Strategic processes to further the professional status of social work in Nigeria

Abstract

This article examines pivotal issues relating to social workers’ search for professional recognition in Nigeria. It begins with a historical discussion of social work’s universal quest to establish a distinct professional identity. Thereafter, it examines Nigerian social work’s path to professionalisation before introducing an analytical framework through recourse to an R-lexicon to highlight the interrelated processes by which professions establish their credentials and attain legitimation. These are registration and regulation, relevance, recognition, representation, relational connection, rights and research. This R-lexicon highlights key strategic areas Nigerian social workers might address to advance their quest for professional status.

Introduction

The article examines pivotal issues surrounding social workers’ attempts to advance the professional standing of social work in Nigeria. Establishing social work’s professional credentials and achieving government sanction for its operations has been an important quest wherever social work is practised and is further along the line for countries where the profession has a long history (Teoh and Shaffie, 2017). Precolonial mission-based charity work that began in the second half of the 19th century and colonial administration that ended in 1960 were precursors to professional social work in Nigeria, that is, social work practised by qualified professionals. Professional social work in Nigeria began with the introduction of undergraduate social work education at the University of Nigeria, Nsukka (UNN) in 1976 and postgraduate programmes at the University of Benin in 1979. Located in departments of sociology and anthropology, these early programmes had a heavy sociological bias though, in time, academics with overseas qualifications in social work began to introduce Western models of social work theory and practice that remain dominant even today. UNN’s social work unit became an independent department only in 2006 (Mbah et al., 2017; Okoye, 2014). Hence, relative to other countries, formal social work education in Nigeria, now offered in at least 15 universities and colleges, is a relatively recent phenomenon and the key strategy for professionalisation ‒ the Nigerian Council of Social Work (Establishment) Bill 2017, known as the Social Work Bill that has yet to receive Presidential approval ‒ comes late in its history. Although this legislation would go a long way to establish social work’s professional credentials, the profession needs to do more to address the political, sociocultural and religious barriers hampering practice. It is important to explore the factors surrounding Nigerian social work’s quest for professional recognition as Nigeria’s experience might yield lessons for other countries in sub-Saharan Africa and beyond that have struggled to gain professional recognition, despite ongoing efforts to indigenise and, more recently, decolonise social work to enhance its relevance.

The article begins with a historical discussion on social work’s universal quest for a professional identity to highlight criteria of professionalisation and the processes by which professions gain social legitimacy. It then provides examples from other countries to show diverse processes of professionalisation internationally that might guide Nigerian social work’s quest for professional status. Thereafter, it examines Nigerian social work’s path to professionalisation before introducing an analytical framework to highlight the interrelated processes by which professions establish their credentials and attain legitimation. These are registration and regulation, relevance, recognition, representation, relational connection, rights and research. This R-lexicon highlights key strategic areas Nigerian social workers might address to advance their quest for professional status.

Universal quest for a professional identity for social work

Criteria approach

The universal quest for a professional identity occurred wherever social work came to be practised beginning historically in England and the United States, where many employed by charitable institutions regarded their work as professional comparing it to law, medicine and psychiatry (Gibbelman, 1999; Woodroofe, 1962). In 1915, US expert on professional education, Abraham Flexner, put professionalisation on social work’s agenda, when, in his address to the National Conference on Charities and Corrections in Baltimore, he asked ‘Is social work a profession?’ He concluded that social work did not meet the hallmarks of a profession, which he described as an essentially intellectual operation with extensive individual responsibilities that derived its raw material from science and learning and applied this material to practical predetermined goals. In addition, it had to have educationally communicable techniques and the ability to organise and monitor its activities, which were altruistic in nature. While he accepted social workers’ altruistic motivations, he believed it lacked the responsibility and power of a true profession. Importantly, its aims were too wide and unspecific. Because of its broad scope, its practitioners lacked specialised skills and, despite its educational initiatives, social work lacked a systematic, scientific body of knowledge and theory to teach to aspiring professionals.

Flexner’s (1915) assessment sparked a ‘flurry of activity’ (Du Bois and Miley, 1992: 35) in the United States, where the number of schools of social work expanded dramatically as the profession advocated training for all social workers. A professional accreditation body established standardised educational curricula in the belief that the singular, generic nature of social work skills, applicable in any setting, would enhance its professional standing.

Flexner’s (1915) arguments rang true given that professionals laid ‘claim to extraordinary knowledge in matters of great social importance . . . [that, in return, granted them] extraordinary rights and privileges’ (Schön, 1983: 4). However, many years later, Gibbelman (1999) noted that social work’s quest for a distinct professional identity was still ‘hampered by the breadth of the profession, its relationship to the external socio-political environment and divisions within the profession itself’ (p. 298) regarding the merits of professionalisation. This was consistent with African scholars’ anecdotal observations that hurtful gerrymandering and ‘perennial internal wrangling’ (Amadasun, 2021a: 262) impeded agreement on a professional identity.

While some viewed professionalisation as fundamental to effective service delivery, others saw it as a heritage of the medical model, with the similarly negative effects of distancing social workers from their clients and communities (Biklen, 1983; Hopp and Pinderhughes, 1987; Webb, 1984). Furthermore, persistent disagreements on the scope of the profession led to the incessant split between micro (caseworkers) and macro (community workers) practice. The severest criticisms came from critical social workers who claimed social work’s bid to gain a monopoly on dispensing social welfare came at the cost of sacrificing its reform impetus (Specht and Courtney, 1994). Gaining expertise to acquire professional power and privilege in the social domain could work against public interest and the profession’s responsiveness to local people’s needs (Biklen, 1983; Hamilton, 1976; Schön, 1983). Hence, drivers for professional recognition created several anomalies and paradoxes for social work given its concern with social change and accessibility to people who needed its services.

Social integration approach

While Flexner (1915) advanced a criteria approach to professionalisation, Hamilton (1976) stressed the social processes by which professions gained legitimacy, sanction and social integration. She highlighted that the achievement of professional status depended on the occupational group’s success in convincing society of the legitimacy of its claims. However, this was a twin-edged sword, as legitimacy hinged on the group’s identification with ruling elites, conformity to social norms, and ability to convince those in power of its significant contribution to society. Professionalisation entailed establishing the occupational group’s credentials as an integral part of the social fabric of society with the skills to support and strengthen its social norms and structures. The occupational group had to ensure that ruling elites remained persuaded of its positive value or, at least, its harmlessness, so they would not undermine its contribution and protect its domain from encroachment. Established authority granted the profession the autonomy to work in the domains to which it laid claim so long as it conformed to the standards and values of the status quo. What then arose was a situation in which the profession received sanction to operate within the confines imposed by politicians and other ruling elites. In the case of social work, in most Western countries, it brought the authority to provide welfare services and protect this domain from encroachment by other occupations. However, being part of the ruling hierarchy with a stake in keeping society as it was was an anomaly for an occupation that started out with a mission of social reform and change. Biklen (1983) believed this undesirable consequence of professionalisation created a paradox for social work with its avowed commitment to challenge injustice and promote change. He questioned whether professional recognition was worth this sacrifice.

The search for professional status involved a political process to occupy a position of power within society, drive out competition and become the sole suppliers of particular services (Biklen, 1983; Hamilton, 1976). Such exclusivity imbued professions with a mystique supported by society’s belief that only certain occupational groups had the knowledge and expertise to dispense certain services. Subsequent developments in the self-help movement questioned these claims to professional exclusivity and to the value of scientific knowledge and expertise over lived experience. The movement demonstrated people’s dissatisfaction with professional services and formal helping systems (Biklen, 1983; Schön, 1983). It raised questions about professional accountability and effectiveness. To whom were social workers primarily accountable: the clients who used their services, the communities they served, the organisations that paid their salaries, the profession that set practice standards or the government that sanctioned their existence? These perplexing questions related to the values and aims of social work and its roles and responsibilities in society that created multiple levels of accountability and sometimes-competing goals. Society expected professions to ensure adherence to social norms and the laws of the country. Professions received formal sanction when their values mirrored societal values. Social work’s quest for social justice and work to change unjust norms and practices supported social legislation that afforded protection for vulnerable groups and sought to right wrongs through the justice system. Thus, being part of the social structure need not have a sinister face, especially where the profession and those in power shared a similar quest for social justice.

From this historical discussion, it is clear that there are two ways to examine Nigeria’s path to professional recognition. The first follows Flexner’s (1915) criteria approach that depends on attaining standard markers of professionalism, such as professional education programmes, professional associations and regulatory bodies, qualification standards, a code of ethics and a scientific knowledge base. Social work in Nigeria has established university-based professional education programmes and has made progress in establishing curriculum standards through its Benchmark Minimum Academic Standards (BMAS) guidelines for undergraduate bachelor’s and master’s courses in social work (National Universities Commission (NUC), 2017). It has also established professional associations though has yet to receive legislative legitimacy and establish an independent regulatory body to enforce qualification and practice standards and title protection. It has a growing body of scholarly literature so has achieved some hallmarks of professionalisation.

It falls short, however, on the social integration approach (Hamilton, 1976). It has yet to receive public recognition and legislative government approval to support its role in Nigerian society. Social work in Nigeria is not alone in its struggle for political recognition. Social workers in many parts of the world have low status, work under extreme pressure, in poorly resourced services, with poor work conditions and low wages. Nigeria might look to examples of other countries’ attempts at raising social work’s professional status. For example, Malaysia embarked on an approach of legal reform in 2010 proposing a Social Workers Act to bring education and practice in line with international standards through, among other things, the registration and licensing of social workers (Teoh and Shaffie, 2017). As in Nigeria, this has proved a long and drawn-out process that has yet to reach fruition.

China followed a centralised strategy of rapid training, regulation and registration with control of the profession vested in the government Ministry of Civil Affairs (MOCA) through standardised national curricula and professional accreditation examinations, based on state-approved social work textbooks (Meng et al., 2018, 2021; Niu and Østbø Haugen, 2019). Its quantity-then-quality approach (Ma et al., 2015) aimed to train 1.45 million social workers by 2020 (State Council, 2016), but fell short of this goal. By 2018, there were 348 Bachelor of Social Work and 150 Master of Social Work programmes at Chinese universities and colleges, and 430,000 certified social workers and assistant social workers, who had passed the accreditation examination (MOCA, 2019).

South Africa, like China, has a government-mandated Council for Social Service Professions that includes individual professional councils for the diverse professions involved in social service provision, such as social work and child and youth care work (Gray, 2000). It has also developed stringent accreditation standards and professional registration requirements yet remains an under-resourced, low-paid, low-status profession (Mazibuko and Gray, 2004; Sewpaul and Lombard, 2004).

The related processes of professionalisation and government sanction through legal reform shown in these examples are important if social work is to be effective as a key player in social service provision. Professional sanction comes with structures and processes that embed a system of professional organisation and regulatory codes of practice to ensure the maintenance of ethical standards. Mostly, professions regulate themselves through member-supported, voluntary professional associations. However, many countries have government regulatory bodies to set qualifications and standards for practice (DeAngelis and Monahan, 2012; Healy, 2013; McCurdy et al., 2020; Teoh and Shaffie, 2017).

Search for professional status in Nigeria

The attainment of professional status for social work in Nigeria has long been a central issue of concern to social work educators, practitioners and other critical stakeholders. From the outset, the profession’s legitimacy rested on the extent to which it contributed to the ‘continuous improvement and transformation in the quality of life of the people throughout the nation’ (Federal Ministry of Social Development, 1977: 8). Colonial government administrators with a secondary school education or diploma and 3–6 months in-service training were Nigeria’s first social workers (Jinadu, 1985; Mbah et al., 2017; Ojanuga, 1985). The small minority with a university education had trained overseas. Hence, the Guidelines for the Fourth National Development Plan, 1981–1985 stressed the government’s commitment to address the shortage of well-trained social workers on whom the success of social welfare depended (Federal Ministry of National Planning, 1981), but implementation failures of this and subsequent plans did little to alleviate the problem (Iheanacho, 2014).

The push for social workers to engage in social development marked a watershed moment in its quest for professional recognition. The influence of Western theory and practice had led to a focus on remedial casework at the expense of broader development. Some social workers saw community development as incongruent with professionalisation and continued tensions between the casework and community development camps hampered professional unity and the search for legitimacy through the 1980s (Amadasun, 2021a). However, beginning in the 1990s, the indigenisation movement gained momentum, laying the groundwork for coalition building to strengthen social work’s push for professionalisation. Several professional organisations emerged, but it was not until the turn of the century that the professionalisation movement intensified culminating in the aforementioned Social Work Bill. Hampering social work’s legislative push to advance professionalisation was the ongoing presence of large numbers of untrained, unqualified, public officials calling themselves social workers. Furthermore, there were no clear-cut strategies to further social work’s professional legitimacy. Our examination of Nigerian social work’s professionalisation efforts highlighted the need for strategic direction for its professionalising objectives. Hence, we developed the R-lexicon to highlight key strategic processes to advance the quest for professional status.

Registration and regulation

Government registration and regulation are two key processes for raising social workers’ professional standing, ensuring effective interventions and protecting clients from harmful practice (DeAngelis and Monahan, 2012). A profession’s status becomes secure once the government assumes regulatory responsibility for defining and monitoring its role and performance, including standards of professional knowledge and practice, and professional conduct. Registration ensures title protection; it provides legal proscriptions preventing unregistered practitioners from using the title social worker (Healy, 2013). Without registration and regulation, clients have little protection from harm arising from poor practice by qualified social workers or unqualified persons calling themselves social workers (McCurdy et al., 2020). Nigerian social work’s attempts to achieve professional legitimacy, reserve the title social worker for qualified professionals and develop government legislation to establish a legitimate regulatory body to date have proved unsuccessful. The following sections highlight key strategic areas on which Nigerian social workers might focus to gain the President’s final stamp of approval for its core professionalisation legislation, the Social Work Bill.

Relevance

Relevance rests on the idea that social work derives legitimacy from its fulfilment of socially accepted values, responsiveness to local people’s interests and priorities, and role in implementing social policy and enhancing the use of social services. It is a factor in social work’s failure to receive government sanction as a recognised profession, despite efforts to embed culturally responsive practice compatible with Nigerian traditions, values, and norms and indigenous ways of assisting vulnerable people (Amadasun, 2021a; Anucha, 2008a, 2008b; Odiah, 1991; Ogundipe and Edewor, 2012). However, it has proved extremely difficult to unseat colonial social welfare policies and structures and disembed methods of helping that were inherently Eurocentric and unresponsive to local sociocultural mores and complexities. Most importantly, given the importance of social work education in shaping knowledge and practice, of ongoing concern is what has proved an extremely difficult undertaking to introduce indigenous content into the curriculum (Okoye, 2014; Ugiagbe, 2015, 2017; Ugiagbe and Ugiagbe, 2015). Indigenisation ‒ or the adaptation of Western knowledge to fit local sociocultural realities within the framework of global standards of social work education and practice (International Federation of Social Workers (IFSW) and International Association of Schools of Social Work (IASSW), 2020) ‒ remains a major challenge for social work in Nigeria. As Ugiagbe (2017) observed, ‘international frameworks have proved remarkably resilient and impervious to cultural transformation’ (p. 272) and continue to dominate across Nigeria’s diverse cultural contexts comprising more than 300 ethnic groups and cultures, though the Hausa-Fulani, Yoruba and Igbo constitute about 70 percent of the population (Olaore and Drolet, 2017). People from these dominant ethnic groups occupy most political leadership positions, including the President and Vice-President, principal officers in the armed forces, police and other Federal parastatals, and 80 percent of federal senior civil servants come from these three ethnic groups (Ugiagbe and Eweka, 2014). Beyond cultural responsiveness, to enhance their relevance, social workers need to engage with ‘broader issues of sustainable human development and the social and political factors ‒ patriarchy, corruption, political conflict, and gender, ethnic, and religious discrimination ‒ that serve as barriers to human and social wellbeing’ (Ugiagbe, 2017: 272).

Recognition

Recognition depends largely on social work’s relevance and usefulness in Nigerian society. Recognition means families and communities value and use social work services, and the government acknowledges the important role social work plays by devising and implementing policies to support its activities in Nigerian society. Such recognition has eluded social work in Nigeria (Anucha, 2008a, 2008b).

Factors affecting recognition

Definition of social work

For the social work profession, recognition requires acceptance of its definition of social work as a professional activity conducted by social workers with a university qualification in social work. This is a global standard of social work education and a professional requirement for social work practice. However, an exclusive definition of social work would alienate large sections of the Nigerian services workforce who are untrained and not professionally qualified. Second, most Nigerians lack access to tertiary education, a requirement of professional qualification. Thus, while it would bring greater regulation of the profession and an enforcement of ethical codes of conduct and practice, and bring social work into line with international standards, it would also cause tensions in the multidisciplinary melting pot in which social workers ply their trade. In most postcolonial contexts, a broad range of people involved in ‘social work’ activities with little or no training use the title ‘social worker’. In Nigeria, ‘anybody can practice or teach social work thereby making it impossible for real social workers to be taken seriously’ (Onalu and Okoye, 2021: 581). However, ‘lived experienced’ is a valuable commodity in a populous country, like Nigeria, where a large percentage of the population have little or no access to tertiary education and are highly unlikely to achieve professional qualifications. Class, gender, race, ethnicity, culture and privilege are all factors in access to education and promotional opportunities, where men have a distinct advantage over women. Thus, global standards relating to the professional title work against pressures from within the country for a more inclusive definition of social work, especially since there is a dearth of trained social workers. China circumvented this problem by identifying three broad ‘categories’ of social work that had developed historically: (1) general social work performed mainly by community members and volunteers, (2) administrative social work carried out by public officials and (3) professional social work involving social workers and assistant social workers certified by the MOCA (Wang, 2013a, 2013b). However, professionalism rests on practitioners having professional qualifications. A large untrained workforce works against social work achieving professional practice standards (Idyorough, 2013).

Close ties to welfare

In most Western and colonial countries, social work evolved with close ties to social welfare and, in the case of Nigeria, to colonial administrations that greatly benefitted the middle class. However, Nigeria lacked a formal social welfare system (Anucha, 2008a). The central government designed the key Federal Ministry of Social Development, Youth and Sports in 1972 to police and control social welfare services (Ogundipe and Edewor, 2012). In contemporary Nigeria, the Ministry reflects the government’s tripartite focus on ‘welfare services, youth development, voluntary youth organizations and national and international voluntary organizations’ (Ogundipe and Edewor, 2012: 49). Public health and welfare services tend to be understaffed, under-resourced and inaccessible to large groups of vulnerable people. This includes child welfare, aged care, disability, health and mental health services that are conventional fields of social work practice in private and public organisations. With a weak system of publicly supported welfare and formally organised services, Nigeria relies instead on voluntary private organisations, many of them faith based (Garcia-Zamor, 2015). AIDS and HIV interventions and international poverty alleviation goals have brought huge injections in foreign aid for early childhood and school education and services for orphaned and vulnerable children, mostly through nongovernment organisations. In most cases, social workers work in a multidisciplinary environment where they receive variable degrees of recognition that keep them away from the frontline of service delivery.

Lack of government sanction

Since the government’s sanction is a major part of establishing professional credentials and status, the Nigerian government’s unsupportive attitude towards social work constitutes a major obstacle to professional recognition. Idyorough (2013) attributed social work’s inability to gain professional recognition to a lack of support from those in authority visible in the underfunding of social welfare services and professional social work practice. Onalu et al. (2020) reported that it was disheartening that the Nigerian government was ignorant of, and did not value, the roles of social workers. The profession’s lack of clarity on its scope, focus, functions and roles has worked against its legitimation (Amadasun, 2021a; Ogbonna, 2018), hence, the President’s refusal to pass the Social Work Bill that would prohibit individuals, who were not members of the Council of Social Work, from practising social work. The proposed council would establish standards for professional education and practice that upheld social work values, ethics, practice standards and qualification requirements (Busari, 2019).

Lack of clarity on social work roles and responsibilities

Part of the profession’s confusion over its roles and responsibilities relates to internal wrangling over its micro (casework) and macro (community/social development) roles in Nigerian society. The former carries the weight of colonial remedial predilections and the latter reflects the thrust of nongovernment, private, voluntary organisations (Amadasun, 2021a). Social work education in Nigeria prepares practitioners mainly for casework practice dealing with personal problems and leaves them ill prepared for macro social problems and social development (Amadasun, 2019, 2020; Onalu et al., 2020; Ugiagbe, 2017). As shown in the social integration approach to professionalisation, professional recognition rests on social work’s ability to carve out an exclusive professional service domain that, in turn, rests on projecting a positive image of a profession united on its roles, responsibilities and goals. Amadasun’s (2021a) study of public perceptions found a fair degree of understanding of what social workers do, though the profession needed to do more to enhance the public’s awareness of its ideals, values and contribution to Nigerian society. Establishing the public’s trust in social workers was fundamental to the quest for professional recognition. The unprofessional and unethical conduct of ‘social workers’ who had not received professional training in social work worked against this goal (Idyorough, 2013).

Professional division

Several professional representative associations in Nigeria could play a pivotal role in furthering professional recognition, especially if they presented a united front, including the Nigerian Association of Social Workers (NASoW), the Association of Medical Social Workers of Nigeria (AMSWON) and the Nigerian Association of Social Work Educators (NASWE) (Mbah et al., 2017). In addition, also active in furthering social work education is the Institute of Social Work of Nigeria (ISWON) (Idyorough, 2013). Each professional body serves different political interests that militate against professional unity (Amadasun, 2021a, 2021b).

The Guardian (2021) reported on NASoW’s appeal to the National Assembly to accelerate the passage of the Social Work Bill first mooted in 2017. Rather than direct representation through government structures, NASoW’s President made this appeal in an interview with the News Agency of Nigeria in Lagos. In 2018, a further appeal to the country’s President came from a group of professionally trained social workers across Nigeria called the Forum of Concerned Professional and Trained Social Workers in Nigeria (FCPTSWN). Again, its representative lodged the appeal through the media. Calling on Nigerians to support the bill, he referred to ISWON’s competing process to sponsor a bill for a Chartered Institute of Social Work Practitioners. While pledging its support for NASoW, NASWE, AMSWON and other representative bodies, FCPTSWN noted ISWON’s attempt to hijack the process and advance its position to control and regulate the profession of social work and its practitioners. Competition of this nature generated by opposing interests led to confusion and undermined social work’s quest for recognition. FCPTSWN petitioned the President and key state functionaries to block the competing bill introduced in the Federal House of Representatives. It called on relevant agencies to consider its petition and support the Social Work Bill the Nigerian Senate had passed in December 2017 but which the President had blocked in February 2018. Subsequent appeals and media statements were ignored, partly due to social work’s lack of representation on essential decision-making structures and the politicking of competing interest groups.

Representation

Advancing social work’s standing depends crucially upon representation, that is, on social workers having a seat at the decision-making table. It depends on the presence of social workers on agency boards and committees, local community forums, and government advisory and decision-making structures. It requires social workers’ participation in political structures that not only advance client interests but also professional goals for recognition. Through these structures, social workers need to articulate their value, usefulness, roles and responsibilities. Representation through these pivotal social networks is crucial to social work’s quest for recognition. The latter requires a strategic approach where social workers harness their political representation at various levels, seeking influential positions on government, organisational and community decision-making structures. Judging from the protracted process surrounding the Social Work Bill, social work’s representative groups have lacked the power to influence the passage of legislation key to professional recognition.

Relational connection

Folgheraiter’s (2004) theory of relational connection highlights the importance of the social networks to which social workers connect themselves. His relational approach sees social work as a social process concerned with identifying problems in coping, finding solutions and creating the relational conditions necessary for change at various levels (Folgheraiter, 2004, 2007). Not only is this important in social workers’ practice interventions that give them the visibility and presence in local communities so pivotal to recognition, but also to the structures on which they seek representation to further client interests. In short, social work’s relevance, drive for recognition and responsiveness to people’s needs and interests depend largely on its relational connections with the clients and communities it serves. Visible community support is one of the factors that would enhance the likelihood of government sanction. Relationships are central to social work at every level of practice. They require presence and visibility. They require that people know where to find social workers. They require that social workers develop a sound reputation through respectful relationships with their clients and each other.

Ugiagbe and Eweka’s (2014) analysis of systematic oppression among Nigeria’s minorities highlighted the political, economic, and cultural pressures and leadership failures that made coping impossible for vulnerable groups, whose problems lay in social relationships and societal processes that led to systemic and institutional oppression. Sociocultural heritage sustained unjust practices and policies that enhanced the domination and exploitations of vulnerable members of Nigerian society with whom social workers worked. Privileged groups within the three major ethnic groups and religious bigots, among others, sustained the systemic oppression and social exclusion of women, older people and ethnic minorities. To combat systematic oppression, social workers needed to establish interprofessional connections and engage with human rights activists and nongovernmental organisations engaged in sustained advocacy for policy reform. They needed to engage in public education campaigns and make media statements aimed at changing damaging social perceptions of excluded groups. Social workers enhanced their visibility and presence in local communities by establishing and engaging in social networks of this nature. This was pivotal not only to professional recognition but also to representing the interests of excluded groups.

Rights

Challenging systematic oppression requires social workers with a sound knowledge and understanding of its human rights and social justice perspective (Onalu and Okoye, 2021; Ugiagbe and Eweka, 2014). Social work education has a key role to play in equipping social workers with knowledge of the root causes of, and strategies and skills to address injustice, inequalities, exploitation and oppression (Onalu and Okoye, 2021). The roots of injustice lie in the patriarchal nature of Nigerian society, where traditional, cultural and religious beliefs support the subjugation and marginalisation of women and minority groups. Misrecognition of women’s and children’s rights is visible in unjust widowhood practices, girl-child marriage, female genital mutilation, child witchcraft accusation and stigmatisation, denial of inheritance to female children, and discriminatory practices against older people, people with disabilities, people with epilepsy and albinos. Addressing these injustices calls for anti-oppressive rights-based practice, advocacy and social action (Atumah et al., 2019; Onalu and Okoye, 2021; Ugiagbe and Eweka, 2014). Social workers challenge social injustices and rights violations inter alia through their engagement in policy processes, conscientisation, public education and legal redress, working in concert with key stakeholders, networks and interest groups.

Research and theory

An important aspect of a profession is its grounding in a systematic, scientific body of knowledge and theory to teach aspiring professionals and guide qualified practitioners. Sound research and scholarly publications on social work’s role and contribution in Nigerian society would greatly enhance social work’s professional standing. Research is also essential to effective practice. Basing social work interventions on sound evidence furthers trust in social work’s effectiveness and usefulness in society. Theories of human behaviour and society offer diverse explanations of the causes of human and social problems, and provide a perspective on what to do to enhance human coping and change oppressive systems and practices.

Conclusion

The R-lexicon employed in this article points to key strategic areas social workers in Nigeria need to address to advance their quest for professional status. We suggest that they need a deliberative approach to:

1. Develop structures for registration and regulation to legitimate social work and ensure the maintenance of ethical practice standards, as these two key processes would ensure effective interventions and protect clients from harmful practice, thus raising social workers’ professional standing.

2. Enhance the profession’s relevance starting with increased local content in the social work curriculum as a key area for shaping culturally responsive practice. Social workers could do this by engaging with broader national development issues and considering culturally appropriate ways of addressing social and political factors that hamper human well-being and social development.

3. Increase professional recognition through unified public statements on the scope and domain of social work, its roles and responsibilities in Nigerian society and contribution to social welfare to attain government sanction. Social workers need to ensure that families and communities, and government officials, that value and use their services raise awareness of the important role social work plays in Nigerian society.

4. Increase professional representation by adopting a strategic approach where social workers harness their political leverage at various levels, seeking influential positions on government, organisational and community decision-making structures.

5. Enhance relational connections through key strategic networks, such as interprofessional service platforms, advocacy fora and government advisory bodies, thus increasing their presence and visibility. These fora offer social workers the opportunity to raise awareness of their role and location in social systems, as well as developing a sound reputation through respectful relationships with others.

6. Challenge systematic oppression by promoting human rights through equipping social workers with knowledge of the root causes of, and strategies and skills to address, social injustices and inequalities. Social workers do this through their engagement in policy processes, conscientisation, public education and legal redress, working in concert with key stakeholders, networks and client interest groups.

7. Engage in research to provide evidence of social work’s effectiveness and enhance trust in its usefulness in Nigerian society and provide culturally appropriate theories of how to proceed towards greater human rights observance and taking social justice seriously.

The article argues that these measures would go some way to address the deep-rooted socio-political and cultural barriers that impede social work’s push for professional recognition. It discerns the importance of social networks in the political drive for the professionalisation of social work in Nigeria. It advocates that the concerted action of key stakeholders would help the profession navigate the often complex and tumultuous politicking hampering its advancement through government legitimation. This goal was within its grasp but the profession’s lack of clarity on its roles and responsibilities ostensibly thwarted its success (National Assembly of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 2019). This hearkens back to Flexner’s acceptance of social workers’ altruistic motivations, while its wide and unspecific aims watered down its responsibilities and weakened its power. Given the political dynamics surrounding representation and ISWON’s challenge to NASoW’s legitimacy, only a strong professional association can deal with the processes at work and counter these threats, among them patrimonialism, by which political leaders trade political favours in exchange for the loyalty of key interest groups. Garcia-Zamor (2015) highlighted the significant levels of government corruption in public service delivery benefitting some ethnic groups at the expense of others. Might self-serving interest groups be a factor in social work’s unsuccessful thrust for recognition? To counter this, social workers could follow approaches taken elsewhere in bringing education and practice in line with international standards, especially through the legitimate channel the NUC offers by taking the BMAS guidelines seriously and working to enhance the cultural relevance of educational courses. The professional association could play an important role in registering and licensing social workers and enforcing practice standards through judicious use of membership fees. Most importantly, a strong national professional association would help the profession build bridges and establish strong networks internally to project a united front and externally to gain the community support and government sanction so necessary to social work’s quest for professional status.