responded to the homophobia unleashed by the association of HIV/AIDS with gay male sexuality. Thirdly, Outrage represented a practical interpretation and application of Queer politics. Queer theory/politics has been influential in gender and sexualities studies within higher education from the late 1980s. The reclamation of the term ‘Queer’ was linked to Queer theory and is associated more generally with post-modernism. Whilst post-modernism has had some impact on social work knowledge (Healy, 2000; 2005; Fook, 2002; Hicks, 2005a), Queer politics has mostly passed social work by.

Another major factor in the development of lesbian and gay politics and organisation was the impact of the second wave of the women’s movement from the 1960s onwards (Jennings, 2007). This movement brought together lesbian and feminist political discourses. It was within this area that much of the radical thinking about social work and feminism as well as social work with lesbians and gay men took place. The women and social work conferences held in the 1980s had a significant focus on lesbian and gay issues in social work. This was mirrored within the Lesbian and Gay NALGO conferences during the 1980s where much of the discussions had a specific feminist and socialist flavour. However, although conference discussions were concerned about such debates, this didn’t always translate into social work publications of the time. Brown comments that ‘recent feminist social work literature has had little, beyond generalities to say about lesbians’ (1992: 204). In fact, some of the most sophisticated writing about social work with lesbians and gay men came out of the Radical Social Work tradition of the 1970s and early 1980s (Hart and Richardson, 1981; Hart, 1980).

The lesbian and gay NALGO conferences were important in that their content did not differentiate the position of worker and client but sought to emphasise their commonalities as lesbians and gay men. Healy comments:

Critical practice discourses frequently refer to ‘workers’ and ‘service users’ as though each identity group is homogeneous and entirely distinct, thus neglecting the differences within each category and the commonalities across them. (Healy, 2000: 40)

The 1980s NALGO conferences were an example of an exception to this.

From 1979 the ‘New Right’ Conservative Government placed great emphasis on trying to marginalise lesbians and gay men and this was acted out through various social policy debates and initiatives. This is covered in Chapter 2. During this time there were a number of positive developments within local government that were to impact on social work. Cooper (1994) has documented the rise of lesbian and gay political influence and organisation:

Municipal lesbian and gay work emerged at the intersection of several different processes: the growing size and confidence of Britain’s lesbian and gay communities; the institutionalisation of the new urban left; identity politics; and the developing influence of feminism within local politics. More particularly, the policies were precipitated by the work of lesbian and gay activists in the Labour party, in local government employment, and as elected council members. (Cooper, 1994: 2)

Although these political and social processes were not a priority for many Local Authorities, those that did take on board the quality of employment and service delivery to lesbians and gay men did have an influence on both social work and social policy more generally. However, it was many years before some of these initiatives were translated into protective legislation in the form of the Equality Act 2006 and the Sexual Orientation Regulations 2007.

One of the most significant local government developments relevant to social work with lesbians and gay men in the 1980s were the initiatives taken by the Greater London Council (GLC). Under the leadership of Ken Livingstone, the GLC disseminated good practice guidelines for the delivery of public services to lesbians and gay men. Some of the comments made in these publications about the poor quality of social work with lesbians and gay men are as relevant today as they were when they were first published (GLC, 1986; GLC and the GLC Gay Working Party, 1985).

These municipal developments and the increasing visibility of lesbians and gay men in the trade union movement meant that the question of equitable treatment of lesbians and gay men started to be seriously addressed within some Local Authorities. This took place in the context of other communities also arguing for autonomous organisations within trade unions and within the Labour party.

Lesbians and gay men within the trade union movement began to make links with other groups’ industrial actions which increased their visibility as well as enabled some degree of mainstreaming. This was best demonstrated when ‘miners and their families led the Gay Pride March in 1985, the biggest yet with over 15,000 participants. The same year, the TUC passed resolutions on gay and lesbian rights in the workplace’ (Cook et al., 2007: 186). This period of activity meant that some Local Authorities started to include ‘sexual orientation’ within their equal opportunities policies. Post the Equality Act 2006 and the decriminalisation of all gay male sexual activities, this might not seem important. However, during the 1980s this was highly significant as it was the only protection that lesbian and gay employees, carers and clients were afforded. It also signified the advanced nature of Labour-led local authority thinking in this arena compared with the overt hostility that the Conservative Government exhibited.

The rising visibility of lesbians and gay men we refer to above is probably most obvious in their increasing presence within popular culture, entertainment and commerce. Although there is still some stereotyping of lesbians and gay men in media portrayals, the economic significance of lesbians and gay men has been demonstrated through commercial developments. This commercial presence, for example in Old Compton Street in London and Canal Street in Manchester, has meant that the public has been more exposed to lesbians and gay men, their varied and various lifestyles as well as their ordinariness. This commercial presence has ensured that lesbians and gay men have entered the public consciousness as more than two dimensional stereotypes.

Against the above backdrop, in 1997 the Labour Government utilised and built upon fertile ground already developed through lesbian and gay commercial, political and social activity that stretched back many decades. However, the impact was somewhat muted by the delays in legislative changes related to the rights of lesbians and gay men until some years after their election. The social policy and legislative changes initiated and realised by New Labour will be covered in Chapter 2. Broadly, this legal and policy framework specifically relevant to lesbians and gay men included: opportunities to parent and have that parenting protected and recognised; to have their intimate relationship commitments recognised and protected, and the decriminalisation of male same-sex sexual activities.

Some of these social policy and legislative developments have exposed, through public and policy debates, the nature and strength of continuing hostility and ambivalence towards lesbian and gay equality. Social work at the end of the first decade of the twenty-first century is in a different position than it was 20 years ago. It could be argued that social work in the 1980s was one of the professions at the forefront of arguing for lesbian and gay equality as demonstrated through social workers’ involvement within trade union as well as labour and community activism (Brown, 1998a). Social work in 2011 sits within a changed legislative landscape which is unrecognisable from the one it occupied in the 1980s or indeed the 1990s. This changed landscape places social work in a fundamentally different position. Having been at the forefront of considerations of equitable treatment of lesbians and gay men, having historically been a major player in the oppression of them, we argue that social work is now in need of serious reflection on its practices to make it at least compliant with current legislative requirements. Creative, innovative and imaginative social work should enable the possibility of practice that addresses the individuality and specificity of every client and carer whilst acknowledging their cultural, racial, familial, social and political location.

Discourses on sexuality influencing social work practice with lesbians and gay men

Hicks (2005a: 151) argues that ‘social work practitioners should think about a range of theories of sexuality … and develop a reflexive approach’ to their understanding of sexuality in practice. We present an overview of ideas about sexuality, including contributions from Queer theory, se...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Contents
• Acknowledgements
• Introduction
• 1 Overview of the historical and contemporary discourses influencing social work with lesbians and gay men
• 2 The legal and policy framework for practice
• 3 Social work values and ethical practice: moving beyond anti-discriminatory or anti-oppressive practice
• 4 Family and kinship and their relationship to social work practice
• 5 Homosexuality, religion and social work practice
• 6 Social work practice with lesbians and gay men: working with older adults, adults with learning disabilities and adults with physical disabilities
• 7 Social work practice with lesbians and gay men: mental health
• 8 Social work practice with lesbians and gay men: working with children and families
• Conclusion
• References
• Index