mainly to mothers. This may be a view or approach perpetrated by men; however, it is not uncommon to see female social workers promoting this type of practice. Inequalities exist within households and within relationships; however, taking an oppressive and privileged stance, neglecting the diversity of opinions and views can be unproductive. According to Healy and Mulholland (2007), a social worker must always try to represent yourself in your writing as thoughtful, objective, experienced and careful about what is being communicated. This will not only make you accountable, but also evidences the thought and care with which you constructed your recording.
The SHARP framework
Shaia (2019) introduced the SHARP framework to assist social workers to make sense of oppression within the context of poverty and socioeconomic disadvantage in the USA. Arguing that social workers routinely respond to the outcomes of poverty and oppression with little attention to the oppression itself, Shaia proposes this framework to address this anomaly. She examines the term context blindness (p18) and makes the case for social workers to examine the contexts of people’s lives. She uses an interesting analogy which we will unpick in this chapter. She likens a social worker who is context blind to a doctor who treats a patient with radiation poisoning without asking about the environment which caused the radiation poisoning. Such practice could result in the doctor prescribing treatment but sending the patient back to that very same poisonous environment which caused the initial illness. Social workers should endeavour to identify and intervene at the source of the service users’ problem, and the SHARP framework enables us do this. There are five core components of this framework:
Structural oppression – This requires you, as the social worker, to interrogate what issues in the service user’s ecosystem are impacting on their ability to succeed. These could be lack of access to employment, inadequate or poor housing, unavailability of affordable housing, inadequate access to healthcare.
Historical context – As a social worker, you should consider how a person’s history has and is impacting on their current situation and need. For example, how has intergenerational poverty and disadvantage impacted on the service user? How might previous engagement with social workers impact on the service user’s willingness or hesitation to engage at this point?
Analysis of role – What role will you, as the social worker have in this situation? The framework argues that there is no neutral position and that social workers are either part of the solution or part of the problem. This analysis of your role will further enable you to reflect on why you are in the role. When you avoid discussing and interrogating issues of oppression and discrimination, you are complicit in their oppression and doing little to disrupt it.
Reciprocity and mutuality – In the fourth component of the framework, you are required to consider what strengths the service user possesses, recognising these as valuable assets which they bring to the helping relationship and the quest for solutions.
Power – Finally, what can the service user do to change their situation and the impact of structural oppression? As a social worker, you should consider supporting the service user to examine how they might change their circumstances through activism or advocacy, recognising that what might seem like small simple actions can have a profound impact. The concept of power and powerlessness is so central to anti-oppressive practice that we have dedicated Chapter 3 to examining it in depth.
The SHARP framework is a useful tool for engaging in anti-oppressive social work as it helps to identify and support service users to counter what may be dominant stereotypical views about them. For minority groups, the SHARP framework employs a social justice perspective, enabling social workers to practise in a careful and systematic, values-informed way towards progress and sustainable change.
Case Study
Mel Johannson is a 44-year-old female on her own with two children after the death of her husband two years ago. She is registered disabled and was made redundant by her employer. She was paid a bulk sum of money which has run out, used mostly on the rent for her house. Her landlord has advised that he does not accept tenants receiving welfare benefits as Mel struggled to pay her rent for the previous month. Mel requests a meeting with her social worker to discuss her options. Social worker Peter insists that Mel remain in her current house as it would be difficult to attempt to find alternative housing. He undertakes a budgeting exercise with Mel and finds that Mel will have less than £200 to live on after all her outgoings. Mel’s current property is adapted to meet her mobility needs, and importantly has a garden where her children, aged 11 and 13, often play. Peter is concerned that it will be difficult find a similar property which will meet the family’s needs. One week later, Mel’s landlord advises her of a planned increase in rent. This is the last straw and Mel becomes anxious and distressed.
Consider how you might use the SHARP framework discussed above to assist Mel.
What do you consider to be the strengths and weaknesses of this framework?
Commentary
In this case study, you are reminded about how Mel’s intersection of identities creates a unique experience for her and her children. Research by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation suggests that there is a growing group of people in the UK who experience poverty due to high housing rental costs. Mel’s current unemployment leaves her in a situation where she is in receipt of benefits, much to the dissatisfaction of her landlord, who notifies Mel of a rent increase. You will need to carefully consider the link between housing, disability, single parenthood, unemployment and poverty.
Greater understanding is required of how poverty and employment traps vary by area and rent levels. The significance of the links between housing, poverty and material deprivation deserves greater recognition in policy.
Chapter summary
In this chapter, we have explored the main ideas around the term ‘oppression’ and have focused on the ways in which oppression manifests in the context of social work. We have argued in favour of the use of the SHARP framework (Shaia, 2019) and how ideas of intersectionality (Crenshaw, 1989) can aid your understanding of the nature and impact of oppression and oppressive practice on service users. Through activities, reflective questions and a case study, you have been encouraged to reflect critically on the forms of oppression and what can be done to minimise and disrupt its presence in social work interactions.
Further reading
Shaia, WE (2019) SHARP: a framework for addressing the contexts of poverty and oppression during service provision in the United States. Journal of Social Work Values and Ethics, 16(1): 16–26.
This article provides an excellent introduction to, and discussion of the SHARP framework, examining the context of poverty and oppression from a North American perspective. It has wide application to the UK context.
Wilson, A and Beresford, P (2000) Anti-oppressive practice: emancipation or appropriation? British Journal of Social Work, 30(5).
This article highlights the importance of involving service users equally in developing anti-oppressive practice and how the failure to involve services users in this work has detrimental effects on the whole concept.
2 Valuing diversity
Achieving
