Social work as a profession has a unique commitment in honoring the dignity and worth of human beings, and believing in the power of human relationships (NASW, 2008). In its approach to helping people, social work has distinguished itself through its dual focus on the person and the environment, a construct which has been widely identified as person-in-environment (Rogge & Cox, 2001). This construct has guided social work to engage in the empowerment of the individual and of society; however, it is a construct that has been criticized for its exclusion of the natural world. This paper examines the person-in-environment construct in social work and introduces deep empathy and ecological empowerment as important strategies of connection with the natural world. The paper also examines strategies of disconnection that negatively impact individual and planetary well-being. The implications of redefining person-in-environment to include the natural world are examined for both fields of social science.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AroraS., & CasonT. N. (1999) . Do community characteristics influence environmental outcomes? Evidence from the toxics release inventory. Southern Economic Journal, 65(4 ), 691–716.
2.
BesthornF. H. (1997) . Reconceptualizing social work’s person-in-environment perspective: Explorations in radical thought. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Kansas, Lawrence.
3.
BesthornF. H. (2000, February). Radical environmentalism: Reflections on educating social workers in spirituality and social justice. Juried paper presented at the Annual Program Meeting of the Council on Social Work Education, New York.
4.
BesthornF. H., & CandaE. R. (2002) . Revisioning environment: Deep ecology for education and training in social work. Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 22(1/2 ), 79–101.
5.
BesthornF. H., & SaleebyD. (2003) . Nature, genetics and the biophilia connection: Exploring the link with social work values and practice. Advances in Social Work, 4(1 ), 1–18.
6.
BrunerJ. (1987) . Life as narrative. Social Research, 54, 11–32.
7.
BuzzellL. (2009) . Asking different questions: Therapy for the human animal. In BuzzellL. & ChalquistC. (Eds.), Ecotherapy: Healing with nature in mind (pp. 46–54 ). San Francisco: Sierra Club Books.
8.
BuzzellL., & ChalquistC. (2009) . Ecotherapy: Healing with nature in mind. San Francisco: Sierra Club Books.
9.
ComstockD., & QinD. (2005) . Relational-cultural theory: A framework for relational development across the lifespan. In ComstockD. >(Ed.), Diversity and development: Critical contexts that shape our lives and relationships (pp. 25–46 ). Belmont, CA: Thomson Brooks/Cole.
10.
DodgeK. A., & PettitG. S. (2003) . A biopsychosocial model of the development of chronic conduct problems in adolescence. Developmental Psychology, 39(2), 349–371.
11.
EnnsC. Z. (2004) . Feminist theories and feminist psychotherapies (2nd ed. ). New York: Routledge.
12.
GermainC. (1979) . Social work practice: People and environments. New York: Columbia University Press.
13.
GreyW. (1993) . Anthropocentrism and deep ecology. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 71(4), 463–475.
14.
GutheilI. A. (1992) . Considering the physical environment: An essential component of good practice. Social Work, 37(5), 391–396.
15.
HillmanJ. (1995) . A psyche the size of the earth: A psychological foreword. In RoszakT., GomesM. E., & KannerA. D. (Eds.), Ecopsychology (pp. xvii–xxiii ). San Francisco: Sierra Club Books.
16.
HoffM. D., & McNuttJ. G. (1994) . The global environmental crisis: Implications for social welfare and social work. Brookfield, VT: Ashgate.
17.
HutchisonE. (2008) . Dimensions of human behavior: Person and environment. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
18.
International Community for Ecopsychology. (2004) . What is ecopsychology? Retrieved August 11, 2009, from http://www.ecopsychology.org/
19.
JordanJ. V. (2001) . A relational-cultural mode: Healing through mutual empathy. Bulletin of the Menninger Clinic, 65(1), 92–103.
20.
JordanJ. V. (2002) . A relational-cultural perspective in therapy. In F.Kazlow (Ed.), Comprehensive handbook of psychotherapy (Vol. 3, pp. 233–254 ). New York: Wiley.
21.
JordanJ. V., & HartlingL. M. (2002) . New developments in relational-cultural theory. In BallouM. & BrownL. S. (Eds.), Rethinking mental health and disorders: Feminist perspectives (pp. 48–70 ). New York: Guilford.
22.
KimballR. O. ,& BaconS. B. (1993) . The wilderness challenge model. In GassM. (Ed.), Adventure therapy: Therapeutic applications of adventure programming (pp. 11–41 ). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.
23.
McQuaideS. (1999) . A social worker’s use of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual. Families In Society: The Journal of Contemporary Human Services, 80(4), 410–416.
24.
MetznerR. (1995) . The psychopathology of the human-nature relationship. In RoszakT., GomesM. E., KannerA. D. (Eds.), Ecopsychology (pp. 55–67 ). San Francisco: Sierra Club Books.
25.
MillerJ. B., & StiverI. P. (1997) . The healing connection: How women form relationships for therapy and in life. Boston: Beacon Press.
26.
MinklerM. (2000) . Using participatory action research to build healthy communities. Public Health Reports, 115(2/3), 191–197.
27.
National Association of Social Workers. (2008) . Code of Ethics. Retrieved August 13, 2009, from http://www.socialworkers.org/pubs/code/code.asp
28.
NortonC. (2009) . Into the wilderness—A case study: The psychodynamics of adolescent depression and the need for a holistic intervention. Clinical Social Work Journal, 4/11/2009. DOI 10.1007/s10615-009-0205-5.
29.
ResnickH., & JaffeeB. (1982) . The physical environment and social welfare. Social Casework, 63(6), 354–362.
30.
RoggeM. E., & CoxM. E. (2001) . The person-in-environment perspective in social work journals: A computer-assisted content analysis. Journal of Social Service Research, 28(2), 47–68.
31.
RosenA. (1993) . Correction of workers’ personal versus environmental bias in formulation of client problems. Social Work Research and Abstracts, 29(4), 12–17.
32.
SaariC. (1992) . The person-in-environment reconsidered: New theoretical bridges. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, 9(3), 205–219.
33.
SaleebyD. (2006) . The strengths perspective in social work practice (4th ed. ). Boston: Person Education.
34.
WalkerM. (2005) . Critical thinking: Challenging developmental myths, stigmas and stereotypes. In ComstockD. (Ed.), Diversity and development: Critical contexts that shape our lives and relationships (pp. 47–66 ). Belmont, CA: Thomson Brooks/Cole.
