The Life World of a Helping Profession in the Pandemic: Rethinking of Symbolic Boundaries

 
PIIS013216250021064-3-1
DOI10.31857/S013216250021064-3
Publication type Article
Status Published
Authors
Occupation: Head of International Laboratory of Social Integration Research
Affiliation: National Research University Higher School of Economics
Address: Moscow, Russia
Occupation: Рrof.
Affiliation: Yuri Gagarin State Technical University of Saratov
Address: Saratov, Russia
Journal nameSotsiologicheskie issledovaniya
EditionIssue 11
Pages112-122
Abstract

The article presents the results of a qualitative study of symbolic boundaries in social work during the COVID-19 pandemic revealed and interpreted in the narrative interviews with practitioners and service users in three Russian cities. The authors consider features of symbolic boundaries in relationships developing in the everyday life of social work under the influence of the pandemic challenges, when contradictions in everyday practice become more complicated, while risks and vulnerability of communication with the clients increase. It is demonstrated that the construction of symbolic boundaries becomes a practical task that social service workers solve in their work routine. The life world of social workers is considered in the triangle of views, experience, and environmental conditions. Social workers’ responses to the main challenges during the pandemic are considered: the growing barriers in contact and remote work; inconsistency of organizational innovations; new risks in the face of growing needs and vulnerability of clients; burnout risks, emotion and stress management. It is shown that changes in symbolic boundaries, leading to a violation of professional identity integrity, require special efforts in boundary work. According to the results of the interview analysis, several types of boundary work are identified: crystallization, closure, suffering, compromise, violation, creativity.

Keywordssymbolic borders, helping profession, pandemic, social work, boundary work, social reality, everyday life, life world, interviews, service users
AcknowledgmentThe research was supported by the Russian Science Foundation, project No. 18-18-00321.
Received19.12.2022
Publication date20.12.2022
Number of characters29573
Cite  
100 rub.
When subscribing to an article or issue, the user can download PDF, evaluate the publication or contact the author. Need to register.

Number of purchasers: 0, views: 328

Readers community rating: votes 0

1. Abbott A. (1995) Boundaries of Social Work or Social Work of Boundaries? The Social Service Review. Vol.69. No. 4: 545–562.

2. Abramov R., Iarskaia-Smirnova E. (2017) Retrospective of Russian and Soviet professionalism in the optics of critical ecology. Mir Rossii. Vol. 26. No.2: 103–127.

3. Ashcroft R., Sur D., Greenblatt A., Donahue P. (2022) The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Social Workers at the Frontline: A Survey of Canadian Social Workers. The British Journal of Social Work. Vol. 52. No. 3: 1724–1746.

4. Cabiati E. (2021) Social workers helping each other during the COVID-19 pandemic: Online mutual support groups. International Social Work. Vol. 64. No. 5: 676–688. DOI: 10.1177/0020872820975447.

5. Chan C.K., Vickers T., Barnard A. (2020) Meaning through caregiving: a qualitative study of the experiences of informal carers. The British Journal of Social Work. Vol.50. No.3: 682–700. DOI: 10.1093/bjsw/bcz039.

6. Cooper F. (2012) Professional Boundaries in Social Work and Social Care: A Practical Guide to Understanding, Maintaining and Managing your Professional Boundaries. Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

7. Fograty M., Elliot D.L. (2020) The Role of Humour in the Social Care Professions: An Exploratory Study. The British Journal of Social Work. Vol. 50. No. 3: 778–796. DOI: 10.1093/bjsw/bcz027.

8. Galkin K. A. (2021) Social exclusion of older people in rural areas during the COVID-19 pandemic in the Republic of Karelia. Vestnik Instituta Sotziologii. Vol. 12. No. 4: 193–210. (In Russ.)

9. Golightley M., Holloway M. (2020) Social Work in the Time of the COVID-19 Pandemic: All in This Together? British Journal of Social Work. No.50 (3): 637–641. DOI: 10.1093/bjsw/bcaa036.

10. Iarskaia-Smirnova E.R., Romanov P.V. (2006) The phenomenology of professionalism: practical knowledge in social work. Person. Community. Management. No. 2: 35–51. (In Russ.)

11. Kapelj A. (2022) Professional Boundaries that Promote Dignity and Rights in Social Work Practice. Ethics and Social Welfare. URL: www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17496535.2022.2033396. DOI: 10.1080/17496535.2022.2033396.

12. Kingstone T., Campbell P., Andras A., Nixon K., Mallen Ch., Dikomitis L., the Q-COVID-19 Group. (2022) Exploring the Impact of the First Wave of COVID-19 on Social Work Practice: A Qualitative Study in England. The British Journal of Social Work. No. 52 (4): 2043–2062. DOI: 10.1093/bjsw/bcab166.

13. Lamont M., Molnár V. (2002) The Study of Boundaries in the Social Sciences. Annual Review of Sociology. No. 28: 167–195. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.soc.28.110601.141107.

14. Llewellyn S. (1998) Boundary work: Costing and caring in the social services. Accounting, Organizations and Society. 1998. No. 23(1): 23–47. DOI: 10.1016/S0361-3682(96)00036-0.

15. Nikolaev V.G. (2012) Sociology of occupations and professions of Everett Hughes: a forgotten intellectual resource. In: Anthropology of professions: borders of employment in times of instability. Edited by P. Romanov, E. Iarskaia-Smirnova. Moscow: Variant, CSPGS: 59–74. (In Russ.)

16. O’Leary P., Tsui M.-S., Ruch G. (2012) The Boundaries of the Social Work Relationship Revisited: Towards a Connected, Inclusive and Dynamic Conceptualisation. British Journal of Social Work. No. 43(1):135–153. DOI: 10.1093/bjsw/bcr181.

17. Oliver C. (2013) Social Workers as Boundary Spanners: Reframing our Professional Identity for Interprofessional Practice. Social Work Education. Vol. 32. No.6: 773–784. DOI: 10.1080/02615479.2013.765401.

18. Pfister S.M. (2020) Theorising – The Social Definition of the Corona Pandemic. The European Sociologist. Issue 45.1. Pandemic (im)Possibilities. URL: https://www.europeansociology.org/european-sociologist/issue/45/discussion/f172f619-bb73-4d07-a6c5-8c31cc6dec83.

19. Ratzon A., Farhi M., Ratzon N., Adini B. (2022) Resilience at Work, Burnout, Secondary Trauma, and Compassion Satisfaction of Social Workers Amidst the COVID-19 Pandemic. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. No.19: 1–14. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19095500.

20. Reamer F.G. Boundary Issues in Social Work: Managing Dual Relationships. Social Work. 2003. Vol.48. No.1: 121–133. DOI: 10.1093/sw/48.1.121.

21. Romanov P., Iarskaia-Smirnova E. (2009) World of professions: revision of analytic perspectives. Sociological Research. No. 8: 25–35. (In Russ.)

22. Rutter N., Banks S. (2021) Rethinking Rights, Responsibilities and Risks: Ethical Challenges for UK Social Workers during Covid-19, Birmingham, BASW.

23. Toshchenko J.T. (2011) Sociology of life as a concept of social reality research. Philosophical studies. No. 4: 26–43. (In Russ.)

24. Toshchenko J.T. (2015) Sociology of life as a theoretical concept. Sotsiologicheskie Issledovaniya [Sociological Studies]. No. 1: 106–116. (In Russ.)

25. Trimberger G.E. (2012) An Exploration of the Development of Professional Boundaries. Journal of Social Work Values and Ethics. 2012. Vol. 9. No. 2: 68–75.

26. Yarskaya V., Iarskaia-Smirnova E. (2021) Low-mobility urban groups as beneficiaries and actors of social support during the COVID-19 pandemic: the results of a sociological survey. Tomsk State University Journal of Philosophy, Sociology and Political Science. 2021. No.63: 145–152. DOI: 10.17223/1998863Х/63/14. (In Russ.)

27. Zeira A., Rosen A. (2000) Unraveling "tacit knowledge": What social workers do and why they do it. Social Service Review. 2000. Vol. 74. No. 1: 103–123.

Система Orphus

Loading...
Up