Author: Norbert Flasko

Ageism and Attitudes Towards Older People in Social Work: A Systematic Review of Operational Definitions

The issue of ageism remains a critical concern in social work, as this profession is deeply rooted in principles of social justice and advocacy for vulnerable populations. Given the increasing aging population worldwide, understanding ageism within social work practice is essential to ensuring the fair and respectful treatment of older adults. Despite its significance, defining and measuring ageism has been a complex challenge, as various conceptual and operational definitions exist in the literature. This study systematically reviews the operational definitions of ageism used in empirical research within the field of social work, shedding light on the prevalent measurement frameworks, existing gaps, and implications for future research and practice.

Introduction

Ageism, first coined by Robert Butler in 1969, refers to prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimination based on age. It is often considered the third major form of discrimination, following racism and sexism. While ageism affects all age groups, older adults are particularly vulnerable to its negative consequences. These include social exclusion, reduced healthcare quality, and limited opportunities for employment or meaningful participation in society.

In social work, ageism is particularly relevant, as professionals in this field are responsible for advocating for older adults and ensuring their access to adequate care and services. However, research indicates that ageist attitudes persist among social workers, often due to societal stereotypes, limited exposure to older adults, or misconceptions about aging. This study examines how ageism has been operationalized in quantitative studies within social work to understand how it is measured and conceptualized.

Conceptual Framework

A clear definition of ageism is crucial for developing interventions to combat it. This study utilizes the framework of São José and Amado (2017), which builds upon Iversen et al. (2009) and defines ageism as negative or positive stereotypes, prejudices, or discrimination based on chronological age or perceptions of aging. Ageism can manifest in various forms:

  • Cognitive (stereotypes): Beliefs about aging, such as associating older adults with frailty or cognitive decline.
  • Affective (prejudice): Emotional responses to older individuals, such as fear, discomfort, or admiration.
  • Behavioral (discrimination): Actions influenced by age-based bias, including exclusion, neglect, or preferential treatment.

Additionally, ageism can be:

  • Explicit or implicit: Conscious vs. unconscious biases.
  • Self-directed or other-directed: Internalized by the individual or imposed by others.
  • Positive or negative: Favoring older adults or discriminating against them.

Understanding these dimensions is essential to effectively measuring and addressing ageism in social work practice.

Methods

A systematic literature review was conducted using the PRISMA guidelines. The search focused on four academic databases (Scopus, PubMed, Taylor & Francis, and Springer) covering the period from 2000 to 2020. Keywords included “ageism” and “social work.” Inclusion criteria required that studies be empirical, quantitative, peer-reviewed, and focused on ageism among social work students or practitioners in Western countries. Qualitative studies, policy papers, and literature reviews were excluded.

Results

Study Characteristics

A total of 414 studies were initially identified, with 12 meeting the inclusion criteria. Most studies were conducted in the United States, while others took place in Greece, Spain, and England. Participants included social work students, practitioners, and faculty members.

Various validated scales were used to measure ageism, including the Attitudes Towards Older People Scale (Kogan, 1961), the Relating to Old People Evaluation (Cherry & Palmore, 2008), and the Facts on Aging Quiz (Harris et al., 1996). These scales primarily measured explicit, other-directed ageism.

Components of Ageism in Social Work

Findings indicate that ageism in social work is predominantly measured through cognitive and behavioral components, with limited attention to affective elements. The most frequently identified forms of ageism were:

  • Cognitive – Other-directed – Explicit – Negative: The most common form, involving negative stereotypes about older adults.
  • Cognitive – Other-directed – Explicit – Positive: Reflecting benevolent but potentially paternalistic views of older people.
  • Behavioral – Other-directed – Explicit – Negative: Observable discriminatory behaviors towards older individuals.

Notably, implicit and self-directed ageism were absent from the reviewed studies, indicating a gap in the literature and a need for broader measurement approaches.

Discussion

This systematic review highlights several key findings. First, the studies primarily focus on explicit, other-directed ageism, neglecting self-directed and implicit biases. This omission is critical, as implicit biases influence behavior in subtle ways that are difficult to detect yet have significant impacts on older individuals. Self-directed ageism, where older adults internalize negative stereotypes, is also underexplored despite its known psychological and physical health consequences.

Additionally, while most research examines negative ageism, the phenomenon of positive ageism—where older adults are stereotyped as wise, kind, or in need of special care—is also relevant. While seemingly benevolent, positive ageism can contribute to infantilization and disempowerment.

Strengths and Limitations

This review systematically examined empirical studies on ageism in social work, providing a comprehensive overview of how the phenomenon is operationalized. However, several limitations exist. The exclusion of qualitative studies means that nuanced insights into social workers’ attitudes and experiences may be missing. Additionally, most studies were conducted in Western countries, limiting the generalizability of findings to non-Western contexts. Finally, the absence of studies on implicit ageism suggests a need for further research using alternative methodologies, such as implicit association tests or observational studies.

Recommendations for Future Research and Social Work Education

To improve understanding and mitigation of ageism in social work, future research should:

  1. Expand measurement approaches: Develop scales that capture implicit and self-directed ageism to provide a more complete picture of how ageism manifests.
  2. Diversify study populations: Conduct research in non-Western settings to explore cultural variations in ageist attitudes.
  3. Investigate positive ageism: Examine how seemingly favorable stereotypes about aging influence social work practice and policy.
  4. Utilize mixed methods: Combine quantitative and qualitative research to gain deeper insights into the lived experiences of older adults and social workers.

In social work education, programs should:

  1. Integrate gerontological training: Ensure that all social work students receive education on aging issues to counteract stereotypes.
  2. Foster intergenerational interactions: Provide students with opportunities to engage with older adults in diverse settings.
  3. Encourage self-reflection: Train social workers to recognize and challenge their biases through critical reflection and discussion.

Conclusion

This systematic review underscores the importance of understanding and addressing ageism in social work. While significant progress has been made in measuring explicit and other-directed ageism, further research is needed to explore implicit and self-directed biases. By adopting a more comprehensive approach to studying ageism, social work as a profession can better advocate for older adults, ensuring equitable and respectful treatment in all areas of practice.

Source

Developing and Integrating Professional Resilience: Influencing Factors for Social Workers as Students and New Practitioners

The increasing complexity of social work practice presents significant challenges to practitioners, particularly those entering the profession as newly qualified social workers (NQSWs). These challenges affect workforce retention and overall well-being, necessitating a deeper understanding of professional resilience. A recent study conducted through longitudinal and qualitative research explored the factors that contribute to the development, maintenance, and integration of professional resilience among social workers. The study followed participants from their time as students in a Master of Social Work (Qualifying) (MSW(Q)) program through to their early experiences as professionals. The findings highlight the evolving nature of resilience, the critical role of relationships, and the disparities between academic preparation and workplace realities.

The social work profession demands engagement with marginalized and disadvantaged individuals, advocating for social justice and overcoming systemic barriers. However, research has shown that the challenging conditions of social work practice often lead to burnout, vicarious trauma, and compassion fatigue. Studies indicate that resilience plays a crucial role in mitigating these adverse effects, allowing social workers to adapt to their professional environments. While earlier research has largely focused on individual attributes such as emotional intelligence and personal coping mechanisms, recent inquiries emphasize the interplay between environmental factors and individual capacities in shaping resilience. This study adopts a strengths-based approach to understanding resilience as a dynamic and socially constructed process.

Research Aim and Methodology

The primary aim of this research was to explore social workers’ perceptions of the factors influencing their professional resilience during their transition from students to practitioners. Using a social constructionist and critical theoretical framework, the study employed a longitudinal qualitative design. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews conducted at two stages: the final year of the MSW(Q) program and approximately six months into professional practice. The research drew participants from eight Australian universities, employing narrative inquiry and thematic analysis to identify key themes related to resilience.

Ethical Considerations and Participant Recruitment

Ethical approval was obtained, and participation was voluntary, with informed consent secured at both interview stages. A total of 23 participants were recruited, with 19 continuing into the second stage. The study ensured anonymity by allowing participants to choose pseudonyms. Participants varied in age, cultural background, and educational experiences, providing a broad perspective on the factors influencing professional resilience.

Key Findings

Personal Adversity and Identity Formation

Many participants reflected on personal adversities, such as mental distress, domestic violence, and financial hardship, as formative experiences that contributed to their resilience. They described how these experiences enhanced their empathy, self-awareness, and ability to support others facing similar challenges. Many participants acknowledged that resilience developed over time through life experiences, reinforcing the notion that professional resilience is inherently linked to personal resilience.

Participants also noted the importance of self-awareness in maintaining resilience. As they transitioned into professional roles, they continued to encounter personal challenges, including difficulties securing employment, health diagnoses, and personal relationships. In these instances, they drew upon strategies they had previously developed, such as seeking support from peers, engaging in self-care, and accessing therapy. The participants’ narratives reinforced the idea that resilience is an ongoing process shaped by an individual’s ability to reflect on and learn from adversity.

The Role of Education in Professional Resilience

Social work education played a crucial role in facilitating self-discovery and strengthening professional resilience. Many participants described their academic journey as transformative, citing experiences such as critical reflection, engagement with peers, and interactions with faculty as instrumental in developing self-insight. Managing academic pressures, accessing university support services, and balancing multiple responsibilities also contributed to resilience.

Participants noted that field placements provided valuable opportunities to observe and model professional behavior, learn effective coping strategies, and engage in reflective practices. However, while they viewed education as a foundational component of their resilience, they anticipated and later experienced significant differences in workplace realities.

Supervision as a Protective Resource

Supervision emerged as a critical factor in developing professional identity and resilience. During field placements, participants generally found supervision to be a safe and supportive space for learning, self-reflection, and professional growth. However, as they transitioned into the workforce, many encountered challenges in accessing quality supervision. Some reported irregular or inadequate supervision due to workplace constraints, while others sought external supervision to compensate for workplace deficiencies.

The quality of supervision significantly influenced participants’ confidence and resilience. Those who received consistent and meaningful supervision described it as a protective resource, helping them navigate professional challenges. Conversely, those who lacked adequate supervision reported feeling unsupported, questioning their professional competence, and contemplating career changes.

The Impact of Workplace Support on Resilience

Participants highlighted the role of teams and management in shaping their resilience. During field placements, they observed workplace dynamics and learned from experienced professionals. Many noted that positive team environments fostered resilience by providing opportunities for collaboration, emotional support, and shared learning.

As practitioners, participants reported mixed experiences with workplace support. Those in supportive teams described a sense of belonging and access to valuable professional guidance. However, others encountered unsupportive environments where high workloads, lack of recognition, and limited managerial support negatively affected their resilience. Some participants responded by seeking support from external networks or considering job changes.

Discussion and Implications

The findings underscore that professional resilience is a multifaceted and evolving construct shaped by individual experiences, educational environments, and workplace conditions. The study reaffirms that resilience is not solely an individual trait but is socially constructed, emphasizing the importance of external support systems. These insights have significant implications for social work education, workplace policies, and professional development programs.

Universities and professional bodies play a vital role in preparing social work students for the realities of practice. Curriculum design should integrate opportunities for self-reflection, critical analysis, and discussions on navigating workplace challenges. Moreover, educators must equip students with the skills to advocate for their needs, recognize supportive workplace environments, and develop strategies for maintaining resilience beyond their academic journey.

Employing organizations must acknowledge the importance of supervision, team support, and managerial engagement in sustaining social workers’ resilience. Implementing structured induction programs, ensuring regular supervision, and fostering collaborative team cultures can enhance practitioners’ well-being and reduce attrition. In the UK, initiatives such as the Assessed and Supported Year in Employment (ASYE) offer a structured transition period for NQSWs, which could serve as a model for similar programs in other regions.

Limitations and Future Research

While this study provides valuable insights, it is limited by its sample size and geographic focus on Australia. Future research could explore cross-cultural perspectives on professional resilience and examine the long-term impact of workplace interventions. Additionally, further studies should investigate how different educational institutions and employment settings shape social workers’ resilience trajectories.

Conclusion

Professional resilience in social work is a dynamic and contextually influenced quality that develops over time. Social work students and practitioners benefit from supportive educational environments, meaningful supervision, and workplace structures that foster resilience. Universities, professional organizations, and employers share the responsibility of ensuring that social workers are equipped with the resources necessary to sustain their well-being and effectiveness in practice. By acknowledging the systemic and relational nature of resilience, the profession can move towards creating sustainable conditions that enable social workers to thrive.

Source

Trust and Power in the Space Between Visibility and Invisibility

Exploring Digital and Social Media Practices in Norwegian Child Welfare Services

The digitalization of Norwegian public services, including Child Welfare Services (CWS), has introduced new communication methods between professionals and clients. This article examines how the use of digital and social media affects trust and power dynamics in professional-client relationships. The study is based on interviews with CWS caseworkers, parents, and youth clients, offering insights into how digital media practices shape visibility and invisibility within this context. By employing Michel Foucault’s concept of Bentham’s Panopticon, the analysis highlights how digital surveillance influences professional authority and client trust.

The rapid adoption of digital tools such as smartphones, emails, SMS, and social media platforms has transformed communication within social work. While digital media can enhance efficiency and accessibility, it also raises ethical concerns about privacy, surveillance, and power imbalances. Previous research suggests that digital media can empower clients by providing them with more control over communication and facilitating social participation. However, this study uncovers how digitalization can also reinforce existing asymmetries, particularly when caseworkers monitor clients through social media without their knowledge.

The methodological approach of this study includes group interviews with 26 CWS caseworkers and individual interviews with five parents and four youth clients. The interviews, conducted between October 2019 and March 2020, explored participants’ experiences with digital communication. Caseworkers reflected on their professional practices, while clients shared their perspectives on how digital interactions influenced their relationships with CWS. The analysis focused on when and how digital tools were used, revealing key patterns of visibility and invisibility in professional-client interactions.

One key finding is that caseworkers view digital tools as a means to remain accessible and build relationships with clients. SMS, for instance, allows them to check in on clients efficiently, maintaining a presence without direct intervention. Some caseworkers expressed a desire to use social media platforms such as Snapchat to reach young clients but refrained due to ethical concerns. Clients, on the other hand, emphasized the importance of face-to-face interactions in establishing trust. While digital tools were seen as useful for scheduling meetings, they were not considered substitutes for in-person communication.

The study also reveals that caseworkers use social media to observe clients, often without their knowledge. Some CWS offices created fake Facebook accounts to monitor clients’ online activities. This practice sparked debates among caseworkers about its legality and ethical implications. While some defended it as a means of obtaining crucial information, others viewed it as a breach of trust. Most clients were unaware of this surveillance, assuming that their social media presence was private. However, those who suspected that they were being watched expressed strong feelings of betrayal, underscoring the potential damage to professional-client relationships.

Another key aspect of digital communication is the ability of professionals to make themselves invisible. Many caseworkers manage two phones, one for work and one for personal use, allowing them to control their availability. They may also refuse to share their email addresses with clients or limit digital interactions to SMS. This selective accessibility contrasts sharply with clients’ experiences, as they have fewer options for making themselves invisible. Some clients avoid digital communication altogether to minimize exposure to CWS surveillance, reflecting concerns about constant monitoring.

The discussion situates these findings within broader debates on digitalization, power, and trust in welfare services. While digital tools can enhance service efficiency, they also introduce new challenges in maintaining ethical boundaries. The study demonstrates that visibility and invisibility in digital interactions are not neutral but are shaped by power relations. Caseworkers have the ability to control their exposure and monitor clients discreetly, reinforcing the asymmetry of professional-client relationships.

Drawing on Foucault’s concept of the Panopticon, the analysis illustrates how digital media enables caseworkers to observe clients without being seen. This surveillance dynamic undermines trust, as clients are unaware of when or how they are being monitored. Previous research has highlighted the potential of digital media to empower clients by providing them with more agency in communication. However, this study suggests that digital tools can also be used to reinforce hierarchical structures, limiting clients’ ability to negotiate their visibility.

The findings call for a critical reassessment of digital media use in child welfare services. While digital tools offer opportunities for improved communication, their use must be guided by ethical considerations and clear regulations. Caseworkers require guidelines on appropriate digital practices to balance professional responsibilities with respect for client privacy. Clients, in turn, should be informed about how their digital presence may be used in professional assessments. Transparency and consent should be central principles in digital communication policies to ensure that trust is not eroded.

In conclusion, the digitalization of Norwegian Child Welfare Services has reshaped professional-client interactions, introducing new complexities in trust and power dynamics. While digital tools can facilitate accessibility and efficiency, they also present risks related to surveillance and ethical boundaries. The study highlights the importance of regulating digital communication practices to prevent power imbalances from being exacerbated. Ensuring that clients have a voice in how digital tools are used can help maintain trust and foster more equitable professional relationships in child welfare services.

Source

The “What” and “Why” of Goal Pursuits: Human Needs and the Self-Determination of Behavior

Human motivation has long been a central topic in psychological research, particularly in understanding how people initiate and persist in goal-directed behaviors. Most contemporary motivation theories suggest that individuals engage in behaviors based on their expected outcomes. However, self-determination theory (SDT) offers a more nuanced perspective by emphasizing the role of innate psychological needs—competence, autonomy, and relatedness—in shaping motivation, goal pursuit, and overall well-being. This article provides a comprehensive discussion of SDT and its implications for human behavior.

The Concept of Needs in Motivation Theory

Early Needs Theories

Historically, the concept of needs has played a significant role in theories of motivation. Early approaches, such as those proposed by Hull (1943), focused on physiological needs that create drive states prompting behavior. However, this approach struggled to account for behaviors like curiosity and play, which are not directly linked to physiological drives. Murray (1938) introduced psychological needs as acquired motives rather than innate necessities, broadening the scope but failing to define a core set of needs essential for psychological well-being.

Needs theories in psychology evolved further with the work of Maslow (1943), who proposed a hierarchy of needs that move from basic physiological requirements to higher-order psychological and self-actualization needs. While this model provided valuable insights, SDT refined the concept by emphasizing that competence, autonomy, and relatedness are fundamental to well-being and not merely steps in a hierarchy.

The Nature of Needs in SDT

In contrast to learned motives, SDT posits that competence, relatedness, and autonomy are fundamental psychological needs that are universal across cultures and individuals. These needs are not learned but rather inherent in human nature and essential for optimal psychological growth and well-being. The satisfaction of these needs fosters effective functioning and well-being, while their thwarting leads to negative consequences, including diminished motivation and psychological distress.

The need for competence involves feeling effective and capable in one’s activities, striving to master tasks, and achieving desired outcomes. Autonomy refers to the sense of volition and self-governance, where individuals feel they are the originators of their actions rather than being externally controlled. Relatedness concerns the need to establish meaningful connections with others, feeling supported, valued, and cared for in social relationships.

The Role of Psychological Needs in Goal Pursuit

Differentiating Goal Content and Regulatory Processes

SDT differentiates between the content of goals and the processes by which goals are pursued. Goal contents refer to what individuals seek to attain, while regulatory processes pertain to how these goals are pursued. SDT suggests that different types of goals and regulatory styles influence motivation and well-being by differentially satisfying basic psychological needs.

For instance, pursuing goals based on personal growth, meaningful relationships, and health (intrinsic goals) tends to satisfy psychological needs, leading to greater well-being. Conversely, pursuing goals driven by external rewards such as wealth, fame, or status (extrinsic goals) can undermine well-being if they fail to meet these core psychological needs.

Intrinsic Motivation and Psychological Needs

Intrinsic motivation, characterized by engaging in activities for their inherent enjoyment, is strongly linked to competence and autonomy. Research has demonstrated that intrinsic motivation is enhanced in environments that provide choice, positive feedback, and opportunities for self-expression. When individuals engage in tasks they find interesting and fulfilling, their motivation is self-sustained and leads to creativity, persistence, and high-quality performance.

Conversely, extrinsic rewards, surveillance, and external pressure can undermine intrinsic motivation by reducing the perception of autonomy. Studies have shown that offering rewards for activities that individuals already find enjoyable can decrease their intrinsic interest, as external incentives shift the focus from internal satisfaction to external gain (Deci, 1971).

Internalization and the Integration of Extrinsic Motivation

Internalization, the process by which individuals adopt external regulations as their own, is another crucial aspect of SDT. This process varies in degree, ranging from external regulation (controlled by external rewards and punishments) to integrated regulation (where behaviors align with one’s core values and sense of self). The successful internalization of extrinsic motivations depends on the social environment’s ability to support autonomy, competence, and relatedness.

Individuals who internalize regulations effectively experience greater personal coherence and authenticity. They perform extrinsically motivated behaviors willingly because they find them personally valuable rather than feeling coerced. This process leads to more sustainable motivation, higher engagement, and greater psychological well-being.

The Impact of Social Context on Motivation

Autonomy-Supportive vs. Controlling Environments

Social environments significantly influence whether individuals experience their goal pursuits as autonomous or controlled. Autonomy-supportive environments foster self-determination by providing choice, acknowledging individuals’ perspectives, and minimizing external control. Such environments enhance intrinsic motivation, engagement, and psychological well-being. In contrast, controlling environments, characterized by pressure and contingent rewards, lead to controlled motivation, which can result in anxiety, diminished performance, and lower well-being.

Research in Educational and Organizational Contexts

Research in educational and organizational settings supports these claims. Studies have shown that students who experience autonomy-supportive teaching exhibit greater engagement, conceptual learning, and persistence compared to those in controlling environments. Teachers who encourage student participation, provide meaningful choices, and minimize coercion help foster greater intrinsic motivation and better learning outcomes.

Similarly, in the workplace, autonomy-supportive leadership has been linked to higher job satisfaction, performance, and psychological health. Employees who perceive their managers as supportive of their autonomy report higher levels of engagement, creativity, and overall job satisfaction compared to those who experience micromanagement and excessive external pressure.

Goal Content and Psychological Well-Being

Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic Goals

Beyond the distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, SDT also considers the nature of the goals themselves. Goals can be classified as intrinsic (e.g., personal growth, meaningful relationships) or extrinsic (e.g., financial success, fame). Research suggests that pursuing intrinsic goals leads to greater well-being and fulfillment, as these goals inherently satisfy psychological needs. In contrast, extrinsic goals are less likely to provide lasting satisfaction and can even contribute to stress and decreased well-being.

The Role of Need Satisfaction in Well-Being

The satisfaction of basic psychological needs has been shown to predict greater well-being, resilience, and overall life satisfaction. When individuals pursue goals that align with their innate psychological needs, they experience greater personal fulfillment and psychological health. On the other hand, when goal pursuits are driven by external pressures and lack personal endorsement, individuals are more likely to experience stress, burnout, and dissatisfaction.

Studies have also highlighted the negative consequences of need thwarting, where individuals feel controlled, isolated, or incompetent. Such experiences can lead to decreased intrinsic motivation, emotional distress, and increased susceptibility to anxiety and depression.

Conclusion

SDT provides a robust framework for understanding human motivation by emphasizing the role of psychological needs in goal pursuit. The theory highlights the importance of both the “what” (goal content) and “why” (regulatory processes) of motivation, demonstrating that optimal functioning and well-being depend on the satisfaction of competence, autonomy, and relatedness. By fostering environments that support these needs, individuals and institutions can enhance motivation, performance, and overall psychological health. Understanding SDT’s principles can lead to better educational practices, workplace policies, and social relationships that empower individuals to thrive.

Source

Creating Elder-Friendly Communities: Preparing for an Aging Society

As the population ages, the need for communities to adapt to the changing requirements of older residents has become increasingly crucial. With the Baby Boomer generation entering retirement, a significant portion of society will soon be over the age of 65. By 2020, it was estimated that one in five Americans would be classified as senior citizens. This demographic shift brings both opportunities and challenges, necessitating the development of elder-friendly communities where older adults can live independently while remaining actively engaged in society.

An elder-friendly community is one that values and supports its older residents by providing necessary infrastructure, services, and opportunities that accommodate their evolving needs. Many communities today were not designed with the elderly in mind, and without appropriate modifications, aging in place can become difficult. This article explores what constitutes an elder-friendly community, the challenges involved in creating such environments, and the role of social workers and policymakers in facilitating these changes.

The Importance of Community Environment for Older Persons

Aging in place—the ability of individuals to remain in their own homes as they age—is a priority for the majority of older adults. Research has shown that over 80% of seniors prefer to stay in their homes for as long as possible. However, many homes and communities present barriers that make independent living difficult. Physical limitations can make daily activities such as driving, shopping, and home maintenance more challenging, increasing reliance on social services and caregiver support. Additionally, unsafe neighborhoods, inaccessible public buildings, and inadequate transportation can contribute to the isolation of older residents.

A well-designed elder-friendly community, on the other hand, actively promotes the well-being of its older residents. It ensures accessibility, offers social engagement opportunities, and integrates health and support services into the fabric of everyday life. A well-integrated support system can also alleviate the burden on family caregivers, reducing stress and preventing burnout. By addressing these issues, communities can empower older adults to contribute meaningfully to society while maintaining their independence.

Characteristics of an Elder-Friendly Community

While there is no universal definition of an elder-friendly community, research has identified several core characteristics that make a community more accommodating for older residents. Surveys and studies conducted by organizations such as AARP and various social research institutions highlight key features that contribute to community elder-friendliness, including:

  • Accessible and affordable transportation: Public transit should be senior-friendly, with features such as low-floor buses, special transport services, and well-maintained sidewalks and pedestrian crossings. Rideshare services and volunteer-driven transportation programs can also be beneficial.
  • Diverse housing options: A range of affordable housing options should be available, including single-story homes, assisted living facilities, and housing that incorporates universal design principles. Home modification programs should be in place to assist seniors in making their homes more accessible.
  • Responsive health and long-term care services: Health services should be easily accessible and include home-based care options, geriatric specialists, and community-based health initiatives. Preventative care and wellness programs should be readily available to ensure seniors maintain their health for as long as possible.
  • Safety and security: Communities should implement measures to ensure safety for older adults, such as well-lit streets, emergency response systems, and crime prevention programs tailored to seniors. Local law enforcement should work closely with senior advocacy groups to prevent elder abuse and scams targeting older individuals.
  • Social integration and respect for seniors: Elder-friendly communities should encourage active participation by older residents through volunteer opportunities, senior centers, and intergenerational programs that promote respect and engagement. Public spaces should be designed to encourage socialization and community events should be inclusive of older adults.

While these general characteristics provide a foundation for elder-friendly communities, individual communities may need to focus on different priorities based on their demographics and urban or rural settings. For instance, rural communities may need to prioritize transportation and healthcare access, while urban areas may need to focus on affordable housing and public safety.

Assessing and Planning for Elder-Friendliness

Creating an elder-friendly community requires a structured approach that involves assessing current conditions, identifying gaps, and planning for improvements. Needs assessments are a crucial first step in this process, as they help policymakers and social workers understand the specific challenges faced by older residents. These assessments can take both qualitative and quantitative approaches, such as focus groups, interviews, and surveys.

Several assessment tools have been developed to help communities evaluate their elder-friendliness, including:

  • The AARP Livable Communities Guide, which provides a checklist of factors affecting older residents.
  • The AdvantAge Initiative, which measures key indicators such as transportation availability, safety, and community involvement.
  • Elder Ready Community Report Cards, which help communities evaluate their accessibility and preparedness for an aging population.

Using these tools, local governments, nonprofit organizations, and community groups can identify necessary changes and develop strategies to enhance elder-friendliness. These assessments can also be used to track progress over time, ensuring continuous improvement in community services and infrastructure.

Examples of Elder-Friendly Initiatives

Several cities and regions have successfully implemented policies and programs to become more elder-friendly. For instance, the City of Pasadena developed a Senior Master Plan that analyzed senior needs, services, and policy recommendations. The plan, which included input from residents, agencies, and local government, resulted in expanded senior services, improved transportation options, and a greater focus on affordable housing.

Another example is the “Coming of Age in Rural Illinois” project, which conducted assessments to identify key issues faced by seniors in rural communities. By leveraging partnerships with local governments and service providers, the project was able to address transportation challenges and enhance community support networks.

Such initiatives demonstrate the importance of a lead organization in bringing together stakeholders, conducting assessments, and implementing meaningful changes that benefit older residents. Collaboration between public agencies, private organizations, and community groups is essential for sustained progress in developing elder-friendly environments.

The Role of Social Workers in Developing Elder-Friendly Communities

Social workers play a critical role in advocating for and supporting elder-friendly community initiatives. Their involvement includes:

  • Community assessment and advocacy: Social workers help identify areas where improvements are needed and advocate for policies that support aging in place.
  • Service coordination: They connect older adults with resources, including transportation, healthcare, and social services, to enhance their quality of life.
  • Policy development: Social workers can influence local planning and development efforts by ensuring that older residents’ needs are considered in housing, transportation, and healthcare policies.
  • Empowerment and education: They work to empower seniors by providing them with information and opportunities to voice their concerns in community planning processes.

Implications for Social Work

Social work plays a crucial role in fostering elder-friendly communities, as professionals in the field are uniquely positioned to advocate for aging populations, bridge gaps between services, and address systemic issues that affect older adults. Social workers must actively engage in community planning efforts to ensure that policies and programs meet the needs of aging residents. By promoting interdisciplinary collaboration between urban planners, healthcare providers, and policymakers, social workers can help create environments that support aging in place. Additionally, they play a key role in providing direct support, ensuring that older adults have access to essential resources such as affordable healthcare, transportation, and social services. Beyond advocacy and service coordination, social workers also empower older individuals through education and community engagement, encouraging them.

Implications for Practice

Developing elder-friendly communities requires a multifaceted approach that integrates policies, services, and infrastructure improvements. Practitioners in social work, urban planning, and public health must work together to create age-inclusive environments that support independence and social engagement. This means incorporating age-friendly design principles into urban development, expanding access to essential services, and fostering community programs that encourage intergenerational interaction. Furthermore, practitioners must ensure that the voices of older adults are heard in policy discussions, promoting participatory planning processes that reflect the real needs of aging residents. By embedding elder-friendly initiatives into broader community planning and public policy frameworks, practitioners can help establish sustainable, long-term improvements that benefit not only older adults but the entire community.

Conclusion

The aging population presents both challenges and opportunities for communities. By developing elder-friendly communities, local governments and service providers can ensure that older adults can continue to live safely, independently, and actively engaged in society. Key strategies include improving transportation, housing, healthcare, and community involvement opportunities.

While much progress has been made in recognizing the importance of elder-friendly communities, there is still work to be done. Needs assessments, policy changes, and community engagement efforts must continue to evolve to address the unique and changing needs of aging populations. Social workers, policymakers, and community organizations must collaborate to create supportive environments that enhance the well-being of older adults while enriching the broader community.

Source

The Evolution of Social Work in Scotland: From Radical Vision to Contemporary Challenges

The history of social work in Scotland over the past forty years has been shaped by two major reports: Social Work and the Community (1966) and Changing Lives (2006). These documents represent key moments in the evolution of a profession that has struggled to maintain its identity and influence while adapting to shifting political, social, and economic landscapes. The transformation of Scottish social work from a radical vision of social equality to a profession increasingly bound by bureaucratic constraints and market-driven policies encapsulates broader trends in welfare provision.

The publication of Social Work and the Community in 1966 marked the beginning of modern social work in Scotland. It was a time of optimism and reform, inspired by the Kilbrandon Report of 1964, which emphasized the need for a unified and proactive approach to addressing social problems. The report envisioned social work as a force for social change, capable of tackling not only individual issues but broader societal inequalities. Unlike the reforms in England and Wales, Scotland’s approach was notably radical, seeking not just to streamline services but to create a profession deeply embedded in community welfare and activism.

The 1968 Social Work (Scotland) Act formalized this vision, establishing social work as a single, unified profession encompassing various specialist roles, including probation officers, child welfare workers, and psychiatric social workers. The Act also introduced Children’s Panels, a distinctive Scottish institution that replaced juvenile courts with a welfare-oriented approach to dealing with young offenders. These reforms positioned Scotland at the forefront of progressive social policy, earning admiration for their coherence and ambition. The creation of a unified social work profession was a significant step forward, one that promised greater efficiency, improved service coordination, and a holistic approach to social welfare.

However, the success of the profession was contingent upon maintaining strong political alliances, particularly with regional governments and the Scottish Office. The Association of Directors of Social Work (ADSW), established in 1969, played a critical role in shaping policy and advocating for the profession. Throughout the 1970s and 1980s, social work departments enjoyed considerable influence, particularly within the large regional councils such as Strathclyde. These councils championed social work as a tool for addressing poverty and social injustice, reinforcing the profession’s ideological commitment to state-led welfare provision. Regional councils provided the structural backbone for social work, allowing it to integrate effectively with other public services, such as education and housing, ensuring a coordinated response to social issues.

The 1980s, however, introduced a series of challenges that tested the resilience of Scottish social work. The Thatcher government’s policies of privatization and reduced public spending threatened the foundational principles of the 1968 Act. While Scottish social work had initially resisted the tide of market-driven reforms, the introduction of the Griffiths Report in 1988 marked a turning point. The report advocated for a mixed economy of care, shifting responsibilities from the state to voluntary and private providers. While ADSW initially opposed these changes, it ultimately had to adapt to the new reality, signaling a departure from the profession’s original vision of comprehensive state provision. This shift was not just ideological but practical, as funding constraints made it increasingly difficult for local authorities to sustain public service dominance.

Further crises in the early 1990s compounded social work’s difficulties. The Orkney child abuse case of 1991, in which children were removed from their homes based on unproven allegations of satanic ritual abuse, severely damaged public trust in the profession. The subsequent Clyde Report (1992) criticized social workers for overreach and lack of accountability, leading to increased scrutiny and regulation. This period marked the beginning of a shift away from professional autonomy toward greater bureaucratic oversight. The media portrayal of social workers as overzealous and intrusive further eroded public confidence, making it more challenging for social work departments to operate without intense scrutiny.

By the mid-1990s, the landscape of Scottish social work had changed dramatically. The dissolution of regional councils in 1996 fragmented the profession, creating 32 smaller local authorities with varying levels of resources and expertise. The abolition of the requirement for local authorities to appoint a professionally qualified Director of Social Work further diminished the profession’s standing. No longer at the ‘top table’ of government, social work became increasingly subordinate to managerial and financial constraints, limiting its ability to act as a transformative force in society. Local authorities struggled to maintain the same level of service provision, as smaller budgets and fewer resources led to a more reactive rather than proactive approach.

Against this backdrop, the publication of Changing Lives in 2006 sought to redefine social work for the 21st century. While the report reaffirmed the importance of a generic profession with a distinct body of knowledge and skills, it also acknowledged the numerous challenges facing social workers. These included excessive bureaucracy, unrealistic public expectations, and a lack of professional confidence. Unlike the 1966 report, which positioned social work as a driver of social change, Changing Lives emphasized a more pragmatic approach—focusing on targeted, individualized interventions rather than broad societal reform. The report encouraged a more flexible and responsive approach, one that balanced professional autonomy with structured oversight.

The report also introduced the concept of ‘Reserved Functions of the Social Worker,’ defining specific roles that only qualified social workers could perform. This was an attempt to clarify professional jurisdiction and restore a sense of professional identity. However, the broader context of market-driven welfare and increased managerialism meant that social work’s role was now more about navigating complex service structures than leading systemic change. The impact of this shift was profound, as social workers found themselves increasingly engaged in risk management and procedural compliance rather than direct social intervention.

The evolution of Scottish social work from the radical optimism of the 1960s to the constrained pragmatism of the 21st century reflects broader trends in welfare provision. While the profession has retained its commitment to social justice, its ability to enact meaningful change has been curtailed by political and economic pressures. The challenge moving forward is to reclaim a sense of professional autonomy and redefine the role of social work in a rapidly changing society. Changing Lives may have marked a departure from the revolutionary aspirations of the past, but it also offers an opportunity for Scottish social workers to critically reassess their position and reassert their relevance in an increasingly fragmented and market-oriented landscape. The question remains: can social work in Scotland recapture its original mission, or will it continue to be reshaped by external forces beyond its control?

Source