8/31/2014: [Social Work] Intervention theories and my value-based
intervention hypothesis (Work in progress)
S:11:09pm
E: 12:15am
As always, I might finish a day later, since it’s already
11pm. There are a lot of things I can
write about, including my experiences at Dismas. However, to plan ahead and to establish a
base for interventions, I want to begin to write and explore a list of possible
social work interventions I can use to work with my clients or residents.
I want to start by saying I know little of interventions but
that is one of the reasons why I am writing about them. As a pre-social worker, I know more about therapeutic
forces what to assess. However, I have
some ideas on what might work.
My professors tell us that in order to work effectively with
clients, each of us must be using at least one theory. Not using a theory is equivalent to going in
blind. One of the main theories touted
by many of my professors is the cogitative-behavior theory. It seems to be effective, thus, I will devote
some time to study this theory more.
But, to give a pre-analysis of it, I feel it has some limitations. This theory states that our thoughts cause
our feelings and our feelings in turn cause our behavior. So, the key is to change the way we
think. It is all a mind game.
This approach may not work for me because I can see the
truth. It can be deceptive because the
change in thinking may not be grounded in reality but instead only used to
achieve a desired effect. It may also
suffer from an all-or-thing fallacy.
For example, if I tell myself that I can’t find a job
because it’s all the economy’s fault, not my fault, the therapist may try to
change my thinking into that I am responsible for my fate. However, that is not really true. The real answer why a person can’t find a job
can be between internal and external factors, although many say that it lies
more in the internal. The 12% what happens
to you and 88% how you respond to it.
But, it’s 88% and not 100%. The
economy may also play a factor, so is the supply and demand of certain
jobs. If I try to think to myself that I
am completely responsible for my own fate, I am leaving out other factors and
if I fail even when doing my best, the person may blame him/herself instead of
looking at other possibilities.
Experienced social workers or counselors may be laughing at
me, but it’s ok. I am still learning and
the purpose of this discovery is to learn, both from my mistakes and the
mistakes of others and to identify, partly through reason, the best method.
I think the military also tried to use a little CBT on
me. They try to drill soldiers into
thinking something that is not completely true (or so I think) in reality, but
thinking the way the Army wants you to think can make you a better
soldier. That’s why many soldiers tell
me I should stop thinking so much and just follow orders. If I do that, if I throw away my inquiry and
questioning abilities and just adopt their way of thinking, I may be a better
soldier, but I will compromise my value of logic and questioning.
For example, in basic training, our drill sergeants or
culture tell us that if we are not meeting the standards, then we are lazy and not
doing our best or giving “110%.” In a
way, this type of thinking is good. It
forces soldiers to meet the standard because, if they meet it, they will feel
good; they will feel that they are trying.
However, this way of thinking doesn’t work for weaker soldiers who may
be doing their best but are still not reaching the Army expectations. Frequently, and only the individual can
testify, I done my best to adapt and reach the expectations. However, I frequently fall short. Other soldiers verbally attack me by telling
me that I’m being lazy and not doing my best, when, in indignation, I might be
trying harder than them. They see the
results more than the effort. This way
of thinking, that if you do your best, you will reach expectations, and that if
you don’t reach it, then it’s your lack of willpower, doesn’t work for me
because I did do my best and still couldn’t reach the expectations. There are other reasons why soldiers can’t
reach expectations besides the lack of effort.
Prior physical conditioning, street-smarts, the ability to adapt quickly
to change, social skills, among others, also play a role.
I do agree, however, that CBT can be effective, and in some
of my experience, is effective. If I
keep telling myself something, I will tend to believe it. However, this approach, and I only have a
cursory knowledge of it, won’t be as effective for those who are broader in
their thinking, who consider other factors as well.
--
The approach I am thinking that may work with my residents
is more like a value-based approach. I
don’t really have a name for it but looking online, it kind of agrees with
value clarification psychotherapy theory.
Everyone has values and their internal motivation is based
on them. Interventions and approaches will
be more effective if it agrees with what the client values.
Thus, finding what the resident or client value is the
assessment. Of course, since we live in
similar environments, many of us may have similar values, such as independence,
money, family, etc. But, everyone can be
different.
Once we know what the client values, we can inquire what the
client intends to do to further that value.
The social worker will then be like a second observer or advisor (I like
to call it a second general) analyzing the client’s methods and
objectives. The end point is to
establish a task or objective that benefits the person without harming other
people (hopefully it may benefit others as well). If the client gives an objective to a value
that may hurt other people, the social worker can educate the client on the possible
consequences as well as moral arguments (maybe).
For example, if the resident values money and he/she says
they want to a hitman to be rich, the social worker can point out the dangers
of a hitman, the consequences of murder, how it may actually counter-act their
goal of wanting to be rich (being arrested, prison time, death), as well as
moral arguments such as the value of a human life. The social worker can then give other socially-acceptable
alternatives that will further the client’s goal of wealth, such as
employment-search, education and job training, how to save money (financial
responsibility- can tell the story of poor lottery winners), among others.
This is a
client-centered approach that drives on internal motivation as well as focusing
on the strengths perspective. Thus,
the client will have a self-interest to accomplish their goals and objectives
in a, hopefully, healthier way thanks to the advice of a social worker using
this approach.
This also goes in-line with Sun Tzu’s Art of War in that if the client knows thyself and the task ahead
(i.e. enemy), he or she will be 100% effective in accomplishing their life task(s).
--
As I learn more intervention theories, I will be able to
learn from others and develop, hopefully, more effective ways to help people.
Add: I probably have no idea what CBT is. Forgive me; I am new.
