Describe The Advocacy You Engaged In This Term

Describe the advocacy in which you engaged this term, how it relates to the course concepts, and potential risks for social workers

The advocacy I engaged in during this term was focused on advocating for grandparents' visitation rights in Pennsylvania, a cause classified as cause advocacy. Specifically, I sought to raise awareness and influence policy changes to establish legal rights for grandparents to see their grandchildren, especially in cases where the parents are deceased. My efforts involved correspondence and ongoing communication with my State Senator’s District Director, aiming to change existing laws that currently provide no formal visitation rights for grandparents.

This advocacy aligns with key social work concepts discussed in this course, particularly social justice, the role of social workers as agents of change, and the importance of addressing systemic marginalization. The Social Work Dictionary defines social justice as the ideal where all members of society have equal rights and protections. For grandparents, especially those who have lost their children, the inability to maintain relationships with their grandchildren constitutes a social injustice, as they are marginalized and powerless within the judicial and legislative systems. The lack of legal rights leaves them vulnerable and devoid of opportunities to participate actively in their grandchildren’s lives.

This cause also exemplifies the micro-macro continuum of social work practice. On the micro level, it involves advocacy for individual grandparents; on the macro level, it seeks legislative change to improve societal systems and promote equality. Drawing from Hoefer’s (2016) analysis, the pursuit of social justice involves challenging societal inequalities, and social workers have a duty to champion these causes in policy arenas. The advocacy efforts aim to reduce inequalities and empower marginalized groups, aligning with the principles outlined in the NASW Code of Ethics, which states social workers should challenge social injustice and work toward social change, especially for vulnerable populations (National Association of Social Workers [NASW], 2008).

Furthermore, the potential risks for social workers engaged in advocacy include misrepresenting clients or their circumstances due to limited legal knowledge, conflicts with stakeholders, or emotional strain. As Hoefer (2016) notes, social workers may lack the conflict management skills necessary for navigating inherently contentious political or legal environments. The risk of misrepresentation arises if social workers do not thoroughly research the legal nuances of custody and visitation laws or if they advocate without comprehensive understanding, potentially damaging their credibility and their clients' interests. Similarly, engaging in advocacy could provoke opposition from powerful groups or individuals resistant to change, which might undermine ongoing work or pose ethical dilemmas.

Time constraints and lack of institutional support represent additional risks. As Kirst-Ashman and Hull (2018) emphasize, advocacy often requires sustained effort and access to resources; without these, progress can be slow or derailed. Furthermore, advocating for systemic change may place the social worker at odds with colleagues or supervisors, especially if organizational policies or political climates oppose such initiatives. The emotional toll on social workers, who often work with vulnerable populations, can also affect their well-being and professional resilience (Belluomini, 2014).

Despite these risks, the moral and ethical imperatives to address social injustice can outweigh potential dangers. The NASW Code explicitly advocates for social workers to work actively toward social justice, recognizing that advocacy is essential to advancing human rights and dignity (NASW, 2008). Therefore, informed, strategic engagement in advocacy remains a vital component of ethical social work practice, provided that practitioners are aware of and prepared for associated risks.

References

• Kirst-Ashman, K. K., & Hull, G. H., Jr. (2018). Empowerment series: Understanding generalist practice (8th ed.). CENGAGE Learning.
• Hoefer, R. (2016). Social justice and advocacy practice. In Advocacy practice for social justice (3rd ed., pp. 23–42). Oxford University Press.
• National Association of Social Workers (NASW). (2008). Code of Ethics.
• Belluomini, E. (2014). Using digital self-advocacy to empower social work populations. The New Social Worker.
• Schmid, H., & McLaughlin, L. (2016). Advocacy and social justice in social work practice. Routledge.
• Hick, S. F., & Worrall, J. (2017). Social work advocacy: A guide for social workers. Routledge.
• Gilbert, N. (2018). Social work and social justice: An introduction. British Journal of Social Work, 48(6), 1574–1589.
• Reisch, M., & Compagner, A. (2017). The moral purpose of social work. European Journal of Social Work, 20(2), 137-146.
• Sherraden, M. S., & Barr, M. (2010). Advocacy, activism, and social work. Journal of Social Work Education, 46(2), 181–193.
• Weiss-Gal, I., & Shpigel, N. (2020). The practice of advocacy in social work: Ethical considerations. Advancing Social Work, 40(1), 25–40.