VAWA and Native American Women

How and why is this population currently disproportionately affected by sexual and domestic violence?

 “Sexual assault rates and violence against Native American women did not just drop from the sky. They are a process of history”(Amnesty International, 2006, pg 15). In order to comprehensively understand the contemporary crises faced by Native American women, historic patterns of discrimination must be considered. Tribal jurisdiction should be effectively restored when considering Native American's rights to self determination. Prevailing barriers to justice and safety will maintain a pervasively asymmetric legal framework, in which Native American's are deliberately barred from their basic civil rights.

Currently, NA/AN suffer disproportionately high levels of health related problems, such that the tuberculosis rate is 750 times higher than among all other Americans, diabetes is 6.8 times higher, and pneumonia and influenza are sixty one percent higher. Public health deficits lead to shorter life spans, and on average Native American's life expectancy is shortened by six years in comparison to the rest of the population. Assess to basic housing and amenities is also curtailed for the Native American population, such that 82 percent of Navajos living on a reservation are lacking telephone services and 46 percent have no electricity. (Entrekin et al, 2006). Simultaneously considering these patterns of poverty and substandard health, housing and education, Native American women face additional barriers, including high rates of sexual and domestic violence.

In South Dakota, Native Americans make up 10 percent of the population, yet they represent 40 percent of the victims of sexual assault. Similarly Alaska Natives are 15 percent of the population yet they constitute 61 percent of sexual assault victims (Perry 2004). This social problem can not be considered in a vacuum. The general overview and demographics presented previously offers insight into a systemic range of problems. According to a Department of Justice report conducted between 1992 and 2002, Native American women are 2.5 times more likely to be raped or sexually assaulted as compared to the American population. 34.1 percent are raped during their lifetime, yet 86 percent of the perpetrators of sexual violence against Native American women were non-Native men. These figures do not take into account that over half of these crimes will remain unreported (Perry 2004). Historical injustices faced by Native American women get to the origins of this contemporary crises. Some examples I found particularly salient were:

- The General Allotment Act of 1887 disrupted women's roles by curtailing the matrilinear system of land inheritance. The federal government divided communal tribal lands into 80-160 acre sites that were given to a male principe. Previously, most tribes honored women's land rights and practiced a matriarchal land inheritance system.

- Educational programs were funded and implemented to attempt assimilation of Native Americans into Western culture. These programs forced farming roles onto men and domestic housework onto women, removing the agrarian role women had previously maintained. Women's autonomy over agrarian practices was a source of strength and power. Imposing a Western distribution of labour degraded the social status and rights previously held by women.

- Religious practices, especially ceremonial dances, were outlawed and Christian missionaries were funded to convert Native Americans. Mandatory boarding schools that existed up until the 1950's systemically removed children from their mothers and tribes, placing them in institutions where they were prohibited to speak their language. Their name were changed and their Christian names reordered how family lineage was tracked. Names were modified from referencing the mother's lineage to a Western patriarchal model. Maternal and fertility values were once again depleted from Native American women's roles (Entrekin et al, 2006).

-During the 1970's IHS sterilized 25 percent of Native American women ages 15 to 44. Systemic failures included false information about sterilization, use of coercion to get signatures on consent forms, lack of appropriate waiting period, and irregular consent forms (Lawrence, 2000).

- A federal appellate court ruling, in 1968, maintained a measure with discriminatory legal consequences. A Native American man convicted of forcible rape charges in a reservation, would receive a lesser sentence if the victim was a Native American woman rather than a non-Native American woman. “It has been suggested that Congress, in passing this law, may have viewed Native women as immoral and less worthy of protection”(Amnesty International, 2006, pg 16)Current legal barriers to effectively reduce violence against Native American women are marked by the lack of comprehensive tribal jurisdiction.

- Oliphant versus Suquamish Supreme Court decision (1978) , removed Native American's right to prosecute non-Indians who have committed crimes in Indian country (Radon 2004). This decision left tribes powerless in the face of alarming rates of crimes against women. A Tribal nation can prosecute criminal cases solely if the defendant is an Indian (Entrekin et al, 2006). 

This legal loophole leaves Native American women at high risk within their communities. Considering that 86 percent of perpetrators of sexual violence against Native American women were non-Native men (Perry 2004), 75 percent of offenders in intimate partner violence crimes were non-Native and 25 percent of offenders in family violence crimes were non-Native, there is clearly a significant gap in the protection of Native American women (Entrekin et al, 2006). Health, legal and social policies have historically failed Native American women, yet their patterns and precedents endure.

Under the Full Faith and Credit Provision of the Violence Against Women Act, survivors of violence are entitled to protection outside of where they were initially issued a protective order. Many women choose to flee the communities where they were victimized and under this provision their protective order remains effective beyond their county or state. Native American women have been unable to fully access the Full Faith and Credit provision under VAWA. Often times, protection orders issued by a tribal court are unenforceable outside of the tribes's issuing jurisdiction. Yet, even within the reservation, local officers are unable to arrest non-Native American criminals. The perpetual inability to centralize protective orders issued by tribal jurisdictions is a major barrier in safeguarding Native American women. There does not exist a national registry for tribal protective orders and a majority of tribal protective orders are not eligible to be entered into the federal registry for protective orders (Entrekin et al, 2006).

Currently only 13 percent of sexual assaults reported by Native American women lead to an arrest, as compared to 35 percent for African American women and 32 percent for Caucasian women (Weisman 2012). The restrictions placed on tribal prosecutes to file charges against non-Indian offenders leaves the federal government responsible for such cases. Federal prosecutors do not offer necessary attention to non-felony domestic violence cases, often times refusing to prosecute them all together. While currently there are no statistics on how many cases are refused by federal prosecutors specific to Native Americans, overall federal prosecutors refused to prosecute 42.9 percent of assault cases investigated. 

Inadequate access to legal and health services in response to crimes against women on Native American reservations remains prevalent. Sexual assault forensic examinations, also known as a “rape kits” are a key component to effectively prosecuting sexual violence crimes. Currently all sexual violence victims must be given the option to access a rape kit, regardless of whether they will be reporting the crime. 44 percent of IHS facilities do not have staff members who are trained and able to provide emergency services specific to sexual violence, according to a recent Amnesty International survey (2006). This forces women to travel hundreds of miles to access these services in settings that might be culturally foreign and insensitive. Currently there is a lack of centralized and coordinated continuum of care for survivors and this results in conflicting instructions and suggestions from multiple service providers. Furthermore, the IHS only provides forensic exams for sexual assault victims in 27 out of the 45 hospitals it funds (Weisman, 2012). Access to services within Native American reservations are crucial for providing timely, widely accessible and culturally sensitive services to Native American women.

There are consistent delays by law enforcement in responding to reports of sexual violence against Native American women. The lack of a timely response by officials deters many survivors from pursuing a criminal case. Additionally there are overwhelming reports of insensitive and improper questioning of victims. Many state, federal and tribal officers have access to training regarding sexual and domestic violence, yet these are commonly not mandatory resulting in substandard responses to such crimes (Amnesty International, 2006).

Stigma and discrimination are key components when considering the reasons underlying the fact that over half of the cases of sexual assault remain unreported (Perry 2004). There is evidence of discriminatory treatment linked to suspected alcohol consumption amongst Native American women by law enforcement officials. Premature assumptions that a victim of violence had been under the effects of alcohol during the attack are connected to perpetual stereotypes linking Native American women and alcohol. Often times survivors reported being questioned about drinking and receiving discriminatory treatment due to this suspicion (Amnesty International 2006). Considering historic patterns of systemic oppression, Native American women might also justifiably hold some level of mistrust towards government officials.

Perpetual oppressive patterns and policies have lead to a breakdown of Native American women's identities."These women, who believe that they are targets of violence specifically because they are Native women, therefore consider that the only solution to the rape crises...is to lose their indigeneity."(Pacheco, 2009). In tandem to this statement, Andrea Smith, a Native American rape counselor and advocate describes how "every Native survivor I ever counseled...said to me at one point 'I wish I was no longer Indian'"(Pacheco, 2009).

There are a several successfully operating Native American organizations geared towards serving women who are survivors of violence as well as developing and implementing policy, educational and preventative programs. White Buffalo Calf Woman Society, Inc organized the first battered women's shelter on a reservation. They are located in South Dakota on the Rosebud reservation and offer shelter and advocacy for domestic violence victims. Morning Star House Inc. in Albuquerque New Mexico impacts 30,000 people through culturally relevant domestic violence services. It fosters comprehensive community programs against domestic violence. The Tribal Law and Policy Institute is a nonprofit corporation conducting research to optimize training, education and policy effecting the well being of Native Americans. Sacred Circle offers assistance to tribes in developing coordinated agency response systems as well as personnel training, tribal policy development and other forms of technical assistance (Entrekin et al, 2006).

The Tri-Ethnic Center at Colorado State University developed a community readiness model that has been successfully implemented in several different Native American reservations. It is a culturally relevant model that reinforces tribal self-determination and sovereignty through tribal and institutional partnerships that consider the cultural context when providing specifically tailored community interventions. It is influenced by the model of individual readiness for treatment and applies the stage appropriate treatment model to communities.

No level of community intervention will be sufficient if deliberate policy disparities continue to curtail a tribe's legal ability to safeguard its community. The VAWA reauthorization act passed bipartisanly in the Senate with a 68-31 vote in April 2012 addresses many gaps in service for Native American women and their communities. It gives tribal law enforcement civil authority to enforce protective orders against Indians and non-Indians equally. Perhaps the most controversial aspect of the bill is found in section 904, which would allow tribes to arrest and prosecute non-Indian perpetrators of domestic or dating violence committed in Indian country. In these cases, the defendant would need to either be employed at the reservation, be a resident of the reservation or be the spouse or intimate partner of a resident or member of the reservation or tribe. The bill also allows tribal courts to give and enforce jail sentences that meet the current federal standards for such crimes. It also provides further funding for training, education and implementation of policies that address violence against women (National Task Force to End Sexual and Domestic Violence). The IHS needs to be better equipped to meet the needs of the population it serves. Funding and implementing an accessible and culturally relevant continuum of care that can comprehensively respond to Native American survivors of violent crimes is essential. The VAWA reauthorization act of 2012 did not pass in the House of Representatives. House republicans are either uninformed on this crisis or they are deliberately choosing to deny basic rights and services to Native Americans. 


 

Amnesty International. Maze of Injustice: The failure to protect Indigenous women from sexual violence in the USA. (2006). New York: NY. 1-92.

Bendery, Jennifer. (April 26, 2012). Violence against women act reauthorization overwhelmingly passes senate. The Huffington Post.

Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/26/violence-against-women-act- passes senate_n_1456839.html

Bubar, R., Thurman, Pamela J. (2004). Violence Against Native Women. Social Justice. 31.4.

Buchwald, D., Tomita, S., Hartman, S., Furman, R., Dudden, M. & Manson, S. M. (2000). Physical Abuse of Urban Native Americans. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 15, 563. 562-564.

Entrekin, Chrisina M., Harper, Shelby S.(2006). Violence Against Native Women. A Guide for Practitioner Action. Office on Violence Against Women, National Center on Full Faith and Credit. 1-38.

Heise, Lori, L. Violence Against Women : An Integrated, Ecological Framework. Violence Against Women 1998 4: 262.

Lawrence, Jane.(2000). The Indian Health Services and the Sterilization of Native American Women. American Indian Quarterly. 24, 3, 400.

National Task Force to End Sexual and Domestic Violence Against Women.Tribal Provision: Myth v. Facts. Accessed at http://4vawa.org/pages/tribal-provision-of-s-1925-myths-v- facts.com

Pacheco, Amanda. (2009). Broken Traditions: Overcoming the Jurisdictional Maze to Protect Native American Women from Sexual Violence. USF Journal of Law and Social Challenges. 1, 11.

Radon, A. (2004). Tribal Jurisdiction and Domestic Violence: The Need for Non-Indian Accountability on the Reservation. University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform. 37, 1275-1312.

Saylors, Karen. Daliparthy, Nalini. (2006). Violence Against Native Women in Substance Abuse Treatment. American Indian Alaska Native Mental Health Resource. 13, 1, 33.

Steven W Perry (December 2004). American Indian and Crime- A BIS Statistical Profile 1992- 2002, Bureau of Justice Statistics, US Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, accessed at www.ojp.usdoj/bjs/pub/pdf/aic02.pdf

Weisman, Jonathan. (May 12, 2012). For Native American women, scourge of rape, rare justice. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/23/us/native- americans-struggle-with-high-rate-of-rape.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

    

Diversity in Social Action

It is relevant to address diversity within social action movements. While social activism or social action is not synonymous to community organizing, often times effective community organizing will employ social action in order to accomplish goals for its constituency. When planning effective social actions there needs to be a cohesive community organizing practice where local stakeholders are trained to emerge as leaders, a variety of voices are considered, and community resources and strengths are assessed. 

Community organizing and social action are dynamic processes that ideally originates from within the pertaining community and its residents. The stakeholder's subjective experiences, shaped by race, gender, class, sexual orientation and disability, is crucial when assessing the origins of a social movement. In Celene Krauss article, Women of Color on the Front Line (2010), in Race, Class and Gender: An Anthology, women's differing roles in toxic waste protests and mobilizations are discussed. She employs a feminist lens to better understand how women's experiences and intentions in activism can be shaped by their roles and pre-existing social hierarchies.

White working class women were often drawn into toxic waste protests on behalf of their roles as mothers. A social work strengths based perspective is employed when Krauss considers how these women's extended social networks within their communities and families provided them with a vehicle for information dissemination and community organizing. Traditional female gatherings such as Tupperware parties, which might make most feminists including myself cringe, served as a catalyst when women in a Detroit suburb began to discuss negative health patterns in their community. Krauss's perspective allowed me to reconsider certain traditional female roles and expectation as potentials for strength and transformation. Kraus provided other examples of how white working class women tied their values to motherhood and democracy and these convictions helped them politicize and reconsider inequities related to power and gender. 

Pregnant women protest the use of harmful chemicals outside of German Chancellor Angela Merkel's office

(retrieved from http://www.greenpeace.org/eu-unit/en/campaigns/chemicals/)

Krauss points out that African American women's toxic waste protests originated from a different angle. Their involvement arose alongside issues of race inequality and political disenfranchisement. Similarly to the experiences of Native American women in environmental protests, their awareness of racial oppression connects to a wider political context where toxic waste is seen as "environmental racism". Within a social work perspective, its crucial to understand the subjective experiences of different groups of people and how they might approach and impact macro scale issues. Assessing strengths within different communities might vary according to people's experiences, roles and perceptions of themselves. 

Perspectives on Community Organizing

Conflict versus Consensus Organizing

Community organizing focuses on shifting inequitable balances of power which adversely effect and/or alienate a population. Conflict organizing & consensus organizing are two modes of community organizing that employ different strategies for community intervention. There is also differences in the projected outcome of these two approaches. 

Conflict organizing is often aimed at calling people's attention to a certain problem or condition and it assumes that the opposing side must concede to a demand. It might be based on contesting power hierarchies and battling for a specific or set of causes. Consensus organizing is focused on implementing a project that builds on the mutual self interest of both sides rather than forcing a concession from the opposing side. A consensus organizer can't necessarily afford to disrupt or demonize the other side as one of their main focuses will be based on finding common ground. Prof Hawkin's summarized one of his student's reflections on consensus organizing: "What Ive learned through this process is that I can better get what I want by figuring out how to help you get what you want". Essentially a consensus organizer must put themselves in the shoes of the person or organization they will be negotiating with.

Saul Alinsky, considered the grandfather of conflict organizing, urged activists to consider how symbols are used to convey messages. We discussed in Prof Hawkin's class how Alinsky was attuned to the idea that if you want to use a metafor to convey discontent then you must understand how that metaphor is going to be interpreted by the general public or target audience. Alinksy was opposed to the use of flag burning in opposition to the Vietnam war because it did not effectively communicate a solution or alternative to war and further offended and alienated the public from the anti-war movement.

One of the differences between the two different modes of community organizing is the outcome and strategy for achieving this outcome. At the end of conflict organizing you are trying to achieve a succession from the opposition. For example when Dolores Huerta and Cezar Chaves were organizing the Delano Grape Strike with the United Farm Workers they used boycotts and picketing efforts in order to establish a minimum wage and collective bargaining rights for immigrant farm workers. They collaborated with several other unions in order to achieve an effective and cohesive boycott, such as the International Longshoremen’s and Warehousemen’s Union, who would not load nonunion grapes onto shipments. The boycott eventually lead to their victory against the DiGiorgio Corporation and Schenley Industries. 

One of the first figure that comes to my mind when I think about community organizing in the United States is Dolores Huerta. She is an accomplished community organizer that lead stikes and political rallies mobilizing Latinos towards union organizing, labour rights, gender equality and political representation. Along with Cesar Chaves she cofounded the National Farmworkers Association in 1962. Her foundation's mission is "to create a network of organized communities pursuing social justice through systemic and structural transformation". 

National Women's Hall of Fame video about D. Huerta

I found the following excerpts especially relevant to the social work values of employing a strengths based approach, acknowledging the self determination of your client and working to help people empower themselves. “As an organizer you also have to keep in mind that....when people get involved they really transform, they get stronger and the work that they do transforms other people and that makes the community stronger and our world stronger.”

Huerta, shortly after receiving the Presidential Medal of Freedom

While not all the contents of this next TED video below are relevant to this post, starting at minute 6:45 Emiliano Salinas describes an example of coordinated civil action or non violent community organizing that is startling and effective in the face of terrorism and fear.

I was having a hard time thinking of how a consensus approach could be employed in situations where entities are fundamentally at odds, human rights have been violated and oppressive practices employed.  I then remembered the amnesty decision during Brasil's transition from dictatorship to democracy. In order for the country to transition as a cohesive unit and collaborate in establishing a democracy, both sides of the long standing conflict between the authoritative military power establishment and the opposition that often times employed violence to oppose the regime, were pardoned of their crimes. This enabled both sides to work together in the future and established some common ground. If there had not been vocal and effective opposition to the military regime via conflict organizing, the opportunity for consensus organizing might not have occurred. Perhaps the necessity and use of these two different modes are reflective of unique moments in history, such that successful conflict organizing can lay the framework for future consensus organizing. 

Community Practice

Strategies for Community Outreach 
(discussed on Nov 4th 2012 by Prof. Hawkins/University of Pittsburgh)

Three modes of community outreach will be discussed within a social work perspective in this post. It remains necessary while considering these distinct modes, to recognize how often times these approaches can be employed simultaneously. Social work practice does not exist in a vacuum and dynamic interlinked practices can strengthen and build upon each other. 

Locality Development

One of the primary goals within a locality development framework is to engage distinct members of a community within a common space. A vehicle for this is to create a physical place where people come together to share a sense of community. This mode of community practice attempts to approach a previously fragmented neighborhood and foster a space where shared experiences, resources and information can be exchanged. The settlement house movement beginning in the late 1800's is an early representation of effective locality development. Jane Adam's 'Hull House' settlement in Chicago is an example of this type of intervention, embodying the value that an individual should be considered and 'treated' within their environment. A person in the environment (PIE) perspective is a key social work value employed within locality development, urging social workers to reform the social and economic environment rather than individually diagnosing an alienated individual. 

Cultural and recreational centers such as the YMCA also fit into this paradigm of community outreach. These centers along with settlement houses were aimed at addressing diverse immigrant populations, assisting with their transition into American society. Initiatives aimed at creating common ground in order to adress rootlessness, disengaged citizens and weak social networks, created social and cultural capital. Accesible and cooperative civic spaces attempted to create a more cohesive society while simultaneously providing essential social services such as child care, medical care, vocational training, cultural workshops and more. Within this locality development, the target population is often viewed as 'citizens', due to a historical attempt to increase people's ability to cooperate and contribute as productive citizens. Within a strengths based approach, a responsible intervention would include different cultural and personal insights. 

Social Planning

Driving questions within a social planning perspective is: How can services be coordinated to better serve a community? What are the primarily gaps in services and resources in the community? Effectively addressing these questions implies a great deal of inter agency networking in order to both adress gaps and create a comprehensive continuum of care. It entails pulling together resources from different organizations to create a consistent intervention. This approach would view their target population either as clients or consumers because they would be generally coming for assistance or services on an individual or family basis. The Mon Valley Providers Council is a program of the Human Services Center Corporation in Turtle Creek, PA. The MVPC provides interagency links and formalizes an alliance between diverse service providers in the region. They discuss and strategize how to better serve the community by bridging gaps in services, creating a more cohesive network of servies, and establishing working groups on housing, health, employment and youth. A list of all their member organizations can be seen HERE. Connecting previously fragmented social service agencies into a cohesive and communicable alliance is a key goal within a social planning framework.

Social Action

Also known as 'community action', a social action paradigm frequently focuses on advocacy and thus it views its target population as constituents. A primary goal of social action is to call the pubic's attention to social problems that are otherwise out of sight. Education, lobbying and mobilization are all tools for social action. Social Action will be further discussed in an ensuing post. 

And finally

Its worth remembering that each mode of community organizing will have distinct ways of interacting with its target population. Within a general social work practice, we refer to the people we are professionally interacting with as clients, constituents, consumers and citizens. Each label carries with it a set of expectations and implications that fall on a spectrum ranging from voluntary to involuntary relationships. There has been a general trend to adress clients as consumers since the title 'consumer' implies a voluntary and perhaps empowering transaction, or at the very least acknowledges a person's choice in services.  Therefore we should remain attuned to how professionals label their target populations, as that provides  valuable information on the nature of their professional interaction and frames their practice within the different modes of social work practice. 

Narrative Nature of Social Work Assessment

Social work assessments can often embody a narrative nature in order to best draw out a client's story. There are several questions a social worker must adress, answer and assess by the end of the assessment process, ranging from micro to macro level problems, strengths and resources. 

retrieved from http://ocw.usu.edu/university_extension/conversation-on-instructional-design/index.html

A narrative assessment should enable your client to make their own discoveries and notice patterns in behaviors or events. When addressing a problematic behavior, it is essential to ask your client: What is the outcome of the behavior? This question is especially important as it can empower the client to self-adress the outcome, aftermath or consequences of a behavior. A social worker's goal within a direct practice paradigm often might entail encouraging self-awareness via self-reflection. This relates to the key social work value of self determination. At best a narrative extends a client's awareness beyond what they have thought about previously by encouraging the assessment to be a discovery process. 

Dynamic questions should help the client create a narrative or story about their behavior which moves them beyond a fragmented view of actions and events to a cohesive story and reflective mode. If people are conscious of their behavior, that gives them something concrete to work with. This moves the social worker beyond passivity,  as they must remain an active listener to help address these questions while giving the client tools to solve a problem. Assessment questions encourage the client to become self reflective regarding their problems and why they are seeing you by tying together different fragments of a problem into a narrative. 

In order to avoid a "one size fits all" mentality within your intervention, a personal and comprehensive assessment must be conducted! 

The Social Work Assessment Process

There are three initial topics social workers must address within direct practice assessments:

1. In the client's perspective, what is his or her primary goal and/or concern?
2. Are there legal mandates that must be met by the social worker and client?
3. Are there immediate or chronic health and safety concerns?
(Hepworth, Rooney, Rooney, and Strom-Gottfried. Direct Social Work Practice: Theory and Skill. 173-174 ) 


How is the Assessment Process linked to Core Social Work Values?

Tools for assessment should remain tightly knit to core social work values. At the top of our list: social workers must address and acknowledge their client's right to self-determination. The client needs to be invested in the process in order to make progress. The social worker's pre-assessment goals might not necessarily be critical within the client's perspective. By encouraging the client to explain and establish their concerns, mutual reciprocity within the client/provider relationship can be established. In addition to having someone listen and empathize with you, it is empowering to find your voice. With the heightened awareness of your client's right to self-determination, social workers should encourage their clients to voice their goals and problems. Within a problem solving mode with another person, a social worker must bridge the needs and objectives of the client with imposed agency or mandated goals. 

Assessments consider a "person in the environment" perspective. The social worker should investigate the client's environmental conditions. The following questions should be adressed as part of the assessment:  What is your client's habitat and what specific roles (their niche) do they play in their habitat? What social systems impact them and how do these impact them positively and/or negatively? What are social safety nets that the client relies on for support? What additional social safety nets might your client be able to connect with in order to receive more support?  People do not exist in a vacuum! Thus it is essential to understand the interconnected systems that impact your client and vice versa.  Cultural competency is a key social work value and skill during this part of the process.  In order to gain a holistic view of the client's habitat the social worker must consider different cultural norms and roles in addition to barriers this client's group might face. Drawing  an ecomap, such as the one below, with the client might be a useful tool during the assessment process. 

image from: http://home.earthlink.net/~mattaini/Ecosystems.html

Understanding your client's habitat allows the social worker to more effectively employ a strengths based approach during the assessment process.  Personal and environmental strengths should be considered. Personal strengths might include: resilience in the face of stress and hardship, confronting rather than avoiding problems, knowing when to seek help and being resourceful. Environmental strengths might include: support groups, family, friends, religious affiliations, institutional affiliations and community involvement such as volunteerism.  

Diagnosis versus Assessment-

While social workers might rely on both of these tools, it is important to highlight their clear differences. Social work assessments posit a holistic view of the client, considering people do not live in a vacum and people's individual problems exist in a wider social context. It accounts for the several different formal and informal systems interacting with your client as potential sources of strength or stress. Diagnosis takes a symptoms based approach to label a condition, such as a medical or mental health condition. Diagnostic tools can sometimes be used as part of a comprehensive assessment. Diagnosis and assessment are not interchangeable terms or processes.     

Micro, Mezzo and Macro Social Work

Micro, Mezzo and Macro Social Work  -

Micro Level practice focuses on personal interaction with your client or consumer on an individual level or with a couple or family. A micro-level intervention could entail a clinical social worker interacting with a client at a mental health facility. Alternatively, it could encompass a school social worker counseling a truant student or a caseworker working one on one with a client at a homeless shelter.

Mezzo Level intervention entails bringing people together who are not as intimate as a couple or family members, but might mutually build and benefit from this social or resource network. It might directly change the system that is affecting a client, such as a classroom or neighborhood group. Examples of mezzo scale work includes group therapy counseling, self-help groups or neighborhood community associations. 

Macro Level practice focuses on systemic issues. It might include creating and maintaining a network of service providers in order to establish a continuum of care. Macro level intervention can intersect with the political realm by creating and lobbying for policy changes. The planning, implementation and maintenance of a social programs are also processes which macro scale practice is aplicable. Coordinating multiple services and policy work offers an opportunity to address several intersecting social problems. 

http://savedsister7.blogspot.com/2012/03/you-knowthose-people.html

Ecological System's HABITAT and NICHE

Keep in mind: "Ecological systems theory posits that individuals constantly engage in transactions with other humans and with other systems in the environment, and that these individuals and systems reciprocally influence each other" (Hepworth, Rooney, Rooney, and Strom-Gottfried. Direct Social Work Practice: Theory and Skill. 15). Considering this perspective, comprehensively understanding and actively considering your client's environment is a crucial social work skill. 

Habitat- A person's habitat includes the different physical places they inhabit, the social systems that they interact with and the formal and informal institutional affiliations they have. For example, a person's habitat might include their educational institution, their religious affiliation, their neighborhood, their friends, their professional environment and/or their family.

Niche- A niche describes that person's role in their habitat. People have multiple roles within their different habitats, providing them with contextual meanings. A person might derive self-worth and dignity from their functions or alternatively their niche might highlight oppressive and disenfranchising situations. Within an educational institution, someone might be an instructor, while simultaneously being a volunteer at their local food pantry. A person's niche contextualizes different hierarchies, contributes to their identity and modulates social and institutional interactions.