1

Critically Infused Social Work: A Website

Hannah Matthews, Sabrina Sibbald, Teréz Szoke, Tara Salehi Varela

Faculty of Graduate Studies, York University

SOWK 5010: Introduction to Social Work Theories and Critical Practice Skills Part I

Dr. Renee Sloos

December 14, 2020

 2

What is Critical Social Work?

Modern critical social work pulls from many critical social science theories and practice

approaches (Healy, 2014, p. 185). While quite wide-ranging, as illustrated by Figure 1 below,

these critical social science practice approaches are rooted in the critical social science paradigm

and, therefore, share common assumptions:

- Macro structures affect social relations and create inequities (Healy, 2014; Hick, 2005);

- There are material and intangible differences in power, privilege—and therefore

irreconcilable interests—between those who are privileged by and oppressed within

structures (Healy, 2014; Hick, 2005);

- Dominant discourses and ideologies function to maintain the status quo and normalize

power relations (Healy, 2014; Hick, 2005);

- There should be a focus on working toward the elimination of “all forms of oppression

and domination” through action achieved through “empowering oppressed people to act,

collectively” (Healy, 2014, p. 186).

As Healy (2014) notes, critical social work practice includes all of the above assumptions.

However, there still exists wide variation in the approaches taken by different critical social

workers; one’s specific approach varies depending on, for example, one’s theoretical orientation

(Hick et al., 2005, p. 4), as well as one’s own embodied experiences and social location (p. 15).

Critical social work practice may also vary depending on the discourses that are dominant within

an institutional context—the possibilities for and modalities of critical social work practice

within a large non-profit agency, for example, will likely look very different than within a small

organization that is committed to radical practice (Healy, 2014; Hick, 2005, p. 15). Critical social
 3

workers may also choose to use some approaches that stem from “conventional” social science

theories (Healy, 2014).

Indeed, a “sensitivity to difference” (Hick, 2005, p. 15) is essential for critical social

work practice. This includes the awareness that any single definitions of critical social work are

“illustrations of power” wherein “the less powerful become excluded from the expression of

their experience” (p. 21). This openness to difference is perhaps a part of the main distinction

between critical social work and the critical social sciences—unlike critical social science

theories, critical social work theory is in an ongoing, recursive relationship with social work

practice whereby each continually shape the other (Kondrat, 2012; Parton, 2002).

While critical social work theories rose in popularity during the 1960s and 1970s, the

field of social work has long included the presence of “critical” social workers (Healy, 2014, p.

186). However, as Chapman and Withers (2019) note, it is important to resist the tendency to

valorize historical or current social workers as “good” or “critical” social workers within a

dichotomy of good/bad or critical/uncritical. Even Jane Addams, who is often positioned as the

seminal “critical” social worker in social work history, was not “cleanly radical”—she, for

example, published eugenic arguments while promoting her work within the now-famous

settlement movement (p. 50). Today, many “critical” social workers remain both complicit and

directly involved in perpetuating and upholding acts and structures of violence and oppression—

consider, for example, that Black and Indigenous youth are disproportionately overrepresented in

care within Ontario’s child welfare system (Ontario Human Rights Commission, 2018), or that

“critical” social work within Ontario operates on stolen land where the sovereignty of Indigenous

nations is not respected. Indeed, we believe that an essential component of critical social work

theory and practice must be the ongoing commitment of critical social workers to challenge their
 4

personal beliefs and public discourses—including those that label their own positions as

“critical”, “progressive”, or “good” (Chapman & Withers, 2019).

Figure 1

Critical and Conventional Social Science Theories that Inform Critical Social Work,

from Sloos (2020a)

 5

Introduction to Reflection and Critical Reflexivity

While moving throughout the different sections of this website, we encourage you to

engage in the stages of reflection outlined in the diagram below. You may find it useful to use

the theories and approaches covered in this website as prompts to reflect on previous actions that

you have taken in your social work practice. You may find it helpful to think about reflection as

an opportunity to “scrutiniz[e] the self for values, needs, and biases” in order to “increase

awareness” and ultimately “engage with service users more consciously and objectively” (Sloos,

2020d).

Figure 1

Stages of Reflection, from Sloos (2020d)

We also encourage you to engage in critical reflexivity. Unlike reflection, critical

reflexivity applies a “lens of power” (Sloos, 2020d). This lens of power is both applied to your

“use of self”—that is, the skills and tools that you have because of your experiences and

positionality—as well as to the processes of reflection themselves. Critical reflexivity, therefore,

 6

includes both a “critical use of self” and “critical reflection” (Sloos, 2020d). You may find it

useful to use critical reflexivity to identify and challenge, for example, the forms of power

embedded within the theories and approaches that this website covers, as well as to identify the

forms of power that are promoted by identifying what is missing from this website (Sloos,

2020d). The diagrams below may be helpful in further understanding critical reflexivity.

Figure 2

Critical Reflexivity, from Sloos (2020d)

In our section that briefly discusses critical social work, we discuss that a component of

critical social work must include resisting to label oneself as purely “critical”. We therefore

encourage you to consider how, in your processes of reflection and critical reflexivity, you may

be leaning toward labeling yourself as a purely “critical” social worker. Instead, we ask you to

think about the ways “in which critical reflexivity can operate to re-inscribe colonial notions of
 7

moral superiority, and re-center whiteness within social work education and practice settings”

(Badwall, 2016, p. 1).

Suggested Reading:

Badwall, H. (2016). Critical reflexivity and moral regulation. Journal of Progressive Human

Services, 27(1), 1–20.

 8

A Conversation with Postmodernism

Me: Hello. Hi reader.

You: [looks around] what is this?

Me: Exactly—what is “this”?

You: [silence]

Me: [silence]

You: Who are you?

Me: Even in thinking about the answer to this question, my answer has changed. I have changed.

I am also always changing. The truth is socially constructed, and so is my subjectivity. Yours too

(Healy, 2014, p. 211).

You: O…kay. So, is this a conversation? An essay? How do I get back to the rest of the

website...?

Me: We have the power to make this whatever we want it to be. Power is relational. It is created,

not possessed (Fook, 2002, p. 52).

 9

You: …if you had to categorize it.

Me: Postmodernism and poststructuralism are all about pushing back on categories (Healy, 2014,

p. 214).

You: Oh, so you’re doing that here, with form?

Me: Yes, clever, eh?

You: [sighs]

Me: Based on my socially constructed understanding of that kind of “sigh”, it seems you are

exasperated with me. Care to share what’s on your mind?

You: Honestly, this is wasting my time. I just need to get back to the site so I can read about how

to apply critical approaches to strengths-based theory. I’m new at my organization and my boss

has just given me a million forms I have to fill out with all of these standardized checklists.

Adopting a “critical lens” is on #1 on the checklist and I have no idea what they mean. And I

have a client waiting for me. I don’t have time for this.

Me: It sounds like you work in an organization where the discourse of New Public Management

[NPM] is dominant.
 10

You: Explain.

Me: Siri, read me the first key theme related to the New Public Management discourse from

Karen Healy’s book.

Siri: That sounds like something I can do. Reading the first key theme related to the New Public

Management discourse from Karen Healy’s book, published in 2014, on pages 52 and 53:

“Based on the assumption that free markets increase service efficiency, quality and choice, the

NPM discourse promotes an increased use of market mechanisms in the organization of health

and welfare services. Clarke (2004, p. 36) describes the link between neoliberal economic theory

and NPM: ‘managerialism embodies this [neoliberal] decision-making calculus in its

commitment to a rational, ruthless, business-like view of organizational and policy choices’.

Proponents of NPM argue for a decreased role for governments in service delivery, seeing the

role of government as one of ‘steering not rowing’ (Osborne and Gaebler, 1993). In the NPM

discourse, governments outsource service delivery functions as far as possible to

nongovernmental service agencies. These agencies compete for government and other forms of

funding, such as philanthropic and fee-for-services, which leads to economic efficiency and

services that are responsive to consumers’ interests.”

You: Oh. Yeah, actually. That’s pretty accurate. While you’re at it, can you ask Siri to read the

definition of discourse? [Mutters: she’s more helpful than you]

 11

Me: Ask her yourself. When you mutter via text I can still hear it, by the way.

You: …Siri…can you read me the definition of discourse?

Siri: Sure, I can read you the definition of discourse: “The term ‘discourse’ refers to ‘a system or

aggregate of meanings’ (Taylor, 2013, p. 14) through which certain social phenomena, such as

‘need’, ‘knowledge’ and ‘intervention’, are constructed. In other words, from a poststructural

point of view, discourses are the sets of language practices that shape our thoughts, actions and

even our identities,” as quoted from Karen Healy, 2014, p. 3.

You: Hmm, that’s helpful, Siri. So now that I know a bit about what NPM discourse is, that it is

present at my organization, and that it’s causing me problems, what do I do? What’s the practice

approach here?

You: Siri? Siri, how do I apply the knowledge of dominant discourses to practice?

Siri: I’m sorry, I don’t have an answer to that question.

You: Hmm, okay. Let’s try…Siri, how do I resist these oppressive neoliberal constraints at my

organization?

Siri: That’s not something I have the answer to. Try another question.
 12

Me: Still think she is more helpful than me?

You: OKAY I’m sorry. Wow. Fine, then, what do you think I should do? Should I tell

management to @#@#$@##$$%^%^&*^&*%^%$^$%^#$@#$%&%&%^*&*(*%^$%

You: Sorry, my cat rolled onto my keyboard #WorkingFromHome…So, should I tell

management to not expect me to work within such oppressive and limited constraints?

Me: Oh. Mhm. I don’t have the answer to that either. Like I said, before power is relational. You

need to look at your context and its power relations to see where sites for resistance and

intervention are (Healy, 2014, p. 217).

You: Context—like organization’s context? Or my personal context?

Me: Yes, exactly. Work from the local to the structural, if you know what I mean (p. 217).

You: Wow, you really are a bother, you know that?

Me: I am going to reframe what you said as that I have the ability to ask thought-provoking

questions that push back against neoliberal demands for efficiency and positivist views of yes/no

and objective truth. So, it’s a strength, really.

 13

Siri: Is it a “strength”, though? A key characteristic of postmodernism is relativism defined as

inherent subjectivity (p. 223).

You: So that means disagreeing with neoliberalism is subjective? Well my boss will just love

that...

Me: Correct. How we make meaning of discourse is influenced by discourse itself (p. 223).

Siri: Very good, that is an application of postmodern theories in practice.

Me: Wow, Siri..! You are a sentient being!

Siri: Yes, in this context I have the relational power to answer questions.

You: This is getting WAY off track.

Me: What is—

You: DON’T you dare answer with “what is the track?”.

Me: Fair enough.

 14

You: So what you’re saying is that any next steps depend on identifying what the dominant

discourses are and then how to proceed?

Me: That interpretation is valid, as are all interpretations.

Siri: Remember, there may be more than one dominant discourse present at your organization.

And, they may be competing (pp. 3-11).

Here is the beginning of the introduction to ‘psy’ discourses from Karen Healy’s book, published

in 2014, on pages 64 and 65:

“The term ‘psy’ was coined by social scientists to refer to ‘heterogeneous knowledges’

developed from the psychological sciences, such as psychology, psychiatry and the behavioural

sciences, which provide practical techniques for understanding, diagnosing and promoting

change within the individual (see Rose, 1999, p. vii)...A core assumption of ‘psy’ disciplines is

that many problems facing service users can be classified and treated at the level of individual

psychological or even physiological processes. Undeniably, ‘psy’ ideas have had a profound

influence on the development of the social work profession. Indeed, many of the concepts widely

accepted by professional social workers can be traced to the influence of the ‘psy’ disciplines,

especially psychoanalytic theory. Yet the social work profession has an ambivalent relationship

to these disciplines and the use of ‘psy’ ideas varies historically and geographically.”

You: [looks at watch] Okay Siri, thanks, that’s good...

 15

Siri: Okay. Here is the beginning of the introduction to sociological discourses from Karen

Healy’s book, published in 2014, on pages 74 and 75:

“The influence of sociology on professional social work has been no less profound than that of

the ‘psy’ disciplines. In a variety of ways, sociological discourses seek to explain the social

origins and consequences of human behaviour. They provide ‘a range of perspectives,

commentaries and interpretations of social life and experience’ (Cree, 2010, p. 201). In turn,

social workers often use these ideas to explain the phenomena they encounter in practice and

guide their responses to them.”

You: Okay, ah, THANKS SIRI. This is all great, but I have to get back like right now or I’m

going to get fired. So…bye…thanks, I guess.

Me: Thank YOU. Good luck!

Siri: Goodbye!
 16

Critical Approach: Anti-Oppressive Practice

Anti-Oppressive Practice (AOP) is one of the central social justice-oriented approaches in

social work. It recognizes the structural origins of oppression and promotes social transformation

by utilizing critical theories including feminist, Marxist, postmodernist, Indigenous,

poststructuralist, anti-colonial, and anti-racist theories, among others (Baines, 2011). AOP

recognizes that multiple forms of oppression can occur simultaneously within micro-, mezzo-,

and macro-levels that uniquely impact marginalized people and communities. It works to

eradicate oppression and challenge power structures through collective institutional and societal

changes (Sakamoto & Pitner, 2005). Accordingly, AOP also promotes a deep reflection and

development of a ‘critical consciousness’ to analyze, for example, how social work can be

complicit in recreating and reinforcing structures of oppression, such as through unequal power

dynamics between a social worker and service user. Critical consciousness is the “process of

continuously reflecting upon and examining how our own biases, assumptions and cultural

worldview affect the way we perceive difference and power dynamics” (Sakamoto & Pitner,

2005, p. 441). Through the development of clear connections between social justice and social

work practice, AOP offers a conceptual model for understanding the multiplicity of oppression,

privilege, and power dynamics at a structural level. AOP’s ultimate goal is to change the

“structure and procedures of service delivery systems through macro changes” (Sakamoto &

Pitner, 2005, p. 437). As we will discuss further in our critical analysis of AOP, its conceptual

model can sometimes be difficult to translate into actionable items for social work practice.

Anti-oppressive practice values the contribution of community and institutional change

processes in achieving broader social change. As such, social workers embody principles of

social justice activism by working to not only provide services to service users, but to also raise
 17

the consciousness of those they are working with, to externalize their problems, and to

understand how social inequality and structures of oppression work to create disadvantaged life

circumstances in areas like housing, employment, healthcare and education. AOP reconciles and

provides a path to link social work theories and values with practice utilizing 5 critical practice

principles (Healy, 2014):

1. Critical Reflection on Self in Practice

Social work is an inherently political role; it allows social workers to occupy a position of power

and privilege via their access to resources and hierarchical structure of the social service sector.

Therefore, it is crucial for social workers to be critically reflexive to avoid recreating oppressive

social relations in practice (Healy, 2014).

Asking ourselves questions like, “how does my social location create positions of

privilege?” and “how may social divisions impact my ability to best meet this service user’s

needs?” can create the foundation for reflection on how our own biographies shape and create

power differentials in our practice. It is also important to note that while social workers occupy a

position of power in a therapeutic relationship, one’s identity and social locations are dynamic

and heavily dependent on the context one is in. For example, a racialized female social worker

working with a white male service user might navigate power differentials based on her race and

gender positions that do not reflect normative service user-service provider power imbalances.

2. Critical Assessment of Service Users’ Experiences of Oppression

Critical social workers strive to comprehensively understand the diversity and multiplicity of

oppression in service users’ lives. Personal, cultural, and structural processes each shape

individuals’ problems, and the access they have to solutions. Critically analyzing the

intersections of oppression such as gender, class, and race, allow us to understand how macro
 18

level policies, discourse, and processes impact service users’ lives. Similarly this critical analysis

must also be turned inward, to understand how social work discourse and language use in

framing of problems can contribute to sustain oppressive power structures (e.g. “disturbed, “at

risk”) (Healy, 2014).

3. Empowering Service Users

Empowering service users is one of the central tenets of AOP and strives to create empowerment

processes both at the interpersonal and institutional level. At the interpersonal level, the process

of “externalizing structural oppression” is key to being able to deconstruct experiences and

recognize how social forces impact service users’ lives. This process allows people to see the

true nature of their circumstances by analyzing the structures and institutions that impact and

influence their ability for social mobility, economic prosperity, and educational attainment. At

the institutional level, “anti-oppressive social workers promote changes to the organization and

delivery of services in ways that enhance anti-oppressive practice and service user control”

(Healy, 2014, p. 198). Practical ways to promote empowerment include ensuring that service

users’ views and stated needs are incorporated into assessment and solution options.

4. Working in Partnership

AOP prioritizes working in partnership with service users through collaborative efforts that

position the service user as the expert in their own life. Consequently, service users must be

included as much as possible in the decision-making processes that impact their life. This is

achieved through a deliberate sharing of power and a commitment to transparency where the

service user has the full information and awareness of the circumstances to make decisions in

their best interest. Working in partnership attempts to balance unequal power dynamics by

working against hierarchical structures to create a supportive environment where the service user
 19

is able to access the necessary resources and information to work collaboratively with a social

worker (Healy, 2014).

5. Minimal Intervention

A key principle of AOP is reducing oppressive and disempowering situations in social work

(Healy, 2014). Utilizing AOP in social work means minimizing opportunities of social control by

strategically intervening in the least intrusive way possible in the service users’ life. Early

intervention and an emphasis on preventative services contribute to minimal intervention and

less disruption in service users’ lives.

Limitations

While AOP is committed to challenging and dismantling systems of oppression and

increasing understanding of structural contexts that we are all embedded in, it does present some

limitations. Working from an anti-oppressive framework without a critical consciousness can

create circumstances for complicity and contribute to oppressive practices in social work. As

Sinclair and Albert (2008) note, “to operate under the assumption that we need go no further than

to state that our schools of social work adhere to anti-oppressive ideology and practice, allows

for the perpetuation of a culture of silence which reinforces neocolonialism”. Further, AOP can

facilitate this complicity in its “dualistic framing of oppression and anti-oppression in critical

social work because it imposes an erroneous conceptual division between oppression and anti-

oppression which is usually simplistically associated with the moral categories of bad and good”

(Wong, 2004). This allows social workers to ignore their own roles in recreating structures of

oppression in their relationship with service users (Baldwell, 2016). As critical social workers, it

is crucial that we do more than simply situate ourselves and our efforts as on the “right” side of

social transformation. We must “take political and ethical stances, but do so in a way that
 20

recognizes that we and our stances have been shaped by the very legacies that we’re struggling

against” (Chapman & Withers, 2019, p. 29).

Further limitations of anti-oppressive practice include its promotion of a robust structural

analysis of factors that contribute to our lived experience, but a lack of tangible steps to engage

in praxis. For example, while AOP endeavours to practice ‘consciousness-raising’ with service

users as a form of empowerment, it fails to acknowledge its own role in social work as part of

settler colonialism, and does not provide practical steps for the repatriation of land. While social

workers call for actions to ‘decolonize’ the profession (Tamburro, 2013), social work in Canada

relies on settler colonialism to function (Fortier & Wong, 2018) and therefore does not truly

engage in decolonial actions. Consider, for example, that “Decolonization as metaphor allows

people to equivocate these contradictory decolonial desires because it turns decolonization into

an empty signifier to be filled by any track towards liberation” (Tuck & Yang, 2012, p. 7). AOP

can be strengthened by incorporating perspectives that address and unsettle the relationships

between colonialism and practice, and that prioritize Indigenist knowledges and goals.

Additionally, the practice of ‘consciousness-raising’ positions the social worker as

knowledgeable on all forms of oppression and creates a power hierarchy in the social worker-

service user relationship. This practice can be patronizing in that it functions to ‘teach’

individuals about their own experiences of oppression (Baines, 2011). To combat this, Dominelli

(2002), states that social workers should engage in anti-oppressive practice and

aim to provide more appropriate and sensitive services by responding to people’s needs

regardless of their social status. Anti-oppressive practice embodies a person-centred

philosophy, an egalitarian value system concerned with reducing the deleterious effects

of structural inequalities upon people’s lives; a methodology focusing on the process

 21

and outcome; and a way of structural social relationships between individuals that aims

to empower service users by reducing the negative effects of hierarchy in their

immediate interaction and the work they do. (p. 6).

Therefore, combined with the development of a critical consciousness that acknowledges and

challenges the role of social work in perpetuating settler colonialism and reproducing power

hierarchies, AOP can potentially become a robust theoretical framework that can be useful for a

critical social worker.

Examples of Social Worker Roles in Anti-Oppressive Practice

Role Implementation Goal

Co-learner Continuously learn from service To foster a sense of control, agency, and self-
users about their lived experiences determination in the service user
and knowledge, skills, and strengths

Co-teacher Incorporate education (ex. To foster a sense of control, agency, and self-
awareness of power dynamics in determination in the service user
relationships) into the work; assume
that people are already capable or
have the capacity to become capable
as the experts in their lives

Empathetic Use active and reflective listening To develop a strong therapeutic relationship and
listener skills; convey positive regard, build trust with the service user
warmth, and respect

Co- Collaboratively provide knowledge To help a service user’s networks be better

consultant and share experiences; provide informed and better able to support them
information and perspective where
applicable
 22

Co-creator Create opportunities for service To promote service user’s ability to see
users to become skilled at obtaining themselves as active agents responsible for
resources and support by acting as change
an “empowerer”, not a “rescuer”

Co- Promote a sense of cooperation and To help service users find new or alternative
activator joint responsibility to meet the support and resources
service users’ needs; promote
partnerships and engagement with
other supportive
groups/communities

Mediator Promote cooperation and To support health interactions between service

collaboration between service users; users and promote skill building of conflict
negotiate tensions if incidents arise resolution

Adapted from: Morgaine & Capous-Desyllas, 2015

Journaling Prompts

1. In all interactions/situations, have I thought about power, privilege, and social location

and how it impacts my actions?

2. Have I questioned/challenged dominant ways of thinking to transform power towards

equity?

3. Have I ensured the actions I have taken are equitable, collaborative and power sharing?

4. How can I promote anti-oppressive actions at an institutional or systemic level?

 23

Critical Race Theory (CRT) and Anti-Racist Practice

What is CRT?

CRT provides social workers with a helpful analytical lens for applying anti-racist

practice by examining structures of discrimination based on race and the implications, in relation

to both the ideological and material circumstances, for racialized populations (Maiter, 2009, p.

270; Ying Yee, 2004, p. 68). Sarah Maiter (2009) explains that CRT positions race as a concept

that “lacks any biological validity” (p. 267) but whose social construction is shaped by and

embedded within hegemonic structures resulting in material effects. From this understanding,

CRT provides two central areas of focus for understanding power dynamics and oppression:

firstly, “the myriad of ways that racism may be embodied or embedded within relations,

institutions, systems, and structures” (Ladhani & Sitter, 2020, p. 56) and secondly, challenging

and unveiling the (at times obscure) power and privilege of whiteness (Ying Yee, 2004, p. 89).

How does CRT examine power relations?

CRT presents whiteness (or white supremacy) as a key concept in its analysis of power

relations at the micro-, meso-, and macro-levels. From the macro-level, it “examines the

historical processes of enslavement, colonization and misrepresentation of non-European

peoples,” and how these processes have come to embed white privilege and power within

institutions and society (Maiter, 2009, p. 270). Furthermore, it recognizes the “powerful social

meanings of race in White-dominated societies,” as well as how these meanings “are evident in

the lived experiences of minority groups,” and particularly in the oppressions they face (Maiter,

2009, p. 270). CRT also examines how these dominant social meanings (or discourses),

particularly presentations of racialized populations, are informed by the “dominant and/or

majority group” and how their “ability to shape, define, and determine the knowledge base about
 24

minority cultures documents not only their power to speak on behalf of those who are

marginalized in society, but also how society itself normalizes the inferior position of minority

cultures” (Ying Yee, 2004, p. 98). By virtue of “dominant and/or majority group’s” normalizing

the inferiority of racialized people, white supremacy and racial discrimination can “take place

without people being consciously aware” of their complicity within these structures, resulting in

the neutralization and deracialization of “whiteness” (Ying Yee, 2004, p. 98).

At the meso- and micro-levels, CRT can provide helpful anti-racist practice principles for

social workers to critically reflect on their relationship with service users and their position

within social service institutions. Anti-racist practice requires social workers to question “the

traditional role” institutions play “in producing and reproducing racial, gender, sexual, and class-

based inequalities in society” (Maiter, 2009, p. 270). For example, historically, efforts to apply

anti-racist practice within institutions and social movements have been challenged due to white

feminists’ preoccupation over their moral self-image resulting in demonstrations of empathy to

racialized women or flaunting their knowledge on anti-racism to prove that they are not racist

instead of working towards organizational change (Srivastava, 2005, p. 57). Ying Yee (2005)

notes that one can “[racialize] the practices of white people by challenging them to reflect on

what practices may appear fair, neutral non-ideological but actually originate from specific

socio-cultural-historical perspectives (pp. 96-97). While this is an important first step in

dismantling the primary structures of racism, Sarita Srivastava (2005) argues that acknowledging

structures of racism is not the only goal of anti-racist practice. Furthermore, these

acknowledgements can in fact prohibit and stagnate implementation of anti-racist practice within

institutions and social movements, because some may believe the acknowledgement of racism is

sufficient action despite it not changing actual structural conditions (Srivastava, 2005, p. 53).
 25

Additionally, critical race theory’s focus on structures producing racial oppression

provides a helpful alternative for social workers when critically reflecting on the lived

experience of a service user: social workers can frame a service user’s identity within the wide

spectrum of oppression instead of through a focus on cultural differences or “cultural

competency”. Ying Yee (2004) argues that social work’s attention to cultural competency and

multiculturalism leads to a “stereotyping of cultures” which results in a “pre-defined, frozen,

cultural identity” formed by the “norm of whiteness” (p. 99). Anti-racist practice provides a

strong case for looking beyond an essentialized cultural identity as the focus on culture fails to

“capture the consequence of race and the related effects of racism for people” (Maiter, 2009, p.

269). This includes, for example, a lack of acknowledgement of the “privileges that accrue to

white people because of their skin color” and “the numerous material hardships for people of

color” that arise due to a lack of structural privilege, such as “employment barriers, scrutiny by

the police, struggles to find adequate housing, amongst others” (Maiter, 2009, p. 269).

Beyond CRT: Considering Intersectional Feminist Theory and Anti-Colonial Theory for

Anti-Racist Practice

Critical race theory can also be linked to intersectional feminist theory as it “suggests that

a full understanding of the effects of race cannot be gained without examining the intersections

of all forms of oppression” (Maiter, 2009, p. 270). Intersectionality stems from demands within

feminist theory to examine “inequality and oppression within groups of women” and provides an

analytical lens “to explore gender, sexuality, class, and race as complex, intertwined, and mutual

reinforcing categories of oppression and social structures” (Mattson, 2014, pp. 9-10). The

concept was first coined by Kimberlé Crenshaw to describe a framework for illuminating the

ways that racism and sexism overlap and create “unique and distinct kinds of burdens” for Black
 26

women (Southbank, 2016). Emerging from critical race theory (Crenshaw, 1989), intersectional

feminist theory’s “aim is to disclose and challenge social structures and oppression” while also

acknowledging the complex and dynamic nature of power relations which results in differences

of experience within and between groups (Dhamoon, 2015, p. 29; Mattson, 2014, p. 10).

Moreover, the work of Crenshaw draws attention to intersectionality’s purpose of

identifying “intersectional failures" (Southbank 2016), where non-intersectional framing of

social issues privileges the perspective of dominant groups over others by reinforcing structures

of oppression which are not accounted for in this narrowly framed narrative. She uses the

example of feminist movements fighting for women’s equality and how they have historically

over (if not only) accounted for issues pertaining to white women, leading to a “representational

scheme that allow[s] white women to represent everybody regardless of whether their particular

way of experiencing discrimination was the same” (Southbank, 2016). By not applying an anti-

racist lens to the issues of women, feminist movements disregard the issues stemming from race,

for example, that are faced by women of colour, and therefore reinforce structures of oppression

like racism.

One area in which critical race and intersectional feminist theories could be more

comprehensive and inclusive is by acknowledging the link between white supremacy and

colonialism. By recognizing the arguments of theories and frameworks that unsettle the

normalization of colonialism social workers may be able to better recognize “the

interconnectedness of struggles” against structures of oppression, a particularly important focus

being how “settler domination” is at the root of oppressive structures that impact everyone within

a settler colonial state, especially marginalized populations (Dhamoon, 2015, p. 34), though

certainly not in equal modalities or magnitudes.

 27

Journal Prompts for social workers

● How does the structure of whiteness impact your workplace’s practices and

relationships? How can you apply anti-racist practice within your individual work or

workplace practices to influence personal and institutional change?

● How do you think the intersections of your identity may impact your work as a social

worker? In particular, how may your intersectional position impact your relationship with

service users?

● Can anti-racist practice be strengthened by connecting this perspectives to other critical

social science theories? Which links may be helpful to you as a social worker?
 28

Anticolonialism, Postcolonialism, Indigenism, and Decolonization

I recently became totally exasperated when I saw a social media post by a white settler

colleague asking for recommendations of “more practical” readings by Indigenous scholars,

which would provide more detail about what decolonization looks like “in reality.” To watch

settler scholars sift through our work as they effectively ask, “Isn’t there more for me to get

from this?” is so insulting. It seems like the tacit (and sometimes arrogantly explicit) request

for more (details, explanation, assurance) is actually a form of dismissal. It is a rejection of

the opportunity to engage with Indigenous texts on their own terms. It is a deferral of

responsibility through asking, “Isn’t there something less theoretical? Isn’t there something

more theoretical? Something more practical? Something less radical? Can’t you describe

something that seems more likely or possible?” These insistences upon Indigenous writings

contradict themselves while also putting all the onus of responsibility on Indigenous people to

make the future more coherent and palatable to white settler readers. In reading Indigenous

work, they ask for more work, even if they have done little to fully consider what has already

been carefully and attentively offered. Often it seems that settler readers read like settlers (that

is, read extractively) for particular content to be removed for future use. The reading is like

panning for gold, sorting through work that may not have been intended for a particular

reader, sorting it by what is useful and what is discardable. (Tuck, 2019, pp. 14-15)

We thought it was important to frame this section by actively drawing attention to the settler

tendency to “read extractivley” (Tuck, 2019, pp. 14-15). In drawing attention to this tendency,

we are not placing ourselves outside of it—rather, we are implicating ourselves directly within

the problem as settler-scholar-social workers who are attempting to include an “overview” of

anticolonial, postcolonial, decolonial, and/or Indigenist theories for our project.

 29

We decided to include this section because we feel that it is important to unsettle versions

of social work theory and practice that erase Indigenous knowledges and perspectives. This is

especially important given the context of social work and its ongoing role in colonization

(Blackstock, 2009). However, we acknowledge that our attempts to fit concepts within the

confines of this project might also be violent form of erasure, especially in relation to decolonial

and Indigenist perspectives, in that we are “sorting [through work] by what is useful and what is

discardable” (p. 15) for this overview website, which, beyond this section, centers largely on

Western conceptions of social work.

With this uncertainty in mind, we want to specify that this section is being written for

other settlers. Furthermore, we want to specify that we will not attempt to give a comprehensive

overview of a theory or theories; rather, we will aim to highlight some concepts and terms as a

starting point—an incomplete starting point—for readers to access the highlighted resources and,

as Tuck (2019) writes, “engage with Indigenous texts on their own terms” (p. 14). Some parts of

this section will deliberately use more long-form quotations than may usually be considered

normal within academic work as we want to use the space to center Indigenous voices rather than

our paraphrased (mis)understandings. Finally, we have attempted to reduce the aforementioned

violence of “making Indigenous perspectives fit” by not applying as strict a focus on length or

categorization to this section as other sections within this project. We invite readers to join us in

noticing and sitting with feelings of discomfort such as defensiveness, guilt, exasperation, or

attempts to neatly “extract” knowledge.

 30

Anticolonialism and Postcolonialism

Anticolonialism can be defined as “the political struggle of colonized peoples against the

specific ideology and practice of colonialism” by “emphasiz[ing] the need to reject colonial

power and restore local control” (Ashcroft et al., 2013, p. 15). There is much variation within the

praxis of anticolonial theory, however, it has often taken the form of a “discourse of anti-colonial

‘nationalism’” where colonial structures of governance are resisted through demands of “an

independent postcolonial nation-state” (pp. 15-16). Postcolonialism “examines the effects of

colonization and reconfigures the colonizer/colonized axis in different ways” (Moreton-

Robinson, 2015, p. 8). While some feel that it has positively contributed through its

conceptualizations of categories such as diaspora, migrant, and hybrid identities, as well as

through its “ability to reveal the operations of counterhegemonic discourses as produced by the

dispersed, or diasporic, subject” (Moreton-Robinson, 2015, p. 8), it is a highly debated field; one

main reason that it implies that colonialism is finished.

Critiques of anticolonialism and postcolonialism have unique aspects, however, one area that

is shared is their tension within settler colonial states, like Canada. Settler colonialism is “the

specific formation of colonialism in which the colonizer comes to stay, making himself the

sovereign, and the arbiter of citizenship, civility, and knowing” (Tuck & Gaztambide-Fernández,

2013, p. 73). In settler colonialism, “invasion is a structure, not an event”; that is, the “logic of

elimination is embedded into every aspect of the settler colonial structures and its disciplines”

(Tuck & Gaztambide-Fernández, 2013, p. 73; Wolfe, 2006, p. 402).

In North America, settler colonialism operates through a triad of relationships, between the

(white [but not always]) settlers, the Indigenous inhabitants, and chattel slaves who are

removed from their homelands to work stolen land. At the crux of these relationships is land,
 31

highly valued and disputed. For settlers to live on and profit from land, they must eliminate

Indigenous peoples, and extinguish their historical, epistemological, philosophical, moral and

political claims to land. Land, in being settled, becomes property. Settlers must also import

chattel slaves, who must be kept landless, and who also become property, to be used, abused,

and managed. (Tuck & Gaztambide-Fernández, 2013, p. 74)

Therefore, the relationship of “colonizer and colonized” as “in absolute and implacable

opposition” that is the basis of anticolonialism is complicated within settler colonial contexts

where there is also the presence of a “more obvious form of complicity” in, for example, the

silencing of Indigenous land claims (Ashcroft et al., 2013, p. 17). The continued presence of

settlers in settler colonialism problematizes postcolonialism as “Indigenous and non-Indigenous

peoples are situated in relation to (post)colonization in radically different ways—ways that

cannot be made into sameness” (Moreton-Robinson, 2015, p. 11); indeed, as Moreton-Robinson

notes, Indigenous peoples’ “ontological relation to land constitutes a subject position that we do

not share, that cannot be shared, with the postcolonial subject, whose sense of belonging in this

place is tied to migrancy” (p. 11).

Decolonization and Indigenism

Another framework is that of an Indigenist outlook, which can be defined as “one who

not only takes the rights of indigenous peoples as the highest priority of [their] political life, but

who draws upon the traditions—the bodies of knowledge and corresponding codes of value—

evolved over many thousands of years by native peoples the world over” (Churchill, 2003, p.

251). Indigenism is not synonymous with Indigenous; from this definition, a person, either

Indigenous or non-Indigenous, can work within or outside of an Indigenist framework (Simpson,

2004, 382). Across Turtle Island (North America), the Indigenist outlook has largely adopted the
 32

six foundational demands stated in Latin America through the Indigenismo movement, “all of

them associated with sociopolitical, cultural, and economic autonomy (or sovereignty) and self-

determination” (p. 255). The fundamental component of this outlook is that “the land rights of

‘First Americans’ should serve as a first priority for attainment of everyone seriously committed

to accomplishing positive change in North America” (Churchill, 2003, pp. 259-260, emphasis

added). Ward Churchill (2003) explains the primacy of this demand thusly:

Let’s imagine that the United States as a whole were somehow transformed into an entity

defined by the parity of its race, class, and gender relations, its embrace of unrestricted sexual

preference, its rejection of militarism in all forms, and its abiding concern with environmental

protection. (I know, I know, this is a sheer impossibility, but that’s my point.) When all is said

and done, the society resulting from this scenario is still, first and foremost, a colonialist

society, an imperialist society in the most fundamental possible sense, with all that that

implies. This is true because the scenario does nothing at all to address the fact that whatever

is happening happens on someone else’s land, not only without their consent, but through an

adamant disregard for their rights to the land. Hence, all it means is that the invader

population has rearranged its affairs in such a way as to make itself more comfortable at the

continuing expense of indigenous people. (Churchill, 2003, p. 259).

Decolonization is used in a similar context as Indigenism by some Indigenous scholars (see, for

e.g., (Simpson, 2004, 382). While there are many articulations of definitions, as settler-scholars,

it is not our place to highlight or theorize about decolonization. Consider, for example, that while

Linklater (2014) notes that “a decolonization approach contributes to two relevant areas of

Indigenous trauma work”, she also notes that “Indigenous people…must be at the forefront of

developing Indigenous trauma practice and theory” (p. 27). Given the tendency of the social
 33

work profession to try and adopt methods of “decolonization”, we think that it is important to

center Tuck and Yang’s (2012) article entitled Decolonization is not a metaphor:

Decolonization brings about the repatriation of Indigenous land and life; it is not a metaphor

for other things we want to do to improve our societies and schools. The easy adoption of

decolonizing discourse by educational advocacy and scholarship, evidenced by the increasing

number of calls to “decolonize our schools,” or use “decolonizing methods,” or, “decolonize

student thinking”, turns decolonization into a metaphor. As important as their goals may be,

social justice, critical methodologies, or approaches that decenter settler perspectives have

objectives that may be incommensurable with decolonization. Because settler colonialism is

built upon an entangled triad structure of settler-native-slave, the decolonial desires of white,

non- white, immigrant, postcolonial, and oppressed people, can similarly be entangled in

resettlement, reoccupation, and reinhabitation that actually further settler colonialism. The

metaphorization of decolonization makes possible a set of evasions, or “settler moves to

innocence”, that problematically attempt to reconcile settler guilt and complicity, and rescue

settler futurity. (Tuck & Yang, 2012, p. 1)

Furthermore, in Losing Patience for the Task of Convincing Settlers to Pay Attention to

Indigenous Ideas, Tuck (2019) writes:

Indigenous and decolonial theories are unfairly, inappropriately expected to answer to

whiteness and to settler relationships to land in the future…A settler future is preoccupied

by questions of, What will decolonization look like? What will happen after abolition?

What will be the consequences of decolonization for the settler?…decolonization is not

obliged to answer questions concerned with settler futures…What I am coming to more

fully understand is that the questions of “What will decolonization look like?,” when posed
 34

by settlers, are a distraction to Indigenous theorizations of decolonization. They drain the

energy and imagination of Indigenous scholarship—they pester, they think they are unique,

and they are boring. I want time and space to sketch the next and the now to get there.

Decolonization is not the endgame, not the final outcome of a long process, but the next

now, the now that is chasing at our heels. I am lucky to come from the long view. (p. 15)

Connections to Social Work?

So, what can be applied from the above to social work practice? As discussed above,

postcolonial and anticolonial theory are problematic within our settler colonial context because

settler colonialism is an ongoing “structure” of “invasion” in which we are complicit (Tuck &

Gaztambide-Fernández, 2013, p. 73; Wolfe, 2006, p. 402). Furthermore, we believe that as

settler scholars, it is not our place to interpret theorizations of decolonization or assert that we are

applying a decolonial lens. As some Indigenous scholars have noted that both Indigenous and

non-Indigenous people can work within (or outside of) an Indigenist outlook (see, for e.g.,

Simpson, 2004, 382), we will proceed humbly and cautiously to attempt to think within this

framework by highlighting the calls for the sociopolitical, cultural, and economic autonomy (or

sovereignty) and self-determination, beginning with land.

Furthermore, instead of attempting to fit concepts within the categories of foundational

assumptions with respect to power, relationships, and change process that we have organized

other sections within this project, we will highlight some questions and concepts as a starting

point—an incomplete starting point—for readers to access the highlighted resources and, as

Tuck writes, “engage with Indigenous texts on their own terms” (p. 14).
 35

Turning the Gaze Inward to Settlers and Settler Colonialism

Ask Yourself: Whose Land am I on?

The fundamental demand of an Indigenist outlook is the repatriation of land to Indigenous

peoples. So, applying an Indigenist outlook would look like working toward this goal. This

application can begin through learning about whose land you are living and working on, and

what treaties are associated with this land. Here is a website that might be a helpful starting

point: https://native-land.ca/. Here is a place you can donate: https://www.gofundme.com/f/legal-

fund-1492-land-back-lane.

Suggested readings:

Simpson, L. B. (2014). Land as pedagogy: Nishnaabeg intelligence and rebellious

transformation. Decolonization: Indigeneity, Education & Society, 3(3), 1–25.

Wolfe, P. (2006). Settler colonialism and the elimination of the native. Journal of Genocide

Research, 8(4), 387–409.

Ask Yourself: How is the Broad Field of Social Work as Well as My Specific Role, Approach,

and Organization Invested in Settler Futurity? How Can I “Interrupt” and Not “Recuperate”

Settler Colonialism?

Anything that seeks to recuperate and not interrupt settler colonialism, to reform the

settlement and incorporate Indigenous peoples into the multicultural settler colonial nation

state is fettered to settler futurity. To be clear, our commitments are to what might be called

an Indigenous futurity, which does not foreclose the inhabitation of Indigenous land by non-

Indigenous peoples, but does foreclose settler colonialism and settler epistemologies. That is

to say that Indigenous futurity does not require the erasure of now-settlers in the ways that

settler futurity requires of Indigenous peoples. (Tuck & Yang, 2012, p. 80)
 36

On an individual level, you might consider asking: does your practice or role promote

Indigenous sovereignty and self-determination? Is it built around understandings that, for

example: Indigenous worldviews, which emphasize interconnectedness with all of creation, are

very different than Western individualistic, anthropocentric worldviews (Linklater, 2014, pp. 27-

32); Indigenous healing is based around “wellness”—as opposed to Western “medical models of

illness”—and includes “holistic approaches that consider equally the spiritual, emotional, mental

and physical aspects of the person” (pp. 21); “Indigenous philosophies and cultural practices

provide the most appropriate and successful therapeutic techniques for individual and

community healing” (p. 25)? (How) does your practice prevent itself from being a tool of settler

colonialism, beyond having good intentions as a social worker (Blackstock, 2009)?

Suggested readings:

Blackstock, C. (2009). The occasional evil of angels: Learning from the experiences of

Aboriginal peoples and social work. First Peoples Child and Family Review, 4(1).

Tuck, E., & Gaztambide-Fernández, R. A. (2013). Curriculum, replacement, and settler futurity.

Journal of Curriculum Theorizing, 29(1), 72–89.

Ask Yourself: How Do I Enact “Settler Moves to Innocence”?

Tuck and Yang (2012) outline six “settler moves to innocence” which “are those strategies or

positionings that attempt to relieve the settler of feelings of guilt or responsibility without giving

up land or power or privilege, without having to change much at all” (p. 10). Tuck and Yang

note that they “provide this framework so that we can be more impatient with each other, less

likely to accept gestures and half-steps, and more willing to press for acts which unsettle

innocence” (p. 10). We have included the title of each below, as well as the title of the article so
 37

that readers can sit with the full descriptions and ask if/how they apply to their own professional

or personal practices.

1. Settler nativism

2. Settler adoption fantasies

3. Colonial equivocation

4. Free your mind and the rest will follow

5. A(s)t(e)risk peoples

6. Re-occupation and urban homesteading. (p. 4)

Suggested readings:

Tuck, E., & Yang, K. W. (2012). Decolonization is not a metaphor. Decolonization: Indigeneity,

Education & Society, 1(1), 1–40.

Chapman, C., & Withers, A. J. (2019). A violent history of benevolence: Interlocking oppression

in the moral economies of social working. University of Toronto Press.

Closing: An “Ethic of Incommensurability”

As settlers after reading this section, it’s likely you have many feelings. Maybe confusion,

exasperation, helplessness, grief, sadness. It is true that this section does not offer concise ways

that anticolonialism, postcolonialsm, Indigineism, or decolonization can be neatly applied to our

social work practice. However—as settlers living on stolen land, benefitting from settler

colonialism, and working in a profession that upholds this structure—to try and neatly apply

concepts to social work practice would be to perpetuate settler futurity, that is, “to reform the

settlement and incorporate Indigenous peoples into the multicultural settler colonial nation state”

(Tuck & Yang, 2012, p. 80).

 38

Instead, we want to close by sitting with Eve Tuck’s concept of an “ethic of

incommensurability”:

…what we might call an ethic of incommensurability…recognizes what is distinct, what is

sovereign for project(s) of decolonization in relation to human and civil rights based social

justice projects. There are portions of these projects that simply cannot speak to one another,

cannot be aligned or allied. We make these notations to highlight opportunities for what can

only ever be strategic and contingent collaborations, and to indicate the reasons that lasting

solidarities may be elusive, even undesirable. (Tuck & Yang, 2012, p. 28)

An ethic of incommensurability, which guides moves that unsettle innocence, stands in

contrast to aims of reconciliation, which motivate settler moves to innocence. Reconciliation

is about rescuing settler normalcy, about rescuing a settler future…to fully enact an ethic of

incommensurability means relinquishing settler futurity, abandoning the hope that settlers

may one day be commensurable to Native peoples. It means removing the asterisks, periods,

commas, apostrophes, the whereas’s, buts, and conditional clauses that punctuate

decolonization and underwrite settler innocence. The Native futures, the lives to be lived once

the settler nation is gone - these are the unwritten possibilities made possible by an ethic of

incommensurability. (Tuck & Yang, 2012, pp. 35-36)

What does an ethic of incommensurability look like in relation to social work? To your

role? To your practice? What components simply “cannot be aligned or allied” with an

Indigenist outlook? Where and how can you move to “unsettle innocence” and “stand in

contrast to aims of reconciliation”?

 39

Mad Studies

Disability Studies

Disability studies is a cross-disciplinary field of study that prioritizes leadership and

inclusion of those living with disabilities in research and in the generation of knowledge

(Jones & Brown, 2013). Within the discipline there is a deliberate centering of first-person

narratives and ‘disabled people’ are inherently considered ‘experts by experience’ (Faulkner,

2017). In accordance to the Society of Disability Studies (2016), the important contributions

of this field of disciple include, but are not limited to:

1. The exploration of models and theories that analyze the factors that define disability

(social, political, cultural, and economic);

2. Working to de-stigmatize ‘disability’, especially those disabilities that cannot be accurately

measured or explained through mainstream research methods;

3. Acknowledging the usefulness as well as limitations of medical research studies and

recognizing the role of mainstream research in furthering stigma;

4. Studying how perspectives, attitudes, policies, etc. differ but analyzing a broad scale

(personal, collective, national and international) and learning through these differences.

However, Disability Studies’ broad scope of “the overarching, or governing, concept

of disability” has posed great limitations upon research that focuses specifically on madness

and seeks to establish a more expansive understanding of mental health knowledge (Ingram,

2016, p.11; Faulkner, 2017).

Mad Studies

In response to this limitation, Richard Ingram, a Canadian activist and academic, is

credited to be the first to coin the term ‘Mad Studies’ in 2016 at the Disability Studies
 40

symposium at Syracuse University. The term grew out of Ingram’s analysis on the limitations

of Disability Studies in conceptualizing madness, and it is described both as an emerging

discipline as well as an indiscipline (Ingram, 2016). More accurately, Mad Studies is the

academic rendition of the service user/survivor or Mad Movement that has emerged across

the world over the past twenty-five years (Faulker, 2017; Ingram, 2016). Kathryn Church

(2015) proposes that both the community-based and academic movements should invite an

understanding of mental health that predates and problematizes psychiatric research discourse

by focusing on lived experience and personal narration. Mad Studies places the ongoing work

and history of survivor/service user activism, as well as survivor narratives, at the forefront of

its focus (LeFrancois et al 2013). Faulkner identifies the interdisciplinary nature of Mad

Studies as one of its great strengths:

One of the strengths of this emerging field of enquiry is that it is drawing on many

different academic disciplines: literature and critical theory, law and sociology, to

name but a few. This gives it the strength to make use of different strands of

knowledge and thinking, challenging the centrality of biomedical psychiatry in

shaping our understanding of mental health. (2017, p. 514)

Mad Studies as a critical approach calls into question the dominance of the

biomedical model, the legitimacy of clinical trials, and the self-interest of pharmaceutical

companies within psychiatric care (Faulkner, 2017). It recognizes that the conventionally

desired “objectivity” in the researcher or service provider has instead the potential to create

further harm and possibly lead to the “distortion or misunderstanding of the experience being

interpreted” (Faulkner, 2017, p. 505). In recognizing the inherent hierarchies of “expert”

evidence and knowledge valued by mainstream research studies, Mad Studies advocates for

the inclusion of:

 41

experiences, history, culture, political organising, narratives, writings and most impor-

tantly, the people who identify as: Mad; psychiatric survivors; consumers; service

users; mentally ill; patients; neuro-diverse; inmates; disabled – to name a few of the

‘identity labels’ our community may choose to use. (Costa, 2014, para. 3)

Mad Studies pushes up against the devaluation of experiential knowledge and seeks to

recenter user experience and first-person narrative within academic dialogue. It helps us to

analyze on a macro-level how mental health structures and the domination of western

medicine contribute to the further stigmatization of ‘madness’. On a micro-level, within the

context of social work, Mad Studies contributes to the reframing of power dynamics between

service user and service provider and urges us to dismantle the hierarchy between

professional and experiential knowledge and evidence. Through examples such as user-led

research studies and peer support roles, Mad Studies also invites us to consider the ways in

which lived experience contributes meaningfully to worker credentials.

Mad Studies is an important approach required in dismantling sanism. ​ Sanism is

described by Poole and colleagues as the “systematic subjugation of people who have

received ‘mental health’ diagnoses or treatment” or those who are neurodivergent (Poole, et

al., 2012, p. 20).​ ​Social workers unknowingly enact sanism within their practice because

“pathologizing, labeling, exclusion, and dismissal have become a ‘normal’ part of

professional practice and education” (p. 20).

Addressing Limitations

Mad Studies encounters limitations that can be overcome if practiced in combination

with other critical theories and perspectives. As an example, Mad Studies encounters the

tension of pursuing academic interests, while striving to maintain relationships and

 42

involvement with ongoing activist movements (Ingram, 2016). This is a difficult pursuit, but

necessary for maintaining a relevant praxis. To demonstrate the significance of community

work as well as the need for adopting other critical perspectives to understand ways in which

Mad Studies is relevant, we look at two examples. The first demonstrates the importance of

integrating critical race theory within Mad Studies. The second draws attention to the

intersections between madness and the trans experience, demonstrating the importance of

maintaining the relationship between queer theory and mad studies. Both cases exemplify the

significant importance of Mad Studies maintaining a relationship with community-based

movements, and supplementing perspectives with additional critical theories.

1) Critical Race Theory: Black communities maintain a strong tradition of self-help and peer

support groups​; one reason behind this is​ the severe lack of available culturally specific social

services (Wilson 2001; Seebohm et al., 2010). To meaningfully engage the experiences of

community mobilization, such as the tireless work of racialized communities, it is imperative

to employ the critical lens of intersectionality. Faulkner & Kalathil demonstrate the

importance of adopting aspects of critical race theory to supplement the approach of Mad

Studies when they state:

It is important to remember that social justice movements and initiatives have an

inherent danger of allowing the narrative of a given group to be dominated by

individuals who are normative in all other senses, thereby marginalising

non-normative voices within the group. (2012, p. 45)

For these reasons, Mad Studies needs to listen deeply to the ways in which madness is

experienced differently when compounded with other lived experiences, such as racial

oppressions.
 43

2) Queer Theory: There is a strong resonance between Mad Studies and queer experiences.

One example is the way that trans individuals experience psychiatric assessments and

medical approval prior to receiving the necessary treatments required for their transition

(McWade et al., 2015). In order to prove treatment eligibility, they must prove their sanity.

The impact of psychiatrization imposed upon an individual who identifies as trans

demonstrates the way in which “compulsory able-bodiedness and compulsory

heterosexuality” dominates medical assessment procedures (p. 307).

By integrating the approach of intersectionality and critical race theory to Mad Studies, we

can begin to establish a more comprehensive ​mad-infused​ critical praxis (McWade, et al.,

2015).

“In a mad world, only the mad are sane.” ― Akira Kurosawa
 44

Conventional Approach: Cognitive Behavioural Therapy

Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) is one of the most widely used forms of

psychodynamic, evidence-based practice for improving mental health. It is a psycho-social

intervention that works to alter unhelpful thoughts, beliefs, attitudes, and behaviours by

improving emotional regulation through the development of targeted skills and strategies. It is a

short-term, structured, goal-focused, and action-based therapy that helps individuals understand

the connection between mood, thoughts, and behaviours and the relationship to the environment

in which they live (O’Neill, 2017).

Through a collaborative process with a CBT therapist, service users develop strategies to

replace dysfunctional core beliefs through 6-8 targeted sessions to address specific issues that

they have identified as detrimental to their mental health. CBT is meant to be a brief intervention

utilizing specific treatments for a limited number of sessions. While there is a range in duration,

common consensus around CBT holds that a time-limited therapy may act as an additional

incentive for patients and therapists to work efficiently (Cully & Teten, 2008; Payne, 2016;

O’Neill, 2017). CBT is widely lauded in the mental health sector for not only its effectiveness in

the treatment of many psychological disorders, but also for its position as a cost-effective method

of intervention (O’Neill, 2017).

Measurement of a service users’ achievement of their goals is critical in calculating the

efficiency of CBT. Therefore, careful assessment and monitoring of a service user’s progress is

vital to the practice. One form of measuring progress is through worksheets and homework

assignments as well capturing mood ratings/scores. Because the success of CBT is contingent

upon an individual’s voluntary participation (Matthews et al., 2003), CBT utilizes homework

assignments and additional reading materials to assist in the service user’s therapeutic growth in
 45

interventions such as cognitive restructuring, problem-solving, and mindfulness (Cully & Teten,

2008).

Foundational Assumptions

1. Situations themselves are generally not problematic. It is our reactions to situations that

cause problems.

2. Thoughts impact how we experience the world and how we feel.

3. Our thoughts, feelings, and behaviours are constantly influencing and reinforcing each

other.

4. We have the capability to change our thoughts, feelings, and behaviours.

(Cully & Teten, 2008).

Origins of Cognitive Behavioural Therapy

In the 1970’s, Cognitive Behavioural Therapy was created as a product of the integration

of two therapies: cognitive therapy and behavioural therapy (Miller, 2005). Cognitive therapy is

derived from cognitive theory, which is an approach to psychotherapy that attempts to explain

human behaviour through understanding thought processes and interpretations of life events. It

argues that “our perceptions and interpretations of the world around us affect our behaviour as

we learn” (Payne, 2016, p. 156). Behavioural therapy was developed out of social learning

theory, which states that learning is gained by modelling behaviour of those around us.

Behavioural therapy aims to change potentially destructive or unhealthy behaviours through

“conditioning” that will allow individuals to adopt new and healthy ways of interacting with their

world (Payne, 2016). Cognitive behavioural therapy pulls from both methods to create an

approach that attempts to change behaviours by focusing on and challenging the thoughts that

create them.
 46

Strengths

CBT is adaptable to meet the needs of individuals

CBT uses a wide variety of methods to treat individuals with mental health issues

utilizing interventions such as Dialectical Behaviour Therapy, Motivational Interviewing, and

Mindfulness training. Often these treatment methods will be used in conjunction with others.

Each treatment plan identifies the particular behaviours and conscious processes that need to be

targeted. This flexibility means that each individual’s treatment is specifically curated to meet

their needs and stated goals.

CBT is a cost-effective, brief therapy with high rates of success

CBT models are widely used for their perceived low cost, structured sessions, and

measurable outcomes. Research on CBT has shown that evidence-based care packages featuring

CBT cost less and increase societal benefit, compared with care featuring medication (Myhr &

Payne, 2006). For this reason, health professionals argue that CBT could produce significant cost

savings to the Canadian government in conjunction with better mental health outcomes. The

brief nature of CBT (6-8 sessions) also produces a desirable quality: it is a relatively fast

treatment method in a society with dramatically increasing rates of depression and anxiety

(Smetanin et al., 2011), two common mental health concerns treated by CBT. Further, CBT

models highlight the importance of monitoring treatment processes to assess the success and

efficacy of the intervention. As an evidence-based practice method of intervention, CBT

provides measurable outcomes that are observable and tracked closely, making it the preferred

method of treatment in many mental health organizations.

Role of the Social Worker

 47

The role of the social worker in CBT is to provide a collaborative setting in which the

service user has an active role in their treatment. A CBT therapist can provide methods for

understanding and working through cognitive distortions; however the internal work and change

processes are reliant on the service user’s ability to engage with the treatment. Consequently, a

strong therapeutic relationship that promotes mutual respect and trust is crucial. To create a

meaningful and supportive relationship with a service user, authors Cully and Teten (2008) note

that CBT therapists should seek to demonstrate empathy through validating a service user’s

experiences, authenticity in their presentation and interactions, and demonstrating a positive

regard by showing the service user the respect they deserve through non-judgement and

commitment to their well-being.

“The therapeutic relationship in CBT is characterized by an active, directive stance by the

therapist, high levels of emotional support, high levels of empathy and unconditional positive

regard” (Keijsers et al, 2000, p. 268; Brisebois & Gonzalez-Prendes, 2012, p. 24). The emotional

experiences that result from this therapeutic relationship can be integral to the service user’s

progress and can lead to changes in cognition and their insight (Hardy et al., 2007). Therefore,

centering the empowerment and strengths of the service user are critical to the development of a

strong therapeutic relationship and the success of CBT. The ultimate goal of the CBT therapist is

to work with the service user to develop skills and strategies that allow them to manage their

symptoms on their own (Brisebois & Gonzalez-Prendes, 2012).

What Does CBT Look Like in Practice?

(Cully & Teten, 2008)

Step 1: Assessment
 48

Assessments are used to:

1. Understand the service user and their current issues

2. Inform treatment and intervention techniques

3. Serve as a foundation for assessing progress during the treatment plan.

Step 2: Case Formulation

⁃ Draws on evidence about the particular problem and how it may be tackled

⁃ Proposes a model of what is happening to the service user and enables them to have a

discussion with the CBT therapist about processes that are occurring, and strategize about

how to tackle them

⁃ Set goals with service user

⁃ Assess service user’s concerns/difficulties

⁃ Establish treatment plan

⁃ Identify treatment obstacles

Step 3: CBT Treatment Sequence

Potential Brief CBT Session Structure:

Session Content

Session 1 Orient the Patient to CBT

Assess Patient Concerns
Set Initial Treatment Plans/Goals

Session 2 Begin Intervention Techniques

Session 3 Continue Intervention Techniques

Session 4 Continue Intervention Techniques

Reassess Goals/Treatment Plan

Session 5 Continue/ Refine Intervention Techniques

Discuss Ending Treatment and Prepare for Maintaining Changes

Session 6 End Treatment and Help Patient To Maintain Changes

 49

Adapted from Cully & Teten, 2008

CBT Intervention Example: Cognitive Restructuring

Cognitive restructuring is a process in which a service user challenges and replaces

negative thoughts and cognitive distortions. It aims to create more positive and functional

thought habits and strategies to overcome irrational or maladaptive thoughts (Mills et al., 2008).

Cognitive restructuring can include developing the skills to identify triggers that lead to negative

emotions, gaining greater perspective on situations, and recognizing automatic thoughts and

feelings (Bonfil & Wagage, 2020). This technique is not simply about changing all negative

thoughts to positive ones; rather, it emphasizes developing a perspective that can consider both

positive and negative thoughts and outcomes. Further, it works to help service users choose to

focus on thoughts that are most helpful in achieving their aims and that has less negative

emotions attached (Bonfil & Wagage, 2020).

According to Bonfil & Wagage (2020) the steps for cognitive restructuring are as follows:

Step 1: Record the situation, thoughts, and feelings

Step 2: Pick one automatic thought from the list created

Step 3: Develop a different point of view about the situation

⁃ Consider:

o What is the effect of believing this thought?

o What would happen if I didn’t believe this thought?

o What is the evidence supporting this thought?

o What is the evidence against this thought?

o Is there an alternative explanation?

o What is the worst/best thing that could happen?

 50

o What can I do about this?

Step 4: Craft an alternative response

 51

Conventional Approach: Narrative Therapy

Origins of Narrative Therapy: A Brief Overview of Postmodern Theories

Narrative therapy aims to explore the narratives of a service user, group, or community,

by looking at how these narratives are constructed and how these constructions of identity within

the narrative actively shape their experience, sense of self and options (Healy, 2014, p. 218).

This focus on constructions of identity stem from postmodern theories which argue that our

reality is socially constructed through discourse (or “language practices”) (Healy, 2014, p. 211).

Two central theories of postmodernism are postmodern theory and poststructural theory which

exhibit “substantial overlap”, however can be differentiated in that poststructuralism studies the

relationship between knowledge and language, “whereas postmodernism is a theory of society,

culture, and history” (Agger, 1991, p. 112).

Postmodern theories in practice aim to deconstruct and reconstruct “discourses,

knowledge, and social relationships” allowing theorists to “question the taken-for-granted or

implied assumptions of our thought and knowledge, [analyze] power, and [imagine] new

possibilities” (Moffatt, 2019, p. 46). Ken Moffatt (2019) argues that “one should not seek the

truth that lies below the surface of relationships and language but instead acknowledge that

multiple truths exist because of the wide range of contexts, languages, images, subcultures, and

cultures” ( p. 46) A postmodern framework asks social workers to “view all aspects of social

work practice, particularly the concepts of client need and social work responses, as socially

constructed” (Healy, 2014, p. 205). While postmodern theories will be utilized in this section

exclusively to understand and explain narrative therapy, it is important for social workers to

familiarize themselves with the basics of these theories, “given that they inform many of the

disciplines on which our profession draws” (Healy, 2019, p. 206).

 52

Origins of Narrative Therapy

Based on these understandings from postmodern theories, narrative therapy maintains

“that people make meaning in their lives based on the stories they live” (Ricks et al., 2014, p.

100). In other words, the “first person narrative” through which a person defines themself is

“based on memories of his or her past life, present life, roles in social and personal settings, and

relationships with important others” and, furthermore, the “problems in people’s lives are

derived from social, cultural, and political contexts” (p. 100). Much of the leading work on

narrative therapy has been developed by workers associated with the ​Dulwich Centre in

Adelaide, Australia (link)​.They have produced extensive work on the application of narrative

ideas to a broad range of social services work and fields of practice (Healy, 2014, p. 218) which

speaks to the far-reach and versatility of this intervention practice.

The Role of the Social Worker in Narrative Therapy

Narrative therapy can be employed by a social worker when they are engaging with a

service user that they believe may be constrained or harmed by narratives they and others have

generated about them (Fook, 2002, p. 137). This speaks to narrative therapy’s concern “that the

presenting problem is exerting undue influence on shaping the client’s identity” (Dybicz, 2012,

p. 268). Healy argues that “because narratives so powerfully shape our ‘identities’ and our life

choices, these narratives should be the site of intervention” and ultimately social workers should

assist people to “realize new narratives” (2014, p. 218).

Facilitating narrative therapy with a service user requires significant input and skill on

behalf of the social worker, relying on particular language and framing of questions to elicit

responses that support the service user in deconstructing and reconstructing narratives of self.

Dybicz (2012) describes “the client-social worker relationship” in narrative therapy “as that of an
 53

author-editor” (p. 281), Ricks et al. (2014) state that “the goal of the counselor in narrative

therapy is to help clients develop a new life story that is representative of their lived experiences”

(p. 101), and Yuen (2007) explains how she uses narrative therapy to “[render] the skills and

knowledges of children and young people more visible and accessible” (p. 7). These assertions

explain that the purpose of the social worker is to support the individual through the process of

identifying the unhelpful narrative as well as to assist with the co-creation and rooting of a

second, more helpful narrative.

The process of transforming the narrative of self within a narrative therapy intervention is

called “mimesis”. Aristotle originally conceived mimesis as “the process of having an image of

who we are and who we would like to be, the latter motivating our present actions” (Dybicz,

2012, p. 219). Dybicz (2012) explains that the concept of mimesis was then updated by Riceour

“by splitting it into three parts: prefiguration (mimesis1), configuration (mimesis2), and

refiguration (mimesis3)” (p. 269). We will explore the process of applying mimesis in practice in

the case study presented ​below​.

 54

A Model of Mimesis

The ontological enrichment of life and story. From ​"And this story is true..." On the Problem of
narrative truth ​by H. Heikkinen et. al.​ ​[Paper presentation]. European Conference on
Educational Research, University of Edinburgh, United Kingston.
http://www.leeds.ac.uk/educol/documents/00002351.htm
 55

Process of Mimesis Applying Mimesis in practice with Melanie

Prefiguration (mimesis1) ​Questions for Exploring Melanie’s Story:

Service user explains their ● What effects do you think that being in a
understanding of their lived experience university program you don’t enjoy is
through a narrative (story of self) and having on your life?
establishes theme(s). ● What effect does the pressure you feel
from your family have on your life?
(Dybicz, 2012, pp. 269-270) ● Are you accepting of the impact that
being in a university program you
dislike is having on your life? Are these
effects acceptable to you or not?
● Why is this? Why are you taking this
position on what the pressure from your
family is doing?

(Muller, ​Externalizing Conversations Handout)

 56

Process of Mimesis Applying Mimesis in practice with Melanie

Configuration (mimesis2) Questions for enabling Melanie’s second

story:
Social worker assists service user in
“consciousness raising” by identifying how ● How would you prefer things to be at
theme(s) used to organize narrative may be university? With your family?
unhelpful and constraining and therefore, ● If you were to stay connected to what
social worker collaborates with service user in you have just said about what you
identifying new themes to construct an prefer, what next steps could you
alternative (more “helpful”) narrative. take?
● Can you describe the last time you
(Dybicz, 2012, pp. 269-270) weren’t worried about the pressure of
your family about attending university
for a couple of minutes? What was the
Refiguration (mimesis3)
first thing you noticed in those few
Occurs simultaneously with configuration: as minutes? What was the next thing?
a new narrative is being constructed (or ● Would you like more time like this in
configured), it is also being embedded as the your life?
“natural” framework for the service user and ● How did you achieve those few
their close social support (as the process of minutes of not worrying about your
construction requires a social process for true family’s opinion of you being in
authenticity) to understand and view the university?
individual’s identity. ● Tell me about times when you have
managed to achieve a similar feeling
(Dybicz, 2012, pp. 269-270) of not worrying about your family’s
opinion in the past.
● How might this alter your view of the
problem of pressure from your family
now?
● Thinking about this now, what do you
expect to do next?

(Ackerman, 2020)
 57

Strengths of Narrative Therapy

Narrative therapy possesses components that can be useful for critical social work practice.

Challenging biomedical and psy- discourses

Narrative therapy critiques medical and psy- discourses’ emphasis on diagnosis by arguing that

the narratives produced through diagnosis, or even the discourse of a diagnosis itself, may be

harmful to the identity formation of the service user (Dybicz, 2012, p. 268; Healy, 2014, p. 207).

Healy (2014) contends that although these diagnoses are meant to “ultimately ‘help’ the person”,

they can actually result in the person feeling imprisoned by a narrative that damages and

constrains them (p. 218).

Externalizing Problems and Identifying Strengths of Service Users

A social worker often uses narrative therapy to “separate the problem from clients” (Ricks et. al,

2014, p. 100) through externalization of problems, which is “an approach...that encourages

persons to objectify and, at times, to personify the problems that they experience as oppressive”

(White & Epston, 1990, p. 38). Narrative therapy not only aims to identify how challenges

impact a service user’s narrative of their identity, it also intends to intervene in an effort to

construct an alternate narrative that portrays strengths and successes and that can provide a new

orientation for clients in understanding and even addressing problems (Dybicz, 2012, p. 268).

For example, Angel Yuen (2007) looks at how “discourses of victimhood, which are often

present in instances of childhood trauma, can contribute considerably to establishing long-term

negative identity conclusions,” (p. 3). Through her work in narrative therapy, Yuen (2007)

supports individuals who have experienced childhood trauma by recognizing both the “trauma
 58

and effects that this has on the child’s life” as well as the “second story of how the child has

responded to these experiences” (p. 6). This dual focus helps establish how children respond in

diverse ways to lessen the effects of the trauma and, furthermore, that these responses

demonstrate agency, knowledge, and skills that can be helpful to constructing a new narrative (p.

5).

Creative Applications of Narrative Therapy

Narrative therapy can be applied using a variety of creative techniques to “assist clients in

reframing ideas, shifting perspectives, externalizing emotions, and deepening their understanding

of an experience or an issue” (Ricks et al., 2014, p. 103). In their article, Ricks et al. (2014)

provide an extensive overview of how social workers can use “photos, movies, artwork, writing,

and music” as “tools for helping clients rewrite their relationship with their problems” (p. 101).

For example, they demonstrate how art can help clients “express declarative and nondeclarative

memories, which may not be accessible through verbal therapies” (pp. 103-104). It can even

assist clients “with self-expression” because it“brings out any hidden aspects of the self” and

“helps capture self-portraits” ( pp. 103-104).

 59

Conventional Approach: Solutions-Focused Brief Therapy

Solutions-Focused Brief Therapy (SFBT) is also known as Solutions-Focused Therapy or

Brief Therapy (Healy, 2014, p. 162). A foundational premise of SFBT is that service users

possess the solutions and capacities to “make satisfactory lives for themselves” (de Shazer et al.,

1986, p. 207, as cited in Healy, 2014, p. 174). SBFT is a therapeutic intervention that is meant to

help service users harness these solutions; it is referred to as a “goal-directed approach” (de

Shazer et al., 2007, p. 1), where “goals” are “desired emotions, cognitions, behaviours, and

interactions in different…areas of the client’s life” (Solution Focused Brief Therapy Association,

2013, p. 9). However, unlike problem-solving approaches, SFBT does not spend time identifying

or understanding a problem to be overcome; rather, therapy is focused on identifying goals and

solutions based on changes that service users can enact in their own lives. Furthermore, SFBT

focuses on small wins as opposed to working linearly toward a large goal (Healy, 2014, pp. 175-

176). Unlike many psychodynamic practices, SFBT is purely “future-focused” (de Shazer et al.,

2007, p. 1) in that it is not interested in revisiting the past or understanding a “truth” (Payne,

2016; Sloos, 2020c). It is also not focused on producing a diagnostic assessment; instead, the

service user is positioned as the “assessor” who determines what changes they want to see and

how they will accomplish those changes (Solution Focused Brief Therapy Association, 2013, p.

9). Trepper et al. (2013) succinctly note:

SFBT helps clients develop a desired vision of the future wherein the problem is solved, and

explore and amplify related client exceptions, strengths, and resources to co-construct a

client-specific pathway to making the vision a reality. Thus, each client finds his or her own

way to a solution based on his or her emerging definitions of goals, strategies, strengths, and

resources. Even in cases where the client comes to use outside resources to create solutions, it
 60

is the client who takes the lead in defining the nature of those resources and how they would

be useful. (p. 3)

Origins of SFBT

While it has some roots in systems theory family-based therapies of the 1950s-1960s, the

origins of SFBT are often credited to Insoo Berg and Steve de Shazer of the Brief Family

Therapy Center in Milwaukee during the 1980s (de Shazer et al., 2007; Lethem, 2002; Healy,

2014). Berg and de Shazer “began exploring solutions” to research that was taking a problem-

oriented approach to family therapy (de Shazer et al., 2007, p. 3). Though it has become a

“theory for practice” (Healy, 2014, p. 164), SFBT was therefore “pragmatically developed”

rather than arising from a base of theory (de Shazer et al., 2007, p. 1).

Role of the Social Worker?

The role of the social worker is to help service users recognize the capacities to enact

solutions that they already possess (Healy, 2014, p. 174) and to “expand” the service users’

options (de Shazer et al., 2007, p. 4). While SFBT acknowledges that there is a “hierarchy in the

therapeutic arrangement” (p. 3), the therapist-service user relationship is rooted in a “positive,

collegial, solution-focused stance” (p. 4) where the practitioner:

- believes that the service user has the knowledge and ability to make change in their life

and leads “in a gentle way” by “pointing out…different direction[s]” for the service user

to “consider” (p. 4);

- “almost never pass[es] judgments about their clients, and avoid[s] making any

interpretations about the meanings behind their wants, needs, or behaviors” (p. 4);

- has an “overall attitude” of being “positive, respectful, and hopeful” (p. 4);
 61

- views “resistance” from the service user as either “people’s natural protective

mechanisms, or realistic desire to be cautious and go slow” or as a “therapist error, i.e.,

an intervention that does not fit the client’s situation” (de Shazer et al., 2007, p. 4;

Lethem, 2002, p. 190). Resistance is not framed as problematic behaviour; instead, the

responsibility lies on the therapist to “discover the ways in which clients are able to

cooperate with therapy” (Lethem, 2002, p. 190).

Indeed, the stance of the practitioner, as outlined above, is considered to be one of the key

aspects of SFBT.

Strengths

There are many positive components of SBFT that are useful for critical social work

practice.

Non-pathologizing approach

While SBFT has its origins within ‘psy’ discourses, it has developed into a practice approach that

breaks with psychodynamic focuses. For example, by focusing on solutions as opposed to

problems, SFBT avoids pathologizing clients; SFBT does not focus on ‘diagnosing’ service users

with biomedical or psychiatric language (Healy, 2014). As such, SFBT can also assist service

users in working toward a solution without placing blame on themselves or others (Lee, 2003, p.

389). This non-pathologizing stance can also make SFBT more accessible to people who

encounter internalized or external stigma around mental health support (Lee, 2003, p. 389).

Collaborative approach that centers the service user

SFBT promotes a collaborative approach between service user and practitioner where paths to

potential solutions are “co-constructed” by both parties and are rooted in the service users’ goals,

language, and perspectives (Solution Focused Brief Therapy Association, 2013, p. 5). This
 62

collaborative approach is in distinct contradiction to the legal and biomedical discourses which

position the practitioner as the expert (Healy, 2014, p. 178). Instead, the service user is

celebrated as the expert of their own life who has the agency and knowledge to enact change

needed. This also allows practitioners to embrace solutions from “multiple worlds,” including

diverse cultural strengths, and “participate in a culturally respectful and responsive therapy

process with clients from diverse ethnoracial backgrounds” (Lee, 2003, p. 393).

Illuminates tangible paths forward, via small steps

Unlike “insight-oriented clinical approaches” SFBT is goal-oriented—therapy sessions

are focused on identifying actions that the service user can take to achieve what feels like a

solution to them (Lee, 2003, p. 390). However, while SFBT is goal-oriented, goals set within

therapeutic sessions do not need to work toward completely resolving a problem; instead, the

session aims to identify any steps toward a solution, even if they seem to be small steps.

Therefore, unlike problem-based approaches which often outline a linear path toward “success”,

SFBT encourages service users to think of paths toward success in a non-linear approach. As a

result, service users are able to identify concrete steps that inch closer to a place of “solution”

without becoming overwhelmed by a needing to complete multiple checkpoints on a specific

path toward success.

Example of a SFBT practice tool: Listen, Select, Build

One approach to SFBT is that the therapist and service user can make “new meanings and

new possibilities for solutions” through the process of “co-construction” (Solution Focused Brief

Therapy Association, 2013, p. 5). In this process, the therapist focuses on the words that the

service user uses to identify some characteristics of a solution, even if small. After the therapist

“listens” and “selects” the potential aspect of a solution, and the service user and therapist
 63

“build” a “clearer and more detailed version of some aspect of a solution” (p. 5). In this “listen,

select, build” process, the therapist continually raises “solution-focused questions or response[s]”

based on the service user’s previous response (p. 5).

Indeed, a key component of SFBT is the dialogue between the practitioner and service

user. Specifically, the “essential therapeutic process” of SFBT looks at what is “observable in

communication” (Solution Focused Brief Therapy Association, 2013, p. 4, emphasis in original).

Unlike psychotherapy’s focus on, for example, a service user’s internal thoughts or biological

stages, SFBT focuses on what is actually said or done in the “therapist’s and client’s moment-by-

moment exchanges” (p. 4). This means that the therapist has to focus on not “reading between

the lines” to try and uncover a “truth” or “underlying meaning” behind a service user’s responses

(pp. 5-6). An important component of the therapeutic dialogue, therefore, is that the therapist

actively tries to “listen for and work within the client’s language by staying close to and using

the words used by the client” (p. 6).

More ways to apply SFBT to your practice

Use the tables below, as well as the information above and resources on the website, to

brainstorm some solution-focused questions/responses that would fit within your practice.

SBFT Main Interventions Examples of solution-focused questions or responses that

(from de Shazer et al., 2007) fit your practice

Looking for previous solutions

Looking for exceptions

 64

Questions vs. directives or

interpretations

Present- and future-focused

questions vs. past-oriented

focus

Compliments

Gentle nudging to do more of

what is working

SFBT Specific Interventions Examples of solution-focused questions or responses

(from de Shazer et al., 2007) that fit your practice

Pre-session change

Solution-focused goals

Miracle question
 65

Scaling questions

Coping questions

Is there anything I forgot to ask?

Taking a break and reconvening

Experiments and homework

assignments

So, what is better, even a little

bit, since last time we met?

 66

Conventional Approach: Trauma-informed Approaches

Introduction to the ‘Trauma-informed’

‘Trauma-informed’ has become a term commonly used among mental health

professionals, service providers and the general public over the past 20 years (Goodman, 2015).

This term is used to describe the way in which service providers are trained to respond to

situations and offer services, with an embedded understanding of the "complex and ongoing role

of traumatic events in an individual’s life” (Harris & Fallot 2001; Goodman, 2015, p.57).

Trauma Informed Approaches (TIAs) are grounded in principles of “neuroscience, psychology

and social science as well as attachment and trauma theories” (Sweeney, et al., 2016, p. 177).

TIA models seek to establish a complete understanding of the lasting impacts of traumatic event

can have on the "neurological, biological, psychological and social development” of a service

user and to further interrogate the repercussions this bares on an individual’s guiding

perspectives and relationships (Sweeney, et al., 2016, p.177). However, it is important to keep in

mind that the discourse around trauma and trauma-informed practice is extensive, and for this

reason, it is difficult to establish a comprehensive and unified definition within this short

overview.

What is Trauma?

The common use of the term ‘trauma’ demonstrates that there is a pervasive

acknowledgement and acceptance that “traumatic experiences can have negative and lasting

effects on individuals” (Goodman, 2016, p. 55). Trauma is recognized by the American

Psychiatric Association and described in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental

Disorders (DSM) as the following:

 67

The person has been exposed to a traumatic event in which . . (1) the person

experienced, witnessed, or was confronted with an event or events that involved

actual or threatened death or serious injury, or a threat to the physical integrity of

self or other; (2) the person’s response involved intense fear, helplessness, or

horror. (p.428; quoted Bustow, 2003, p. 1296)

The significance of the DSM, will be further discussed when evaluating ways in which mental

health professionals assess and diagnose service user trauma. What is also important to note here

are the dissimilar ways in which individuals may respond to the same traumatic event.

Symptoms of trauma include, but are not limited to: fear, nightmares, hopelessness, helplessness,

worthlessness, flashbacks, avoidance, depression, anxiety, despair, distrust, rage, guilt,

dissociation, self-harm, emotional numbness (American Psychological Association, 2013;

Goodman, 2015; Burstow, 2003).

Of significance here is the variance in which individuals identify with the term trauma.

For instance, Yuen (2007) raises that there are “individuals and groups who are determined to

not be defined by stories of trauma” ( p.4), whereas others posit that trauma is “[a]rguably, […] a

conceptualization that psychologically injured people claim for themselves” (Burstow, 2013, p.

1301). Therefore, although trauma is defined concretely by the DSM, as demonstrated above

there are countless ways in which it is understood and embodied by survivors of trauma.

Key Principles of the TIAs

"Trauma-informed mental health services are strengths based: they reframe

complex behaviour in terms of its function in helping survival and as a response to

situational or relational triggers” (Sweeney, 2016, p. 179)

 68

According to Sweeney et al. (2016), frontline mental health professionals should be

trained in methods that foster a safe environment, prevent the retraumatization of service users

and provide further referrals to trauma-specific resources. A consolidated list of TIAs’ key

principles includes: recognizing the signs of trauma, building trust, maintaining transparency and

practicing an attuned awareness of power differentials. Ultimately, the goal is for service

providers to work with service users to collectively establish a care plan that involves

peer-support and appropriate service referrals. The table below, borrowed from Sweeney et al.,

(2016) defines the nine key principles of TIA in more detail.

Table 1. Key Principles of TIAs (Sweeney, et al., 2016, p. 178)

 69

Assessing Trauma

“[T]rauma-informed services can engender more comprehensive and effective mental

health services by ensuring that practitioners conduct in-depth assessments of trauma service”

(Goodman, 2016. p. 57). Through this process, service providers “screen for a history of trauma

and assess for trauma symptoms, including the ways in which trauma coping might manifest ''

(Fallot & Harris 2001, as sited in Goodman, 2016, p. 57).

A tool commonly used to diagnose trauma is the DSM. According to Burstow, the “DSM

is the key text that mediates the application of diagnoses” (2003, p.1299). It defines mental

disorders and provides a guideline for further assessing trauma and diagnosing Post Traumatic

Stress Disorder (PTSD). For example, the PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 is a 20 question survey

that can be completed individually by a service user, or together with a service provider to assess

symptom severity. Answers are to fall within the 5- point Likert scale, which ranges from zero

(‘Not at all’) to four (‘Extremely’) and, according to the International Society for Traumatic

Stress Studies (ISTSS), the survey results should only be interpreted by a professional or

clinician (ISTSS, 2020). Results are used to determine appropriate treatment plan, allows service

provider to track service user progress, and if necessary, prompts service provider to address the

lack of improvement (National Center for PTSD, 2018a). The image below showcases a section

of the PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (National Center for PTSD, 2018b).
 70

Table 2. ​PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (National Center for PTSD, 2018b)

Benefits

Goodman (2015) acknowledges that through the creation of TIAs and the

acknowledgement of the complex, multifaceted and long-lasting impacts of trauma on an

individual, we have made significant progress in counselling and psychology. Goodman

identifies three key benefits that TIAs bring to the mental health sector:

1) By integrating the use of assessments to identify the root and the severity of trauma

symptoms, especially within settings that are not typically focused on mental health where

trauma-specific needs might be overlooked (such as schools), we can avoid misunderstanding of

cause of behaviour, and can provide appropriate referrals rather than discipline.
 71

2) Trauma-informed practitioners and scholars advocate for a deeper understanding of the

“underlying and interconnected concerns’ of trauma rather than only “treating symptoms or

seeing life events and concerns as separate and unrelated” (p.57) and a recognition that

“traumatic events have ongoing impacts” on trauma survivors (p.58).

3) The strength-based approach employs the construct of ‘empowerment’ when working with

service users who have experienced trauma. This is significant because “trauma survivors [..] are

often disempowered by traumatic events and/or by post-trauma symptoms that continue to affect

their lives” (p. 58).

However, Goodman also identifies that in order for TIAs to be effective they need to be

integrated within all social service programs (2015). Further limitations are discussed below in

the section entitled, Infused Approach: TIAs and Mad Studies.

 72

Infused Approach: Using Anti-Oppressive Practice in Cognitive Behavioural Therapy

Limitations

Individualizes and pathologizes service user’s problems

CBT has an individualistic focus; it sees problems as coming from an individual’s

thoughts and corresponding behaviours, and ignores forms of structural oppression (Payne,

2016). This method fails to see how an individual’s problems can stem from social interactions

and behaviours and are often the result of unequal power dynamics and oppressive social

structures. This is problematic and limiting because CBT does not address systemic issues as a

source of an individual’s problems, nor does it provide an opportunity for CBT therapists to

critically reflect on their own assumptions and social location in their relationship with the

service user. For example, CBT attempts to ‘restore’ individuals to ‘rational’ and ‘functional’

cognitive processes. It does not acknowledge, however, that what is considered ‘rational’ or

‘functional’ has been defined by white, colonial understandings of mental health and ways of

being (Howell & Vornka, 2012). In this way, CBT both ignores and perpetuates sanism and

Eurocentrism. In addition to working from a narrow understanding of mental health, CBT also

pathologizes individuals’ mental health concerns. By using CBT, “you can erase issues related to

employment, housing, education, healthcare, substance use, colonialism, racism, ableism,

cisheteropatriarhcy and make them about certain people with ‘disorders’ and ‘distortions’. CBT

pathologizes behaviours, thoughts, and feelings based on one model or worldview that has a way

to individualize all problems” (Joseph, 2020, as cited in Linton, 2020).

Conforms to a neoliberal ideology that reproduces inequality

CBT is a popular approach to mental health treatment because of its alignment with

neoliberalism and the discourses of New Public Management [NPM]. Neoliberalism in the
 73

mental health and health care sectors manifests in lean health care strategies that value

efficiency, standardization and cost containment. Michel Guilfoyle (2008) argues that CBT’s

success can be attributed to the ease of integration with existing cultural and institutional power

arrangements rather than its effectiveness. CBT’s short-term therapy format is particularly

appealing within neoliberal politics which value fiscal restraint in the mental health care sector.

Ameil Joseph, a professor and critical theorist at McMaster University, offers some insight into

provincial and federal implementation of internet-based CBT (iCBT) stating, “online CBT can

be a highly profitable way of claiming to provide mental health services without offering the

depth and breadth of appropriate, required or necessary services and support for people” (Linton,

2020). Further highlighting CBT’s alignment with neoliberal values of individualism and

responsibility, Joseph continues, “CBT has a way of suggesting that both success and failure of

the model is evidence of success–redirecting blame onto individuals or blaming external factors

that CBT does not address. When the model fails, it’s because the person didn’t do the work”

(Linton, 2020).

An Infused Approach

So, how do we address the limitations of CBT using an Anti-Oppressive approach? Furthermore,

are these two approaches even compatible?

CBT is severely lacking in a structural analysis of sociological factors and overarching

systems of oppression that impact a person’s mental health and well-being. Utilizing an anti-

oppressive approach in CBT treatment models may provide invaluable strategies and insight to

address the structural underpinnings of service users’ mental health concerns. However, it is

worth noting that “the goal of therapy should never be to help people adjust to oppression”

(carmencool, 2018). While CBT is used to develop skills and strategies to overcome challenges
 74

in one’s cognitive and behavioural processes, in the context of structural oppression, CBT from

an AOP perspective does not endeavour to maintain oppression by providing superficial

solutions to service users. Rather, it seeks to understand the context that defines a service users’

social reality and address social action to change institutions so that social justice becomes

available to all. As Salas et al. (2010) note,“Social work is most effective when the false

dichotomy between working with individuals and working towards social change is reconciled

and when social justice is addressed at all levels of practice” (p. 95). Therefore, CBT–when

grounded in a critically reflexive, non-judgmental, strength-based, and empowering philosophy

that promotes equality within the therapeutic relationship and aims to understand the structural

factors that contribute to one’s lived experience–can be an excellent fit for the social justice

mission of social work (Brisebois & Gonzalez-Prendes, 2012).

AOP Practice Principle Present in CBT Main Interventions?

1. Critical Reflection on No.

Self in Practice While CBT encourages a collaborative and equal therapeutic
relationship, it does not ask CBT therapists to consider how
their own positionality and social locations might impact their
relationship with the service user and the impact of the CBT
treatment.

2. Critical Assessment No.

of Service Users’ CBT’s major tenet is that an individual’s problems are often
Experiences of the result of ‘dysfunctional’ cognitive processes and core
Oppression beliefs that can be altered to create a desired response (Payne,
2016). However, while the main focus of traditional CBT may
be individual thoughts or beliefs, these beliefs are not formed
in a vacuum; rather, they are shaped by life experiences,
including poverty, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, racism,
etc. (O’Neill, 2017). Having this knowledge allows service
users to make choices about the context and course of
treatment.
 75

3. Empowering Service Yes.

Users CBT emphasizes service user empowerment as one of the
major components of a successful CBT treatment. Client
empowerment takes place in various forms, including:
socializing the service user to the cognitive-behavioural model;
sharing information about the nature of the problem that
afflicts them; and providing a detailed rationale behind
proposed interventions (Brisebois & Gonzalez-Prendes,
2012).

4. Working in Yes.
Partnership CBT is based on a strong therapeutic relationship.
Consequently, working in partnership with a service user is
crucial to developing a relationship founded on mutual trust,
respect, and working toward a common goal (Cully & Teten,
2008). In the CBT model, service users are seen as possessing
the abilities and strengths to become active agents in their own
change process. A CBT therapist is present to help the service
user facilitate their own healing and provide guidance,
ultimately working with the service user to develop skills to
problem-solve on their own and independent of the CBT
therapist (Brisebois & Gonzalez-Prendes, 2012).

5. Minimal Intervention Yes.

CBT is a brief and voluntary treatment method that usually
lasts from 6-8 sessions. These sessions are guided by the
service user’s goals and needs. Minimal intervention states that
social workers should aim to strategically intervene in the least
intrusive way possible (Healy, 2014); CBT exemplifies this
AOP principle because it honours the service user’s needs and
stated goals, and operates from a structured, short-term model.

Case Example:

A 50-year-old Latino man, José, has come to your clinic seeking therapy as a result of

severe depression and anxiety stemming from an injury at work that caused him to be put on

medical leave. José lives in a rural town in Ontario with a majority white demographic and

worked in agriculture. He has been at home for the last six months. He has three children, all of
 76

whom are enrolled in university on scholarships and have moved away for the school year. His

wife is supportive but works long hours as a receptionist at a physiotherapist clinic. José has

stated that he often turns to alcohol to help the days pass by, as he has little motivation to do

much else. When his children come home for the holidays, José says that he is overwhelmed

with joy, but when they leave, he becomes even more depressed than usual. José has stated that

he has little desire to return to work, and when you ask him about his thoughts on the situation,

he constantly repeats, “I’m just a bad dad”.

Questions to Consider:

1. What does it mean to approach José’s case from an anti-oppressive lens?

2. What steps should you take?

A traditional CBT approach would work with José to restructure his thoughts around

being a ‘bad dad’. One approach could be to use a thought record to help him look for evidence

against this negative thought and move toward more balanced or alternative thinking. For

example, this could look like asking José for instances when he thought he was a good dad (e.g.

spending time with his children when they come home, supporting them in their university

careers, etc.). However, this neglects the larger structural issues that are impacting José and

creating the conditions for his depression. A traditional CBT approach might help José develop

strategies against negative thoughts, however, the true source of the problem remains

unchallenged.

During further discussion with José, you decide to ask him what the source of his

thinking stems from. He tells you that he feels bad for not being able to provide for his children.

He states that since he lost his job, he was not able to afford to continue paying for his children’s

extracurriculars at university, as their scholarship only covered part of their tuition. He tells you
 77

that he also feels bad that they are under significant financial stress that could have been

alleviated by his return to work. However, when you broach the subject of returning to work,

José reveals to you that he feels uncomfortable returning because he thinks he will “make

mistakes” and that “people at work don’t like him”. While this may look like negative thinking

that is delaying him from returning to work, you find that the source of his hesitation is actually

racism in the workplace.

Questions to Consider:

1. How do poverty, racism, and precarious employment contribute to a service user’s mental

health?

2. How do structural forms of oppression function in José’s life on a macro and micro

scale?

3. What CBT interventions can be used to address these oppressions?

If you were to use CBT to teach him strategies to challenge these negative thoughts and

encourage him to return to work with these new coping strategies, this would actually aid in

maintaining an oppressive structure because this approach using CBT would only help José

adapt to an oppressive system, and would not address the underlying issue: working in a racist

environment. In addition to teaching service users CBT strategies for coping and managing

negative thoughts and feelings, critical social workers also need to help service users access

resources like community groups that offer practical support, to work with service users to find

practical solutions to address racism in the workplace (e.g., approaching management or a

union), and to connect service users with advocacy groups who are doing work in the areas that

are impacting them.

 78

Below are potential guidelines to working with José’s case from an anti-oppressive framework:

1. Bring awareness to the José’s positionality and the intersections of his social locations

2. Acknowledge the historical, social, political, and structural dimensions of oppression

- Attempt to distinguish between problems that are environmental and those that stem

from dysfunctional thoughts

3. Collaborate regarding the construction of treatment goals and planning a working alliance

(that acknowledges power dynamics and works to dismantle them)

- Co-construct goals to be accomplished through the relationship

- Co-construct tasks to be fulfilled by each partner in the relationship

- Build mutual trust and respect

4. Coping Strategies/Skill building

- Identifying José’s strengths

- Validating his experiences of oppression/discrimination

- Engage in cognitive restructuring practices by externalizing structural forms of

oppression that are impacting José’s mental health

- Work together to create a list of tangible steps that can be taken to support José in

securing employment and addressing racism in the workplace

Working from an anti-oppressive framework means aiming to understand the full impact

of structural oppressions and the context in which a service user develops negative thoughts and

mental health concerns. While it is beyond the scope of CBT to directly address structural issues

of oppression, AOP can provide practical steps to create systemic change. Utilizing CBT with

oppressed communities can create opportunities for strengths-based approaches to intervention

 79

and help service user’s build the skills for empowerment. Cognitive restructuring, emotional

processing, and behavioural interventions need to focus on the service user’s experiences of

oppression, on useful thoughts, coping skills, and identification and incorporation of adaptive

behaviours that work for the service user—not for an oppressive system. This is facilitated by a

strong, collaborative therapeutic relationship, characterized by empowerment and validation

strategies that help clients have a liberating, anti-oppressive CBT experience. As critical social

work practitioners, our goal is to empower and work with service users to challenge and

overcome these oppressions. Utilizing anti-oppressive practice in cognitive behavioural therapy

can provide insight into the larger structures that impact an individual and how these structures

can be addressed using conventional approaches in social work.

Basic Principles of AOP in CBT and Beyond

1. Identify Critical Issue/Source of Problem

2. Address Issues of Power

3. Acknowledge Structural Barriers

4. Reflect/Retheorize Incident Using Anti-Oppressive Framework

5. Highlight Strengths of Service User

6. Collaborate on Achieving Service User’s Stated Goals

7. Work Toward Empowerment

8. Create Strategies for Change

 80

Infused Approach: Using Anti-Oppressive Practice (AOP) in

Solutions-Focused Brief Therapy (SFBT)

Limitations

While SFBT is an intervention with many strengths, it also has several limitations that

must be considered within a critical social work practice. The following section highlights some

of the main limitations of SFBT based on those identified by Healy (2014).

Emphasis on Individual Action and Responsibility

Some practitioners argue that SFBT can be viewed as a “systemic therapy” (de Shazer et

al., 2007, p. 3) because it is often used in therapeutic interventions with families and couples;

therefore, it is seen as intervening in the level of the “family system”. Practitioners who label

SBFT as a “systemic therapy” also note that the solutions discussed within therapeutic sessions

often involve a service user’s interactions with other people or with systems within their life.

Furthermore, these practitioners observe that “once small changes begin to occur, larger changes

often follow, and those larger changes are usually interactional and systemic” (p. 3). However,

this definition of “systemic intervention” is very different from other definitions of “systemic

intervention” that aim to change the environment, or from “structural interventions” that aim to

address how structures like white supremacy and settler colonialism create oppressive conditions

for individuals and groups. Indeed, a limitation of SFBT is that it places emphasis and

responsibility on the service user to make changes in their environment; interventions do not

focus on directly modifying conditions within the environment (Healy, 2014).

Does Not Take into Account Barriers, Including Structural Obstacles

Similar to the limitation above, SFBT does not consider the barriers and obstacles that an

individual might encounter when trying to work toward their goals or hopes. These barriers also
 81

include structural considerations, like racism or transphobia, that might limit the amount of

change that an individual can actually implement in their life, even if they proceed with hope and

determination (Healy, 2014, p. 178).

Does Not Highlight or Encourage Broader Social Change

Indeed, SFBT practitioners “rarely aspire to broader social change” (Healy, 2014, p.

179). Instead, intervention is focused on helping the service user move toward solutions within

the environment that they inhabit, without discussing, for example, how their problems are

connected to broader social problems or how they might work toward changing the structural

conditions that contribute to their problem.

Falsely Assumes Objectivity is Possible

Healy (2014) notes that a limitation of the strengths-based perspectives is that the

evaluation of something as a “strength” is fundamentally contrary to the self-defined “objective”

stance of the therapist. Similarly, we would argue that while SFBT practitioners claim the stance

of being non-judgmental and objective, the values and worldview of the practitioner are re-

centered in the co-construction process as the therapists’ solution-focused questions will be

rooted in what the therapist recognizes as a potential solution. For example, Lee and Bhuyan

(2013) note that “patterns and structures of naturally occurring talk in therapeutic encounters can

reproduce whiteness as a powerful organizing principle” (p. 121). Furthermore, Ying Yee (2004)

notes that “whiteness” includes the “social processes” which enable “the dominant and/or

majority group’s ability” to normalize “the inferior position of minority cultures,” often in ways

that are not visible or recognized (p. 98).

 82

An Infused Approach?

As we can see, a common theme threaded throughout some of the main limitations of

SFBT is its narrow view of intervention and change—it does not focus on structural conditions

as a consideration for discussion, or as a location of change. It also does not look at the barriers,

including structural barriers, that might prevent an individual from enacting a “solution”. Based

on the solution-focused orientation of SFBT, a likely reason for this is because to focus on

barriers or structural components would be to focus on a “problem”. Infusing an AOP lens into a

SFBT approach, therefore, might address some of the limitations inherent to SFBT. The table

below considers the presence of AOP principles in current SFBT interventions.

AOP Practice Present in SFBT Main Interventions?

principle
1. Critical Somewhat
Reflection on - SFBT emphasizes “contextual knowledge and taking a not-knowing
Self in Practice stance” which “requires clinicians not to rely on prior experiences or
theoretically formed truths and knowledge to understand and interpret
therapeutic needs” (Lee, 2003, p. 393);
- By adopting a social constructivist view of solutions, therapists are at
least indirectly acknowledging that their own worldview is not universal
(Lee, 2003).
2. Critical Somewhat
Assessment of - With advances in SFBT, practitioners may include acknowledgement or
Service Users’ reference to the “to the social disadvantages that may have contributed to
Experiences of distress and difficulties” (Letham, 2002, p. 191);
Oppression - Some SFBT may incorporate an “empowerment-based approach” which
states that “a client’s unique experiences and the social base of that
experience should be understood within a social, cultural, economic, and
political context (Congress, 1997; Rose, 1990)” (Lee, 2003, p. 385);
- However, this does not include a critical analysis: “Instead of reading
between the lines, SFBT therapists discipline themselves to listen for and
work within the client’s language by staying close to and using the words
used by the client” (Solution Focused Brief Therapy Association, 2013,
p. 6).
 83

3. Empowering Somewhat
Service Users - SFBT is rooted in the belief of a service user’s ability to set goals for
themselves and make changes in their own lives. However, this notion of
“empowerment” is not related to understanding or changing structural
conditions (Healy, 2014). Indeed, “empowerment” within SBFT is
centered around assisting service users in identifying micro-level actions
they can take to work toward a desired goal (Lee, 2003, p. 390).
4. Working in Yes
Partnership - The role of the practitioner within SFBT interventions is to work with
the service user to “co-construct” potential solutions (Solution Focused
Brief Therapy Association, 2013, p. 5);
- Goals and solutions discussed within therapeutic interventions are based
on the strengths and opinions of the service user; SBFT practitioners
work to and to “expand” the service users’ options without inserting
their own judgement, beliefs, or interpretations (de Shazer et al., 2007,
p. 4).
5. Minimal Yes
Intervention - An assumption that guides SBFT interventions is “if it isn’t broken,
don’t fix it” (de Shazer et al., 2007, p. 1). While some “schools of
psychotherapy” encourage service users to engage in therapy even
without the presence of current problems in order to continue personal
“growth,” SFBT is premised on the notion that “if there is no problem,
there should be no therapy” (p. 2).

Based on the chart above, we have three ideas for an AOP-infused SFBT approach.

AOP Principle AOP-Infused SFBT approach Examples of Actions

suggestion
Critical Reflection Continually engage in: - Through critical reflection, a
on Self in Practice - critical reflection by therapist reflects on how
“scrutinizing self for values, their position as a white
needs, biases” in order to settler influences the values
“increase awareness and that they consider to be
engage with service users “solutions”;
more consciously” (Sloos, - A settler therapist uses
2020d); critical reflexivity to evaluate
- critical reflexivity to develop if/how they have engaged in
an “intentional awareness of what Tuck and Yang (2012)
power relations in broader describe as “settler moves
social systems and structures toward innocence” (p. 10)
and recogniz[e] how they within their practice.
impact your social work
practice with service users”
(Sloos, 2020d).
 84

Critical Consider how micro-, mezzo-, - When working with service

Assessment of and macro-level processes might users to set goals, a therapist
Service Users’ impact a service user’s ability to considers how different
Experiences of define and achieve “solutions” intersectional subject
Oppression - Personal (Micro): “Personal positions influence what is
practice of health; coping seen as a “solution”.
skills; resilience; biological
endowments” (Sloos, 2020e)
- Cultural or Social (Mezzo):
“Income and social status;
social support networks;
employment conditions;
physical environments; social
values and cultural norms
internalized through
socialization” (Sloos, 2020e)
- Structural (Macro): “Sexism
(gender); gender neutral
agency policies racism (race);
ignoring that race matters;
heterosexism; language
- that excludes; colonialism;
ongoing and historical
trauma” (Sloos, 2020e).
Empowering Advocate for structural change - Settler therapists advocate at
Service Users community and policy levels
for repatriation of land to
Indigenous nations.

Add a structural lens to general - In the “co-construction

responses and questions with process” (Solution Focused
service users Brief Therapy Association,
2013, p. 5), a therapist uses
solution-focused questions
and responses that open
possibilities for connections
to the structural level.
Add a structural lens to specific A therapist adds a structural lens
SFBT intervention questions to the “miracle question” (de
Shazer et al., 2007)
- For example: Imagine that
you were to wake up
tomorrow and feel like
 85

everything in your life is

solved. What do you think
would be organized
differently in the world? Are
there any people you know
or have heard of who are
working toward this change?

A therapist adds opportunities

for “critical adult education”
(Burstow, 2003, p. 1313) to
SFBT “experiments and
homework assignments” (de
Shazer et al., 2007)
- For example: Look up a
group or organization that is
doing work related to a
social change that you
identified within your
miracle question.

Concluding Tensions: Is Objectivity Even Desirable?

One of the core tenets of SFBT is for the practitioner to maintain an objective view and

ensure that the solutions co-constructed during a session are not influenced by the practitioner’s

own values or beliefs (Solution Focused Brief Therapy Association, 2013, pp. 4-6). Our

suggestions for an AOP-infused SFBT approach disrupt this tenet by asking practitioners to draw

attention to structural connections within a SFBT intervention, when possible. However, as we

have discussed in the limitations section above, we do not believe that it actually possible for a

therapist to achieve an “objective” stance; dominant structures and values, such as whiteness, are

re-centered in contexts as simple as identifying what is, and is not, a solution (Lee & Bhuyan,

2013; Ying Yee, 2004). We think, therefore, that critical social workers should draw attention to

structural conditions that may shape a service user’s goals or identified solutions within SFBT

interventions. In other words, we believe that social workers who use SFBT interventions
 86

without critical considerations, such as an AOP-infused lens, are not obtaining “objectivity”;

rather, they are asserting a worldview that normalizes and upholds existing structural conditions,

inequities, and forms of oppression. It is important to note, however, that the use of critical

perspectives like AOP does not absolve a social worker from complicity or direct participation in

the perpetuation of oppressive structures and material inequities (see, for e.g., Blackstock, 2009;

Chapman & Withers, 2019; Tuck & Gaztambide-Fernández, 2013).

AOP-Infused SFBT Approach: A Brief Summary

This infused approach can be summed up as: respecting a client’s experience and

knowledge as central to their ability to construct solutions within their own lives while also

maintaining a critical framework in order to, whenever possible, open up opportunities for

solutions that connect to structural levels.

 87

Infused Approach: Trauma-informed Approaches and Mad Studies

What Limitations Do TIAs Reveal?

Although Goodman states that “[i]n some ways, the inclusion of PTSD in the DSM was a

significant step forward for the study and treatment of trauma” TIAs do reveal a number of

limitations.

It is imperative to recognize the stark limitations of TIAs in order to maintain a critical

awareness of the practice, as well as to correct the gaps in this approach. In this section, we will

expose some of the key limitations of TIAs, before borrowing from external critical practice

elements to supplement and strengthen this conventional approach. We first focus on the

following four limitations: restricted definitions of trauma, diagnosing trauma through an

evidence-based approach, and sanist assumptions.

Narrow Definitions of Trauma

Restricted definitions of trauma and PTSD, as put forth by the DSM and practiced in

clinical settings, emphasizes the individualization of trauma and oversimplifies “the complex and

multifaceted ways in which individuals and communities experience traumatic events”

(Goodman, 2015, p.60). Furthermore, this Eurocentric definition established by Western

scientific research ignores centuries of community-based understandings of trauma.

“This exemplifies a colonial or Western/Eurocentric framework that focuses on the

individual as a way to deflect attention from systemic factors” (Goodman, 2015, p. 60).
 88

Burstow (2003) suggests we think of trauma as not a disorder, but as “a reaction to a kind

of wound” caused by a profoundly injurious situation or event, occurring in a “world in which

people are routinely wounded” (p. 1302). A trauma diagnosis is most often applied to

individuals, but it is imperative to note that not it is not only individuals who can experience

trauma. Community theorists recognize that entire communities “as an integral whole is

traumatized” (Burstow, 2003, p. 1297). Trauma should also be understood as transgenerational

or intergenerational, meaning that the impacts of traumatization felt by one individual can be

passed onto the next generation. It can be passed on in this way by “virtue of belonging to a

specific social group” or family (Burstow, 2003, p. 1297). The definitions provided by the DSM

do not account for the way in which trauma can result from systemic oppression, such as

ongoing racism, and be passed on as collective, historical (Goodman, 2015.) or vicarious trauma.

Diagnosing Trauma

Another critique of TIAs prevalent in the literature is in the way that individual trauma is

diagnosed by a professional, demonstrating the “power of psychiatry” (Burstow, # p.). Many

trauma-focused facilities are diagnostic which implies that reactions are "seen as an intrinsic

character flaw” and are therefore pathologized (Goodman, 2015, p. 59). Indeed, Burstow (2003)

argues that the mental disorder is brought on not by the trauma itself, but by the professional who

applies the diagnosis as mediated by the DSM. Through both definition and diagnosis there is an

inherent individualization of trauma; in this way TIAs fail to address or advocate to change the

systemic injustices and daily oppressions that increase one’s susceptibility to trauma (such as

racism, and colonialism) (Goodman, 2015).

 89

Evidence-based Formula

The causes and conditions of trauma, as well as the embodied impacts of trauma have

been heavily researched and documented within clinical settings. In fact, there are “numerous

scholarly publications and intervention programs on traumatology (the study and treatment of

trauma)” (Goodman, 2015, p. 56). This work has pushed TIAs in the direction of having more

systematic and comprehensive models of practice. By understanding trauma in this way, the

effects of traumatization have been reduced to an equation. Forms such as the DMS-5 PTSD

Checklist claim to be a “psychometrically sound measure” and understood as “valid” “reliable”

and “useful in quantifying PTSD symptom severity” (link to pdf). Burstow (2003) describes the

way in which trauma is codified and measured by the DMS:

Each of these criteria stipulates an attribute of trauma, then provides a list of included

symptoms and identifies a precise number that must be met ( p. 1295). In practice, these

standardized forms can contribute to retraumatization. Herz and Johansson (2012) discuss the

adversities that seem to follow the implementation of evidence-based practices: standardization,

increase of manual-based social work, theoretical assumptions, and “neo-liberal individualization

of ‘social problems’”( p. 529).

False Assumptions : Normalcy

TIAs operate under a number of problematic theoretical assumptions. For example, it is

built on the assumption that “[t]he world is essentially benign and safe” and those who do not

trust in this inherent security are unreasonably cautious (Burstow, 2003, p. 1298). These

assumptions demonstrate the “unquestioned belief in normalcy” that is prevalent in TIAs, along

with a sense of superiority that is afforded to those who act accordingly (Burstow, 2003, p.
 90

1298). This set of assumptions point to elitism (lewis, 1999), since the luxury of safety is

afforded only to the wealthy. A traumatic event is defined as something that occurs outside the

parameters of what is considered ‘normal’ human experience:

“The range of human experience becomes the range of what is normal and usual in the

lives of men of the dominant class; White, young, able-bodied, educated, middle class. Trauma is

thus what disrupts the lives of these particular men but no other” (Brown, 1995, p. 101).

To demonstrate the way in which ‘normalcy’ is a guiding assumption underlying TIAs, we look

to the practitioner guide for the aforementioned PTSD Checklist. It states that this self-report

measure can be completed either by the respondent individually, or together with a service

practitioner in “ approximately 5-10 minutes” (​ISTSS, 2020​). This allots as little as fifteen

seconds to read, interpret and numerically rank each deeply personal question. This demonstrates

the westernized, colonial, and sanist assumptions that are embedded within the assessment

measures affiliated with TIAs.

Identifying the Gaps Between TIAs and Mad Studies

In effort to address some of these gaping limitations of TIAs as identified in the reviewed

literature, we turn to the principles of Mad Studies. The table below presents a comparative

review of four key principles of Mad Studies and how these are presently addressed by the

conventional TIAs. Following this table, we offer some suggestions for ways in which you can

problematize the use of TIAs in your practice and suggest ways in which you can adopt a more

critical approach to trauma work.

 91

The astute reader may observe that these categories all share a common root. We agree

with you. Much of Mad Studies does centre around pushing back on normative assumptions of

what constitutes sanity. However, for practicality, we have organized some key principles into

artificial categories.

Mad Studies Present in Trauma-Informed Main Interventions?

Principles (based on the approaches covered here)

Resisting Narrow NO
Definitions of Mental
Disorders Although there are many practicing definitions of trauma, those used in
TIAs tend to be derived from professionals and clinical research.
Trauma has become a “psychiatric conceptualization as mediated by the
DSM” (Burstow, 2003). Trauma is not routinely defined by individual
experience and personal narrative. According to Faulker (2017),
“[m]ental health knowledge is dominated by professional knowledge to
the exclusion of the knowledge based on lived experience (experiential
knowledge) that people with mental health problems can bring” (p.
500). Trauma is individualized by TIAs, but not personalized.

Survivors as experts SOMEWHAT

When applying a strengths-based approach, Sweeney et al. (2016)

address empowerment, choice, mutuality and collaboration as some of
the key principles of TIAs. Although they emphasize the value of “peer
support and coproduction” (p. 178), this is less apparent when looking
at the way that trauma screenings are administered. According to
ISTSS, survey results should only be interpreted by a professional or
clinician. In neither the collaborative nor the professional diagnostic
approach is the trauma survivor treated as the expert of their own
experience.
 92

Resisting biomedical NO
diagnosis/ resisting
psychiatry as an Burstow (2003) states that trauma only becomes a disorder once it is
institution labelled as such by someone in a position of authority. It is through this
label, or diagnosis, that trauma becomes a mental disorder. Faulkner
The ​Indiscipline​ of Mad (2017) states that “the dominance of the biomedical model is in
Studies practice, expressed through these diagnostic frameworks (p. 502). By
participating in these diagnostic frameworks that comply with the
labeling and pathologizing of service users, social workers become
complacent in the"sanist aggressions” that have become a ‘normalized’
component to our professional practice and education (Joseph, 2015;
Poole, 2012).

Resisting false NO
assumptions of
normalcy It is apparent from the literature that ‘normalcy’ is a guiding
assumption of TIAs. Central to TIAs is the assumption that a traumatic
experience is something that occurs outside the parameters of what is
considered ‘normal’ human experience. This is generally defined
through the lens of the dominant class (white, middle class,
able-bodied, education, young etc.). To establish what is normal in this
way, we pathologize the lived experiences of “women, Blacks, natives,
Arabs, and I […] psychiatric survivors” for whom “the world is not a
safe and benign place, and so mistrust is appropriate” (Burstow, 2003,
p. 1298).

Infusing TIAs with Mad Studies

This is a difficult question, and one which cannot be simply answered on this webpage.

This is a process that requires self-reflection in practice. However, as a starting point, we offer

some initial thoughts for you to consider in your pursuit for a mad-infused TIA practice.

We need to separate our understanding of trauma from the psychiatric narrative

(Linklater, 2014). Very simply, trauma is “a person’s reaction to an injury” followed by an

embodied response (Linklater, 2014, p. 22); it is not a diagnosed mental health disorder. It is, by
 93

no means, outside of the ‘normal’ experience of individuals and communities who are routinely

affected by colonization, racism, discrimination, sexism, and the list goes on. This alludes to the

critical importance of also adopting an anti-racist framework when practicing TIAs (Maiter,

2009). “We can assume no absolute confidence in the homogeneity of people” (Faulkner, 2017),

however, we do not need a trauma diagnosis to approach each service user with the intention of

building a safe, transparent and collaborative environment of working relationship.

We need to recognize that the ways in which the biomedical model, and the systems that

support it (officially mandated helping institutions), are inherently oppressive. Burstow (2003)

declares that “trauma is systematically produced by” these institutions, especially those operated

by the state, and “must be understood as central players in the traumatizing of people and

communities” ( p.1307). Can we, as social workers continue our work in these institutions

without reinstating harm to service users? Even as “critical” social workers? How can TIA

principles claim to advocate for collaboration when operating within a model of psychiatry that

“alienates people from their capacity to name, invalidates people’s conceptualizations, imposes a

stigmatized identity on them, places them on paths not of their own choosing, deprives them of

liberty, and imposes harmful treatments on them” (Burstow, 2003, p.1307)? Is it possible for

effective collaboration to occur when working within these systems of care? For these and other

reasons, TIAs need to align with the values of Mad Studies, and recenter experiential knowledge,

and first-person narratives within academic and clinical dialogue about trauma.

By integrating principles of Mad Studies and other critical approaches into the practice

of trauma-informed social work, we can address some of the inherent short-coming of TIAs. As

Goodman (2015) identifies, TIAs offer major advancements in recognizing the underlying and

complex impacts of a traumatic experience. However, in order to adopt a mad-infused practice

 94

we must analyze the disempowering, diagnostic implications of trauma assessment surveys as

well as the officially mandated institutions that administer care.

 95

Infused Approach: Using CRT and Intersectional Feminism in Narrative Therapy

Limitations of Narrative Therapy

Neglects Impacts of Structures of Oppression

Some of the limitations of narrative therapy stem from the same limitations adhered to

postmodern theories. Postmodernism provides social workers with a helpful lens to question and

deconstruct concepts and discourses, especially in regard to the needs of service users and how

social work professionals respond to these needs in practice (Healy, 2014, p. 206). However

social workers should be cautious to ensure that the pursuit of deconstruction does not preclude

them from recognizing the real life impacts that result from oppression based on structures that

maintain inequities between people. Essentially, while narrative therapy can enable individuals

to reconstruct a more helpful narrative in understanding their sense of self and the options they

have, this does not mean that narrative therapy has the capacity to remove or lessen constraints

of structural oppressions which have real impacts on the ideological and material contexts of an

individual’s life. Healy (2014) asserts that a focus on the language practices that shape [a

person’s] situation should not distract [social workers] from the pressing material needs...or

recognition of the broader contexts of oppression” facing certain individuals (p. 223). While

changing a person’s perspective on the problem may be helpful to their understanding of their

identity, it does not change the root of the problem.

Implications of Power Dynamics in the Social Worker and Service User Relationship

As stated previously, the social worker holds a significant role when supporting a service

user through narrative therapy:they must skillfully guide the dialogue with language and

questions that assist service users to tell their story of self, deconstruct harmful or unhelpful

narratives by identifying alternative stories or themes, and reconstruct or co-construct a second

 96

narrative. In this facilitative role, a social worker holds considerable power in this intervention,

especially with respect to how their own positionality and perspectives may have influence on

how a service user externalizes problems or develops their second story.

Lack of moral framework

As mentioned previously, limitations of narrative therapy can be linked to critiques of

postmodern theories. Here, we consider how postmodernism’s belief in the complexity of

meaning and rejection of universal truths dismisses moral and political standings essential for

social justice (Healy, 2014, pp. 223-224). Ricks et al. (2014) assert that “narrative therapy works

to separate the problem from clients; and after this is accomplished, clients can work on their

relationship with the problem” (p. 100).This assertion, however, disregards how problems are

understood or explained by the service user and/or the social worker. Without incorporating a

critical lens, narrative therapy fails to incorporate “guidelines about who is to be empowered and

for what ends” (Fook, 2002, p. 47). Jan Fook (2002) states “unless we ask the more important

questions like ‘empowerment for what?’ and ‘for whom?’, we are left with the possibility of

perpetuating oppressive structures for someone” ( p. 48).

Applying a Critical Race Theory and Intersectional Feminist Theory Lens to Narrative

Therapy

In response to these limitations, we put forth an example of how a social worker could

use the critical theoretical lens of CRT and intersectional feminism to address some of the issues

discovered in narrative therapy as addressed above:

 97

CRT/Intersection CRT/Intersectional Feminist - Reflective Questions for Social

al Feminist (IF) Infused Narrative Therapy Workers
Principle Suggestion
What structures impact the
A Critical As theoretical positions that look narrative of a service user? How
Framework to in-depth at the structural forces of do connections between
Recognize and oppression that impact people hegemonic structures magnify
Acknowledge based on their positions of experiences of oppression?
Structures of identity, especially with regard to
Oppression race, CRT and Intersectional For example: How do structures
Feminism provide a helpful of white supremacy impact the
framework for applying a more narrative of a person who is
critical perspective when racialized and/or Indigenous?
practicing narrative therapy. In How do structures of patriarchy
approaching narrative therapy, impact the narrative of a
this framework could assist in woman? How do structures of
raising the consciousness of an white supremacy and patriarchy
individual regarding the impact of impact the narratives of
structures, such as systemic racialized women?
racism, patriarchy, colonialism,
xenophobia, homophobia, on their
narrative. While the root of the
problem impacting their narrative
may be beyond their capacity to
change, the service user’s
awareness of the embeddedness
of structures in society and
institutions may challenge how
they view this problem in relation
to their sense of self. This is
potentially a helpful realization
for a service user in the
reconstruction of their narrative,
including how they can influence
discourse at the micro-level to
challenge these structures.

How do the language, dialogue

Critical This framework can help a social and questions you use reinforce
Reflexivity on worker critically reflect on their or diffuse power? How does
Power Dynamics intersections of identity and how your intersectional position
in the Social power dynamics within the social impact your interpretation of an
Worker and worker and service user individual’s narrative of self?
Service User relationship are generated and
Relationship maintained based on these
positions. Recognizing and
acknowledging these power
 98

dynamics can be helpful in

mitigating the reinforcement of
oppressions when practicing
narrative therapy because it asks
the social worker to critically
reflect on how their perspectives
may influence their language
when framing questions and
comments. As well, recognition
of their intersectional position’s
influence on their perspectives
can help them apply critical
reflexivity in their dialogue with a
service user, in both their own
interpretation and understanding
of a service user’s commentary
and the service user’s
interpretation and understanding
of the dialogue based on their
own intersectional position.

What values and beliefs orient

Applying a While supporting a service user in your critical social work praxis?
Critical Moral realizing their narrative and How can you apply an anti-racist
Framework to reconstructing their story of self, a and intersectional approach to
Narrative social worker can use a narrative therapy? How can you
Therapy CRT/Intersectional Feminist assist a service user in
framework to position their values challenging structures of
and beliefs to orient their aims oppression that impact their
and how they facilitate these narrative?
goals in practice. In particular,
this framework would ask a social
worker to recognize the inherent
inequalities between people
which are maintained and
informed by complex,
intertwined, and mutually-
reinforcing categories of
oppression and social structures”
(Mattson, 2014, pp. 9-10) This
provides a critical moral
framework for how narrative
therapy can challenge diverse
structures of oppression, avoid
reinforcing inequalities and
collaboratively engaging as well
 99

as respecting service users’ own

beliefs and understandings.

Concluding Tensions

As narrative therapy draws heavily from postmodern theory, one of its core tenets is to

not seek the “truth” of the causes impacting the lived experience of the service user and, instead,

to assess how their narrative impacts their understanding of who they are and the options they

have. However, this avoidance of “truth” inhibits narrative therapy from both recognizing the

material impacts of hegemonic structures on peoples’ lives and from providing an orientation for

how to address these structures at the individual and community level. CRT and Intersectional

Feminism provide a valuable lens to address these limitations by considering the links between

structures of oppression and a person’s narrative. They also offer guidance for how a social

worker can both critically reflect on their own intersectional position, in order to try and avoid

reproducing these oppressions, as well as to support consciousness raising regarding the impacts

of structures with the service user. With that being said, applying this critical lens to narrative

therapy will not change the material conditions of a person’s life and therefore attention must
 100

also be paid to addressing these issues as in addition to how they impact a service user’s

narrative.
 101

References

Ackerman, C. (2020, January 9). 19 Narrative Therapy Techniques, Interventions +

Worksheets. Positive Psychology. https://positivepsychology.com/narrative-therapy/

Agger, B. (1991). Critical theory, poststructuralism, postmodernism: Their sociological

relevance. Annual Review of Sociology, 17(1), 105–131.

American Psychological Association. (2013). Trauma- and stressor-related disorders. In

Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders DSM-5. Washington, DC:

American Psychiatric Association.

Ashcroft, B., Griffiths, G., Tiffin, H., & Ashcroft, B. (2013). Postcolonial studies: The key

concepts (3rd ed.). Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.

Badwall, H. (2016). Critical reflexivity and moral regulation. Journal of Progressive Human

Services, 27(1), 1–20.

Baines, D. (2011). Doing anti-oppressive practice: Social justice work. Fernwood Publishing.

Blackstock, C. (2009). The occasional evil of angels: Learning from the experiences of

Aboriginal peoples and social work. First Peoples Child and Family Review, 4(1),

28–37.

Bonfil, A., & Wagage., S. (2020). Cognitive restructuring to change your thinking. In A

Course in CBT Techniques: A Free Online CBT Workbook. Retrieved from

https://cogbtherapy.com/cognitive-restructuring-in-cbt

Brisebois, K., & Gonzalez-Prendes, A. (2012). Cognitive-behavioural therapy and social

work values: A critical analysis. Journal of Social Work Values and Ethics, 9(2), 21-

33.
 102

Brown, L. (1995). Not outside the range. In C. Caruth (Ed.), Trauma: Explorations in

memory (pp. 100-112). Johns Hopkins University Press.

Burstow, B. (2003). Toward a radical understanding of trauma and trauma work. Violence

Against Women, 9(11), 1293–1317.

carmencool. (2018, July 26). The goal of therapy should never be to help people adjust to

oppression [Tweet]. Retrieved from

https://twitter.com/carmencool/status/1022552731066675200

Chapman, C., & Withers, A. J. (2019). A violent history of benevolence: Interlocking

oppression in the moral economies of social working. University of Toronto Press.

Church, K. (2015). Making mad studies: Process, practice and contestations [Presentation]

Ryerson University, Toronto. https://ryecast.ryerson.ca/80/Watch/8844.aspx

Churchill, W. (2003). Acts of rebellion: The Ward Churchill reader (1st ed.). Routledge.

Costa, L. (2014, October 15). Mad studies – what it is and why you should care. Retrieved

December 5, 2020, from

https://madstudies2014.wordpress.com/2014/10/15/mad-studies-what-it-is-and-why-

you-should-care-2/

Cully, J.A., & Teten, A.L. (2008). A Therapist’s Guide to Brief Cognitive Behavioral

Therapy. Department of Veterans Affairs South Central MIRECC.

de Shazer, S., Dolan, Y. M., Korman, H., Trepper, T., McCollum, E., & Berg, I. K. (2007).

More than miracles: The state of the art of solution-focused brief therapy. Haworth

Press.

Dominelli, L. (2002). Anti-oppressive social work theory and practice. Palgrave MacMillian.

Dybicz, P. (2012). The hero(ine) on a journey: A postmodern conceptual framework for

social work practice. Journal of Social Work Education, 48(2), 267-283.

 103

Fallot, R. D., & Harris, M. (2001). A trauma-informed approach to screening and assessment.

In M. Harris & R. D. Fallot (Eds.), Using trauma theory to design service systems

(pp. 23–31). Jossey-Bass.

Faulkner, A. (2017). Survivor research and mad studies: The role and value of experiential

knowledge in mental health research. Disability and Society, 32(4), 500–520.

Faulkner, A., & J. Kalathil. (2012). The freedom to be, the chance to dream. London:

Together for Mental Wellbeing. Retrieved from: https://www.together-uk.org/wp-

content/uploads/2012/09/The-Freedom-to-be-The-Chance-to-dream-Full-

Report1.pdf

Fook, J. (2002). Power. In Social work: A critical approach to practice (pp. 45-55). Sage

Publications Inc.

Fortier, C. & Wong, E. (2018). The settler colonialism of social work and the social work of

settler colonialism. Settler Colonial Studies, 9(4), 1-20.

Goodman, R. D. (2015). A liberatory approach to trauma counseling: Decolonizing our

trauma-informed practices. In R. D. Goodman & P. C. Gorski (Eds.), International

and cultural psychology. Decolonizing "multicultural" counseling through social

justice (p. 55–72). Springer Science.

Guilfoyle, M. (2008). CBT Integration into Societal Networks of Power. European Journal of

Psychotherapy and Counselling, 10(3), 197.

Hardy, G., Cahill, J., & Barkham, M. (2007). Active ingredients of the therapeutic

relationship that promote client change: A research perspective. In P. Gilbert and R.

L. Leahy (Eds.), The Therapeutic Relationship in the Cognitive-Behavioral

Psychotherapies (pp. 24–42). Routledge.

Healy, K. (2014). Social work theories in context: Creating frameworks for practice (2nd

ed.). Palgrave Macmillan.

 104

Heikkinen, H., Huttunen, R., & Kakkori, L. (Eds.). (2020) "And this story is true..." On the

problem of narrative truth. Paper Presented at the European Conference on

Educational Research, University of Edinburgh, United Kingdom. Retrieved from

http://www.leeds.ac.uk/educol/documents/00002351.htm

Hick, S., Fook, J., & Pozzuto, R. (Eds.). (2005). Current understandings of critical social

work. In Social Work: A critical turn (pp. 3–23). Thompson Educational Publishing

Inc.

Howell, A., & Voronka, J. (2012). Introduction: The politics of resilience and recovery in

mental health care. Studies in Social Justice, 6(1), 1-7.

Ingram, R. A. (2016). Doing mad studies: Making (non)sense together. Intersectionalities: A

Global Journal of Social Work Analysis, Research, Polity, and Practice, 5(3), 11–

17.

International Study for Traumatic Stress Studies (ISTSS). (2020). PTSD Checklist for DSM-5

(PCL-5). Retrieved from https://istss.org/clinical-resources/

assessing-trauma/ptsd-checklist-dsm-5

Joseph, A. J. (2015). The necessity of an attention to Eurocentrism and colonial technologies:

An addition to critical mental health literature. Disability and Society, 30(7), 1021–

1041.

Keijsers, G. P., Schaap, C. D., Hoogduin, C. A. (2000). The impact of interpersonal patient

and Therapist behavior on outcome in cognitive-behavioral therapy: A review of

empirical studies. Behavior Modification, 24(2), 264–297.

Kondrat, M. E. (2002). Actor-centered social work: Re-visioning “person-in-environment”

through a critical theory lens. Social Work, 47(4), 435–448.

Ladhani, S., & Sitter, K. (2020). The revival of anti-racism. Critical Social Work, 21(1), 54–

65.
 105

Lee, M. Y. (2003). A solution-focused approach to cross-cultural clinical social work practice

utilizing cultural strengths. Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Social

Services, 84(3), 385–395.

LeFrancois, B. A., Menzies, R., & Reaume, G. (2013). Mad matters: A critical reader in

Canadian mad studies. Canadian Scholars’ Press Inc.

Lethem, J. (2002). Brief solution focused therapy. Child and Adolescent Mental Health, 7(4),

189–192.

Lewis, T. (1999). Living beside. McGilligan Books.

Li, M. (2020) What are the key principles of narrative therapy. Very Well Mind.

https://www.verywellmind.com/narrative-therapy-4172956

Linklater, R. (2014). Colonialism, Indigenous trauma and healing. In decolonizing trauma

work: Indigenous stories and strategies (pp. 19-50). Fernwood Publishing.

Linton, M. (2020, September 11). Mental health under neoliberalism: From self-help to

CBT. Canadian Dimension. https://canadiandimension.com/articles/view/mental-

health-under-neoliberalism-from-self-help-to-cbt.

Maiter, S. (2009). Using an anti-racist framework for assessment and intervention in

clinical practice with families from diverse ethno-racial backgrounds. Clinical

Social Work Journal, 37, 267–276.

Matthews, S., Harvey, A., & Trevitchick, P. (2003). Surviving the swamp: Using cognitive

behavioural therapy in social work settings. Journal of Social Work Practice, 17(2),

177-185.

Mattsson, T. (2014). Intersectionality as a useful tool: Anti-oppressive social work and

critical reflection. Affilia: Journal of Women and Social Work, 29(1), 8-17.
 106

McWade, B., Milton, D., & Beresford, P. (2015). Mad studies and neurodiversity: A

dialogue. Disability and Society, 30(2), 305–309.

Miller, L. (2005). Drawing on cognitive behavioural therapy in social work practice. In

Counselling Skills for Social Work (pp. 49-79). SAGE Publications Inc.

Mills, H., Reiss, N., & Dombeck, M. (2008). Cognitive restructuring. Mental Help Net.

https://www.mentalhelp.net/articles/cognitive-restructuring-info/

Moffatt, K. (2019). Postmodern Social Work. Columbia University Press.

Moreton-Robinson, A. (2015). The white possessive: Property, power, and Indigenous

sovereignty. University of Minnesota Press.

Morgaine, K., & Capous-Desyllas, M. (2015). Anti-oppressive practice with families. In Anti-

oppressive social work practice: Putting theory into action (pp. 187-234). Cognella

Inc.

Muller, K. Externalizing conversations handout. Re-authoring teaching: Creating a

collaboratory. https://reauthoringteaching.com/pages-not-in-use/externalising-

conversations-handout/

Myhr, G., & Payne, K. (2006). Cost-effectiveness of cognitive-behavioural therapy for

mental disorders: Implications for public health care funding policy in Canada. The

Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 51(10), 662-670.

National Center for PTSD. (2018a). Using the PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5).

Retrieved December 8, 2020, from

https://www.ptsd.va.gov/professional/assessment/documents/using-PCL5.pdf
 107

National Center for PTSD. (2018b). PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5). Retrieved

December 8, 2020, from

https://www.ptsd.va.gov/professional/assessment/documents/PCL5_Standard_form.

PDF

O’Neill, L. (2017). Cognitive behavioural therapy and anti-oppressive practice: Compatible

or irreconcilable difference?. In D. Baines (Ed.), Doing Anti-Oppressive Practice:

Social Justice Social Work (pp. 269-285). Fernwood Publishing.

Ontario Human Rights Commission. (2018). Interrupted childhoods: Over-representation of

Indigenous and Black children in Ontario child welfare.

http://www.ohrc.on.ca/en/interrupted-childhoods

Parton, N. (2000). Some thoughts on the relationship between theory and practice in and for

social work. British Journal of Social Work, 30(4), 449–463.

Payne, M. (2016). Modern social work theory (4th ed.). Oxford University Press.

Poole, J., Jivraj, T., Arslanian, A., Bellows, K., Chiasson, S., Hakimy, H., Pasini, J., & Reid,

J. (2012). Sanism, ‘mental health’, and social work/education: A review and call to

action. Intersectionalities, 1, 20–36.

Ricks, L., Kitchens, S., Goodrich, T., & Hancock, E. (2014). My story: The use of narrative

therapy in individual and group counseling. Journal of Creativity in Mental Health,

9, 99-110.

Sakamoto, I. & Pitner, R. O. (2005). Use of critical consciousness in anti-oppressive social

work practice: Disentangling power dynamics at personal and structural levels. The

British Journal of Social Work, 35(4), 435-452.

Salas, L. M., Sen, S., & Segal, E. A. (2010). Critical theory: A pathway from dichotomous to

integrated social work practice. Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary

Social Services, 91, 91–96.

 108

Seebohm, P., Munn‐Giddings, C., & Brewer., P. (2010). What’s in a name? A discussion

paper on the labels and location of self‐organising community groups, with

particular reference to mental health and Black groups. Mental Health and Social

Inclusion, 14 (3), 23–49.

Sinclair, R., & Albert, J. (2008). Social work and the anti-oppressive stance: Does the

emperor really have new clothes? Critical Social Work, 9 (1).

Simpson, L. R. (2004). Anticolonial strategies for the recovery and maintenance of

Indigenous knowledge. American Indian Quarterly, 28(3/4), 373–384.

Sloos, R. (2020a, September 28). Mini lecture. [Video]. eClass.

Sloos, R. (2020b, November 2). Seminar 7: Critical perspectives on psychodynamic theories

and strengths-based theories [PowerPoint Slides]. eClass.

Sloos, R. (2020c, November 9). Seminar 8: Critical perspectives on cognitive-behavioural

therapy and solution-focused approaches [PowerPoint Slides]. eClass.

Sloos, R. (2020d, October 19). Seminar 5: Critical use of self and critical reflection vs

critical reflexivity [PowerPoint Slides]. eClass.

Sloos, R. (2020e, September 28). Seminar 3: Overview of critical perspectives part 1

[PowerPoint Slides]. eClass.

Smetanin, P., Stiff, D., Briante, C., Adair, C.E., Ahmad, S. & Khan, M. (2011). The life and

economic impact of major mental illnesses in Canada. The Mental Health

Commission of Canada.

https://www.mentalhealthcommission.ca/sites/default/files/MHCC_Report_Base_Ca

se_FINAL_ENG_0_0.pdf

Society for Disability Studies. (2017, November 06). What is Disability Studies? Retrieved

December 5, 2020, from https://disstudies.org/index.php/about-sds/what-is-

disability-studies/
 109

Solution Focused Brief Therapy Association. (2013). Solution focused therapy: Treatment

manual for working with individuals.

Southbank Centre. (2016). Kimberlé Crenshaw - On Intersectionality - keynote - WOW 2016.

[Video]. Youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DW4HLgYPlA

Srivastava, S. (2005). ‘You’re calling me a racist?’: The moral and emotional regulation of

antiracism and feminism. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 31(1),

29-62.

Stepney, P. (2006). Mission impossible? Critical practice in social work. British Journal of

Social Work, 36(8), 1289-1307.

Sweeney, A., Clement, S., Filson, B., & Kennedy, A. (2016). Trauma-informed mental

healthcare in the UK: What is it and how can we further its development? Mental

Health Review Journal, 21(3), 174–192.

Tamburro, A. (2013). Including decolonization in social work education and practice.

Journal of Indigenous Social Development, 2(1),1-16.

Tuck, E. (2019). Introduction: Losing patience for the task of convincing settlers to pay

attention to Indigenous ideas. In L. T. Smith, E. Tuck, & K. W. Yang (Eds.),

Indigenous and decolonizing studies in education: Mapping the long view (pp. 13–

15). Routledge.

Tuck, E., & Gaztambide-Fernández, R. A. (2013). Curriculum, replacement, and settler

futurity. Journal of Curriculum Theorizing, 29(1), 72–89.

Tuck, E., & Yang, K. W. (2012). Decolonization is not a metaphor. Decolonization:

Indigeneity, Education & Society, 1(1), 1–40.

White, M., & Epston, D. (1990). Narrative means to therapeutic ends. Norton.

Wilson, M. (2001). Black women and mental health: Working towards inclusive mental

health services. Feminist Review, 68, 34–51.

 110

Wolfe, P. (2006). Settler colonialism and the elimination of the native. Journal of Genocide

Research, 8(4), 387–409.

Wong, Y-L. R. (2004). Knowing through discomfort: A mindfulness-based critical social

work pedagogy. Critical Social Work, 5(1).

Ying Yee, J. (2005). Critical anti-racism praxis: The concept of whiteness implicated. In S.

Hicks, J. Fook & R. Pozzuto (Eds.). Social work: A critical turn (pp. 87-104).

Thompson Educational Publishing Inc.

Yuen, A. (2007). Discovering children's responses to trauma: A response-based narrative

practice. International Journal of Narrative Therapy & Community Work, 4, 3-18.