Person-In-Situation: History, Theory, and New Directions ...

1 AbstractThis article explores the history of the person-in-situation concept in social work practice, identifies dif-ficulties in integrating the concept in practice theories,and explores how philosophical innovations haveinformed a more integrated approach to social worktheory. The potential impact of the convergence ofintegrating subjective and objective phenomena inphilosophy with integrating the person and environ-ment perspective in clinical theory is concept of person-in-situation or person-in-environment stemmed from the beginning ofsocial work and its dual focus on both individualassistance and social reform.

2 The historical develop-ment ofthe concept reflects political, social, andeconomic concerns as well as debates within theprofession of social work. It has been central todirect practice1in particular, though there have beendifficulties in applying the concept within some ofthe major theoretical frameworks adopted by socialworkers. This article will trace the person-in-situa-tion concept throughout the history of social work,examine how practice theories have often failed tofully integrate the concept, and explore the conver-gence of contemporary philosophy with advances inintegrating the concept in clinical early years of social work practice are definedby the contributions of Jane Addams in the settle-ment house movement and Mary Richmond insocial casework.

3 The two influences represent thebeginnings of the dual focus of social work on socialreform (by the settlement house movement) and onindividuals and families (in social casework). MaryRichmond (1922) attempted to bridge these divi-sions by emphasizing the importance in work withindividuals and families of the interaction betweenthe person and the environment. She defined socialcasework as those processes which develop person-ality through adjustments consciously effected,individual by individual, between men [sic] andtheir social environment (pp. 98 99). Here weencounter the first formal conceptualization ofdirect social work as focusing on both the person andhis or her environment.

4 Richmond proclaimed thatthe social worker should be no more occupied withabnormalities in individual than in the more able to neglect one than the other (p. 98). Richmond s casework occurred within thecontext of the relationship between social worker andclient, but she promoted both direct action throughthat relationship and indirect action through use ofenvironmental resources (p. 101). Furthermore,Richmond stated that in the absence of workers should develop substitutes and pushhard to secure community agencies still lacking bymaking use of arguments and illustrations fromcasework (p.)

5 115). In this way, she understood thatcasework, group work, community work, socialreform, and social research were all interdependentaspects of social work that should come together onthe behalfof clients. Hence, Richmond was able tocontextualize individual, direct action within theframework of the environment and the multiplefunctions of the social Richmond s work synthesized concernsabout the person and environment in both theassessment of cases and in the activities of the socialworker, the rise of psychoanalytic theory soon shift-ed this focus for social workers in direct s work and his focus on individual pathologybecame widely read and popular among social work-ers in the (Simon, 1994).

6 The intrapsychic focusof Freud s theories as well as the analytic stance ofabstinence of the practioner in treatment led to areduction of attention to, and intervention in, envi-ronmental causes of distress. By the 1940s, somedirect practitioners were beginning to label them-selves as psychiatric social workers and explicitlyaligning with psychoanalytic theory and was then that Gordon Hamilton (1940) wrotethe influential Theory and Practice of SocialCasework. Hamilton clearly incorporated aspects ofpsychoanalytic theory including transference,defense and resistance , and interpretation into case-work practice.

7 In the preface to the 1951 edition ofTheory and Practice of Social Casework, Hamiltonidentified herself as part of the diagnostic schooland expressed her allegiance to Freudian Theory, though she also stated that by the time the secondPRAXIS50 Fall 2006 Volume 6 Person-In-Situation: History, Theory, and New Directionsfor Social Work Practiceby Kathryn L. Cornell1 Direct practice here is used to distinguish work with individuals and familiesfrom macro level administrative, community, and policy social was published she believed social work practicefit more with ego psychology and psychodynamictheory than with the specialty of psychoanalysis ( vii).

8 Hamilton reaffirmed social work s tradition-al concern with the environment and committednot only to understand the structure and dynamicsof personality but also to rediscover the use of envi-ronmental or social therapy (p. v). Hamilton wasthe first to make use of the phrase person and situ-ation as a way to define the distinguishing charac-teristics of social work as a humanistic or clinicalprofession (p. 3). She used the construct to highlightthe interaction between the intrapsychic and objec-tive, with the interaction being the primary domainof the social worker. Hamilton perceived the role ofthe direct practice social worker as understandingintrapsychic conflict while making use of thehealthy aspects of the client to help the individualadapt to his or her environment, though she fails toequally emphasize intervening to cause the environ-ment to adapt to the individual.

9 She did recognizethat counseling frequently needed to be accompa-nied by practical assistance that required the socialworker to develop an understanding of the commu-nity, the client s social needs, and the resources tomeet those needs (p. 84). She also included the useof social resources as one of the four characteristicprocesses of direct practice (p. 26). Thus, whilepsychodynamic theory strongly influencedHamilton s approach to practice, she returned to theemphasis on person and situation in assessment andtreatment, and in defining the unique perspective ofthe s desire to define the profession wasnot unique in her was a prevailing fearthat social work would become absorbed in otherprofessions such as psychology, psychiatry, medicineand sociology (Turner, 1978).

10 By the 1950s, mentalhealth work had strong popular support and thera-pists held high status, leading to higher status forpsychiatric social workers (Turner, p. 2). Psychiatricsocial workers advocated for casework to be recog-nized as a form of psychotherapy and appeared tobe more aligned with psychiatry than social work. Inclinical settings, direct practice social workers wereseen as experts on the external factors of a case,while psychiatrists were experts on the internal fac-tors, though in fact the roles of the social worker andpsychiatrist were not so clearly defined in actualpractice (Turner, p.)