Discussion: The Impact of Social PolicySocial policies can have a significant impact on individuals and families, as well as the organizations and agencies that implement the policies. In some cases, the policy, as written, appears comprehensive and effective. Yet, despite appearances, the policy might fail to be effective as a result of improper implementation, interpretation, and/or application of the policy. As a social worker, how might you reduce the potential negative impact faulty social policies might have on organizations and agencies, as well as the populations you serve?For this Discussion, review this week’s resources, including cases “Working with Immigrants and Refugees: The Case of Luisa” and “Social Work Policy: Benefit Administration and Provision.” Then, select either of the cases and consider how the social welfare policies presented in the case influenced the problems facing Luisa or Tessa. Finally, think about how policies affect social agencies and how social workers work with clients such as Tessa or Luisa.Post by Day 3 an explanation of the effects of the social welfare policies presented in the case study you selected on Luisa or Tessa. Be specific and reference the case study you selected in your post. Finally, explain how policies affect social agencies and how social workers work with clients, such as Tessa or Luisa.Support your post with specific references to the resources. Be sure to provide full APA citations for your references.
The impact of social policy
The impact of social policy Social Work Policy: Benefit
Administration and
Provision
Tessa is a 45-year-old, divorced, Filipina female who came to
the
Department of Human Services seeking assistance. I was asked
to see her
because she was denied services by the Division of Family
Development. She is
homeless and in need of mental health treatment for
post-traumatic stress
disorder (PTSD) but has no insurance or funds to pay for the
services. She also
reported that she has experienced domestic violence. Tessa
reported that she
was brought to this state from another state by an
underground network for
women who have experienced domestic violence and are still at
risk for
violence. Tessa stated that she was formerly married to a
high-ranking officer in
the military. The Division of Family Development denied her
application
because she refused to disclose her legal name and Social
Security number. She
fears that if her name is entered into any system, her
ex-husband will locate her
and kill her. Tessa carries a binder containing photographs
of the injuries that
she sustained during the final year of her marriage. The
photos are graphic and
depict severe facial bruising. There is medical documentation
indicating that her
orbital bone was fractured and both of her kneecaps were
broken when her ex-
husband struck her with a baseball bat. Her former husband
was found guilty of
domestic violence and ordered to undergo a substance abuse
treatment program
for his alcoholism. This program satisfied the requirements
set forth by the
military and Child Protective Services (CPS). Once the
program was completed,
Tessa was court ordered to bring Maria, her 5-year-old
daughter, to him for
visitation. Tessa began to see signs that her ex-husband was
sexually abusing
Maria during these unsupervised visits. She approached CPS
with her concerns,
but they found no evidence to substantiate this allegation.
Under the visitation
agreement, Tessa was not permitted to leave the state, but
she ignored the order
and moved to another state with Maria. She was subsequently
located by the
authorities, and the child was removed and returned to her
home state. To her
knowledge, Maria is now in the care of her paternal
grandparents. Presently,
Tessa is staying at the home of a member of a local church
that is connected to
the domestic violence network. She is unable to remain in
this home indefinitely
and has been told that she must find her own home and begin
the process of
establishing herself independently. Tessa is deeply saddened
and worried about
Maria’s safety. She has been advised to legally change her
name and apply for a
new Social Security number to protect her from future
assaults by her exhusband. This would also allow her to apply for
benefits, but Tessa is unwilling
to do this because she has been advised by her attorney that
once her name has
been changed, she must give up all contact and hope of
reuniting with Maria. In
our state, the computer system used by the Division of Family
Development is
designed to conceal the identities of women who have
experienced intimate
partner violence as a means to protect them. I advised Tessa
of this and
informed her that her legal name and Social Security number
is a requirement
for benefit approval. Tessa continues to refuse to share this
information because
she does not believe that the computer controls will limit
access for a highranking military officer. In order to address her
concerns, I contacted the office
of the commissioner of the Department of Human Services to
inquire whether
the system is able to prevent access by a high-ranking
military officer with
connections to the government. I was told that this could not
be guaranteed. I
worked out an alternative solution with the state using a
pseudonym until the
issue of an identity change could be resolved for Tessa.
Tessa received the cash
benefits and housing grant, began mental health counseling,
and found an
apartment. She eventually was assigned a new identity with
the understanding
that she could not continue her search for Maria.
Working With Immigrants and Refugees: The Case of Luisa.
Luisa is a 36-year-old, married, Latino female who immigrated
to the
United States from Colombia. She speaks only Spanish, so a
translator must be
used for communication. She came to the United States on a
visa, but remained
beyond the allotted time. While in the United States, she met
and married Hugo,
who was in the country with documentation. Once Luisa married
Hugo, she
became pregnant with a daughter, who is now 3 years old.
Luisa has a 10-yearold son named Juan in Colombia. Luisa has always
had the desire to reunite
with Juan and bring him to the United States to live with
her. After her marriage
and status change, she began the process of sponsoring Juan.
She has been
advised that in order for sponsorship to be achieved, she
cannot receive welfare
benefits because she needs to prove that she can support
herself and her child.
Luisa came to the local welfare agency after she and her
daughter entered the
domestic violence shelter. She reported that Hugo had a
history of violence,
which was exacerbated when he drank alcohol. Hugo had been
drinking more
frequently, and the episodes of violence had increased in
severity. The domestic
violence program requires all residents to apply for any
available benefits in
order to remain enrolled in their services. In one particular
episode, Hugo
almost fractured her orbital bones. She had extensive facial
bruising and blood
pooled in one eye. Luisa is quite fearful of Hugo. She is
also financially
dependent on him. She is reluctant to apply for benefits
because she fears that
this will compromise her ability to sponsor her son in
Colombia. She is tearful
and tells me that she cannot sacrifice her son’s opportunity
to come to the
United States. Luisa is socially isolated because she has no
family in the United
States, and Hugo has restricted her ability to socialize and
establish friendships.
However, she is a practicing Catholic and does belong to a
church that offers
bilingual services. Luisa began to discuss returning to Hugo
because she felt
that this was her only viable option. I advised her that
under the new federal
changes in immigration laws she might be allowed to apply for
benefits and still
sponsor her son because she is experiencing domestic
violence. I explained that
we would need to speak to an immigration lawyer to verify
this, but it could
possibly be an alternative to returning to Hugo. Luisa
reported that she had
given money to lawyers in the past who had been unhelpful.
She was suspicious
of the law’s ability to protect her. Hugo had also threatened
to report her to the
authorities, stating that he would tell them she only married
him to remain in the
country. Although this is not true, she feared that he would
do this, and she
would never see her daughter again. I offered to speak with
someone at the
domestic violence program and advocate that they allow her
some time to
research her options. I told Luis that these were difficult
decisions to make and
that she would be supported in her decision. I told her that
she knew what was
best for her family. I offered to research the options that
she might have under
this new federal program. I also asked for permission to
contact the priest at her
church so that she might be able to review her situation with
a religious leader
in the community. Luisa agreed. Two weeks later, Luisa
applied for services on
behalf of her daughter and herself. She has decided not to
return to Hugo.
References: •
Plummer, S.-B., Makris, S., & Brocksen, S. (Eds.).
(2014).
Social work case studies: Foundation year. Baltimore: MD:
Laureate
InternationalUniversities Publishing. [Vital Source
e-reader]. • o “ Social
Work Policy: Benefit Administration and Provision” (pp. 75–
76)
o “ Working with Immigrants and Refugees: The Case of Luisa”
(pp.
79– 80)•
…
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
Other samples, services and questions:
When you use PaperHelp, you save one valuable — TIME
You can spend it for more important things than paper writing.
