|
|
From January 2001 NASW NEWS The Ph.D. PathThe November article on doctoral education addresses the shortage of skilled social work researchers by noting a "need to inform potential students that we need their talent and commitment to practice at that level." This suggests some confusing of research and practice. People who enter social work do have a commitment to practice. One reason they avoid doctoral study may be a fear that they will have to relinquish that commitment in order to survive in an academe under the increasing dominance of research — a dominance the article makes abundantly clear. Social work needs researchers. Social work also needs faculty with a commitment to engaging in and teaching practice. Ask social work students what they find of most value in their education. I'll wager a statistically significant number of them will say that it is learning from the experiences of seasoned practitioners. W. Dana Holman, CSW, DSW
If I were going for a Ph.D. or a Psy.D in psychology, I would be taking about 77 credits of course work. Since my MSW from Fordham was 66 credits, why should I take an additional 40-plus credits to obtain my Ph.D. in social work? It seems to be saying that the social worker needs more academic work to reach the same level of competence as other related Ph.D.s. Charles Greco, M.A., R-CSW, BCD
Since its inception, it is my opinion, the doctoral degree in social work has often been demeaned and disregarded by our own profession. Simply, I must wonder if there is a level of disdain for this degree, as it is not even fully recognized by our own colleagues. Evidence? I think it might be interesting to examine the various state licensing provisions for social workers, both those currently in effect and those being proposed. I suggest that you will probably discover that there are no levels of licensing specifically designated for doctoral-level social work practitioners. In most cases, doctoral-level practitioners are subsumed under some other designation, usually being grouped in with senior-level MSWs. Moreover, if you examine the categories of representation on most of the state NASW executive committees, you will usually find the following: BSW student-at-large and BSW member-at-large; MSW student-at-large and MSW member-at-large. Clearly, there are no provisions made for a DSW/Ph.D. student-at-large or a DSW/Ph.D. member-at-large. In my opinion and the opinion of many doctoral-level practitioners, this is either a gross oversight or clear discrimination against our own. I think it is difficult to motivate a social worker to pursue doctoral-level training when doctoral-level social workers are seemingly "ghosts" within our own profession. Joseph A. Cattano, Ph.D., CSW
The inadequate pipeline to produce sufficient Ph.D.s in social work is well described. We have discussed this alarming professional issue and its repercussions for the health and viability of our profession extensively on the Advisory Council at the Columbia University School of Social Work. As one who has paid a considerable price for ignoring professors' advice and rushing to practice while deferring doctoral studies, I urge my students to get the highest degree under their belt. Once involved in balancing career demands and family, the finances, time and energy to pursue advanced academic work shrink. In health care, where many senior management careers have been dismantled, our modest presence as senior academic researchers and our difficulty marshalling evidence-based outcome data paved the way for budgetary concerns to prevail and the seasoned to be replaced with the less trained and the less expensive. The plans outlined in the article are overdue and welcome. Sue Matorin, ACSW
I suggest the revival of the DSW as a three-year, dissertation-optional degree for advanced practitioners. This would correspond to the doctoral-level practice degrees in other professions, such as medicine (M.D.), law (J.D.), clinical psychology (Psy.D.) and ministry (D.Min.) These degrees are also professional practice doctorates, not the research-oriented Ph.D. Does the push for more Ph.D. candidates arise from the professional concerns of practitioners or of the academy? If the latter, then we have here a case of the tail wagging the dog. Daniel Liechty Machismo's MeaningWe are writing to you from the Women's Coalition Against Racism in New Jersey in response to "Latino Forum Examines Domestic Violence" [September]. While we agree that addressing the issue of domestic violence is vital to the growth and survival of the Latino community, we are concerned about the way that cultural factors are named as enabling the violence. The subtitle of the article states, "Cultural factors, such as the value of machismo, may enable abuse." "Machismo" is defined in the indigenous Latino culture as a positive value, whereby Latino men are expected to be responsible for and protective of their families in noncontrolling ways. It is the overlay of patriarchy, which exists in all cultures, that has turned the value of machismo into a negative, coercive quality. To the contrary, we feel that the community values of connection to family, nurturing, loyalty, responsibility and protection are strengths of the Latino culture that may actually help end domestic violence. By defining cultural factors as enabling domestic violence in the Latino community, we perpetuate the racism that exists and further marginalize the Latino community. If we instead begin to focus on the oppression and dominance which are central to the patriarchy that cuts across all religions and cultures, we can then embrace the positive cultural values of Latinos. In this spirit, Latino men can begin to shed their patriarchal education while simultaneously celebrating their culture and learning expanded ways of being men. Theresa Messineo, LCSW, DVS Tracy Durkin, LCSW, DVS Gun ControlIt is hard not to respond to the September letter by Dean K. Adair criticizing NASW for its backing of gun control. His rationale that opposition to gun control flies against Second Amendment rights is sadly flawed and painful to read from a colleague. Without access to a gun, individuals who have not had reasonable parenting or developed inner capacity to cope with conflict and intense emotions cannot kill anyone easily. If, as Mr. Adair contends, our social infrastructure is crumbling, that is all the more reason to set in place nationwide controls of deadly weapons. Social work has stood for sound social policies since its beginning as a profession. It is not responsible for the gaps and contradictions in our culture. It, like other human services, is an imperfect science. I am not against gun ownership, only against all the means to maintain them secretly and in great numbers! NASW is right and moral when it confronts this issue vigorously. Isidore Shapiro, ACSW Prenatal Protection"Arrests for Drug Use in Pregnancy Opposed" [November] brings up the controversial question of when does parenting begin: prior to or after birth. The research would appear to be fairly clear in reference to the developing fetus potentially being adversely effected by exposure to drugs or alcohol. At the very least, most of us, as social workers, would condemn the parenting practice of giving an infant alcohol or illegal drugs. In my state, if I became aware of such parenting behavior it would necessitate a report to my child protective services office. It would appear to me that the argument NASW is taking is that the child does not exist as a child until birth — a ludicrous argument in my opinion. It does, however, cause us as an organization to answer the question of at what point during the pregnancy do we advocate for the child. Many of us advocate for prenatal care programs. Why aren't we condemning prenatal abuse? Aren't we talking out of both sides of our mouth on this issue? Kevin Theriot, Ph.D. Letters PolicyLetters are published as space permits and may be edited for clarity and length. Submissions may not necessarily be published or responded to; receipt is not acknowledged. Unsigned letters, form letters and ccs to third parties are not published. Mail to: Managing Editor, NASW News, 750 First St., N.E., Suite 700, Washington, DC 20002. E-mail — plain (ASCII) text only — to: naswnews@naswdc.org Back to NASW NEWS Contents
|
 |
