Social workers helping each other during the COVID-19 pandemic: Online mutual support groups
Abstract
Social workers not only help service users, they also help each other, and they know the group as a space through which opportunities to give and receive help multiply. In Italy, the initiative ‘Social Workers Helping Each Other’ was launched to help practitioners stay resilient and mutually supportive during the COVID-19 pandemic. In these unprecedented and turbulent times, social workers have been called on to face new challenges and new concerns for service users and for themselves. The initiative consisted of online mutual support groups for social workers conducted through a virtual platform. Participants were 45 social workers divided into three groups on the basis of the social workers’ area of intervention. The author facilitated the groups, encouraging the development of reciprocal support dynamics typical of self-help and mutual aid groups. Group sessions were very rich in content, and the discussion focused on several topics following the participants’ needs. The content analysis revealed that the mutual support conversations among social workers focused on three main categories: practical and organizational; methodological and ethical; and personal and emotional. The groups offered supervision and mutual support based on experiential learning processes. The article presents the rationale, methods and outcomes of the experience. This initiative could inspire the development of online mutual support groups for social workers.
Introduction
The COVID-19 pandemic is an unprecedented challenge for everyone, including social workers. During the lockdown period from 10 March to 4 May, the Italian government stated that social work interventions are essential activities and social workers are essential workers. In these unprecedented and turbulent times, social workers have been called on to face new challenges and new concerns for service users and for themselves. The ‘Social Workers Helping Each Other’ initiative was launched in Northern Italy during the first weeks of the COVID-19 health emergency. Italy has been severely affected by the pandemic, and at the beginning of June 2020 the World Health Organization (WHO) reported over 34,000 deaths and over 235,000 confirmed cases in Italy (WHO, 2020). This article presents the rationale of the initiative and analysis of the main content shared by the social workers during the virtual group sessions.
The rationale of the initiative
Social work literature suggests that social workers are often at the forefront of crisis intervention (Dominelli, 2017; Javadian, 2007; Schott and Weiss, 2016), offering social structure and support through crisis resolution. Taking care of people, families, and communities in trouble and accompanying them in increasing their personal wellbeing is supported by the global definition of social work as that which ‘engages people and structures to address life challenges and enhance wellbeing’ (International Federation of Social Workers [IFSW] and International Association of Schools of Social Work [IASSW], 2014) and by the International Code of Social Work Ethics (IFSW, 2018). Social work is an ‘emergency profession’ by definition, but during the 2020 lockdown situation, social workers have been called upon to make difficult decisions about in-person contact with their clients and to reinvent ways to continue helping people to access required services, providing counseling, and organizing ways to overcome isolation. The COVID-19 pandemic led to drastic changes in daily life, including ways of helping themselves and others. COVID-19 and measures to control and prevent its spread have restricted the services and responsibilities usually carried out by social workers, while generating new needs and demands (Banks et al., 2020). Doing social work under the conditions imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic is challenging and fraught with difficulties and risks (Dominelli, 2020). Furthermore, social workers have to fight against injustice and discrimination occurring during the pandemic (O’Leary and Tsui, 2020). During this difficult time, social workers must stay safe and healthy, and getting adequate support is essential for them. During the first weeks of the COVID-19 pandemic, the author discussed social workers’ concerns regarding social work under restrictions, with reference to people’s needs and the strong social impact of the pandemic on local communities.
These premises gave rise to the idea of an initiative to help social workers stay mutually resilient and supportive. The key idea was to offer frontline social workers a space for giving and receiving help and sharing data, suggestions, experiences, feelings, and thoughts to best address the challenges imposed by COVID-19. Through joint actions and dynamics of reciprocity typical of mutual support groups (Folgheraiter et al., 2020; Steinberg, 2014), each participant helped themselves and others, while simultaneously receiving help. The initiative consisted of weekly online mutual support groups of social workers running for a total of 10 weeks. The initiative involved 45 social workers divided into three groups: two composed of child protection social workers and one composed of social workers working with the elderly, migrants, and people in poverty. The author, having previous experience with group work, was the facilitator for the groups. All group encounters were audio - and video recorded for research purposes.
Social worker mutual support groups
Group work is a method of working with people that affirms their strength and ability to contribute to others (Steinberg, 2014). The process of mutual aid, unique to group work practice, takes place when members draw upon their own experiences and deep felt needs to help their fellow members, who in turn relive their experiences and relearn through their own offers of help, gaining strength through this exercise (Kurland and Salmon, 1992). Social work literature has shown that social workers consider self-help and mutual aid groups as important resources for service users and clients in several fields (Gitterman and Shulman, 2005; Noorani et al., 2019; Pandya, 2010; Raineri, 2017; Steinberg, 2014; Toseland and Hacker, 1985). In the last few decades, periodic group work experiences have been organized via the Internet and telephone (Bronwyn, 2013; Damianakis et al., 2008).
Little is known and developed about mutual support groups for social workers, as practitioners usually conduct such groups rather than participate in them. Literature shows that support groups for social workers are very rare (Meier, 2002) or consist of single-session groups (Clemans, 2005). There has been limited research on the topic to date. The hypothesis proposed by the author, who promoted and conducted the initiative ‘Social Workers Helping Each Other’, was that professionals facing challenges can benefit from mutual aid groups. The physical and mental health of social workers who work in complex welfare systems to address others’ suffering, needs, and hopes can be at risk, although little is known about these risks and preventive measures. Support groups are a good resource to develop supportive structures not only for service users but also for social workers. The ability to draw on resources gained from their own experiences, both positive and negative, is not reserved only for service users. Social workers can act as a coping network of professionals founded on the reciprocity principle, as suggested by relational social work (Folgheraiter, 2004). Furthermore, social workers require helping relationships to successfully manage the challenges of social work practice, as well as personal challenges. This is particularly true in times of crisis, such as during COVID-19, which has revealed that we are all vulnerable.
Self-help and mutual aid groups represent a space for firsthand helping relationships and experimenting with the power of group dynamics. In this context, social workers can find new strategies to support their wellbeing and, in some cases, to develop greater confidence in promoting self-help groups for service users and carers.
Methods
The initiative1 was launched in March 2020. An invitation letter with the proposal, the date of the first meeting, and some practical information was shared via social media. The invitation letter described the activity with the following message: ‘During the pandemic, it is important to create a space in which social workers can help each other, exchange experiences, and rely on the power of the group.’ The initiative was experimental and social worker participation was voluntary and free. Group sessions were realized through a virtual platform that enabled all participants to speak and see each other simultaneously. All social workers used a microphone and a camera. During sessions, participants also used a chat to share links or data, such as names of services and references to texts or laws, or to interact in case of connection problems.
The author facilitated the groups, encouraging the development of reciprocal support dynamics typical of self-help and mutual aid groups (Borkman, 1976; Raineri, 2017; Riessman, 1965; Steinberg, 2014). The facilitator has had previous experiences of support groups, but this was the first virtual experience. During the first session, participants were presented with two main rules: to speak in first person and to be confident.
The role of the facilitator was to support the dialectical process within the groups, creating space for all voices, stimulating reflection, and giving feedback or stimulus when needed.
The facilitator did not provide answers or advice, but rather encouraged participants to connect with each other, exchange thoughts, and collectively explore ways or imagine actions to continue helping and stay well.
The agenda was not planned in advance but was driven by the social workers’ needs at the time. At the beginning of the first session, the facilitator encouraged social workers to express how they felt, their current situation, and what they wanted to ask or share with their colleagues. Session after session, participants spontaneously decided to start the encounter with similar questions and incentives or with an update of the spent week. The number of sessions was decided during the process based on the needs and willingness of the participants. At the end of each session, the facilitator asked the participants if they wanted to meet again the following week, giving them the freedom to join if they wished. Every week, the facilitator sent an email to each participant with the link to join the meeting. The program ended in June 2020. The number of participants in each group was constant, as described below. Despite the differences within and among the groups, the participants expressed common problems and similar experiences faced during the health emergency. This common ground generated group dynamics typical of mutual support groups.
Participants
Only social workers were invited to participate in the sessions. In the first 48 hours after the launching of the initiative, the author was approached by 60 social workers who expressed interest and requested information about the activity.
In the end, 45 social workers participated in the sessions. Participants were initially divided into two groups on the basis of the social workers’ area of intervention. Group 1 was composed of child protection social workers, and Group 2 was composed of social workers working with elderly, migrants, and people in poverty. Group 1 started on 1 April 2020 and Group 2 on 2 April 2020. During the first Group 1 session, it was decided to split the group into two due to the large number of participants (around 30). Thus, the final number of groups was three (see Table 1). Social workers joined the groups with the idea of finding something useful to face the new challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic. From April to June, each group met every week for a total of 28 sessions. The duration of each session was one and a half hours. The number of participants was 11 social workers per group on average (range: 9–15 participants). All participants were registered social workers, all female, with an average age of 34 (range: 24–58) years and an average working experience as social workers of 9 (range: 1–32) years. The majority of social workers worked in the Lombardy region, except for four social workers from Piemonte, Toscana, and Veneto. During the pandemic and the 7 weeks of lockdown, social workers adjusted in different ways: some stopped all activities in institutions and worked fully online, some continued working from social work institutions, and some rotated working from home and working from institutions. These differences depended on the decisions of social services organizations.
| Area of intervention | Number of participants (average) | Age of the participants (average) | Participants’ work experience (average) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group 1 | Child protection | 10 | 38 years | 11 years |
| Group 2 | Child protection | 13 | 38 years | 12 years |
| Group 3 | Migration, elderly, and poverty | 10 | 27 years | 5 years |
What happened in the groups? Analysis
Group sessions were very rich in content, and the discussion focused on several topics following the participants’ needs. The 28 group sessions were audio - and video recorded with the written permission of the participants. Over 50 hours of activity were recorded. The research was conducted in accordance with the ethical research standards established by the Ethical Code of Catholic University (Chancellor Decree no. 9350/2011). The group sessions were analyzed through content analysis. Content analysis is the scientific study of content of communication (Prasad, 2008). At the end of the activity, the author listened to each recording, noting in an Excel file the recurring themes for each group. The transcription revealed over 30 different themes. Themes were identified inductively from the data. All contents were kept in the Excel file in order to avoid personal selection and ensure trustworthiness. In a further step, themes organized through the Excel file were assembled or divided following semantic analogy. This step permitted the identification of three main categories: practical and organizational issues; social work methodological and ethical issues; and personal and emotional issues. The categories were mutually exclusive and defined in a way to be internally as homogeneous as possible and externally as heterogeneous as possible.
For each of the categories mentioned above, participants shared information, strategies, and advice based on their personal experiences. These themes were common issues of discussion across the groups, albeit with some particulars. Practical and organizational issues and methodological categories showed differences in the group discussion, while personal and emotional issues showed strong commonalities across the three groups.
The content of conversations between social workers mainly focused on difficulties and critical aspects faced during the pandemic, and also included additional issues. From the first group session, the participants also shared positive elements, even if these were less frequent than negative ones. The Venn diagram (Figure 1) represents the three content categories that emerged from the content analysis, demonstrating the relationships between the three categories. For each content category, Table 2 presents nine main themes that emerged from discussions among the participants.
| Practical and organizational issues | Methodological and ethical issues | Personal and emotional issues |
|---|---|---|
| Reinventing service spaces to respect physical distancing and working safely | Conducting online parenting competence assessment/gatekeeping assessment for food voucher | Overcoming personal distrust toward social work practice via the Internet |
| Using digital tools and having digital skills | Maintaining confidentiality through the use of smartphone and internet | Living and working in uncertain conditions |
| List of care institutions that welcome children without swab test | Having confidential conversations with service users living at home with family members | Managing worries and anxiety for relatives and colleagues affected by COVID-19 |
| Providing essential services for homeless people | Unexpected benefits from online interviews with some service users | Creating trusting and empathic relationships via online professional interviews |
| Support (or lack of support) by institutions, managers and coordinators | Unexpected collaboration and networking with other professionals and citizens | Developing strategies for self-care during the pandemic |
| Personal protective equipment management | Conducting professional interviews via the Internet (and with a linguistic mediator) | Unexpected service users’ personal resources |
| Promoting online support groups for caregivers or adoptive parents | Conducting home visits using video cameras or in the family’s garden | Balancing time for professional and personal life |
| Privacy form for online interviews | Managing contacts between parents and children living in care | Feelings of frustration, powerlessness, and guilt |
| Arranging for care after release from hospital | Continuing to support children at risk of emotional, physical, sexual abuse | Proud to be social workers |
Doing social work during COVID-19 pandemic: Results
Practical and organizational issues
Digital tools and digital skills
COVID-19 has significantly affected social work practice, and social workers expressed the need to share data about practical and organizational issues. COVID-19 has highlighted the digital inequalities that exist in our society (Beaunoyer et al., 2020). Digital tools and digital skills were at the core of social workers’ worries, with reference to two main issues: their own and service users’ attitudes, particularly those without digital tools (laptop, smartphone, or tablet), without an Internet connection, or with very limited skills; and the difficulties of creating safe and meaningful spaces online.
Sharing information and advice on how to reach these people and communicate with them in a safe environment, social workers assisted in coping with social isolation and identifying those who are isolated or without a voice to ask for help. The difficulties related to digital tools and digital skills concerned not only service users but also social workers who had never conducted social work interventions via the Internet.
Maintaining essential services
Group 3 particularly focused on families in poverty and homeless people, as continuing homeless services during the community spread of COVID-19 was critical in Italy, as well as in other countries. In the face of the pandemic, a lack of access to adequate housing could be fatal and might put the broader population at continued risk (Fahra, 2020). During the group sessions, social workers shared resources and concrete strategies, such as temporary housing, to mitigate the impact of COVID-19 on people needing essential help, maintain services for all people experiencing unsheltered homelessness, and arrange for care for those with no place to go after release from hospital.
Reinventing service spaces to respect physical distancing and working safely
During the health emergency, all direct contact between social workers and service users (and among professionals) was risk assessed and carefully planned in advance, taking into account local guidance and public health guidance. The reality shows that many social work institutions were unprepared to face important organizational changes. During the group sessions, social workers shared two main difficulties: reinventing the service spaces to respect social distancing within organizations with a lack of physical spaces, and securing adequate personal protective equipment to work safely.
At the end of the lockdown period, some practitioners were worried about returning to the office due to poor protective measures imposed by institutions and wished for more safeguards to protect themselves and the service users.
Social work methodological and ethical issues
Extra support and special protection for people at risk
During group sessions, social workers reflected on many methodological and ethical issues, as shown in Figure 1. Maintaining adequate methodological and ethical standards during the COVID-19 pandemic remained a controversial issue discussed worldwide (British Association of Social Workers [BASW], 2020; Farkas and Romaniuk, 2020; IFSW, 2020). Groups 1 and 2 prioritized discussions on supporting children at risk of emotional, physical, and sexual abuse. The participants expressed concern for youth and children involved in the child protection system, as spending more time at home meant that some families may need extra support with parenting and special protection for children. Some participants expressed anxiety when referring to families in which there was risk or suspicion of women and children experiencing abuse, as assessment interventions were delayed and there were fewer opportunities for people to request help during the lockdown period.
Managing contact between parents and children living out of family
Another important issue among child protection social workers was the management of contact between parents and children living out of family. During the lockdown and until the beginning of June, in-person contact between parents and children in care was suspended due to mandatory restrictions. This raised discussions on the effect of these decisions on the rights of parents, relatives, and children involved in the child protection system. In giving and receiving help on this and other sensitive issues, participants based the discussion on the core principles of social work and expertise acquired through previous experiences. Participants asked, for instance, how the others were managing the anger and suffering of parents and children whose in-person contact was suspended (Group 1), whether they had already experienced a telephone interview with an ethnic minority person and a linguistic mediator (Group 2), and whether they had facilitated an online support group for caregivers whose relatives were affected by COVID-19 (Group 3).
The facilitator encouraged the participants who had faced these issues to not only tell their personal experience but also to identify the parts of the experience that were and were not effective, and point out potential difficulties and useful measures. These and other issues (shown in Figure 1) were discussed by the groups on three levels:
•
whether it was possible and reasonable to do the intervention without traditional tools, contexts, and settings (and with new tools, contexts, and settings);
•
how to do it in practice, with which tools and methods;
•
how to maintain professional and ethical behavior.
Transforming social work interventions
Regarding the need to transform social work interventions to continue to help, the groups offered supervision and mutual support based on experiential learning processes. The term ‘experiential learning’ characterizes the knowledge produced in groups, describing it as ‘truth based on personal experience with a phenomenon’ (Borkman, 1976: 445). Through social workers’ narratives, participants shared technical or methodological advice to shift from face-to-face interventions to online or hybrid models. Rethinking and transforming social work interventions requires social workers to be creative and confident. During the first group session at the beginning of April 2020, only a few social workers per group were engaged in online activities with service users. However, all the participants eventually became engaged in activities via the Internet to some extent. Some of them expressed that what was shared in the previous sessions had positively influenced them, their colleagues, or their managers to implement new and unique ways of helping. Using the words of two participants, ‘After our last session, I reflected on your experiences and I asked my coordinator for permission to activate online home visiting interventions’ (Group 2), and ‘Without your support and encouragement, I would never have thought it was possible to do an online parenting competence assessment’ (Group 1).
The strength of the group was useful in inspiring new ways to take into account helping interventions via the phone/Internet or in person with protective equipment. Discussions in the groups helped social workers overcome feelings of distrust toward social work activities via the phone or Internet and find strategies to ask for more support from managers of social welfare organizations. As usually occurs in mutual support groups for service users, participating in the groups was conducive to social workers’ empowerment and helped them become more aware of their strengths and limits and find strategies to make their voices heard.
During the second and third sessions, all groups expressed the need to discuss the issue of the food voucher system designated by the Italian government during the pandemic to support families without salaries, with income loss, or suffering from business closure. The financial package was distributed among all the municipalities of the country, appointing social services to distribute the resources to the citizens in need. This meant that social workers decided the general criteria of the gatekeeping assessment for food vouchers and the methods of distribution. This was done while maintaining social distancing and using online assessments, and the distribution of food vouchers to families was organized with the collaboration of charities, supermarkets, and civil protection. The participants shared their strategies and successful and unsuccessful experiences, allowing colleagues to be inspired by their positive or negative experiences.
Personal and emotional issues
Living and working under uncertain conditions
Personal and emotional issues were at the core of group discussions. From the first to the last group sessions, a significant part of the discussion was dedicated to social workers’ emotions and sharing feelings. The participants required emotional support, as the typical stress of their work was compounded by the difficulty of living and working in unpredictable conditions. Although there were some differences among the groups, during the first session, the participants expressed frustration and powerlessness: in the participants’ words, ‘We are blocked, without the possibility of in-person contact with service users’. These feelings were exacerbated by the impossibility of knowing the development of the health emergency.
Disruptive mix of personal and professional concerns
At the beginning of the lockdown period, the participants experienced a mix of professional and personal concerns. Some participants expressed anxiety about a relative, a colleague, or a service user affected by COVID-19. Discussing these issues, the groups reflected on the evidence that social workers were emotionally and physically engaged not only in service users’ wellbeing, but also for their personal and family wellbeing. Some social workers expressed that having personal and professional concerns about the situation was a disruptive mix. During the first group session, one participant explained this issue effectively, stating, ‘I feel that I am too worried about myself and about my family to be effectively clearheaded and focused on service users’ problems’ (Group 3). The impact of COVID-19 in northern Italy caused social workers to experience concerns and difficulties similar to those of service users that they had to help. In other words, during the pandemic, professionals’ and users’ problems were similar, which made it difficult for the social workers to perform their duties and reassure others. As usually occurs in self-help and mutual aid groups, participants pursued others’ experiences with curiosity to discover whether a colleague experienced similar or different feelings. In many sessions, once a participant shared how they felt, they indirectly asked the group whether they were experiencing similar emotions.
Balancing personal and professional life
The participants expressed physical and emotional exhaustion in addition to worry. Using the words of one social worker, ‘During this time, not only service users but also social workers suffer and face difficulties’ (Group 1). The need for self-care was blended with the need to be responsive toward others. Another crucial theme of discussion was the social workers’ difficulties in maintaining a healthy work–life balance. In particular, during the first 2 months of online activities, a recurring topic among social workers was the stress, fatigue, and difficulty of maintaining the boundary between professional and personal life. The participants’ experiences revealed that removing the rigidity related to particular work hours or settings contributed to increasing levels of stress and exhaustion. Social workers noticed that work time significantly increased (up to 52 working hours per week), interviews with service users were longer than expected (up to one and a half hours), their schedules were very tight every day, and they were always accessible and connected (even during evenings and weekends).
Several social workers shared that the extra work was affecting their own family dynamics, with particular reference to child care and support for distance learning. As confidence grew, social workers shared these difficulties with feelings of guilt toward their own family members or toward the service users.
Creating trusting and empathic relationships via professional online interviews
Under pressure and concern imposed by COVID-19, some social workers recognized that creating and maintaining trusting and empathic relationships via professional online interviews was difficult. Some participants reported being more nervous and less patient than usual in daily practice. From their point of view, interactions with service users were negatively affected by their excessive pressure and fatigue. Furthermore, some participants reported having physical symptoms of stress, such as sleep disorders or persistent headaches, which increased their difficulty in being empathic toward the users’ problems.
Developing strategies for self-care during the pandemic
After listening to the participants, the facilitator guided discussions of the importance of self-care. The participants reflected on the topic and shared strategies to manage work time, such as establishing boundaries to create a balance between work and family life, joining relaxing online activities, and asking colleagues or managers for help. Group 1 reflected that constantly working online meant losing control over the service users’ situations, institutions’ dynamics, processes, and interpersonal contact with colleagues. For some social workers, this loss of power and control increased feelings of anxiety. As the sessions progressed, participants spoke regularly about their wellbeing and monitored that of their colleagues, asking how many hours the others had worked and inquiring after their health. As outlined by the IFSW (2020), ‘Social workers must be aware of situations that might threaten their own safety and security’ (p. 2).
Discussion: Positive discoveries among social workers
Although the sessions were mainly focused on the challenges and problems faced by social workers during the COVID-19 pandemic, the participants also shared some positive discoveries. The main discoveries were unexpected collaboration and networking among professionals and citizens of local communities, unexpected benefits of online interviews with some service users, and unexpected personal resources of service users. Social workers described these discoveries with feelings of astonishment, as they had never experienced such phenomena before. These discoveries cross-cut issues among the three groups.
Unexpected networks among professionals and citizens
During the health emergency, the participants discovered a renovated collaboration with other professionals inside and outside their organizations characterized by greater cooperation and fewer misunderstandings. The increase in solidarity among professionals enabled efficient networking. Networking extended to local communities, soliciting partnerships between social service organizations, professionals, volunteers of charities, and citizens. Social workers named this, being all ‘in the same boat’ and requiring mutual collaboration to face unpredictable challenges.
Unexpected benefits of online interviews
Another important discovery among social workers during the pandemic was the effectiveness of professional online interviews with some service users. Comparing previous face-to-face interviews with online interviews conducted during the lockdown period, participants reported unexpected benefits of listening and speaking to a youth or a mother through an online platform. Despite being unable to generalize to all situations, social workers discovered that for some people, being online represented an opportunity to have more room to speak and feel more confident and freer to discuss sensitive issues. Using the words of two social workers, ‘Through online interviews, the user told me issues that she has never told me before’ (Group 1), and ‘For the first time in three years, that young boy spoke with me for more than five minutes’ (Group 2). By contrast, as represented in Figure 1, online interviews were very problematic for people who were not able to speak freely or ask for help due to the presence of family members.
Unexpected personal resources of service users
Due to the challenges posed by the pandemic, some social workers noticed unexpected resources in some service users. The participants reported that some families showed great resilience when facing difficulties during this period (Group 1). Some people expressed unexpected skills in adapting to the mandatory changes at personal and collective levels (Group 3). Some who were divorced partners became more cooperative regarding their children (Group 2). Among the positive elements, some social workers reported feelings of hope for the future and pride in being social workers during the global emergency.
Conclusion
Overall, the group sessions (1) increased the participants’ reflexive practice, (2) allowed social workers to experience relationships of reciprocal care as a basis to provide help and stay healthy, (3) revitalized social workers’ capacities to adapt to unpredictable challenges and cope more effectively with stressful life events, (4) supported social workers’ advocacy for their and others’ needs, and (5) fostered a strong sense of community among social workers.
The mutual support groups enhanced social workers’ reflexive practice regarding their life and work during the COVID-19 pandemic. As recently suggested, ‘We must reflect, analyze, and learn from this crisis’ (O’Leary & Tsui, 2020: 274). ‘Using the lessons learned from working during the pandemic [we must] rethink social work in the future’ (Banks et al., 2020: v). The core principles of social work of upholding human rights, promoting social justice, and maintaining professional integrity became particularly relevant during the COVID-19 pandemic. The dialogue among social workers in the group sessions reflected how social work is passionate, creative, and highly mobile. Social workers’ commitment to be productive, proactive, and overcome social isolation, maintaining helping relationships with people in need, was palpable despite high levels of complexity that influenced not only social work practices but also social workers’ wellbeing.
During the pandemic, group dynamics characterized by relationships of reciprocal care helped participants with a double focus: how to work to provide help and services as well as possible, and how to stay safe and healthy. As never before, these two issues were clear and interconnected. The mutual support groups revitalized and enhanced social workers’ capacities to adapt to current challenges and cope more effectively with stressful life events. The group sessions were virtual, but group dynamics were real. During the last group session, participants expressed that they highly valued the supportive and collaborative nature of the groups, recalling the ‘helper therapy principle’ described by Riessman (1965), which suggests that when an individual (the helper) provides assistance to another person, the helper also benefits. Therefore, those who participate in a mutual-self-help group assume the roles of both the helper and the helped and develop greater wellbeing through the very act of being a helper. While sharing their expectations and uncertainties, social workers looked forward to the future with the hope of returning to full in-person social work practice. Referring to injustice and inequalities that characterized our world, Johannesen (2020) stated that the ‘COVID-19 pandemic is a solidarity test for society’ (p. 399). For most social work organizations, this health emergency has been a test to prove their creativity, resilience, and flexibility. Social workers have the opportunity to renovate their commitment toward the most vulnerable people in society, discovering unusual ways of helping, together with solidarity with other practitioners, citizens, volunteers, and local communities. As recently affirmed by Dominelli (2020), ‘Dealing with a pandemic requires concerted international action as well as national and local action’ (p. 1). ‘Social Workers Helping Each Other’ was not only a slogan but a real process of reciprocal learning and helping among professionals. This initiative confirmed that mutual support groups can be a source of help and wellbeing not only for service users but also for social workers, even beyond the COVID-19 pandemic. The art of helping others involves giving and receiving help as people, as professionals, and as members of a community.
Declaration of conflicting interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
ORCID iD
Elena Cabiati https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5244-7603
Footnote
1. The initiative was ideated and realized by the author, who is a social worker, with the support of a non-profit organization (Centro di Terapia dell’Adolescenza di Milano). The activity was sponsored by the regional association of social workers.
References
Banks S., Cai T., De Jonge E., Shears J., Shum M., Sobočan A.M., Strom K., Truell R., Úriz M.J., Weinberg M. (2020) Ethical Challenges for Social Workers during COVID-19: A Global Perspective. Rheinfelden: International Federation of Social Workers.
Beaunoyer E., Dupéré S., Guitton M.J. (2020) ‘COVID-19 and Digital Inequalities: Reciprocal Impacts and Mitigation Strategies’, Computers in Human Behavior 111: 106424.
Borkman T. (1976) ‘Experiential Knowledge: A New Concept for the Analysis of Self-Help Groups’, Social Service Review 50: 445–56.
British Association of Social Workers (BASW) (2020) ‘COVID-19 Pandemic: Ethical Guidance for Social Workers’. Available online at: https://www.basw.co.uk/covid-19-pandemic-%E2%80%93-ethical-guidance-social-workers (accessed 11 January 2021).
Bronwyn H. (2013) ‘Mutual Aid Group Work: Social Work Leading the Way to Recovery-Focused Mental Health Practice’, Social Work with Groups 36(1): 43–58.
Clemans S.E. (2005) ‘Recognizing Vicarious Traumatization: A Single Session Group Model for Trauma Workers’, Social Work with Groups 27(2-3): 55–74.
Damianakis T., Climans R., Marziali E. (2008) ‘Social Workers’ Experiences of Virtual Psychotherapeutic Caregivers Groups for Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, Stroke, Frontotemporal Dementia, and Traumatic Brain Injury’, Social Work with Groups 31(2): 99–116.
Dominelli L. (2017) The Routledge Handbook of Green Social Work. New York: Routledge.
Dominelli L. (2020) Surviving COVID-19: Social Work Issues in a Global Pandemic (Child Protection and Welfare, Social Care). Stirling: Stirling University.
Fahra L. (2020) ‘COVID-19 Guidance Note: Protecting Those Living in Homelessness’. Available online at: https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Housing/SR_housing_COVID-19_guidance_homeless.pdf (accessed 11 January 2021).
Farkas K., Romaniuk R. (2020) ‘Social Work, Ethics and Vulnerable Groups in the Time of Coronavirus and COVID-19’, Society Registered 4(2): 67–82.
Folgheraiter F. (2004) Relational Social Work: Toward Networking and Societal Practices. London: Kingsley.
Folgheraiter F., Corradini F., Avancini G. (2020) ‘Voce “Mutual Support Groups”’, in Gu D., Dupre M.E. (eds) Encyclopedia of Gerontology and Population Aging, pp. 1–5. Cham: Springer.
Gitterman A., Shulman L. (2005) Mutual Aid Groups, Vulnerable and Resilient Populations, and the Life Cycle. New York: Columbia University Press.
International Federation of Social Workers (IFSW) (2018) ‘Global Statement of Ethical Principles’. Available online at: https://www.ifsw.org/global-social-work-statement-of-ethical-principles/
International Federation of Social Workers (IFSW) (2020) ‘Ethical Decision-Making in the Face of COVID-19’. Available online at: https://www.ifsw.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Option-A-Ethical-Decision-making-in-the-face-of-COVID-19.pdf (accessed 11 January 2021).
International Federation of Social Workers (IFSW) and International Association of Schools of Social Work (IASSW) (2014) ‘Global Definition of the Social Work Profession’. Available online at: http://ifsw.org/get-involved/global-definition-of-social-work/ (accessed 11 January 2021).
Javadian R. (2007) ‘Social Work Responses to Earthquake Disasters: A Social Work Intervention in Bam, Iran’, International Social Work 50(3): 334–46.
Johannesen T. (2020) ‘News from Our Societies – ICSW: COVID-19 – Five Tests We Face’, International Social Work 63(3): 399.
Kurland R., Salmon R. (1992) ‘Group Work vs. Casework in a Group: Principles and Implications for Teaching and Practice’, Social Work with Groups 15(4): 3–14.
Meier A. (2002) ‘An Online Stress Management Support Group for Social Workers’, Journal of Technology in Human Services 20(1–2): 107–32.
Noorani T., Karlsson M., Borkman T. (2019) ‘Deep Experiential Knowledge: Reflections from Mutual Aid Groups for Evidence-Based Practice’, Evidence & Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice 15(2): 217–34.
O’Leary P., Tsui M.S. (2020) ‘Ten Gentle Reminders to Social Workers in the Pandemic’, International Social Work 63(3): 273–4.
Pandya V. (2010) ‘An Evidence Base for Group Work with Older Adults Living in the Community’, Social Work with Groups 33(4): 323–49.
Prasad D.B. (2008) ‘Content Analysis: A Method of Social Science Research’, in Lal Das D.K. (ed.) Research Methods for Social Work, pp. 174–93. New Delhi: Rawat Publications.
Raineri M.L. (2017) ‘Relational Social Work and Mutual/Self-Help Groups’, Relational Social Work 1(1): 19–38.
Riessman F. (1965) ‘The “Helper” Therapy Principle’, Social Work 10(2): 27–32.
Schott E.M.P., Weiss E.L. (2016) Transformative Social Work Practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Steinberg D.M. (2014) A Mutual-Aid Model for Social Work with Groups, 3th edn. New York: Routledge.
Toseland R., Hacker L. (1985) ‘Social Workers’ Use of Self-Help Groups as a Resource for Clients’, Social Work 30(3): 232–7.
World Health Organization (WHO) (2020) ‘The Current COVID-19 Situation’. Available online at: https://www.who.int/countries/ita/
Biographies
Elena Cabiati is a social work professor at the Catholic University of Milan and Brescia. She is a member of the Relational Social Work Research Centre and is a social worker.
Cite article
Cite article
Cite article
OR
Download to reference manager
If you have citation software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice
Information, rights and permissions
Information
Published In
Article first published online: February 7, 2021
Issue published: September 2021
Keywords
Authors
Metrics and citations
Metrics
Article usage*
Total views and downloads: 12844
*Article usage tracking started in December 2016
Altmetric
See the impact this article is making through the number of times it’s been read, and the Altmetric Score.
Learn more about the Altmetric Scores
Articles citing this one
Receive email alerts when this article is cited
Web of Science: 28 view articles Opens in new tab
Crossref: 21
- Self help group (SHG) in India: a path toward empowerment and poverty ...
- The Perceived Job Performance of Child Welfare Workers During the COVI...
- A Critical Appraisal of Ways Organizations Can Support Social Workers ...
- Child protection social workers in Italy and the Covid‐19 challenges: ...
- ‘The Pandemic Affected My Life in a Negative Way’: The Experiences of ...
- A qualitative analysis of how frontline homeless service workers in Te...
- Filling a gap: virtual clinician-led support groups for disordered eat...
- Empowering Cooperative Teamwork for Community Service Sustainability: ...
- Knowledge, Attitude, and Practices Towards COVID-19 Among Social Worke...
- Reimagining Social Work Placements in the Covid-19 Pandemic
- Stress and Depression in Ohio Social Workers during the COVID-19 Pande...
- Parenting a child with disability: A mother’s reflection on the signif...
- Challenges to social work professionalism during the COVID-19 pandemic...
- A Qualitative Exploration of Frontline Homeless Service Worker Experie...
- Motivational factors among social work undergraduates in online educat...
- On the Frontlines: The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Social Worke...
- “Without social there is no health”: Social work perspectives in multi...
- Exploring the COVID-19 Practice Experiences of Social Workers Working ...
- The Challenges Faced by Korean Social Workers at the Community Welfare...
- The voices of parents in child protective services: A qualitative anal...
- Silenced Coffee Rooms—The Changes in Social Capital within Social Work...
Figures and tables
Figures & Media
Tables
View Options
View options
PDF/ePub
View PDF/ePubGet access
Access options
If you have access to journal content via a personal subscription, university, library, employer or society, select from the options below:
loading institutional access options
IFSW members can access this journal content using society membership credentials.
IFSW members can access this journal content using society membership credentials.
Alternatively, view purchase options below:
Purchase 24 hour online access to view and download content.
Access journal content via a DeepDyve subscription or find out more about this option.
