Mary Ellen Richmond is often credited with developing social work as a profession in the United States. In this article, we focus on Richmond’s Social Diagnosis, revisiting this hallmark of social work practice a century after its publication and tracing its foundational ideas at the root of the conceptualization and practice of subsequent giants in social work. Our aim is to recenter and retrace these formative ideas so crucial to the origins of social work as a profession and its subsequent growth and development by examining Richmond’s understanding of social diagnosis, evidence-informed practice, and the helping relationship. A full century after the publication of Richmond’s far-reaching Social Diagnosis seems the most apposite time for such a review and revisit.
AgnewE. N. (2004). From charity to social work: Mary E. Richmond and the creation of an American profession. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
2.
American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing.
3.
AustinD. M. (1983). The Flexner myth and the history of social work. Social Service Review, 57, 357-377.
4.
Barriga MuñózL.Martínez AlonsoM. A. (2011). Mary Richmond en la perspectiva del Trabajo Social en España [Mary Richmond in Spain’s social work perspective]. Cuadernos de Trabajo Social, 24, 113-121.
5.
BerlemanW. C. (1968). Mary Richmond’s Social diagnosis in retrospect. Social Casework [now Families in Society], 58, 328-336. http://doi.org/10.1177/104438946804900701
6.
BerzoffJ. (2016). Relational and intersubjective theories. In BerzoffJ.FlanaganL. M.HertzP. (Eds.), Inside out and outside in: Psychodynamic clinical theory in contemporary multicultural contexts (4th ed., pp. 249-268). New York, NY: Rowman & Littlefield.
7.
BrownP.LysonM.JenkinsT. (2011). From diagnosis to social diagnosis. Social Science & Medicine, 73, 939-943.
8.
ChristensenC. R.HansenA. J. (1987). Teaching and the case method. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School.
DellavalleM. (2011). La actualidad del pensamiento de Mary E. Richmond en el Trabajo Social italiano. [Mary E. Richmond’s thinking in current Italian social work]. Cuadernos de Trabajo Social, 24, 101-111.
12.
DorfmanR. A. (1996). Clinical social work: Definition, practice, and vision. New York, NY: Brunner/Mazel.
13.
DriskoJ.GradyM. (2012). Evidence-based practice. New York, NY: Springer.
14.
DriskoJ.GradyM. D. (2018). Teaching evidence-based practice using cases in social work education. Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Social Services, 99, 269-282. http://doi.org/10.1177/1044389418785331
15.
FischerJ. (1970). Portents from the past: Whatever happened to social diagnosis?International Social Work, 13, 18-28.
16.
FranklinD. L. (1986). Mary Richmond and Jane Addams: From moral certainty to rational inquiry in social work practice. Social Service Review, 60, 504-525.
17.
FreedbergS. (2015). Relational theory for clinical practice (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
18.
GambrillE. (2013). Social work practice: A critical thinker’s guide. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
19.
GelmanC. R.GonzálezM. (2016). Social work 100 years post-Flexner: Where are we now, where are we headed, what has been gained, what has been lost? An introduction. Journal of Social Work Education, 52, S1-S5.
GermainC. B. (1970). Casework and science: A historical encounter. In RobertsR. W.NeeR. H. (Eds.), Theories of social casework (pp. 5-32). Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
22.
GermainC. B. (1973). An ecological perspective in casework practice. Social Casework [now Families in Society], 54, 323-330. http://doi.org/10.1177/104438947305400601
23.
GittermanA. (2017). Life model of social work practice. In TurnerF. J. (Ed.), Social work treatment: Interlocking theoretical approaches (6th ed., pp. 287-301). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
24.
GoldmeierJ. (1973). The legacy of Mary Richmond in education and practice. Social Casework [now Families in Society], 54, 276-283. https://doi.org/10.1177/104438947305400503
25.
GreeneR. (2008). Human behavior theory, person-in-environment and social work method. In GreeneR. (Ed.), Human behavior and social work practice (3rd ed., pp. 1-27). New Brunswick, NJ: Aldine Transaction.
26.
HamiltonG. (1951). Theory and practice of social case work. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
27.
HiersteinerC.PetersonK. J. (1999). “Crafting a usable past”: The care-centered practice narrative in social work. Affilia, 14, 144-161.
28.
HollisF. (1964). Casework: A psychosocial therapy. New York, NY: Random House.
29.
HollisF. (1970). Crisis intervention as a mode of brief treatment. In RobertsR. W.NeeR. H. (Eds.), Theories of social casework (pp. 33-76). Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
30.
IshibashiN. L. (2015). Mary Richmond and the causal ontological status of relatedness. Smith College Studies in Social Work, 85(90), 90-105.
31.
JutelA.NettletonS. (2011). Toward a sociology of diagnosis: Reflections and opportunities. Social Science & Medicine, 73, 793-800.
KirkS. A.SiporinM.KutchinsH. (1989). The prognosis for social work diagnosis. Social Casework [now Families in Society], 42, 295-304. http://doi.org/10.1177/104438948907000505
34.
LeeP. R. (1929). Social work as cause and function. In LeeR. (Ed.), Social work as cause and function and other papers: Selected papers of Porter (pp. 3-24). New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
35.
Martinez-BrawleyE.ZoritaP. M. B. (2017). The psychosocial framework of social work practice. In TurnerF. J. (Ed.), Social work treatment: Interlocking theoretical approaches (6th ed., pp. 411-419). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
36.
McLeanS. F. (2016). Case-based learning and its application in medical and health-care fields: A review of worldwide literature. Journal of Medical Education and Curricular Development, 3. doi:10.4137/JMECD.S20377
37.
PerlmanH. H. (1957). Social casework: A problem-solving process. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
38.
PerlmanH. H. (1970). Crisis intervention as a mode of brief treatment. In RobertsR. W.NeeR. H. (Eds.), Theories of social casework (pp. 129-180). Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
39.
PerlmanH. H. (1979). Relationship: The heart of helping people. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
40.
PollioD. E. (2006). The art of evidence-based practice. Research on Social Work Practice, 16, 224-232.
41.
ProbstB. (2012). Diagnosing, diagnosis, and the DSM in clinical social work. Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Social Services, 93, 255-263. http://doi.org/10.1606/1044-3894.4235
42.
PumphreyM. W. (1957). Mary Richmond’s process of conceptualization. Social Casework [now Families in Society], 38(8), 399-406.http://doi.org/10.1177/104438945703800801
RapoportL. (1970). Crisis intervention as a mode of brief treatment. In RobertsR. W.NeeR. H. (Eds.), Theories of social casework (pp. 267-311). Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
45.
ReischM.WenocurS. (1986). The future of community organization in social work: Social activism and the politics of profession building. Social Service Review, 60, 70-93.
46.
ReynoldsB. C. (1951). Social work and social living. New York, NY: Citadel Press.
RichmondM. E. (1899). Friendly visiting among the poor: A handbook for charity workers. New York, NY: McMillan.
49.
RichmondM. E. (1917). Social diagnosis. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
50.
RichmondM. E. (1922). What is social casework? An introductory description. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
51.
RichmondM. E. (1930). The long view: Papers and addresses by Mary E. Richmond. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
52.
RippleL.AlexanderE.PolemisB. (1964). Motivation, capacity, and opportunity: Studies in casework theory and practice. Chicago, Il: School of Social Service Administration, University of Chicago.
53.
RobertsA. R. (Ed.). (2000). Crisis intervention handbook: Assessment, treatment and research (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
54.
RobertsR. W.NeeR. H. (Eds.). (1970). Theories of social casework. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
55.
RobinsonV.P. (1930). A changing psychology in social work. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
56.
RobinsonV. P. (1962). Jessie Taft: Therapist and social work educator. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.
57.
RubinA. (2008). Practitioner’s guide to using research for evidence-based practice. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
58.
SaariC. (1992). The person-in-environment reconsidered: New theoretical bridges. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, 9, 205-220.
59.
SackettD.StrausS.RichardsonW.RosenbergW.HaynesR. (2000). Evidence-based medicine: How to practice and teach EBM (2nd ed.). Edinburgh, Scotland: Churchill Livingstone.
60.
SchwartzW. (1969). Private troubles and public issues: One social work job or two? The Social Welfare Forum 1969. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
61.
ShoemakerL. M. (1998). Early conflicts in social work education. Social Service Review, 72, 182-191.
62.
SmalleyR. E. (1967). Theory for social work practice. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
63.
SmalleyR. E. (1970). The functional approach to casework. In RobertsR. W.NeeR. H. (Eds.), Theories of social casework (pp. 77-128). Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
64.
StreanH. S. (1978). Clinical social work: Theory and practice. New York, NY: The Free Press.
65.
ToikkoT. (1999). Sociological and psychological discourses in social casework during the 1920s. Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Social Services, 80, 351-358. http://doi.org/10.1606/1044-3894.1230
66.
TosoneC.GelmanC. R. (2017). Relational social work: A contemporary psychosocial perspective on practice. In TurnerF. J. (Ed.), Social work treatment: Interlocking theoretical approaches (6th ed., pp. 420-427). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
67.
TowleC. (1947). Social casework. In KurtzR. H. (Ed.), Social work yearbook (pp. 28-35). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
