The U.S.A. Patriot Act and theErosion of Human Rights: AVital Issue for the Profession.......................................... 1
From the Editor: Speaking Out onHuman Rights ..................... 2
Latino Foster Parents: Strategiesfor Developing CulturallySensitive Practice ................. 3
Book Review ............................ 7
Observations of an American RedCross, Disaster Mental HealthServices Volunteer—TheSocial Injustice of Disasters.......................................... 8
THE U.S.A. PATRIOT ACT AND THE EROSIONOF HUMAN RIGHTS: A VITAL ISSUE FOR THE PROFESSION
See Issue, Page 13
Beth Lewis, DSW
The U.S.A. Patriot Act was passed shortlyafter Sept. 11, 2001, purportedly to easethe apprehension of terrorists. It givesgovernment agencies sweeping powers,including the ability to conduct secretsearches, have increased access to classi-fied records, and order prolonged deten-tions. Particularly affected are immigrants,refugees, and minorities who, under theAct’s provisions, can be detained forextended periods without notice of thecharges against them (Lawyers Committeefor Human Rights [LCHR], 2003).
It is important that members of the socialwork profession are knowledgeable aboutthe erosion of basic human rights asafforded by United States law and policy.The provisions of the Patriot Act couldpotentially be applied to social workerswho are currently, or have at any time,engaged in social change efforts to pro-mote social justice with and on behalf ofclients; as one commentator has described,these efforts “could be interpreted by theadministration as endangering domesticsecurity” (Chang, 2001). Social workerswho provide services to immigrants,refugees, and other communities targetedfor surveillance and detention should beaware of the potential impact of the Acton these groups, and should join othercommunity-based efforts to address theportions of the Act that deny individualsbasic human rights.
This article summarizes components of thePatriot Act, and provides informationabout avenues for social action throughwhich members may add their voices. Suchefforts are aimed at restoring civil libertiesand basic human rights, and scaling backthe changes brought about by the Act thatgive increased executive authority inmatters of domestic surveillance.
Components of the U.S.A.Patriot Act
Personal privacySome of the most glaring encroachmentson civil liberties include the Patriot Act’sprovision for the United States governmentto obtain the personal records of anyonerelated to a terrorism investigation. Underthe Act, the FBI may secretly accessAmericans’ personal information—such aslibrary, medical, Internet, telephone,education, and financial records—withouthaving to show that the person targetedfor this surveillance has any involvementwith terrorism or espionage. The FBI cansearch and even seize someone’s property,without notifying him or her of either thesearch or the seizure for up to two weeks,and can tap into a suspect’s electroniccommunications—from cell phones andcomputers, to personal digital assistants—allowing for some of this to be done under
2 Spring 2004 • Poverty & Social Justice SectionConnection
THE NEWSLETTER OF THE NASW SECTIONON POVERTY & SOCIAL JUSTICE
Poverty &Social Justice
SectionConnection
From the EditorSPEAKING OUT ON HUMAN RIGHTS
My apartment overlooks the site of the print shop where ThomasPaine’s Common Sense was printed in 1776. Yes, it is a parking lotnow. In fact my truck is parked there. But the revolutionary visionand dexterous argument articulated by Paine continue to seep intomy consciousness as I gaze out the window. The following wordsfrom Paine’s introduction to his most influential tract seem apt forthis issue of our newsletter:
Perhaps the sentiments contained in the following pages arenot yet sufficiently fashionable to procure them general favor;a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superfi-cial appearance of being right, and raises at first a formidableoutcry in defence [sic.] of custom. But tumult soon subsides.Time makes more converts than reason (Paine, 1776).
There is a common thread stitching this edition of the newslettertogether: It is the concept of basic human rights and, particularly,economic human rights. This collection of articles draws attentionto rights denied and threatened. I believe that it is urgent that everysocial worker be clear about the dangers we face. Indeed, we havehad “a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong.”
A stealth attack on the very concept of rights and entitlements wasrevealed in the popular press by business leaders and “intellectuals”in the 1980s (Baptist & Bricker-Jenkins, 2001). As Beth Lewispoints out in her article, the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001created a climate for the acceleration of the abrogation of rights; butwe must be clear that time—as well as spectacularly manipulatedprejudices and fears—had already won many converts to abolishingrights. Welfare “reform,” and even some aspects of the Adoptionand Safe Families Act—notably, both supported by a Democraticpresident in 1996—represent a defining moment in recent history ofthe dissolution of the very concept of rights for all U.S. residents.
Poor folks and “bad” parents were the visible targets; eliminatingtheir rights and entitlements was politically “acceptable.” But mostof us were unaware of the trajectory of history, and were alsounaware of the fact that the very scaffolding for the continuedconstruction of a rights-based society was being disassembled for allof us.
Today, we cannot afford to be less than clear on these points. BethLewis warns that the Patriot Act could be used to quell activism
See Editor, Page 12
Poverty & Social Justice SectionConnection • Spring 2004 3
The number of Latino children entering out-of-home placement has been increasing, andwill continue to rise, as Latinos now consti-tute the fastest growing ethnic minority groupin the United States. However, the number ofLatino families available to care for thesechildren has not kept pace with the need forLatino foster families. The longer a childremains in a home that is not linguisticallyand culturally syntonic to his or her culture,the greater the likelihood that that child willdevelop problems of low self-esteem and poorself-identity. The Adoption and Safe FamiliesAct (ASFA) and the Multiethnic PlacementAct (MEPA) were created to provide stabilityto children, and to encourage states to recruitfoster families that reflect the racial/ethnicidentity of children in the states’ child welfaresystems.
In New Jersey, the Child Advocacy ResourceAssociation of New Jersey (CARAS) wascreated to advocate for Latino children andfamilies. The goal of CARAS was to expandthe pool of Latino foster families in HudsonCounty, one of the areas in the state with thehighest concentrations of Latinos. This paperwill describe the model that was developed torecruit families, and the barriers Latinos faceas they attempt to become foster parents. Therecommendations presented here can guidepolicy decisions to develop best practices forthe support of Latino children in care, and forthe strengthening of Latino families.
SociodemographicCharacteristics of LatinosLatinos*, as projected by a number of studies,have become the largest ethnic minority in theUnited States. The number of Latinos hasbeen growing nationally since the 1990Census; New Jersey, like the rest of the
country, has seen a tremendous growth in theLatino population. By the year 2000, theLatino population in New Jersey was 13.3percent of the total population, and num-bered nearly 1.1 million, in contrast to 9.6percent and nearly 740,000 in 1990—agrowth rate of 51 percent (U.S. CensusBureau, 2001).
Puerto Ricans remain the largest single ethnicgroup of all Latinos in New Jersey and thelargest constituency served by Latino commu-nity based organizations. While Cubans havedeclined in numbers over the last decade, thenumber of Mexican and other Central andSouth American immigrants has climbeddramatically, accounting for the overallincrease of Latinos in New Jersey. Latinos areconcentrated in six counties: Hudson, Passaic,Essex, Union, Middlesex, and Camden. InHudson County, for example, of the 608,975total population in 2000, 39.8 percent—or242,770 people—were Latino residents. Ofthe County’s 12 municipalities, Union City,with an 82.3 percent Latino population, hasthe largest concentration of Latinos, followedby West New York with 78.7 percent, andNorth Bergen with 57.3 percent.
Latino Children and PovertyThere were 328,819 Latino children underthe age of 18 living in New Jersey in 1999. Ofthese children, 22.5 percent (73,953) wereliving in poverty. The highest numbers ofpoor children (15,339) were living in HudsonCounty. Of Latino children under five yearsof age, 21,128 were poor (A. Sherman,[Children’s Defense Fund], personal commu-nication, October 2003). Hudson County hadthe highest number of all children living inpoverty in New Jersey, at 22 percent.
See Foster Parents, Page 4
4 Spring 2004 • Poverty & Social Justice SectionConnection
Neither their parents’ marital status nor laborforce participation could protect Latinochildren from poverty. The rates of povertyamong children of married couples rangedfrom 24.2 percent in Newark to 18.5 percentin Trenton. The rates of labor force participa-tion were also high: 50 percent or higher formothers with children under 18 years of age.Data show that Latino children living in two-parent families where the mother is in thelabor force are not immune from living inpoverty (U.S. Census Bureau, 1990). Theconcentration of high rates of poverty amongLatinos in Hudson County may account forthe increasing number of Latino childrenentering the foster care system.
Poverty and Out-of-HomePlacementChild welfare literature (Gelles, 1996; Weil &Finegold, 2002) identifies poverty as one ofthe major risk factors for child abuse andneglect. Poverty places tremendous strains onfamilies to be able to cope with lack ofresources for food, housing, medical, andeducational expenses. For those childrenliving in female-headed households, theirchances of being poor are greater. Forexample: “New Jersey children living with asingle female householder have a one in threechance of being poor. Racial disparitiesfurther impact these rates: the chance that aBlack or Latino child living in a female-headed household will experience poverty isnearly one in two” (Mateo & Miller, 2003, p.21).
The number of children in out-of-homeplacement in New Jersey exceeded 9,000 in2003. This figure does not include the morethan 50,000 children receiving case manage-ment services while remaining with theirfamilies (Iadanza & O’Leary, 2003). Aprimary focus of CARAS is to draw attentionto the needs of Latino children in out-of-home placement. One of the first concerns wediscovered in 1999 was the need for Latino
foster families in New Jersey. Latino fosterfamilies help to maintain a child’s culturalidentity. The trauma of out-of-home place-ment is reduced when children are placed inhomes where parents are familiar with thechildren’s culture and language (Perez Foster,1998).
In 1999, there were 449 Latino children infoster care and 221 Latino families availablefor these children, with the majority (65percent) of Latino children placed in non-Latino homes. As Table 1 shows, the pool ofLatino foster homes has not kept pace withthe number of Latino children entering thefoster care system. Because of the disparitybetween the number of Latino children inout-of-home placement and the number ofavailable bilingual/bicultural foster homeproviders, CARAS developed the LatinoFoster Care Recruitment Model.
Latino Foster Care RecruitmentModelWith a grant from the Division of Youth andFamily Services (DYFS), CARAS, in collabo-ration with Kean University and New JerseyFoster and Adoptive Family Services (FAFS),developed the Latino Foster Care Recruit-ment and Retention Model (see page 6). Thegoal was to recruit Latino foster families inHudson County, an area with the highestconcentration of Latinos in New Jersey. Anumber of major barriers were uncovered aswe began the operations of our project.Among them were the following:
Barriers to Recruitment ofLatino Foster Parents
• Language barriers: There is a lack ofSpanish language materials, includingthe six-page foster care applicationform.
• Lack of sufficient on-site interpreters: Atdifferent points of the recruitment,orientation, foster parent training,
Foster Parents, from Page 3
Poverty & Social Justice SectionConnection • Spring 2004 5
See Foster Parents, Page 7
certification, and retention process,families will need assistance provided tothem in a language that they under-stand. In a 12-month period only oneSpanish language foster care orientationsession was offered in Hudson County.Foster parent training in Spanish wasoffered sporadically or outside thecommunity where travel was difficultfor families.
• Lack of sufficient numbers of bilingual/bicultural child welfare workers toconduct orientation, Parents as TenderHealers (PATH) training sessions, andhome studies: In a 12-month period,only one Spanish language foster careorientation (mandatory for Englishspeaking parents) session was offered inHudson County.
• Complex recruitment and certificationprocess: Families interface with at leastfour or five agencies or units in agenciesbefore they are certified (CARAS, FAFS,DYFS, foster care unit, bureau oflicensing), and other outside contractorsif necessary for home studies.
• Lengthy certification process: Ourresearch shows that, on average, 12to15 months elapse between the time afamily makes an inquiry, to the timethey are certified. Several familiesrecruited by CARAS have been waitingmore than one year to have a homestudy completed.
• Misunderstanding of foster care in theHispanic community: For a variety ofreasons (lack of bilingual personnel,poor outreach, diverse cultural under-standing of child welfare issues),Hispanics need better clarification andconceptual understanding between out-of-home care and family daycare.
Many of the barriers identified in the recruit-ment and certification of Latino fosterparents have been document by CARAS and
addressed by DYFS. Increased communica-tion between our community based projectand DYFS staff have resolved some of themajor barriers families faced. Our staff hasalso assumed more responsibilities, includingconducting the orientation sessions and fosterparent training in Spanish at sites convenientto Latino families. Our practice and researchcontinues to focus on areas that will improveaccess and service delivery to Latino familieswho are interested in supporting Latinochildren coming into the foster care system.
ConclusionThe growing Latino population in the UnitedStates, and the increasing number of childrenin out-of-home placement, behooves us tocontinue to explore best practices for work-ing with Latino families. Poverty, even amongworking families, continues to plague thiscommunity. Social work practice and socialwelfare policies that enhance the lives of allchildren and families should be the goal of allprograms. The importance of bilingualworkers who understand the language andculture of families is crucial to success withLatino families. Using targeted recruitmentefforts and developing collaborative partner-ships are important in the development ofcommunity capacity. An integrated system of
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
01 2
1999 2003
Table 1Hispanic Children in Foster Care and Hispanic Foster Care Providers
Hispanic Children in Foster Care
Foster Families
6 Spring 2004 • Poverty & Social Justice SectionConnection
Child Advocacy Resource AssociationLatino Foster Care Recruitment Model
Staffing
Targeted Recruitment
Orientation Session
Foster Parent Training
Home Study/Certification
Retention
Hire Bilingual/Bicultural Staff.Hire staff with knowledge of community systems.Ensure staff has Child Protective Services experience.Offer a flexible work schedule.
Identify areas with large concentrations of Latinos.Develop materials in language the Latino community understandsWork with community systems that Latinos have access to, such
as churches, schools, daycare centers.Identify systems that have a built in support network—i.e.
Women’s Church Group; Parent Teacher Associations; civicorganizations; coalition of pastors; Latino agency executives.
Run stories in Spanish print media and public service announce-ments on Spanish radio and TV programs.
Face to face contact works best.
Provide thorough information on foster care programs.Use Question and Answer period to illustrate how the foster care
training and certification operates in a bureaucracy—i.e., theprocess can be lengthy.
Use session to stress the safety of children and to screen forfamilies with CPS experience.
Conduct all training in Spanish.Use materials, videos, and other training materials that have
been translated into Spanish.Use informal experiential teaching style rather than lecture
format.Encourage group process and group problem solving methods.Assist members to develop their own support network.Acknowledge their positive parenting styles and support of
children in need of care.
Agencies contracted to conduct home studies should havebilingual/bicultural staff.
Awareness of concepts of ‘respeto’ (respect for those in authority)and ‘dignidad’ (dignity and worth of every individual) areimportant to know when visiting Latino homes.
Support families as they negotiate requests to providers forreferences and varied forms needed for completion of homestudies.
Keep families abreast of how home study process is proceeding.
Work is not completed when child is placed in the home.Make use of local community based organizations—they have
an array of supportive services, which could be “wrappedaround” Latino families.
Poverty & Social Justice SectionConnection • Spring 2004 7
See Review, Page 8
Foster Parents, from Page 5
identification, recruitment, and retention offoster families is in the best interest of Latinochildren and families.
* “Latino” and “Hispanic” are used to referto persons of Hispanic origin from Mexico,Puerto Rico, Cuba, and Central and SouthAmerica. Latino is a self-designated term bymembers of different groups. Latino andHispanic are used interchangeably withoutpreference or prejudice.
Doris Correa Capello, DSW is Assistant Professor,Kean University of New Jersey Social WorkDepartment. She can be contacted [email protected]
ReferencesChildren’s Defense Fund. (2003). Child Poverty for
Latino Children in New Jersey NJOOH. ArlocSherman email communication, October, 2003.
BOOK REVIEWThe Dynamics of Social Welfare PolicyBy Joel Blau (with Mimi Abramovitz)Oxford University Press, New York, NY518 pp.Reviewed by Janice Andrews-Schenk, PhD, MSW, LICSW
The Dynamics of Social Welfare Policy, byJoel Blau (with three chapters written byMimi Abramovitz), is a comprehensive policytext written primarily for social work stu-dents. This book is an outstanding additionto the policy literature available to those whoteach in social work education.
As chair of the MSW policy content area at aschool of social work, I am particularlypleased to find a book that provides aframework for analyzing policy that speaksto all social workers, regardless of whichclient systems they serve. The clear message isthat all social work practice emerges from
policy. To best serve one’s client system—individual, group, family, or community—one needs to understand the social problemsclients face, and the ways in which socialpolicies have framed these problems. Thistext is probably best suited for graduatestudents; however, it could be effectively usedin an undergraduate program with a strongpolicy focus.
The main purpose of social welfare policy isto reduce economic insecurity. Underlyingpremises about social welfare policy are
Gelles, R. J. (1996). The book of David: How preservingfamilies can cost children’s lives. NY: Basic Books.
Iadanza, M. D. & O’Leary, B. (2003). DYFS QuarterlyDemographics Reports [DARS-SISQ-11/12]. Trenton,NJ: Department of Human Services InterofficeCommunication.
Mateo, K. & Miller, M. D. (2003). A desperate andwidening divide: The concurrent increase in poverty,income, and inequality in New Jersey. Edison, NJ:New Jersey Legal Defense Fund.
Perez Foster, R. (1998). The power of language in theclinical process: Assessing and treating the bilingualperson. NY: Aranson.
U.S. Census Bureau. (1990). Census of population andhousing summary Tape File 3, Profile 1. Washington,DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2001). The Hispanic population:Census 2000 brief. [Online]. Retrieved fromwww.census.gov/prod/2001pubs/c2kbr01-3.pdf onFebruary 6, 2004.
Weil, A. & Finegold, K. (eds). (2002). Welfare reform:The next act. Washington, DC: The Urban InstitutePress.
8 Spring 2004 • Poverty & Social Justice SectionConnection
Review, from Page 7
articulated. For example, social workers needto understand the factors shaping policy andthe knowledge of income security, employ-ment, housing, health, and food, becausethese issues permeate the field of social workpractice. Additionally, social workers need tograsp the fluidity of policy and acknowledgethat change is a given. Conflict and tensionwill accompany change, and what surfacesdetermines policy development.
A policy analysis model is presented thatfocuses on the economy, politics and thestructure of government, ideology, socialmovements, and history, and outlines forpractitioners what promotes good practice, aswell as what might impede it.
Similar to other policy texts on the market,Blau addresses the political functions ofsocial welfare from a number of ideologies,ranging from conservatism to radicalism. Animportant addition, however, is the feministideology with a succinct description offeminism from liberal to socialist. In recentyears, there has been a backlash against agendered perspective; it is heartening to see itgiven a respectful analysis in this book. Moreimportantly, Blau, with Abromovitz, helpsthe reader understand that, while the various
ideologies seem dramatically different, theirdistinct differences tend to blur at somepoint. Readers are encouraged to think ofideological categories, not as absolutelyopposing views, but more as guides forunderstanding social welfare issues.
Blau assists the reader in understanding theconstruction of a social problem, how anissue gets chosen as a problem, how—and bywhom—it is framed, and what theoryexplains it. Who chooses it and defines itresults in a policy that may or may not agreewith the social worker’s perspective on theissue. Social workers are not necessarily atthe table when this process occurs; yet, theyare left to implement the often-flawed policy.
Blau acknowledges that the social workprofession has not always contributed to thewell-being of those they serve. Including thisbook in a policy class could move us in thedirection of a more responsible professionthat tends to all levels of practice with agreater understanding of the impact of policydecisions on direct practice.
Janice Andrews-Schenk, PhD, MSW, LICSW, isprofessor of social work at the School of Social Work,University of St. Thomas, in St. Paul, Minn. She can bereached at [email protected]
OBSERVATIONS OF AN AMERICAN RED CROSS,DISASTER MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES VOLUNTEER—THE SOCIAL INJUSTICE OF DISASTERS
Nadine Bean, PhD, LCSW-C
Social work has always been my calling. Formany years before becoming a full timefaculty member, I worked in families’ homesand in their communities in the areas of earlyintervention and child welfare. Often, Iworked with traumatized individuals andfamilies—families whose lives had been tornasunder by interpersonal violence and hostileenvironments. On September 11, 2001, my
calling became an overwhelming feeling ofsocial responsibility.
On September 12, 2001, I called the RedCross to volunteer my services as a mentalhealth professional, to support the survivorsof the World Trade Center attacks in NewYork City. I was told that I needed to betrained in Disaster Mental Health Services.
Poverty & Social Justice SectionConnection • Spring 2004 9
See Observations, Page 10
On November 8 and 9, 2001, I was privi-leged to be among a group of 35 mentalhealth professionals from across the countrywho convened in Philadelphia for the special-ized training.
Most of those professionals boarded trainsand headed for New York City and the areasaround “Ground Zero” at the end of thesecond day of training. I volunteered to go upduring the post-holiday period in earlyJanuary, when I thought symptoms of PostTraumatic Stress Disorder were likely topeak. On January 11, 2002, I was called bythe Disaster Mental Health Volunteer Coor-dinator at the American Red Cross, South-eastern Pennsylvania chapter to go to NewYork, and went with trepidation and muchdetermination.
I was hoping to give back in some way, to thesurvivors, the type of support that my familyand I received from mental health andphysical health professionals in early 2001,when my 18-year-old daughter was recover-ing from a serious auto accident. She sufferedseveral broken vertebra and had severalstrokes. She can walk, and is taking a coupleof college courses now, months and monthssooner than any of the medical and mentalhealth professionals originally predicted. Mydaughter closely identified with the victimstrapped in the World Trade Center, andwanted me to go and help these people. Forher, I went willingly.
When I arrived in New York City, what Ifound were incredibly inspiring stories ofstrength, courage, and survival. I also foundsome of the most traumatized individuals andfamilies I had ever worked with. The initialoutpouring of public support, post- Septem-ber 11th and through the holiday period hadbuoyed many persons. Now, the people Iworked with were just moving back into theirapartments and condominiums in and aroundGround Zero, and the reality of their devas-tating losses was setting in—ranging fromhaving lost loved ones or friends in the
disaster, to having been severely injured andstruggling with recovery, to the loss ofmaterial goods that had been covered in afoot of powdery, brownish ash. Some ofthose who had been displaced found thatthey could not continue to live or work inbuildings that once had breath-taking viewsof Liberty Island, the Hudson River, and theWorld Trade Center.
I held people in my arms as they cried andrecounted how they ran for their lives,blindly, that day. I helped people move out ofonce, glorious, residential high rises and intothe “safety” of hotel rooms for rest andrespite. I made “no-suicide” pacts with somewho had lost everything—all belongings,jobs, friends, security. I visited secretaries andother skilled laborers who had run for theirlives out of their job sites in the World TradeCenter and, subsequently, had been unable toleave their apartments for months, due tosevere, post-traumatic stress disorder.
I played with children with chronic“coughs,” as their parents filled out formafter form for assistance from the Red Crossto replace the material goods that they hadlost. For hours, I entertained children whostood with their parents in assistance lines inthe frigid cold. Many of them could barelyspeak English, and had lost their jobs asmaintenance workers, cleaning staff, secretar-ies, and cab drivers because of the devasta-tion in lower Manhattan. I realized, on myfirst assignment in my work with the RedCross, that disasters, whether man-made ornatural, disproportionately affected thosewho are socially and economically disenfran-chised in our society.
As I worked at family services centers thathad been set-up in some of the high risebuildings in lower Manhattan, I noticed thatthe crews who were coming in to “superclean” apartments filled with ash frombuildings and bodies, were mostly non-
10 Spring 2004 • Poverty & Social Justice SectionConnection
Observations, from Page 9
English speaking people. They came inwithout any masks or protective gear at all.They came in with pre-school children in tow.Those of us working with the Red Cross,Family Services Division, tried to reach out tothese workers—to tell them that they wereprobably entitled to some assistance from theRed Cross. However, most were very wary ofus and declined. Many of us surmised thatthese workers were probably illegal aliens,received poverty-level wages, and wereworried that Red Cross workers wouldreport them to the INS. I have since won-dered how many of these people are sufferingwith chronic, medical conditions like eye,skin, or lung problems, as a result of doingthe cleaning in these buildings.
Since January 2002, I have continued in mywork as a Red Cross Disaster Mental HealthServices Volunteer. I am on-call one weekenda month for the Southeastern PennsylvaniaAmerican Red Cross Chapter for localdisasters. Even in this capacity, I have noticedthat the economically and socially oppressedare disproportionately affected by disasterson the local level, whether fires or floods.
I most recently served families in southernChester County, in Pennsylvania, who weredisplaced from their homes due to torrentialrains and flooding pre- and post-HurricaneIsabel (in September 2003). All of the familieswho were in the shelter that I worked at wereMexican, migrant farm working families.There is a significant population of thesefamilies in this, the wealthiest (per capita)county in Pennsylvania, working the localmushroom farms. Of course, they live insubstandard apartment buildings and lean-tos.
I heard stories from some rescue workerswho had paddled out in boats to the dilapi-dated row houses of these impoverishedfamilies. They recounted that the adults wereextremely wary of Red Cross rescue workersand many fled, swimming or running throughchest high waters, rather than be taken into
rescue boats, because they feared thatsomehow the INS would deport them. Theydid not know that the Red Cross servesanyone in need of the basic human rights ofshelter, food, water, and medical care,without regard to income, citizen status, orethnic group. There were children in tempo-rary shelters, American citizens, going toschool and speaking the English language,who did not know where their parents were.
These experiences have made me realize thatthe United States is woefully behind manyother countries in the world in terms ofeconomic human rights. Those whose rightsare in jeopardy or denied altogether are mostat risk for devastating loss in disasters.
As most social workers know, the UnitedNations, with the guidance of some incred-ible leaders around the world, includingEleanor Roosevelt in the United States,passed the Universal Declaration of HumanRights shortly after the end of World War II.That Declaration recognizes a number ofcentral, social and economic human rightsincluding the right to education, food, workunder just, favorable conditions, health,housing, and security. The term security, inthe U.N. Declaration of Human Rights refers,in part, to economic security in the event of“unemployment, sickness, disability, widow-hood, old age or other lack of livelihood incircumstances beyond a person’s control”(UDHR Articles 22 & 25).
Certainly, disasters like 9/11, forest fires, orflooding are circumstances beyond a person’scontrol. If the United States had fully ratifiedthe U.N. Declaration of Human Rights, thefear and distrust that I have seen on alienworkers’ faces, when offered assistance bythe Red Cross, might be lessened. In themeantime, all I can do is continue to educatemy fellow Red Cross workers and anypersons whom I cross paths with, sociallyand professionally, about the importance ofassuring economic human rights in thiscountry. Only with assured economic human
Poverty & Social Justice SectionConnection • Spring 2004 11
rights, can all who need assistance in the faceof disaster seek and receive the assistancethey deserve.
Nadine Bean, PhD, LCSW-C is an Assistant Professor inthe Graduate Social Work Department of West ChesterUniversity of Pennsylvania. Dr. Bean also serves WestChester University in the capacity of Faculty Senatorfrom the School of Business and Public Affairs, as VicePresident and Program Chair of the Faculty Research
Consortium, as a LGBT Ally, and as a member of thePresident’s Alliance for Alcohol and Other Drug Abuseand Violence Prevention. She serves the social workprofession in a number of local, state, and nationalpositions with the National Association of SocialWorkers. Dr. Bean is a Certified, Disaster MentalHealth Services Technician with the American RedCross and served in New York City in the aftermath ofthe World Trade Center. She can be contacted [email protected] or (610) 436-3253.
REBELLIOUS SPIRIT: GISELA KONOPKA(1910-2003)Janice Andrews-Schenk, PhD, MSW, LICSW(Reprinted with permission from NASW-MN News, January 2003.)Gisela Konopka died on December 9, 2003,two months shy of her 94th birthday. Herfriends, colleagues, and students will remem-ber her as someone who had the ability—whether in a small classroom, a large audito-rium, or a prison reception area—to create anatmosphere that convinced others thatchange was possible.
A rebel and fighter since childhood, Gisatook the worst that humans can experienceand turned it into a philosophy of love andtolerance for others. She was born in Berlinbefore World War I; came of age during theturbulent 20s and 30s; and fought against therising power of the Nazis in pre-World War IIGermany, Austria, and France. She and heractivist future husband, E. Paul Konopka,became refugees in southern France until1941, when they moved to the United States.
They lived in Pittsburgh—where Gisa earnedher graduate degree in social work at theUniversity of Pittsburgh—for six years. Sheworked at the Pittsburgh Child GuidanceCenter, where she advanced the concept oftherapeutic group work in the social workfield and successfully fought to have socialworkers recognized as professionals who aretrained to do psychiatric work in the context
of a group. At the same time, she never lostsight of the importance of the group to notonly help the individual, but to also help thegroup as a whole and society, as well.
Gisa, along with her husband, moved toMinnesota in 1947 where she accepted ateaching position at the University of Minne-sota School of Social Work. She earned herDSW from Columbia University in 1957. Inthe late 1960s, she moved into administrationat the University, and served as assistant tothe vice-president for student affairs, andcoordinator of regional programs for theCenter for Urban and Regional Affairs. In1970, she founded the Center for YouthStudies and Research at the University, anddirected it until her retirement in 1978.
Her legacy continues through the work of theKonopka Institute for Best Practices withAdolescents at the University. Recently, shemade a $1 million legacy gift to the Univer-sity of Minnesota to establish the Gisela andE. Paul Konopka Chair in Adolescent Healthand Development. She also established ascholarship at the School of Social Work.
See Konopka, Page 12
12 Spring 2004 • Poverty & Social Justice SectionConnection
among social workers and others. Already wecan see that the climate has changed; acolleague of mine got a chilling letter fromthe Pennsylvania Attorney General’s officefollowing her arrest for civil disobedience,insinuating that further arrests could lead tosuspension or revocation of her license topractice (Jones, 2002).
But the articles in this issue offer somethingelse—sentiments “not yet sufficiently fashion-able to procure them general favor.” Theseare sentiments that the notion of rights, whileunder attack, is as tenacious as the dandelion.Nadine Bean points out that the United Statesnever fully endorsed the United Nation’sUniversal Declaration of Human Rights(UDHR). Two treaties were derived from theUDHR, the Covenant on Civil and PoliticalRights and the Covenant of Economic,Social, and Cultural Rights. The US signedand ratified the former. President Cartersigned the latter, but to this day it languishesin the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Nevertheless, the notion that certain condi-tions in this country—conditions abhorrent
to social workers—are violations of eco-nomic, social, and cultural rights, is a notionthat is gaining traction. Nadine Bean uses aneconomic human rights framework to fix ourattention on the “disappeared” in disastersand the barriers to engagement that socialworkers must address.
Doris Capello links economic and culturalrights of Latinos in the foster care system,examining the consequences of denial of theright to a linguistically and culturally syn-tonic home, and suggesting ways that thevery right to communicate can be preservedand promoted.
Janice Andrews’ review of Joel Blau’s newtext on social policy underscores the centralidea in the book—that the overarchingpurpose of social welfare policy is to reduceeconomic insecurity. In other words, policy isabout protecting and promoting the rightslisted by Blau, which include income security,employment, health, housing, and food.Finally, Andrews’ moving obituary of GiselaKonopka reminds us that this gracious, self-effacing woman was known in world circles
Editor, from Page 2
Konopka, from Page 11
Gisa was one of the most influential intellec-tuals and activists of the 20th century in thefields of social work, group work, adolescenthealth, and corrections. She was an interna-tionally recognized expert on adolescent girls.Her seven books and hundreds of articleswere translated into a dozen languages, andare still in use today. She lectured worldwideon issues of human rights. She also playedpivotal roles in several social work organiza-tions including the American Association ofGroup Workers, the National Association ofSocial Workers, and the Council on SocialWork Education. She was one of the firstwomen to be elected president of the Ameri-can Orthopsychiatric Association. Gisa isknown as the “Mother of Group Work” inGermany, and was instrumental in rebuilding
the German child welfare system after WorldWar II. Yet, she felt most at home in her oldhouse on the hill overlooking Lake Calhoun,where she and Paul sheltered youths, wel-comed people from around the world,listened to and supported the disenfranchised,and built coalitions around issues of justiceand humane treatment. Wonderful, oftenhumorous “Gisa stories” abounded during aprivate memorial service held on December14, 2003. A public memorial service was heldon Friday, January 9, 2003, at 10 a.m., onthe campus of the University of Minnesota(McNamra Hall).
Janice Andrews-Schenk, PhD, MSW, LICSW, isprofessor of social work at the School of Social Work,University of St. Thomas, in St. Paul, Minn. She can bereached at [email protected]
Poverty & Social Justice SectionConnection • Spring 2004 13
See Issue, Page 14
search warrants issued by a secret court.Further, the Patriot Act makes it a crime toreveal that the FBI has conducted any suchsearch. For example, a librarian who speaksout against having to participate in such asearch can be subject to prosecution (LCHR,2003).
Immigrants, refugees, and minoritiesAccording to a comprehensive report issuedby the Lawyers Committee for HumanRights, the impact of the Patriot Act hasoccurred in five general areas: governmentopenness, personal privacy, immigration,security-related detention, and the effect ofU.S. actions on human rights standardsaround the world (LCHR, 2003). While all ofthese are areas of concern, the treatment ofimmigrants and refugees is particularlydeserving of our attention.
The U.S.A. Patriot Act conflates immigrantstatus with terrorist status (Chang, 2001),
with immigrants now being viewed as aprimary threat to national security. Under theAct, non-citizens may be detained for sevendays without charges. Arab, Muslim, andSouth Asian minorities have been particularlysingled out for detention sweeps, although—importantly—these efforts have not appearedto ensure further safety. Of the 1,200 peopledetained in connection with the 9/11 investi-gations, 762 were detained solely on the basisof civil immigration violations (LCHR,2003). Under the provisions of the Act, suchindividuals could have no recourse to anyindependent civilian court, and instead willhave their fate decided by military personnelwho report directly to the president, depend-ing on whether they have been determined tobe an “enemy combatant,” or are designatedas another type of criminal suspect.
According to the LCHR report:There is no pretense of the U.S. duty to
Issue, from Page 1
as an expert on human rights—rights that shesaw disassembled as the Nazis rose to powerin Germany in the 1930s.
We see much commentary today—frombumper stickers to esoteric essays—likeningthis moment and this regime to the Nazi era.A deep study of history is needed to revealthe truth of the comparison. But a deep studyof history will reveal another set of truths—that the concept of rights has, at times,moved the people of this country towardjustice, and that common people using theircommon sense can, over time, embrace“unfashionable” notions. That we canrebuild this country on a framework ofeconomic human rights is such a notion.
Thomas Paine reminds us that “time makesmore converts than reason.” So let us, if wemust, be unreasonable in our demands, andtrust that the time we take to reclaim the very
notion of human rights will win over con-verts.
I wish to thank Beth Lewis for stepping in asco-editor when my workload became unman-ageable. Her support exemplifies collegiality.
Mary Bricker-Jenkins, PhD, ACSWCo-editor, Poverty and Social Justice SectionConnection
ReferencesBaptist, W., & Bricker-Jenkins, M. (2001). A view from
the bottom: Poor people and their allies respond towelfare reform. Annals of the American Academy ofPolitical Science, 577, pp 144-156.
Jones, J. (2002, May/June). Social work is makingsociety work for everyone. The Pennsylvania SocialWorker, newsletter of the National Association ofSocial Workers—Pennsylvania Chapter.
Paine, T. (1776). Common Sense. [Online]. Retrievedfrom http://www.constitution.org/civ/comsense.htmon January 31, 2004.
14 Spring 2004 • Poverty & Social Justice SectionConnection
Issue, from Page 13
adhere to international law, includingthe Geneva Convention protection forprisoners of war in these cases. Theexpansive wording of the decision raisesconcerns that the administration mayseek to deny broader categories ofimmigration detainees any individual-ized assessment of whether theirdetention is necessary whenever theexecutive contends that nationalsecurity interests are implicated (LCHR,2003).
The LCHR report points out that the U.S.program to resettle refugees has “long been amodel for states all over the world, a re-minder of the country’s founding as a havenfor the persecuted. But in the immediateaftermath of September 11, the program wasshut down. Now, from an average of 90,000refugees resettled annually before September11, 2001, the United States anticipates27,000 resettlements in 2003" (LCHR,2003).
The United States and InternationalHuman RightsThe continuing erosion of human rights andcivil liberties under the U.S.A. Patriot Actmust also be viewed in the context of interna-tional human rights practice. On the interna-tional level, there are a number of areaswhere U.S. human rights practice trails othercountries (Gershman, 2002). The following isa partial list of failings in U.S. human rightspolicy, drawn from a more detailed discus-sion in a recent Amnesty International report,United States of America: Human Rights v.public relations:
• In 2002 the Bush administration hasapproached governments requestingthem to enter into agreements that theywill not surrender U.S. nationalsaccused of genocide, crimes againsthumanity, and war crimes to the newInternational Criminal Court.
• The Inter-American Commission onHuman Rights has criticized the Bushadministration’s handling of immigrantsdetained in post-9/11 sweeps and hascalled upon the administration to “takethe urgent measures necessary to havethe legal status of the detainees atGuantánamo Bay determined by acompetent tribunal.” More than 600detainees held in the U.S. Naval Base inGuantánamo Bay remain in legal limbo,without access to the courts or lawyers.Some have been held for almost a year,with no prospect of release or trial.
• The U.S. has failed to ratify the Ameri-can Convention on Human Rights,which it signed 25 years ago.
• The U.S. is one of only 23 countries notto have ratified the Convention on theElimination of All Forms of Discrimina-tion Against Women. While initiallysupporting ratification of the Conven-tion, the administration has recentlybackpedaled on its support due toopposition from right-wing anti-choiceactivists.
• Although 145 countries have ratified theInternational Covenant on Economic,Social and Cultural Rights, the U.S. hasnot, 25 years after signing it.
• The Bush administration has opposedthe adoption of the Optional Protocolto the Convention Against Torture,which aimed at providing a system ofunannounced visits to places of deten-tion, such as police stations and prisons,and was approved by UN GeneralAssembly’s Third Committee in earlyNovember 2002 despite U.S. opposi-tion.
• In May 2002, Somalia signed theConvention on the Rights of the Childand indicated its intention to ratify it.Once it does so, becoming the 192ndstate party to the Convention, the U.S.will be the only country not to have
Poverty & Social Justice SectionConnection • Spring 2004 15
See Issue, Page 16
ratified this fundamental treaty.(Gershman, 2002).
Efforts to increase and expandprovisions of the U.S.A. Patriot ActEfforts continue to expand governmentauthority in matters of domestic surveillance.The proposed Patriot Act II (“DomesticSecurity Enhancement Bill of 2003”) metwith bipartisan opposition, and was ulti-mately never introduced as a piece of legisla-tion. However, portions of the bill have beenbroken off and incorporated into otherbills—most recently in the signing into law ofthe “Intelligence Authorization Act for FiscalYear 2004” (Martin, 2003). This proposedact would expand law enforcement andintelligence gathering authority, reduce oreliminate judicial oversight over spying,authorize secret arrests and detentions, createa DNA database for “suspicious” persons,apply the death penalty in new situations,and allow the Administration to strip citizen-ship by mere inference of the individual’sassociation with terrorists. It would also haveexpanded the FBI’s power to seize recordsfrom banks and credit unions to securitiesdealers, currency exchanges, travel agencies,car dealers, post offices, casinos, pawnbro-kers, and any other businesses that, accordingto the government, have a “high degree ofusefulness in criminal, tax or regulatorymatters.” Such seizures could be carried outwith the approval of the judicial branch ofgovernment (Lobe, 2003).
Taking ActionNASW has taken steps to alert members ofthe importance of this legislation regardingtheir work, and encourages interestedindividuals and chapters to contact their localACLU offices to get involved in or to stimu-late development of resolutions in their stateor local governments. For example, manycommunities across the country are adoptingsweeping resolutions protesting federalmeasures that violate civil liberties. The
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)provides information and assistance toindividuals interested in attending townmeetings on the issue, carrying out work onan existing campaign, or in taking on aleadership role in campaigning for thepassage of a resolution in their community.
According to the American Civil LibertiesUnion, resolutions have been passed in 178communities in 32 states, including threestatewide resolutions in Hawaii, Alaska, andVermont. Many of these resolutions call for arestoration of civil liberties lost since 9/11.These communities represent approximately21 million people who oppose sections of theUSA Patriot Act (NASW, 2003).
Central to social action on the local level isthe view that the U.S.A. Patriot Act empha-sizes “safety” over freedom. A key compo-nent of the resolution movement is the effortto ensure that our government balances ourcivil rights with our safety, making sure thatthey’re equal and important.
Support for H.R. 3171NASW President Gary Bailey wrote a letterto Rep. James Sensenbrenner, urging supportof the “Benjamin Franklin True Patriot Act”(H.R.3171), introduced by U.S. Rep. DennisKucinich (NASW, 2003). This Act, currentlyreferred to committee, would repeal majorportions of the Patriot Act, including secretproperty seizures, expanded grounds fordeportation of terrorist suspects, and abroadened definition of domestic terrorism.According to Gregory T. Nojeim, associatedirector and chief legislative counsel of theACLU Washington Legislative Office, “Thesecontroversial measures [of the U.S.A. PatriotAct] addressed by the Kucinich-Paul Bill maynot necessarily make us safer, but theydefinitely make us less free” (ACLU, 2003).
The bill also seeks to mandate a reviewperiod before Congress can enact new
Non Profit Org.U.S. Postage
PAIDWashington, DCPermit No. 8213
750 First Street, NE, Suite 700Washington, DC 20002-4241
N A S W S P SNational Association of Social WorkersSpecialty Practice Sections
Issue, from Page 15
sections of the 2001 Act, and chal-lenges federal policies calling for locallaw authorities to enforce immigrationlaw (Kaplan, 2003). In addition toNASW, H.R. 3171 is supported by theAmerican Civil Liberties Union(ACLU), the National Association forthe Advancement of Colored People(NAACP), the Council on AmericanIslamic Relations (CAIR), and theReligious Action Center of ReformedJudaism; it also has 20 congressionalco-sponsors.
Beth Lewis, DSW, is an assistant professorand clinician educator at the University ofPennsylvania School of Social Work. Dr. Lewisis a member of the Poverty and Social JusticeSection Committee. She can be contacted [email protected]
ReferencesAmerican Civil Liberties Union. (2003,
September). ACLU Welcomes Bi-partisan“True Patriot Act,” Measure seeks to restorefreedoms lost post-9/11. [Online]. Retrievedfrom http://www.aclu.org/SafeandFree/SafeandFree.cfm?ID=13731&c=206 onDecember 17, 2003.
Chang, N. (2001). The U.S.A. Patriot Act:What’s so patriotic about trampling on theBill of Rights? Covert Action Quarterly.[Online]. Retrieved from http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Civil_Liberties/USA_Patriot_Act_BillRights/ on December17, 2003.
Gershman, J. (2002, December). Human rights:Celebration and concern. [Online]. Retrievedfrom http://www.presentdanger.org/frontier/2002/1210hr.html on December17, 2003.
Kaplan, A. (2003, October). Officials push billto repeal provisions of U.S.A. Patriot Act. TheMichigan Daily, p. 1A.
Lawyers Committee for Human Rights. (2003).Assessing the new normal: Liberty andsecurity for the post-September 11 UnitedStates. [Online]. Retrieved from www.lchr.orgon December 17, 2003.
Lobe, J. (2003, November). Going backwards:Patriot Act expansion moves throughcongress. [Online]. Retrieved from http://www.oneworld.net/article/view/73383/1/on December 17, 2003.
Martin, D. (2003, December). With a whisper,not a bang. The San Antonio Current.[Online]. Retrieved from http://www.sacurrent.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=10705756&BRD=2318&PAG=461&dept_id=482778&rfi=6 on January 2,2004.
National Association of Social Workers. (2003,October 2). U.S.A. Patriot Act Action in localcommunities. Government Relations ActionAlert. [Online]. Retrieved from http://www.socialworkers.org/advocacy/alerts.aspon December 17, 2003.
ResourceAmnesty International. United States of America:
Human Rights v. public relations. [Online].Available at: http://www.amnestyusa.org/countries/usa/amr511402002.pdf
