Privilege and Power

(1)

Master’s thesis, 15 credits Department of Social Work

Spring term 2021

Privilege and Power

Swedish Social Workers’

Understandings, Experiences,

Reflections, and Emotions

(2)

UMEÅ UNIVERSITY Department of Social Work Master’s Thesis, 15 credits Author: Veronica Söderberg Supervisor: Jens Ineland

Approved by: Öncel Naldemirci

Title: Privilege and Power: Swedish Social Workers’ Understandings, Experiences, Reflections, and Emotions

Abstract

Social workers are able to both promote social justice as well as exercise social control, however, the topics of privilege and power are rarely discussed regarding how it is experienced and perceived by social workers. The purpose of this thesis was to deepen the understanding of Swedish social workers, their experience and reflections regarding their own privileges and power. To achieve this, semi-structured interviews were conducted with eight Swedish social workers and thematic analysis was applied to the data with a framework of social constructionism. The analysis resulted in five themes: the vagueness of privilege; the ambiguity of power; reflection is a priority, but not concerning privilege and power; multifaceted experiences and emotions; and leveling the playing field. Findings indicate that social workers experience privilege and power in a variety of ways which impact and affect their daily practice. By suggesting that privilege and power are contextual and complex concepts, the study recognizes that there are no identical experiences. The findings also reveal that privilege and power can subliminally be present in the various experiences. While the participants sometimes did not identify them as such, their reports brought the presence of privilege and power in their practice to light.

(3)

Sammanfattning

Socionomer har möjlighet att både arbeta för social rättvisa och utöva kontroll, emellertid diskuteras sällan privilegier och makt gällande hur de upplevs av socionomer. Syftet med denna uppsats var att fördjupa förståelsen för svenska socionomer och deras erfarenheter och reflektioner avseende deras privilegier och makt. För att uppnå detta genomfördes semistrukturerade intervjuer med åtta svenska socionomer, tematisk analys tillämpades på informationen med ett teoretiskt perspektiv i social konstruktion. Analysen resulterade i fem teman: privilegiernas vaghet; maktens tvetydighet; reflektion är en prioritet, men inte gäller privilegier och makt; mångfacetterade upplevelser och känslor; samt utjämnande av spelplanen. Resultaten indikerar att socionomer upplever privilegier och makt på flera sätt som påverkar deras dagliga arbete. Genom att föreslå att privilegier och makt är kontextuella och komplexa står studien för att det inte finns några identiska upplevelser. Resultaten tyder också på att privilegier och makt undermedvetet vara närvarande i de olika upplevelserna och fastän deltagarna ibland inte identifierade dem som sådana, så avslöjade deras berättelser närvaron av privilegier och makt i arbetet.

(4)

Acknowledgements

(5)

1. Introduction

1.1 The Problem

The general consensus is that social workers aim to do good as they possess the ability to advocate for social justice and confront oppressive societal norms (Dominelli, 2002; Henrickson, 2018; Kondrat, 1999; Pease, 2010; Taiwo, 2018). Furthermore, social workers tackle issues concerning “who in society is privileged or not, who benefits at the expense of whom, who is dominant or subordinate, who is an agent or target, and who is marginalized by, or excluded from the social system based on their social identities and differences in terms of race, sex, gender, or class” (Taiwo, 2018, p.3).

However, while discussing privilege and power within social work, it is important to remember how contemporary social work is embedded in its history of oppressive and controlling processes as an extension of government to protect the status quo of Whiteness and Wester superiority (Davis & Gentlewarrior, 2015; Dominelli, 2002). And today, social workers are still capable of carrying out social control (Dominelli, 2002; Fultz & Kondrat, 2019; Henrickson, 2018; Pease, 2006, 2010; Taiwo, 2018) as they are responsible for deciding who is eligible to receive the available services (Dominelli, 2002; Greene, 2010; Hasenfeld, 1987).

(7)

2

evaluating the needs of clients and making decisions accordingly (Eliassi, 2015; Shanks & Mejdell Bjerland, in press).

Social workers are often committed to identifying their own biases and how they affect their practice (Greene, 2010), but there is there is an absence of social workers acknowledging their various types of privilege despite them accompanying us in our practice. Thus, revealing the need for discussions regarding privileges, their consequences, and how they affect our interactions with clients (Black et al., 2007; Greene, 2010). Furthermore, there is an imbalance of power between social workers and their clients, which often is underestimated in social work practice (Hasenfeld, 1987). In order for social workers to approach social justice and become allies to those who are marginalized in society there must be an understanding of how privilege, power, and oppression is constructed and reconstructed (Black et al., 2007; Dominelli, 2002; Fultz & Kondrat, 2019). If not, social workers might inadvertently produce and reproduce oppression of others, as well as their own power over marginalized people (Dominelli, 2002; Henrickson, 2018; Pease, 2006, 2010).

It can often be difficult to recognize your own privileges and people who are privileged often perceive their lives as normal (Pease, 2006, 2010; Taiwo, 2018). However, social work literature names critical reflection as a method which can aid social workers to acknowledge privilege (D’Cruz et al., 2007; Kondrat, 1999; Middleton et al., 2009; Pease, 2006, 2010; Spencer, 2008). It is important for social workers to reflect and identify their privileges and power, as denying the existence of differences in society also deny the societal disparities, structural inequalities, the existence of power structures (Fultz & Kondrat, 2019; Mullaly, 2010), as well as diminishes the disadvantages of people and their experiences (Pease, 2010).

(8)

3

the discourse (Pease, 2006, 2010). Thus, revealing a need for research which includes voices from the Swedish social work field regarding privilege and power, making this study relevant.

1.2 Aim

This study aims to gain insight and deepen the understanding of Swedish social workers’ perception, experiences, and reflections regarding their own privilege, while focusing on its relationship with power, as well as explore accompanying emotions.

1.3 Research Questions

• How do social workers understand and relate to their own privilege and power?

• In which ways have social workers experienced privilege and power during client work? • What opportunities do social workers have to critically reflect about privilege and power

during work?

• What emotions arise when social workers experience, talk about, and reflect upon privilege and power?

1.4 Definition of Terms

1.4.1 Social position

Social positions are characteristics and categories such as gender, disability, ethnicity, class, sexual orientation, etc. (Burr, 2015; Mullaly, 2010).

1.4.2 Privilege

According to Black et al. (2007), several authors in social work literature have a basic agreement regarding the definition of privilege and based on this, the authors have identified five fundamental components within the concept:

(9)

4

Furthermore, privilege can be viewed as both a process and an outcome. The process takes place when certain social positions are continuously regarded and retained as the societal standard which everyone else are compared to. The outcome is when opportunities are given to people that are regarded as privileged whereas the people who are marginalized are left out, discriminated against, or viewed as incompetent (Black et al., 2007).

1.4.3 Exercise of public authority

The exercise of public authority regards when social workers have mandate in their professional practice in terms of, inter alia, decision-making where they can “regulate and influence outcomes of welfare” (Eliassi, 2015, p. 555). In Swedish, exercise of public authority is called

myndighetsutövning (Swedish Courts, 2019).

2. Literature Review

I approached the topic of privilege and power by conducting searches of databases, including socINDEX and APA Psychinfo, as well as the university’s library search. Key words used in search included “social work”, “privilege”, “power”, “oppression”, “social justice”, and “critical reflection”. Boolean search operators and asterisks were used to maximize the search results. No timeline restrictions were placed on publications; however, I specified the search to books, dissertations, and peer-reviewed journals.

2.1 Privilege and Power

(10)

5

The concepts of privilege and power are correlated and intersects within social work practice (Greene, 2010; Hasenfeld, 1987; Taiwo, 2018) and the social worker-client relationship is often viewed as asymmetrical as one person is the professional expert whereas the other person is seeking help (Dominelli, 2002; Hasenfeld, 1987). In order for social workers to appropriately support clients, they must understand their own power and its effects, as well as of how societal structures affect their interactions with clients (Bar-On, 2002). Some authors argue that social workers should acknowledge their various types of privilege and be aware of how these can impact their professional practice (Black et al., 2007; Greene, 2010). Through this process, social workers can become allies to those who are marginalized in society (Black et al., 2007).

(11)

6

The power that the agency has over its social workers is often invisible, but it exists through procedures and policies, in which variety of services that are offered to clients, and in the requirements that the clients have to meet in order to be eligible for those services. The social workers’ expertise and competence is often presumed as qualities that will protect them from the agency’s interference during client work, however, this is not always a reality as the social workers’ beliefs and concerns cannot supersede the agency’s procedures and policies (Dominelli, 2002; Hasenfeld, 1987).

2.2 Social Justice and Oppression

Social workers can be viewed as experts on the effects of oppression due to having insight into the experiences of marginalized clients (Greene, 2010) and they have opportunity and responsibility to advocate for social justice and challenge the inequalities of society (Dominelli, 2002; Greene, 2010; Henrickson, 2018). However, along the ability to promote social justice, social workers are also capable of control (Dominelli, 2002; Fultz & Kondrat, 2019; Henrickson, 2018; Pease, 2006, 2010; Taiwo, 2018) as they assess who is deserving and meet the requirements of the available services (Dominelli, 2002; Greene, 2010; Hasenfeld, 1987). Dominelli (2002) explains that politicians argue that benefits must be moderated as they believe that the marginalized and disadvantaged people in society will exploit the system and resources. Consequently, social workers who work within governmental agencies consequently reinforce these beliefs through the rules and regulations they enforce in their practice.

(12)

7

There are claims that “social workers have ignored the ways in which their practice and the conduct of social agencies are shaped by the social construction of whiteness and white privilege” (Pease, 2006, p.16). While social work today has changed considerably, there are still Western hegemonic ideologies and practices which dominates the field. As a result, diverse people and those who are not ascribed as privileged must adapt and adhere to the customs of those who are considered privileged as to access the benefits (Davis & Gentlewarrior, 2015; Dominelli, 2002). Oppression exists on personal, cultural, and structural levels (Collins, 2000) and while there have been changes within the field, social workers can still today have a professional authority which gives them a sense of entitlement to be coercive and persuasive in their practice. For example, the social workers can put forward the options they believe are most suitable rather than providing the client with all available options, which is based on the social workers own assumptions and social positions (Dominelli, 2002).

Social work research has focused a lot on how social work education have adjusted, or can adjust, to the changes within the field (Almeida et al., 2019; Lill & Jacobson Pettersson, 2019; Simon et al., in press) but despite cultural competency often being taught in social work education, it can be challenging to adapt in practice (Eliassi, 2015). Nonetheless, the production and reproduction of oppression does not require active actions of individuals who experience privilege. Despite not deliberately partaking in oppressive actions, they may be doing so inadvertently (Pease, 2010). For example, there is a misconception of equal opportunity where privileged individuals view societal resources and opportunities as equally accessible to everyone in society, which consequently diminishes the of social, economical, and political differences of the individuals (Mullaly, 2010).

2.3 Critical Reflection

(13)

8

knowing subjects, achieve a deepening awareness both of the sociohistorical reality which shapes their lives and of their capacity to transform that reality” (Freire, 1970, as cited in Kondrat, 1999, p. 472).

Critical reflection is an ongoing process (Fook, 2015) which can be viewed as a skill, in which the social worker can improve and explore their practice, and through critical reflection there can be critical awareness of self (D’Cruz et al., 2007). It is often regarded as an individual process but there are many benefits to reflect with colleagues, both informally and during structured session. During informal reflection, colleagues are able to express emotions as a way to cope with the job or discuss next steps in a case, whereas a structured session such as internal or external supervision is crucial for constructive reflection (Ferguson, 2018; Yip, 2006). Both has its benefits, but Fook (2015) argues that the latter is more beneficial for changing one’s perspective as it challenges the social workers to examine themselves and their assumptions.

(14)

9

challenging existing social, political and cultural conditions … it involves ethical and moral criticism and judgements” (ibid., p.778). Consequently, the process of critical reflection requires the social worker to be critical regarding their own reflections and to question their own ethical and moral principles. Only then, is it possible to reveal discrepancies between our actions and the values and beliefs we hold as our own (Fook, 2015; Spencer, 2008; Yip, 2006). These scholars are in accordance with Freire (1998, as cited in Hegar, 2012) who argued that self development and learning cannot be passive.

3. Theoretical Framework

The theoretical framework for this study is social constructionism. Theories are an essential part of provides social research as it provides a background (Bryman, 2012), and it is with this foundation I will interpret and analyze the research findings.

3.1 Social Constructionism

Social constructionism claims knowledge is produced through social interactions, and it explores and examines power relations which are created through these social interactions. It has its foundation in Marxism and encourages a critical approach towards how we understand everything around us. As a result, we can challenge what we perceive as knowledge (Berger & Luckmann, 1966: Burr, 2015; Galbin, 2014). Our understanding of the world is unavoidably dependent on our social positions as they provide us with a specific point of view of society and the people in it (Burr, 2015). An individual can have multiple social identities which are dependent on social positions, the social situation, and the interactions with others. The experiences of social situations are subjective and the knowledge within is communicated and sustained through social interactions (Berger & Luckmann, 1966).

(15)

10

dominance of individuals which belong to a dominant group, where they view their own social positions as superior, consequently affecting social interactions (Pease, 2010). Therefore, we must analyze part we play for others and their world (Berger & Luckmann, 1966).

Social constructionism contains both micro and macro approaches. The macro approach regards how discourse impacts our social interactions and how consequently it is those who are powerful within society which creates the discourse, whereas the micro approach refers how the interactions between individuals constructs knowledge, as well as focusing on the individual’s processes in which they construct themselves and circumstances (Burr, 2015). Berger and Luckmann (1966) identified externalization, objectification, and internalization as the three fundamental processes of social constructionism. Externalization refers to the production of our world through social practices such as language, activities, and symbols. Objectification regards to the way individuals perceive the world as natural and objective rather than socially constructed. The process of

internalization our social reality is concerned with how the objective world is projected into our

consciousness through socialization.

Criticism has been directed towards social constructionism for focusing too much on the disadvantaged groups (Pease, 2010), it is therefore imperative to examine the dominant social positions when utilizing social constructionism (Berger & Luckmann, 1966). Moreover, while examining data collection through a lens of social constructionism, Burr (2015) cautions assuming the findings are superior to the findings of other because they are accurate in certain social situations. Such reasoning could contribute to the supremacy over others, particularly if the reports are made by those who are dominant in society.

Social constructionism provides this study with a critical framework for understanding privilege and power as phenomena which are subjective, contextual, and created during interactions with others. And by approaching the collected data as such, the various experiences can be analyzed as experienced, described, and interpreted by the individual participant.

4. Methodology and Approach

(16)

11

4.1 Sampling and Recruitment

For this study, I utilized purposive sampling based on the objectives of the research, it is a non-probability method which strategically samples participants to gain access to information-rich data (Bryman, 2012). Purposive sampling resulted in the recruitment of eight participants who all have experience of working with clients and with a variety of professional characteristics (e.g., years of practice and approach). The recruitment took place via email by sending a letter of information (see Appendix A) to social services of a mid-sized Swedish municipality. Eight social workers responded they would like to participate in the study, and one social worker responded that they could be a backup in the event of a participant would withdraw from the study. The eight participating social workers are all cisgender female, their ages range from 26 to 64, and their year of graduation were between 1982 and 2021. All participants work within social services in a variety of teams, the exact nature of their duties is not described as to ensure their anonymity. However, all participants have experience of working with both children and adults, and their duties involves exercise of public authority.

4.2 Data Collection

(17)

12

4.3 Analysis

To approach the data collected during the interviews, I applied a thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006) as it is an appropriate method in relation to the purpose of the research and a commonly used analysis method within qualitative research as it identifies themes in comprehensive and complex statements. A theme represents a pattern within the data and by identifying common themes and analyzing them, one can get detailed and multifaceted results which reflects what is of importance to the participants. It is also used to identify and interpret the underlying assumptions and ideas of the data (Braun & Clarke, 2006; Bryman, 2012; Vaismoradi et al., 2013). Thematic analysis consists of six phases as described by Braun & Clarke (2006, p.87) (1) familiarizing yourself with the data, (2) generating initial codes, (3) searching for themes, (4)

reviewing the themes, (5) defining and naming themes, and (6) producing the report. The authors

describe the thematic analysis as a recurring process where the researcher can move freely between the phases as needed rather than being a linear process. First, I transcribed the interviews and reading and rereading the transcripts helped me become familiarized with the results and identify initial patterns. Second, I systematically coded the entire data set of responses while giving equal attention to each data set. Then, I gathered the coded data extracts into potential themes, which was done thoroughly and inclusive of all the data. After that, I reviewed and refined the themes by going over the data in each theme to ensure coherency, followed by doing the same for the entire data set to make sure the themes reflect the entire data. At this point, the themes were coherent, and I moved on to defining and clarifying the themes and conducted a detailed analysis of each theme to make sure they capture the content of the data. Finally, I produced the report where I selected extracts of the data which validates the themes and relates to the research question and literature while having an analytical narrative. The analysis produced five themes: the vagueness of privilege; the ambiguity of power; reflection is a priority, but not concerning privilege and power; multifaceted experiences and emotions; and leveling the playing field.

4.4 Ethical Considerations

(18)

13

level of higher education is excluded from ethical review (SFS 2003:460), it is still an important part of this study and appropriate steps have been taken to protect the participants.

Social research encompasses four main ethical principles which concern harm to participants,

informed consent, invasion of privacy, and deception (Bryman, 2012). It is imperative for the

researcher to consider the confidentiality and anonymity of the participant as not to invade their privacy. Pseudonyms are often used but they may not completely eradicate the possibility of someone identifying the participant, in some instances the researchers can alter the report of a participant during transcriptions to ensure that the participants remain unidentifiable, however it is important to not change the content of the responses. The personal information of the participants must be kept confidential as to ensure their privacy, which also involves storing the recordings and transcripts (Bryman, 2012; Swedish Research Council, 2017). It is also important to think about how the participants could be affected by partaking in the study as not to bring harm to them, e.g., in terms of stress or similar. Furthermore, the researcher must remember the participants have right to refuse to answer a question or withdraw from the study at any time. By providing participants with ample information regarding the aim of the research, they are able to partake in the study fully informed, thus, being able to give informed consent to participation. Researchers can avoid deceiving participants by being honest with them regarding the research being conducted and its use (Bryman, 2012).

(19)

14

informed of their right to do so. The participants were not given any monetary, or otherwise, compensation for partaking in the study.

4.5 Quality Assurance

Reliability, replication, and validity are the most common criteria for evaluating social research. Reliability is concerned regarding whether the results of the study are repeatable, which is close to replicability. Occasionally, although not often in social research, attempts are made to replicate

the findings of other studies. For this to be possible, the research must be made objectively, and the researcher must describe the methods and processes comprehensively. Correspondingly, the same rules apply for reliability (Bryman, 2012), which also concerns how accurately and reliably the methods used in the research produces the data (Mason, 2002). Validity is described as the most important measure as it concerns integrity of the research and its findings (Bryman, 2012), the accuracy of the findings (LeCompte & Goetz, 1982). Mason (2002) describes research as valid if “you are observing, identifying or ‘measuring’ what you say you are” (p. 39).

(20)

15

4.6 Researcher’s Social Location and Assumptions

The researcher holds a key role in social research and is a part in the production of knowledge (Bryman, 2012). However, for the research findings to be credible, they must be based on the responses of the participants and not on the biases and assumptions of the researcher (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). It is therefore imperative for researchers to be transparent and inform readers of their biases and assumptions, as well as reflect upon how they may have affected the findings in the study (Braun & Clarke, 2006; Bryman, 2012; Holstein & Gubrium, 2011). Furthermore, researchers should continually reflect upon and evaluate their own biases throughout the study (Holstein & Gubrium, 2011) as how much the research is influenced by researcher’s bias is dependent on their reflexivity, i.e., being able to acknowledge and examine these beliefs and assumptions (Collins & Stockton, 2018).

I approached the subjects of privilege and power as a 30-year-old, white, cisgender female social worker, who have practiced social work in both Sweden and Australia in addition to having travelled to over 50 countries. The idea for this topic came from my experiences and encounters of privilege and oppression during both work and travels, as I have come to understand that people, including social workers, can be aware, oblivious, or even ignorant of their privileges, and consequently, either be empathic and understanding or unempathetic and ignorant towards others, or clients. I believe that we cannot strip ourselves of our social identities, however, I consider the social identities and biases of the social workers as multifaceted which impact their interactions with various clients in various contexts. Subsequently, I have developed a critical approach to social work and become aware of how social workers can be oppressive in the desire of social justice. My perspective is, therefore, that privilege and power are complex and multidimensional, and can be understood in numerous ways. Furthermore, I believe they are socially constructed and socially situated as they can fluctuate in time and space, and they are dependent on interaction with others.

(21)

16

and power deepened as a result of reviewing literature. Similarly, my understanding of the social workers’ perceptions and experiences of privilege and power increased throughout the interview process. I have been attentive to my assumptions as not to let them characterize my analysis.

4.7 Strengths and Limitations

This study has a number of strengths and limitations. First, qualitative research every so often is criticized due to being too subjective, and dependent on researcher, e.g., what they focus on during data collection is dependent on their preferences and what they find noteworthy (Bryman, 2012). I have attempted to tackle this issue by reporting and reflecting upon potential research bias. However, the subjectivity also allows for the researcher to go into subjects which others might not. The concept of privilege is often overlooked in the social work discourse making this thesis relevant, contrastingly, the lack of discussion of privilege within the social work field could have contributed to the participants having difficulties understanding the concept and relating it to their role as a social worker.

Second, qualitative research is difficult to replicate and generalize, and the purposive sampling in this study does not allow for generalization (Bryman, 2012). However, the purpose of this study is not for the findings to be generalized as a universal truth for all social workers and the use of semi-structured interviews was the most appropriate method in relation to the purpose of the study. Additionally, as all participants are cisgender female white social workers, there may be a lack in diversity of the responses. I am aware of the use of purposive sampling may have excluded individuals with meaningful experiences from participation, however, the recruitment email was sent to multiple teams which increased the opportunity for participation of social workers with various social positions.

(22)

17

being a social worker myself could have impacted the interviews positively as the participants might have felt comfortable discussing the concepts of privilege and power with a ‘colleague’. Nevertheless, the social desirability can also be positive as it can generate reflections and discussions regarding what would be the ‘ideal’ way to respond to an issue and how to get there. Fourth, due to the different geographic locations of the participants and I, the interviews were not conducted in person. Consequently, there can be limitations, e.g., miscommunication (Bryman, 2012), however, the interviews were conducted via video call in attempt to minimize these limitations.

Fifth, the interviews were conducted in Swedish whereas this paper is in English. The decision for this was to benefit the participants, whom are all native Swedish speakers, so they would be able to express themselves as genuine and natural as possible. Consequently, the cited quotes are not the actual words of the participants, however, I have attempted to translate them with the outmost authenticity.

Lastly, there are a couple of things a researcher can do, or not do, which results in a weak analysis of the data. It is imperative to conduct an analysis and not only using extracts or paraphrases as to prove ideas, instead extracts should be used to support the author’s analysis. Additionally, the themes should not where the researchers use the interview questions as themes which indicates that the researcher has not analyzed the data or identified themes. Furthermore, the themes should not be overlapping or contain incoherent data and the presentation of the analysis should convince the reader via credibility in the arguments (Braun & Clarke, 2006). Critique has also been directed towards the quality of thematic analysis, however Vaismoradi et al. (2013) argues that the method is robust but that the quality of the data is dependent on the time and effort put in by the researcher. To ensure the quality of my analysis, I followed Braun and Clarke’s (2006) “15-point checklist of criteria for a good thematic analysis” (p. 96).

5. Findings and Analysis

(23)

18

the ambiguity of power; reflection is a priority, but not concerning privilege and power; multifaceted experiences and emotions; and leveling the playing field.

5.1 The Vagueness of Privilege

The vagueness of privilege emerged as a theme from the data as the participants expressed difficulties in defining the concept within their professional role as it appears as an unfamiliar concept and difficult to recognize, as well as being mindful of. A commonality among the participants were that they did not initially relate privilege to their role as a social worker, one participant stated that their age might be a contributing factor to that meaning that the discussions of privilege might be more common now than before. Furthermore, it appeared initially that the topic of privilege in relation to their profession was unfamiliar to most of the participants in their attempts to illustrate the concept.

Privileges are a bit more difficult to define (…) personally, I would say that I do not link privileges with my situation. Because I can’t really say that I’m privileged or discriminated against in my role as a social worker, in my work with clients. (P6)

Regarding privilege, I don’t really know what you mean (…) I think that if you meet clients, that they don’t think about what education I have. (P7)

Nevertheless, throughout the duration of the interviews, the majority of the participants’ notions of their own privileges became apparent as they identified their own privilege as a part of their social identities and societal statuses, and the accompanying advantages in their practice. In some instances, the privileges became apparent for the participants when comparing themselves to social workers with different social identities, therefore, making privilege contextual.

I have it very easy for me, really based on the fact that I am, well, I am a very ‘Swedish social worker’, and I know from colleagues that have a different ethnic background have, at times, received a little more resistance. (P6)

(24)

19

Some participants suggested that their social identities can affect their client work, which furthers the idea of how privilege is generated through social interactions and dependent on involved individuals. Being privileged can create barriers in client work as it can create a distance between the social worker and the client, which can suggest that privilege regards how others perceive you.

Well, I think that they are affected a lot by it (…) and I see it as a concern that many of my colleagues often come from pretty good from situations, and they’re meeting people that they’re really haven’t met, or the issues. (P8)

I think so, I have more than likely reflected on it, that I feel like a stereotype or something. I, in my professional role, could not have it easier considering my education, my background, my gender etc. It also means that in many situations and encounters with people, I have to keep in mind that I may have different assumptions, I may have different prerequisites, than the person I meet. (…) I think that they are certainly affected by it. It’s easy for the person I meet to think ‘easy for you to say, easy for you to come with advice’. (P3)

For example, the majority of the participants reports age as something which impact client interactions. Being older can be an advantage as this can instil comfort or confidence with the clients as they are viewed as experienced, whereas being younger can cause scepticism among clients if the social worker is knowledgeable enough. The participants reported that their gender can be a disadvantage when meeting male clients as they sometimes are met with more resistance than male social workers.

I think that you feel safer meeting a person that is a bit older. (P5)

I can sometimes experience that in meetings with certain clients, that I’m not listened to just because I’m a woman. (P2)

Furthermore, while discussing privilege, the majority of participants often brought up power and they indicated that they do not view themselves as privileged based on their professional status as a social worker.

(25)

20

However, while not stating that their profession is a form of privilege, a couple of the participants did associate privilege to their professional status and connected it to of being able to make a difference for clients and do good while differentiating this from the connected power. And within this privilege, there is a responsibility for your own actions as a social worker, and not solely becoming an extension of the government and act as a controlling agent.

And it is a privilege to have a job where I actually can make a difference. (P8)

You then have to decide, ‘who do I work for?’ I don’t want to be a ‘social secretary’, I want to be a social worker. I often ask myself who I want to be at work. Are my cases there for me to collect salary every month, or is it that I can do something good out of this as well? (P1)

5.2 The Ambiguity of Power

As stated, the participants often brought up power while discussing privilege which highlights the relationship between privilege and power. The consensus of all participants is that power accompanies their position as a social worker and the authority which comes with working for social services, however, they do not view their power as a form of privilege. The majority of participants described their power as being able to be both positive and negative, depending on circumstances and how it is used. However, while acknowledging their power, the participants simultaneously did not view themselves as powerful. Therefore, the ambiguity of power emerged as a theme.

All participants acknowledged that they possess power and described it as something which becomes apparent in their contact with clients due to a noticeable imbalance of power. The power described was often connected to a sense of agency as the social workers have the authority to make decisions and there are clients who are reliant on their assessments.

(26)

21

I think that I have a lot of power, or that I have it within my professional practice, (…) and I think it’s very important to be aware of that power. If I have authority to exercise power, it is very clear that I can make decision which also can, or always will, affect people. (P8)

While recognizing their own power as a social worker due being given a report or an issue, having read up on the family, and meeting the clients as a professional, several participants reported that they more, often than not, do not consider themselves as possessing power. Within this ambiguity, the participants acknowledged the need to stay attentive to their power as it has the potential to impact people’s lives.

Sure, others probably think that I have more power than what I do. I’m more than likely aware that I have power, I am, based on that it’s people’s lives and integrity that I’m in and talking about, questioning and dealing with. So, in that way, even if I myself maybe can’t directly say that I have power, but I’m probably perceived as power, and I need to have that with me in my work. (P4) I think that I have a lot of power in my professional role, I can influence the lives of children and adults to a very large extent. But I think that the power itself isn’t anything I think of, but I think that the power means I have the opportunity to change the lives of people. And some people want that change, and some don’t want that change. (…) So, I am well aware that power comes with the professional role. It’s nothing I think about daily, even if I use it more or less daily when making decisions. (P3)

Furthermore, the majority of participants reported being mindful how their own impression of their power can differ from how it is perceived by clients and acknowledging how being employed at social services can be associated with a perceived authority.

And if it’s the case where a youth or a parent does not consent, it becomes very personal, in my experience, when I talk to them that they think that it’s I who become social services. (P6)

I always have the upper hand since I am able to make decisions (…) against the wishes of a family, so I always have the upper hand. So, the family probably think I have more of a control than I do.

(P4)

(27)

22

or being required to. Which enforces the idea of power as something which is constructed in interactions with others.

I understand that some people think there is a power imbalance in this, ‘I have called them to come for a meeting here, and they have to come’. (P2)

Well, someone said to me when I said my usual phrase ‘how good that you could come today’, and the person in question said, ‘when social services call, you come’. And I think that I’d do the same. (…) that is why someone comes when I send letters and call them here, that’s power. (P5)

Some participants also made references to how power and authority comes with responsibility, which consequently can create a sense of control and be misused. For example, assumptions can be made regarding what the clients’ best interests are that then can impact the clients lives negatively.

You have to strive to see the whole picture, because otherwise, I think, this power could be used wrong. (P3)

And then it’s that you can never threaten, like ‘if you don’t do this now, we will have to do this or this’ (…) And I think of this, that we do it a lot, about coercion, where we act like if it were, like we had the right to act, the right to decide, when that’s not the case. It takes a lot for us to go in and take the liberty and take control, give people orders of what they can do or not. (P1)

However, the participants reported how some situations can call for the use of power, which they labelled as necessary, where it is required to fulfil their duties, for example when the client do not consent to live saving treatment or when parental responsibilities are not fulfilled.

I don’t think power is fun. Power can be a necessity rather, when you don’t have a recipient who works for the best interests of the child. (P6)

(28)

23

One participant reported that there can be dangers to possessing power as the it possibly can contribute to the social workers to believe they are above the client, or when they do not realize the impact that their actions can have on the clients.

And I think about power, for the social worker to know claim to ‘know best’, and in an investigation to say ‘this is how it is’ or ‘I assess’. (…) we meet families, or clients, in difficult situations and we shall the investigate. We meet these people, we ask the questions, we interpret the answer, and we construe it. And then we give this story to these people and they do not recognize themselves, and they feel despaired, and then this somehow has major consequences. And then we still claim that ‘yes that’s how it is’. It is rarely that we revise and say ‘oh darn it, it was that wrong?’. And in the same way, I have been in situations where we choose what we include in the investigations, for example removing a statement from someone, adding a statement from someone else. It’s like as you ask, you get answers. And I think that’s a form of using your power. (P1)

5.3 Reflection Is a Priority, but Not Concerning Privilege and Power

This theme demonstrates the broad consensus among all participants of the value of reflection in their practice and the recognition that these reflections rarely, or ever, involve the concepts of privilege and power.

No, I can say that it might not be what you think about first. You probably mostly process, primarily you may be processing the day and the meeting you’ve had. But in there it also comes thoughts about ‘I did this, then it turned out like this for that person’. So on the other hand it does have to do with power, you reflect on your behaviour and how it pans out for others. (P3)

However, as stated, all of the participants did emphasize the importance of reflection and that it can impact on themselves and their practice as it encourages the social workers to explore and examine themselves and their actions.

I want to highlight the need for reflection, I think it’s very important that you examine yourself as an instrument, as not to hurt yourself as well. To be able to do a good job, but also both to protect yourself and the client. (P1)

(29)

24

Some participants stated how the workload can affect reflection time as it does not become a priority in the daily practice as there sometimes is no time leftover for reflection.

Sometimes you don’t have time to reflect because everything just rolls by. (P7)

I see a decline where the work situation is worse than in a long time, so most people don’t have time for these reflections. (P8)

Nevertheless, all of the participants reported that there often is a lot of time for reflection as a result of the six-hour workday they usually have. All participants normally work six workplace-based hours where the remaining two hours of the workday is to be spent on, inter alia, reflection, recovery, exercise, and learning. The participants reported a hiatus of the six-hour workday during the COVID-19 pandemic, but that it is now in the process of being reinstated. All participants stated that the six-two work division creates more time for reflections.

We’ve had a break from it during the pandemic, but we’ve had such an unsustainable work situation that they’ve decided to bring it back. I notice a big difference when I’ve worked during the pandemic and a normal 8 to 5 working day, it so much client work that you just rush from one thing to the next. (…) but if there is scheduled time for reflection, I take the time. (P6)

And then we also work six-two, so I think there’s plenty of opportunity for reflection, even if it’s a high work pace. (P3)

Some of the participants reported currently having external supervision whereas others stated that they don’t have it now but that they have had it in the past. The participants stated that external supervision produces more critical reflection regarding processes, however, these occasions do not often relate to privilege and power. But according to the reports, the external supervision encourages reflection regarding how the interactions with clients affect the social workers, as well as how it impacts their future practice.

I think that external supervision without case reflection have been quite important because to have time to reflect about who I become in my cases. (P6)

(30)

25

However, some participants stated that the sessions of external supervision sometimes can stray away from processes and instead become too focused on making progress in cases. Furthermore, the participants agreed that these case reflections ought to be done during other forms of team discussions.

I wish it was more process-oriented than it is, it easily becomes case reflections which I think we should be able to manage without an external supervisor, and instead talk about ourselves and what we feel and how it came to be like this in meetings with certain people. (P8)

Right now, there are many who are interested in processes (…) but case reflections creeps in. (P1)

Several participants reported reflecting with colleagues throughout their day while simultaneously acknowledging the team is of significance when it comes to being able to be open and honest regarding their thought processes. The team is valued as being able to reflectively listen and respond to each other.

I have the benefit of working in a unit where it’s quite an open-minded atmosphere and there’s a fair few people who have quite a lot of work experience. And where you can, and where you dare, to examine things. (P1)

It’s a lot of… The time spend during break is much about reflection and such. We have quite an open-minded team, so we reflect quite a lot and do so openly. (P5)

Some participants also highlighted how professional experience can affect the quality of the reflections and how they might feel more comfortable being honest about your thought processes and emotions.

I think that you reflect, you do it all the time, and the longer you’ve been working, the more experience, and maybe the more reflections you do too. (P7)

(31)

26

5.4 Multifaceted Experiences and Emotions

This theme illustrates the participants’ various experiences of privilege and power, and how their interactions with clients, colleagues, as well as other agencies have resulted in a variety of emotions ranging from positive to negative, including mixed emotions.

Its a bit different you know, sometimes it can be happiness, mostly I think it’s happiness, but sometimes it can also be sad. Sadness over legislation (…), sadness over how some people are treated here, everyone shouldn’t work here. Some people are in the wrong place and I can think that’s, well, sad. But also to reflect over that we also do a good job, really not always, it’s a funnel of all sorts of emotions. (P2)

The positive is when there’s change, when you can calm a client in one way or another, and talk to them about why we’re doing this, it’s not about scrutinizing, but instead it’s about what we can offer and motivating them. (P4)

The participating social workers gave conflicting reports regarding how they feel about their power. Some participants stated it was solely negative while others reported their power as positive when being able to do what they feel is right while having the client’s best interest in focus.

I don’t personally experience that my power is positive in any way. (P2)

I think it has felt good because it has then been rooted in me that I believe in this, that I think this can be of help. I have also been involved where I have changed decisions that colleagues made but that made me feel uncomfortable, that I didn’t think were right. That has felt very good, because I have followed what I believed in. (P8)

There can be a perceived barrier between the social workers and their clients due to the imbalanced relationship and the participants reported that this is not enjoyable. The reports of some participants indicate of how the social workers privileges and power can affect clients, even cause fear, despite the participants themselves not labelling them as such.

(32)

27

want to help, basically. So, to step into a room where you feel automatically that the parents or the child is scared of what you’re going to say, that’s not a fun situation. (P6)

I think I have noticed a difference when meeting people from other cultures, where you can see they are more prone to say that ‘everything is good, everything is good, it’s ok, it’s just fine’. They are saying exactly what I want to hear because, I think, they so used to power and authority, and a different kind of society than we have here. And I there I think that its often more difficult when I meet them from different cultures because I think I can’t get past this. We’re polite, we’re nice, and they tell me that. And I can’t move on from that. And I think that many times it’s depended on the power they think that I have, they’re thinking the whole time ‘you’re gonna take my child, I’m not going to say anything to you that makes you take my child away’. (P5)

A few participants shared experiences of being humbled by their position as a social worker as they, without stating so outright, acknowledged their own privilege and power brought on by their professional status.

And I think that power comes, well I think it has to come, with a very large portion of humility and understanding. (P3)

It could just as well be me sitting there and meeting me, the roles could have been reverse. I’m not bigger than them just because I’m sitting on this chair, it could have just as easily been me who ended up in this situation. (…) it’s not that I’m sitting where I’m sitting, and they’re sitting where they’re sitting because I’m so smart and good. I think they we’ve taken different paths in life and I could have been where they are, or I could be there soon. (P5)

The participants stated that that the majority of social workers they meet want to do good but that it is not a certainty as they recognize that social workers are not universally good people and that it’s not the profession that values who you are as a person. The participants revealed feeling sad and angry over witnessing colleagues and other agency workers being either blatantly or blindly diminishing and/or oppressive towards clients.

(33)

28

surprise me, women who are misogynistic (…), for example ‘that mother is mentally unstable’ or ‘she’s typically borderline’. People use expressions that I believe are terrible, but its not particularly uncommon. (P1)

Then there’s some that, I don’t want to judge anyone, not even my colleagues but some have kind of an ‘us-vs-them’ mentality that I don’t like. (…) I think that I can see that people, that colleagues, have developed an ‘us-vs-them’ mentality, like ‘this could never happen to me at least’. But I understand that people need to think like that to, like, understand, I think. But I don’t like it when I see it amongst my own. I can understand it more when I see it in society, but when you’re working at social services, or in care, there we’re like supposed to take care of those people, it’s our job.

(P5)

Finally, the majority of the participants highlighted the need to ask the clients regarding the social worker’s privilege and power as they can only assume and interpret what they see, hear, and feel, without actually knowing what the clients think and feel.

I think you’d get a very different answer if you’d ask the clients themselves. It’s more difficult but I’m surely very blind about certain things, but try to work on that, absolutely, as much as I can.

(P6)

You should ask the clients about that… (P4)

As one participant concludes:

But even if we might not think so ourselves, it’s how the client views it, that’s important. (P2)

5.5 Leveling the Playing Field

This theme represents the social workers thoughts regarding the importance of leveling the playing field and the different ways of minimizing the imbalances in their meetings with clients. As illustrated in previous themes, the participants are one way or another, and to different extents, aware of their power and privileges. To be able to move towards help, rather than control, the participants described different ways they attempt to reduce the imbalances.

(34)

29

social workers and their clients. The clients might feel attacked, offended, or accused, which the participants stated is understandable, but it still creates a barrier which affects the interactions.

We try the best we can to suppress this power situation, especially if someone is coming to social services for the first time. Then it becomes very obvious that it is something unknown, and many people enter the social services office with a feeling that the social services are quite foreign. You kind of know that the social services take children. (P6)

If I notice that they are very nervous, and that the children are nervous, I can say that. ‘You know what, you’re going to leave here with mom and dad, you don’t have to worry, I only want to have a chat with you’. (…) I think that this helps them be more honest and a certain amount of stress is released. (P2)

By addressing the client’s concerns, the social workers can calm the clients and create a safe space. And all of the participants described, in some way or another, the importance of information as an approach to making the situation less uncomfortable and more comprehensible for the clients.

What I noticed quite early on was that information is the key to everything. You can often reduce the stress level by just trying to provide answers to the questions they are probably sitting on. Most people sitting there are thinking ‘what happens now?’. So, to give information about what will happen, and initially provide information about what rights they have, provide information about the type of availability I have, my role etc. (P6)

I cannot remove it, but we will not be able to connect if my attitude is that I have power over the one I meet. I can construct the meeting, I can arrange the room so that you feel you have right to leave, I can clarify time, place (…) so that it will be predictable. I have to constantly relate to the fact that I am in a position of power. But it is difficult to try to help a person who sees me as someone who exercises power. (P5)

Some participants talked about being able to radiate trust in order to work better with the clients and the social workers believe they can achieve more by building rapport. This ability was associated with work experience and becoming more skilled in meeting people and anticipating their needs.

(35)

30

approach towards everyone, it would not work. It would not be favorable for the clients, or favorable for me in my professional role. (P3)

I meet a lot of people in my job and have done so for a long time, and then you become aware of what works. Because I want the person to open up so I can help them, I cannot help them if they do not talk to me. And for them to talk to me, I have to display trust, and they have to feel that we are on the same level. (P5)

Some participants also expressed the importance of clarity and transparency during client engagements whereas being ambiguous can mislead the client or hinder the work that is to be done. This further indicates that the participants are aware of how clients perceive them is dependent on their individual efforts during the interactions.

An exercise of power is also to be ambiguous, (…) to get the consent, you avoid mentioning certain things that you know that the parent does not agree with. (…) which then can get consequences down the line. (…) if you’ve avoided writing down certain things because you know that, for example, the most common is that the parent says they don’t have any addiction issues, but we believe they do, and if you avoid that question because it’s sensitive and then they might refuse everything, then its paved the way for issues later on. (P8)

You try to have a conversation, and you get into the topic of things that I might be able to decide, then I have to inform that I actually can decide about this because it’s a part of my job. (P7)

Furthermore, the participants also discussed different strategies they use during client interactions as to meet them where they are, along with limiting the gap between the social worker and the client.

I think it is very important to have a language that is as easy as possible to understand, you can take for example the usual that we throw ourselves with abbreviations (…) that most people do not know. (P8)

(36)

31

is what I believe are the way to a more equal relationship between the social worker and the client.

(P1)

Despite having a certain power and privilege in the meeting with clients, some participants discussed working together with clients and that the clients are viewed as the solution to the presenting issues rather than the social workers themselves being the solution. By handing over the responsibility to the clients, there can be increased cooperation.

I think you have to deal with them in some way, not judgmentally, but with respect (…). It is not about me evaluating them as people or judging them based on their actions, but rather we have a common job to do and how can we work together to make this situation good for a child, or whatever it may be. (P1)

After all, people themselves are the ones with the solutions, our task is to release their own resources. (P8)

Additionally, the participants acknowledged that there also can be an increased level of power imbalance due to different ethnicities of social workers and clients as some participants raised as something they’re aware of and considerate of during client interactions.

I have to adjust to what situation the client is in. I mean both in respect for the client, but also to make myself understood so the clients understand what I’m saying and what I mean. Then it could be that you might use a different vocabulary when someone doesn’t have Swedish as their native language (…). I usually try to have an interpreter most of the time. And I try to revisit topics to make sure they’ve understood. (P4)

Sometimes you have to talk around the subject to get somewhere, for them to understand, if they don’t speak Swedish well you bring a translator of course. (…) and sometimes after a meeting, I send a text message so they can peacefully read what we’ve agreed on. (P7)

6. Discussion and Conclusion

(37)

32

generated five themes: the vagueness of privilege; the ambiguity of power; reflection is a priority, but not concerning privilege and power; multifaceted experiences and emotions; and leveling the playing field. The findings provide opportunities of insight into the social workers self-perception regarding their own privilege and power, and an insider perspective to their nuanced experiences. Similar to the findings of Taiwo (2018), the findings of this study suggest that privilege is difficult to define and identify as the majority of the participants had to stop and think about the question, one participant even stated she had not thought about privilege until the interview. This could be a result of privilege not being a common topic of discussion in the workplace, or as Pease (2010) argues, that privilege can be invisible to those who have it. However, despite there being mixed reports among the participants where some identified themselves as privileged and some did not, the findings are conflicting with Pease’s (ibid.) claims of invisibility as the findings suggest that the participants are aware of their privileges despite them not labelling it as such.

(38)

33

Most of the participants reported that they had not reflected about how their own privileges affect their practice, or how these privileges can affect their interactions with clients. Nonetheless, this study suggest that the participants are aware of their privileges and power due to the majority of the participants reported being uncomfortable with how some clients view them as an authority figure or agent of social services. Likewise, Dominelli (2002) discusses how social workers sometimes can feel uneasy about being perceived as privileged by those they are helping. The participants reported being under the impression that this perceived authority might be met with fear or hostility, and they described different approaches as they attempt to level the playing field and minimize power imbalances in client interaction. This finding can be related with Hasenfeld’s (1987) claim that social workers often desire to separate themselves from their power. While some participants do not say so outright, their accounts can be interpreted as such.

Furthermore, there were mixed reports from the participants regarding whether they view their professional status a privilege or not. Some participants associated their role as social worker as a privilege due to being in the position of change while holding themselves responsible for doing a good job. In contrast, some participants did not associate their role to privilege, and instead linked it to power, which could further suggest that the participants could be viewing themselves as agents within their agency and wanting to distance themselves from that power, as Hasenfeld (1987) discusses. The findings of this study suggests that that privilege and power often overlap and can be difficult to differentiate as the participants often brought up power while discussing privilege or made connections to power when it also could have been related the concept of privilege. The notion that privilege and power overlap is also discussed by Taiwo (2018).

(39)

34

and beneficial to ask clients regarding these topics as their own experiences might vary from those of the clients, yet none revealed that they had done so themselves.

(40)

35

participants work as agency workers within social services as their duties include exercise of public authority. While reporting a strive to work together with and empower clients, the participants stated that there are extreme situations where lives might be at stake, which relates to the legitimate power Hasenfeld (1987) discusses.

A consequence of privilege can be that the social workers do not recognize or underestimate the disparities of peoples’ experiences and how a client’s previous experiences can influence the relationship between client and social worker (Kondrat, 2019; Mullaly, 2010). One participant highlighted that people from different countries might have different experiences of authority and government and considered how these experiences can result in clients being afraid of social workers in Sweden. As only one participant brought up this example, there might be a blindness to how clients previous experiences shape their perception of power and privilege, especially in a globalizing world where many clients are refugees or come from countries where authority is exclusively linked with negative emotions and experiences. A white social worker having grown up in Sweden, a safe country without war and persecution, is in itself a privilege. And Pease (2006) discusses how social work often ignore how social work is a product of whiteness and white privilege. As a result, Swedish social workers might overlook how clients from other countries might have experiences of oppressive government agencies. Furthermore, social workers can fail to notice how the agencies impact and determine how discussions regarding privilege and power are implemented, or overlooked, in the workplace.

(41)

36

processes, as well as collectively reflect upon who they become in meetings with client, which emotions arises during client interactions, as well as during these reflections. This finding suggests that the participants recognize that critical reflection with colleagues increases the quality of the reflections, similarly to the claims of several scholars (Ferguson, 2018; Fook, 2015; Yip, 2006). Additionally, the participants acknowledged that the quality of the reflections is dependent on the efforts put in by individual social worker, the team, as well as the external supervisor.

The consensus among the participants is that they often felt comfortable raising issues withing their team or with their manager and the daily reflections often occur with colleagues. Yip (2006) states that appropriate conditions such as a supportive environment is important for good and healthy reflections. This study also suggests that work experience can impact the quality of the reflections and that the social workers might feel more comfortable raising issues and thought processes with colleagues despite a high turnover in staff. Furthermore, the findings suggest that there is a variety of emotions connected to privilege and power, which is contradictory to the literature (D’Cruz et al. 2007) which reports almost exclusively negative emotions related to the concepts. The participants reported positive emotions when they are a part of positive change, e.g., when it is possible to motivate clients to accept help. However, the participants also reported feelings of hopelessness and sadness, or even anger, regarding society and societal inequalities, legislation, and lack of resources. These negative emotions suggests that participants power is inferior to the agency’s power, as discussed by Hasenfeld (1987).

(42)

37

Privilege and Power