March is Social Work Month, a time to “educate the public about the contributions of social workers and give social workers and their allies tools they can use to elevate the profession,” according to the National Association of Social Workers (NASW). “Social workers stand up for millions of people every day. These include people who are experiencing devastating illnesses and mental health crises, our veterans, children, families and communities. Yet many people still misunderstand who social workers are and the invaluable contributions they bring to society…Social workers are trained to look at situations in a holistic way. They help people increase their ability to solve problems, to cope with stressors and to get needed resources. Social workers bring individuals together with other people and their communities to find solutions for problems that continue to plague our society, including hunger, lack of affordable housing, and equal rights for all. And social workers make organizations responsible to people through sound social policy.”
Every year, Social Work Month highlights resources and information that can lead to policy, laws and legislation that serve to increase social justice and advance the social work profession. It was established in 1963.
World Social Work Day is celebrated on the first day of Spring, March 21st.
Join the #MacroSW chat this Thursday, March 16, with host Pat Shelly from @UBSSW, as all kinds of social work organizations, practitioners, agencies, legislators, schools and students share ideas and actions that help celebrate our profession in all its aspects. We’re pleased to have Greg Wright of @NASW on the chat too!
Discussion questions:
What activities are you engaging in for #SWmonth 2017?
Who or what do you stand up for?
Why this choice?
How does Social Work Month help you and other social workers?
And…
~Please share media – news, movies, books – that feature social workers~
Here is an annotated list of novels about social workers from 2015. Titles: All Our Names (2014); The Believers (2010); Fourth of July Creek (2014); The Interestings (2014); The Social Worker (2011); Unprotected (2012). And let’s add PUSH by Sapphire (1997).
Update: Chat archive is now available! As the new presidential administration comes into power, basic assumptions about the role of government in assisting the most marginalized have been thrown into question. Social workers should be deeply concerned about proposed changes to social service programs and the government agencies that administer them.
The National Association of Social Workers (NASW) has called on social workers to organize, oppose, resist, and educate in response to the anti-social work agenda that is being put forward by the new administration. But how do we actually proceed?
In the first chat of this series, we discussed power–how it’s defined, who has it, and how we build it. To build the power we need for change requires organized people or organized money. In this week’s chat, we will discuss how to build the relationships needed to effectively organize. What starts as a small group of likeminded people can grow into a network of activists driving a movement.
The most important component of organizing, like social work, is listening and building relationships. We must meet people where they are and forge connections based on empathy, shared experiences, or common interests. This development of trust allows us to ask people to take necessary actions they may not ordinarily take–attending a protest or challenging an elected official–in a way that isn’t transactional, but based on mutual self-interest and respect.
To take a closer look at these concepts, we will discuss the following questions:
Organizing builds public relationships which differ from personal or professional ones. What do you think this means?
How would you engage stakeholders to start organizing around an issue you care about?
Do you see a unique role for social work institutions to build relationships for change?
Once you’ve established public relationships for organizing, what do you think is the next step to address an issue?
What will you do in the next month to organize around around the issue of your choice?
Indivisible Guide – a practical guide for resisting the Trump agenda
People’s Action – volunteer with a national network of grassroots advocacy organizations
About the Host
Justin Vest is the lead organizer for Montgomery County at Progressive Maryland where he
leads issue-based advocacy campaigns and develops volunteer organizers to fight for social and economic justice. He earned his BSW from the University of Montevallo and MSW from the University of Alabama before relocating to the DC Metro area.
As the new presidential administration comes into power, basic assumptions about the role of government in assisting the most marginalized have been thrown into question. Regardless of your political affiliation, social workers should be deeply concerned about proposed changes to social service programs and the government agencies that administer them.
The National Association of Social Workers (NASW) has called on social workers to organize, oppose, resist, and educate in response to the anti-social work agenda that is being put forward by the new administration. But how do we actually proceed?
#MacroSW is introducing a organizing chat series to educate social workers on the important role they play in resisting cuts to services and advancing social justice in their communities by teaching basic community organizing skills that will move social workers from an online space to real world action.
In the first chat of the series, we will discuss the concept of power–who has it, what structures support it, but also how to build our own to confront injustice. For most of us, power does not come naturally. We have all been disadvantaged in some way by a lack of power–through economic oppression, racism, sexism, homophobia, ableism or based on some other characteristic. Therefore learning to want power can be challenging. But social workers also have a unique relationship to power. We may experience personal oppression from society while working at institutions that uphold traditional power structures.
To take a closer look at these concepts, we will discuss the following questions:
How do you define power and how do you know it when you see it?
Who has power in our society and why?
What role does social work play in maintaining or challenging current power structures?
How can advocates for justice build power to challenge inequality
What new or existing opportunities do you see for yourself to build power?
Justin Vest is the lead organizer for Montgomery County at Progressive Maryland where he leads issue-based advocacy campaigns and develops volunteer organizers to fight for social and economic justice. He earned his BSW from the University of Montevallo and MSW from the University of Alabama before relocating to the DC Metro area.
Linda Grobman, MSW, ACSW, LSW, is the publisher, editor, and founder of the award-winning The New Social Worker magazine (www.socialworker.com). Linda has had an interest in connecting with social workers online since the late 1980s, and has published a technology column in The New Social Worker since its beginning in 1994. She also co-authored The Social Worker’s Internet Handbook with Gary Grant in 1998. Linda was 2014 Social Worker of the Year for PA NASW and was named NASW Social Work Pioneer this year for “…supporting early-career social workers through her innovative publishing endeavors, and embracing technology for social workers—and in the intersection of the two.”
Susan Mankita, MSW, LCSW
Susan Mankita, MSW, LCSW has been educating social workers about technology since 1995. She founded the AOL Social Work Forum, one of the earliest and the longest running online communities for social workers. She connected thousands of social workers there, and later, through SocialWorkChat.org. These long running online communities for social workers, enabled easy access to support, mentoring and training FOR colleagues BY colleagues, long before the existence of Facebook, Linkedin and Twitter. She provided the earliest training about the Internet to NASW’s National Board of Directors, and The Association of Social Work Boards before many of them had access to email. Currently, Susan owns a professional development company for social workers and provides licensure preparation focused on struggling re-takers. She teaches social work practice courses at FIU. She was the 2013 Social Worker of the Year for both the Miami-Dade Unit and Florida Chapter of NASW.
In April 2016, Susan Mankita and Linda Grobman presented at the 2016 Social Work Distance Education conference on the topic, “A True History of Social Workers Online.”
They presented a timeline, which represents major events and memories in the development of social workers’ use of the Internet beginning in the 1980s. Through this timeline and presentation at the Social Work Distance Education conference in April 2016, in Indianapolis, IN, and now through this Twitter chat, Susan and Linda seek to preserve the rich history of social workers’ use of the Internet, dispel the myth that social workers have not been and are not online, and emphasize the value of the relationships formed through online networking by social workers with social workers.
Please join us for this discussion with two early adopters of online networking for social workers.
Here are questions we will discuss:
So now you’ve heard our early experiences. Fill in some gaps. What’s your earliest experience with social work or social workers online?
Building community and insuring social presence. Here’s how we did it. How has it changed?
You are our legacy. What do you hope your legacy will be? What will social workers be doing online 15-20 years from now?
Seriously Old but Appropriately Selected References:
Bellamy, D. (1987). Innovative applications of computer technology in social work. Paper presented at the Conference of the Canadian Association of Schools of Social Work, Learned Societies Meeting, Hamilton, Ontario, June 7.
Cnaan, R.A. (1989). Introduction: Social work practice and information technology – an unestablished link. Computers in Human Services,5(1/2), 1-15.
Colon Y. (1996). Chatter(er)ing through the fingertips: Doing group therapy online. Women and Performance: A Journal of Feminist Theory (9), 205-215.
Giffords, E. (1998). Social Work on the Internet: An Introduction. Social Work, 43(2), 243 – 251.
Grant G.B. & Grobman, L.M. (1998). The social worker’s internet handbook. Harrisburg, PA: White Hat Communications.
Marson, S. M. (2003). A Selective History of Internet Technology and Social Work,” that was published in Computers in Human Services, 14:2, 35 — 49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J407v14n02_03
For our October Media Night, we will be discussing how social workers can become effective allies within online disability advocacy, and what does that mean and look like from members of the disabled community.
There is no denying the power online advocacy has played in ushering the disability rights movement into the 21st century. Disabled advocates are able to discuss issues, policies, ableism, and combatting multiple identities with members of the disabled community across the country and globe, as well as paint a more rightfully diverse and genuine images of the disabled experience. Our chat will explore how the social work profession and social workers can become effective allies, and in what ways disabled advocates desire for us to work alongside them.
Here are a few resources that goes in-depth about what disability advocacy is, what good allyship looks like, the use of identity-first language versus person-first language, and why the social model of disability is preferred by members of the disabled community:
Our guest expert will be Dr. Casey Bohrman, who is the Assistant Chair of Undergraduate Social Work at West Chester University. She teaches direct practice and social policy courses. She integrates Twitter into her introduction to social policy class, including an assignment that requires students to document and tweet about accessibility issues in their local communities.
Our #MacroSW Partner facilitating the chat is Vilissa Thompson (@VilissaThompson).
Here are the questions we hope to discuss during the chat:
What does it mean to be a good ally to communities that you do not have membership to?
Is there a need for allies within advocacy movements? Why or why not?
How has social media played an important role in propelling online advocacy?
Which technologies/social media platforms have been instrumental to online advocacy, and are most favored among advocates?
Does the social work profession have an out-of-date view and understanding of disability?
What can we do as social workers to better connect with the disabled community, and be effective allies?
About #MacroSW:
#MacroSW is a collaboration of social workers, organizations, social work schools, and individuals working to promote macro social work practice. Macro social work practice focuses on changing larger systems, such as communities and organizations. It encompasses a broad spectrum of actions and ideas, ranging from community organizing and education to legislative advocacy and policy analysis. The chats are held weekly on Twitter every Thursday at 9 p.m. EST (6 p.m. PST). Click here for a list of chat partners. For information about how to participate in the #MacroSW chat, view our FAQs. For chat schedule and chat archives check out: http://macrosw.com.
About #MacroSW Media Nights:
Tune in for our once a month #MacroSW Media Night to talk about different social problems highlighted by the press. We’ll feature a video, podcast, blog post or article that features a hot topic. These chats are ideal for class assignment or extra credit opportunity. For the chat schedule: https://macrosw.com/special-events/.
(Here is the archive of all the tweets from this chat)
What does healthy aging and productivity look like in the 21st century? Baby boomers are retiring later, millennials are starting families and technology continuously offers new ways to delegate tasks.
“Increased automation and longevity demand new thinking by employers and employees regarding productivity. Young people are increasingly disconnected from education or work and the labor force faces significant retirements in the next decades. Throughout the lifespan, fuller engagement in education and paid and unpaid productive activities can generate a wealth of benefits, including better health and well-being, greater financial security, and a more vital society.”
Superhero and sidekick. Image: Beth Johnson Foundation
The challenge of reshaping social expectations, institutions, policies, and programs so we can benefit from the older population and its growing social capital is more important than ever.
Join us on Thursday, October 6, 2016, at 9pm ET, 8pm CT and 6pm PT:
We’ll chat about how ways to increase ongoing engagement with and productivity by our older Americans.
Hosts: Pat Shelly, University at Buffalo School of Social Work @UBSSW Mikhail Bell, representing the American Academy of Social Work and Social Welfare @AASWSW
Questions for Discussion:
Why is increasing productive engagement in later life a Grand Challenge for Social Work?
What is productive aging?
How does productive engagement benefit society?
How can social work lead the way with this challenge?
What are some examples of productive engagement for later life? Any from your community?
Do you have new ideas or visions for a productive later life?
Teresa Minja speaks out at the U.N. on the need for a convention on the rights of older people. Image: Help Age InternationalMamy Rock, a British DJ in her 70’s, made appearances across Europe. Image: SPOA films
About #MacroSW:
#MacroSW is a collaboration of social workers, organizations, social work schools, and individuals working to promote macro social work practice. Macro social work practice focuses on changing larger systems, such as communities and organizations. It encompasses a broad spectrum of actions and ideas, ranging from community organizing and education to legislative advocacy and policy analysis. The chats are held weekly on Twitter every Thursday at 9 p.m. EST (6 p.m. PST). Click here for a list of chat partners. For information about how to participate in the #MacroSW chat, view our FAQs. For chat schedule and chat archives check out: http://macrosw.com.
Social Workers & Community Psychologists, Allies from Intersecting Domains
With pressing social issues and conflicts around the globe regularly calling out for intelligent, effective, and compassion solutions, the need for greater cooperation among diverse disciplines in the fields of community-related work is stronger now more than ever. Fostering interdisciplinary collaborations can go a long way in creating the macro-level societal change that impacts those issues. But as can be the case in academic fields of discourse, professionals hunker down in their “advocacy silos” (in the scientific professional, this can be called “stovepiping”) not aware of the larger context of other related fields and their resources, their interdependent relationships, and the great potential for healthful, societally beneficial collaboration.
Two fields in particular — community psychology and macro social work — share overlapping values and each field has unique talents and resources that they can share. How are the practices of macro social work and community psychology similar yet distinct? What can social workers and community psychologists do to collaborate for macro-level social change? Join us for a Twitter chat on Thursday, July 21, 9-10 p.m. EDT, for a discussion on these and other questions and related topics, including sharing of resources, practices, and research across these disciplines that are at the intersection of social change and working toward greater community well-being.
Hosts
Rachel L. West (@poliSW), L.M.S.W., Advocacy & Community Outreach Consultant, ACOSA (@acosaorg) Board Member, & Instructor at Stony Brook University-School of Social Welfare
Peter Charles Benedict, M.A. (@petebenedict), Outreach and Communications Specialist, Society for Community Research and Action (@scra)
Taylor Scott (@jtaybscott), Administrative Coordinator, Society for Community Research and Action
Special Guests
Jean Hill , Ph.D. (@jeanhillnm), SCRA Past President, and Director of Institutional Research, New Mexico Highlands University
James R. Cook, Ph.D. (@jimcookuncc), SCRA Past President, and Professor of Psychology, The University of North Carolina at Charlotte
Questions we will consider in this twitter chat
— What is community psychology and how is it distinct yet similar to social work?
— What are the primary goals and motivations of community psychology?
— What resources (practices, research, etc.) does community psychology offer?
— What resources does macro social work offer?
— What questions do you have about either community psychology or macro social work?
— How can social workers and community psychologists better work together to share resources and collaborate?
— What were some good collaborations you were a part of, and what were the benefits?
— What types of circumstances have you found yourself in that would have benefited from a collaboration, and if it didn’t happen, then why not?
The Society for Community Research and Action (@scra), a division of the American Psychological Association, is an 1,100-member professional organization devoted to advancing community research and social action, and it also serves and supports many different disciplines engaged in community work. SCRA members are committed to promoting health and empowerment and to preventing problems in communities, groups, and individuals. SCRA’s vision is to have a strong, global impact on enhancing well-being and promoting social justice for all people by fostering collaboration where there is division and empowerment where there is oppression. Learn more at scra27.org.
(Note: The post that is reblogged below is by Laurel Hitchcock. Laurel is one of the nine #MacroSW partners who rotate as host of our weekly Twitter chats. Her blog post below is a good introduction to our July 14 chat, hosted by @ubssw and @officialmacrosw. We find it especially useful due to her use of a specific example – one of the standards on social work education – and the NASW interpretation of the ethical use of technology. This example underscores the importance of feedback to NASW on the draft for these standards.
The task force that wrote this draft of the standards includes the National Association of Social Workers (NASW), the Council on Social Work Education (CSWE), Clinical Social Work Association (CSWA), and the Association of Social Work Boards (ASWB). This is the first update on Technology Standards since 2005.
Please join us for the July 14th chat. Your comments and tweets will be included in the comments that our #MacroSW Chat group submits to NASW before the deadline on the 20th.)
I am so pleased that the draft Technology Standards for Social Work Practice have been released for public review. NASW, CSWE, CSWA, and ASWB developed a task force to collaboratively draft these technology standards, which you can access the draft standards here.
I am working with several groups to provide comments to the task force and, I also plan to submit my own comments. Once adopted, these standards will be considered a model for best practice in social work. Given the important legal and ethical role that practice standards have in the professional lives of social workers, I believe it is essential to offer constructive and timely feedback on this document. I want to encourage everyone in the social work community to review and submit their feedback. You do not need to be a member of any group to offer feedback. The timeline is short for submitting comments – the one-month comment period closes July 20th.
Here are some highlights about the document. The draft standards and their interpretations are 82 pages. If you do not want to read 82 pages, you may want to know that these standards cover the following:
Section 1: Provision of Information to the Public
Section 2: Designing and Delivering Services – Part A: Individuals, Families, and Groups and Part B: Communities, Organizations, Administration, and Policy
Section 3: Gathering, Managing, and Storing Information
Section 4: Communication with and about Clients
Section 5: Social Work Education (especially distance education)
Overall, I applaud the effort to revise standards that are over a decade old and no longer relevant to many forms of technology commonly used by social workers in their professional lives. It is a challenging task to write effective and informative standards that will help social workers navigate the use of technology in practice with the fast pace of change in digital and social technologies. A definite strength of the committee’s work is that the standards strongly reflect the NASW Code of Ethics, with multiple references to the Code throughout the standards.
However, these standards are also very specific, providing detailed directions on how social workers should use technology in an ethical and professional manner. For example, under Standard 5.10: Educator-Student Boundaries, the interpretation of the standard recommend that “to maintain appropriate boundaries with students, social work educators should avoid the use of personal technological devices and accounts for professional (educational) purposes.” As a social work educator, I agree that all educators should maintain appropriate ethical and professional boundaries with students and colleagues, but I should have the choice and autonomy in how I establish and maintain those boundaries. I’d like to see the evidence that using my personal smart phone to answer calls or texts from students violates an ethical boundary. In fact, I believe it makes me more accessible to my students. I started using text messaging with students many years ago, after working for a semester with a student who had a hearing disability. Texting was easier for the student to ask me questions, and allowed us to communicate outside of class without an interpreter. As a result of this experience, I developed guidelines for texting with students which I still follow today.
Further, many of the standards address the use of technology in practice settings without recognizing the parallel situations such as the “in-person” equivalent or the use of more commonplace technology. Considering Standard 5.10 as described above, this would suggest that social work educators should never give out their home phone to students or call students from their home phones. Further, this interpretation would suggest that educators not answer emails or access their institution’s learning management system from a home or personal computer or tablet. All of these options are impractical to me, and would result in an undue burden for the educator, especially adjunct educators who often use personal technology to communicate with students.
I would like to see these standards modified to offer practical, clear, and realistic guidelines that can be adopted and operationalized by both social workers and social service agencies across all practice settings. One of the groups I am working with to write group feedback has drafted this statement, which I believe provides an ideal general recommendation for how the draft standards can be re-framed:
The guidance provided by these technology standards should support aspirational goals related to technology use in our profession (including access, innovation, and consumer protection and voice), and encourage thoughtful and professional judgment related to technology use, while not directly specifying how one should carry out their use of technology in social work practice. To do so, limits innovation and will cause those who already practice outside the scope of these standards (or will in the near future as these standards become dated) to seek identity alignment outside of social work.
While you may agree or disagree with my interpretation of the draft standards, I urge you to read through the standards and give your feedback. This is your opportunity to join the conversation and give back to your professional community.
If you are interested in working with a group to provide feedback, here are two options:
Participate in the #MacroSW Twitter Chat on July 14th at 8:00 PM CST/ 9 PM EST when we will discuss the draft standards from a macro social work perspective. We will share the transcript with NASW.
Here are the details about how and when to submit your individual feedback:
TECHNOLOGY STANDARDS IN SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE – Draft released on 6/20/16
Description from NASW: The draft Technology Standards in Social Work Practice were developed jointly by the National Association of Social Workers, Association of Social Work Boards, Council on Social Work Education, and the Clinical Social Work Association to create a uniform set of practice guidelines for professional social workers who incorporate technology into their services. The draft standards were developed by a task force comprised of representatives from each of these social work organizations.
Request from NASW:
Your comments and feedback are requested to help make the technology standards a model best practice document for social workers. Please consider the following questions as you review the standards:
Are the standards easy to comprehend?
Are there any concepts that require clarification?
Are the standards applicable across social work practice levels and settings?
How relevant are the standards to current social work practice?
Submit your comments no later than July 20, 2016. Comments regarding the content of the draft standards are preferred rather than edits.
Here are two additional questions specific to the July 14th #MacroSW Twitter Chat:
What are ways you think macro-level social works should use technology?
What perspectives do social workers bring to the use of technology in the 21st century?
An edited version of the chat held April 14th can be found here.
New content in this post added after the chat:
Below the sources listed in this post, there are the additional resources that were tweeted during the chat.
On April 14 the American Academy of Social Work and Social Welfare (AASWSW) – @AASWSWorg and Pat Shelly – @UBSSW will co-host the #MacroSW Twitter Chat about smart decarceration, one of the Grand Challenges for Social Work.
Smart decarceration is a response to failed mass incarceration and rehabilitation policies, which have contributed to the United States holding 25% of the global prison population.
image: DUSTIN HOLMES | FLICKR
According to the White House, between 1988 and 2009, annual state corrections spending increased from $12 billion to $52 billion. Since 77% of prisoners are rearrested within five years of release, implementing effective reentry models can dramatically improve outcomes.
What are the Grand Challenges for Social Work?
Led by the AASWSW , the Grand Challenges for Social Work is a groundbreaking initiative to champion social progress powered by science. It is a call to action for social work researchers and practitioners to:
Harness social work’s science and knowledge base
Collaborate with individuals, community-based organizations, and professionals from all fields and disciplines
Partner to tackle some of our toughest social problems
We will address the following questions about smart decarceration:
What have been the effects of mass incarceration?
What are alternatives to mass incarceration?
What successful prison reentry models have you seen?
How do we move from mass incarceration to smart decarceration?
Please follow and use the hashtag #MacroSW on Thursday, April 14 at 9:00 p.m EDT.
Sources:(new ones from chat participants added below these original sources)
Here is a link to the Grand Challenge, Promote Smart Decarceration – at this link, click on the cover of the AASWSW Grand Challenges paper, “From Mass Incarceration to Smart Decarceration” to download a copy.
Links for the report’s authors:
Dr. Carrie Pettus-Davis bio Assistant Professor and Director, Concordance Institute for Advancing Social Justice, George Warren Brown School of Social Work, Washington University in St. Louis
Matthew W. Epperson bio
Assistant Professor, School of Social Service Administration, The University of Chicago
HIPAA compliant technology:
VSee – Word’s Largest VideoTelemedicine Platform for HIPAA compliant video visits. https://vsee.com/Dr. Joiner of Wayne State describes it: “VSee is a version of videoconferencing (we use it w/ our online students when holding synchronous meetings). VSee is a great tool to continue the conversation and 2 engage beyond the traditional classroom .”
Image: Smyth, N.J. (2015). Trauma-Informed Social Work: What is it, and Why Should We Care? [PowerPoint slides]. All social workers and other professionals who work with people who have experienced trauma are at risk of being personally impacted by that trauma. Secondary traumatic stress (STS), vicarious trauma (VT) and re-traumatization are common among helping professionals. When we hear the term trauma-informed care we typically think about how to avoid re-traumatizing our clients.
But what about considering a trauma-informed approach to the systems in which we work?
On February 18, 2016, the #MacroSW chat will discuss systems-level change to avoid re-traumatizing not only our clients but ourselves as social workers, as staff and as nonprofit entities. Through our understanding of Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs), we know that adult health can be negatively impacted by traumatic experiences in the early years. ACEs also affect our thoughts, behaviors, actions and reactions as individuals, as employees and as leaders. Can we start to address ACEs with system-wide policies and practices that may minimize that impact in later years? A trauma-informed workplace can help not only our clients but our staff in minimizing re-traumatization.
Pat Shelly of the University at Buffalo School of Social Work @UBSSW will host with guest Shelley Hitzel @UBittic.
Shelley Hitzel, Univ. at Buffalo Institute for Trauma and Trauma-Informed Care Intern
Since 2010, Shelley has worked at the Child Advocacy Center of Niagara in Niagara Falls, NY, as a member of a multidisciplinary team providing direct services to both child and adult survivors of trauma. Shelley completed UB’s Trauma Counseling Certificate Program in 2012. Currently, she is an Advanced Standing MSW student and an intern at the UB Institute on Trauma and Trauma-Informed Care. She has participated in aome of our past chats, representing ITTIC.
Questions for discussion:
What is Secondary Traumatic Stress (STS)? What is Vicarious Trauma?
What is re-traumatization?
How can systems be considered to be traumatized or traumatizing?
How can we build systems to prevent re-traumatization across all levels?
Policy – What is TIC policy?
For information about how to participate in the #MacroSW chat, view our FAQs.
![Smyth, N.J. (2015). Trauma-Informed Social Work: What is it, and Why Should We Care? [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved from http://www.slideshare.net/njsmyth/toronto-tic-june-2015-handout](https://macrosw.files.wordpress.com/2016/02/retraumatizaton-by-systems-njs.jpg)
