Today has been a busy day inside my head. Moving between discussing issues related to harmful sexual behaviour in children and adolescents, to considering plans to make a toilet into a shower room and maximise the use of space in a utility area, I went to the bank, and so on... I continually struggle with the work that a social worker has to do these days. In child protection you work to assess the referrals, disclosures, queries from warring couples and people in schools and health workers about vulnerable kids... just for starters. What is the relationship between the art of social work, steeped as it is in theories of human behaviour that struggle to find a place for external agency (God), authentic personal freedom (humanity) and, perhaps most important: sin. I am currently wrestling with the meaning and use of theology (quite theoretical) and the practice of life and social work. Particularly interesting is the functionality of most assessment and the use of language to describe behaviour. These procedures are at the heart of social work/psychology. The quality of the description has a considerable impact on the outcome in assessment. With children who display behaviour that is sexually inappropriate (i.e with relation to their age, and/or in relation to coercion and the intention) there are so many questions to reflect upon.
The principle reason for 'theologising' harmful sexual behaviour is to try to put it into a wider context than is possible within existing frameworks. Such frameworks are - cognitive/behavioural; psychodynamic ( about which I know little); child developmental models amongst others. There are specific criminological and offence focused models, and there are others borrowed from drug treatment etc. There is also attachment theory which has a big following in social work but still seems to lack rigour. The models also continue to diversify and multiply as if the questions are all being reduced to a single problem 'atom' with its own unique core definition and solution. Hence the single biggest problem in this area of work: the lack of a comprehensive model of explanation (one that brings it all together under one discursive roof), everything seems to be somewhat tentative. all I know is that the opportunity to live in hope of redemption and with the reality of the healing power of God is where it begins and ends. The day to day reality, however, needs some thoughtful reflection. The main thrust of much theology now is context and method. the biggest and most significant movements seem to tend toward an understanding of 'community' and sociality as the starting point for understanding and knowledge.
Can there be an expansion of the work of theology into all fields. After all theology does nothing if it does not ask questions? there is a significant opportunity for theological critiques at a time when postmodern theory has upturned the bloated (and un-self aware) confidence of instrumental rationalism. Yet when I search the web for theological critiques and methods in relation to specific subjects such as my own I find a void. We should be able to be salt and light in the academic forum, where the minds of the generation are battling for truth and influence.
Labels: theology and social work