Editorial Putting Ideals Into Practice No period of history has ever been great or ever can be that does not act on some sort of high idealistic motives, and idealism in our time has been shoved aside, and we are paying the penalty for it. ALFRED NORTH WHITEHEAD, Dialogues of 1953.
T when idealism was not only an honored word but an honored approach—one that, HERE WAS A TIME
more often than not, could be applied to the profession of social work. However, worldwide and national events have somehow made the concept seem naive and have replaced it by cynicism and apathy. Although all of us are concerned with medical-legal responsibility, I believe that we must take an equally strong stand on what may be termed a social-legal responsibility, which would imply putting our old ideals into practice in an advocate role. This must be done despite the implication that the social-legal responsibility may seem to contradict the medical-legal one. Our social-legal responsibiliy can best be illustrated by posing a few questions. For example, what action do 3
4
HEALTH AND SOCIAL WORK
we take when nursing homes fail to live up to standards, not only to those mandated by state laws but to those held by all of us who recognize the dignity and care of individuals? How seriously do we take our responsibility to report incidents of child abuse, not only flagrant ones but those that are less apparent? Are we prepared to take action? And what do we do when members of a professional team fail to live up to PSRO regulations? Some colleagues state that at this time it is more realistic to set minimum standards, that because our profession lacks the resources to implement standards at a higher level, practice is unable to demonstrate its skills. However, I contend that it is f ar better to risk ourselves and institute what may seem to some "pie in the sky"' measures than to support minimum actions. We must take positive steps, not placating ones. Our consumers expect no less from the profession. Several of the articles in the current issue are concerned with various aspects of pediatric care and pose strong arguments for preventive and therapeutic roles as well as advocacy positions. A recent editorial in the New York Times reports that pregnancy among youngsters has reached epidemic proportions. How vocal will we be in opposing recent government regulations that deny federal funds for abortions of Medicaid patients, the largest number of whom are teenagers? How vocal and active will we be in insuring that adequate care and preventive services are made available not only for these children but for all children? Surely our concerns for individuals and our interest in the protection and promotion of sound and healthy family life must convince us of our social-legal responsibility —to take a stand that supports the ideals of the profession. —B.P.
T when idealism was not only an honored word but an honored approach—one that, HERE WAS A TIME
more often than not, could be applied to the profession of social work. However, worldwide and national events have somehow made the concept seem naive and have replaced it by cynicism and apathy. Although all of us are concerned with medical-legal responsibility, I believe that we must take an equally strong stand on what may be termed a social-legal responsibility, which would imply putting our old ideals into practice in an advocate role. This must be done despite the implication that the social-legal responsibility may seem to contradict the medical-legal one. Our social-legal responsibiliy can best be illustrated by posing a few questions. For example, what action do 3
4
HEALTH AND SOCIAL WORK
we take when nursing homes fail to live up to standards, not only to those mandated by state laws but to those held by all of us who recognize the dignity and care of individuals? How seriously do we take our responsibility to report incidents of child abuse, not only flagrant ones but those that are less apparent? Are we prepared to take action? And what do we do when members of a professional team fail to live up to PSRO regulations? Some colleagues state that at this time it is more realistic to set minimum standards, that because our profession lacks the resources to implement standards at a higher level, practice is unable to demonstrate its skills. However, I contend that it is f ar better to risk ourselves and institute what may seem to some "pie in the sky"' measures than to support minimum actions. We must take positive steps, not placating ones. Our consumers expect no less from the profession. Several of the articles in the current issue are concerned with various aspects of pediatric care and pose strong arguments for preventive and therapeutic roles as well as advocacy positions. A recent editorial in the New York Times reports that pregnancy among youngsters has reached epidemic proportions. How vocal will we be in opposing recent government regulations that deny federal funds for abortions of Medicaid patients, the largest number of whom are teenagers? How vocal and active will we be in insuring that adequate care and preventive services are made available not only for these children but for all children? Surely our concerns for individuals and our interest in the protection and promotion of sound and healthy family life must convince us of our social-legal responsibility —to take a stand that supports the ideals of the profession. —B.P.
