This document discusses social worker attitudes towards not knowing key information about clients and their families early in the assessment process. It emphasizes that building trust through attunement, sensitive responsiveness and showing up is more important than concrete knowledge. The framework presented focuses on open-ended inquiry, seeking to understand each person's unique situation and perspective, and being open to correction. Social workers are advised to share what they learn over time with clients in a gentle way, while also reflecting on their own potential biases. Relationships, not rigid thinking or tools alone, are central to the assessment process.

1. Social Worker Attitudes
Jane F. Gilgun, PhD, LICSW
Professor, School of Social Work
University of Minnesota, Twin Cities, USA
October 30, 2012
jgilgun@umn.edu

2. Topics
 Not Knowing
 Framework for not Knowing
 Alternatives to Not Knowing
 Sharing with Parents What You do Know
 Assessment Tools
 Knowing Some Things in General
 Not Knowing Individuals
 Relevance of Signs of Safety Framework

3. Not Knowing
 Importance of a storehouse of knowledge
 Social workers know nothing about individuals family
members at intake
 Assessments based on relationships
 Relationships built on trust
 Trust based on attunement, sensitive
responsiveness, showing up

4. Framework
for Not Knowing
 Centrality of seeking to understand
 Open-ended inquiry
 Contextualized inquiry
 Be open to correction by children & parents
 Gentle focus on person’s stories and perspectives
 Situated stories
 Service users’ points of view
 Life histories
 Belief systems

5. Framework
Not Knowing
 Reflection as reciprocity
 During early parts of assessment, well-timed
statements of what you are hearing
 Be open to correction
 As you learn more, let parents and children know what
you are learning about them
 Sensitive responsiveness & attunement
 Be a secure, safe base
 Hold back on showing rage, shock, disgust, and pity

6. Framework
for Not Knowing
 You could be wrong
 Reflection
 Value base of your work
 Know own life history
 Know own flaws and biases
 Be honest with yourself
 Find one other person to be honest with
 Supervision
 Be open-minded
 On-going study

7. Framework
for Not Knowing
 More on Building Relationships
 Relationships of trust with other professionals
 Return phone calls
 Show up
 Listen
 Know systems and referral sources
 Safety first
 Advocate for service users based upon values of
justice, care, dignity, worth, autonomy

8. Alternatives
to Not Knowing
 Paternalism (Dismissive of parents’/children’s pov)
 Child saving (Preoccupied & Paternalistic)
 Rigid Thinking (Dismissive)
 Confusions of Perspectives & View Points at
Individual & Systems Levels (Disorganized)

9. Share with Parents
& Children What you Do Know
 Bit by bit
 Toward end of assessment
 Examples?

10. Assessment Tools
 As crib notes and cheat sheets
 Most important is what is in your head
 Keep adding to what is in your head
 Revise what is in your head
 Connect head and heart
 Be authoritative
 Secure base
 Some behaviors are harmful
 Parents who harm require clarity & direction

11. Assessment Tools
 Lessons From Common Factors Model
 Most change occurs outside of sw/su relationship
 Relationships single most important factor after outside
influences
 SW and SU (Service User) variables important:
motivation, desire for change
 Specific technical framework, such as
CBT, competency-based, solution focused, narrative
therapy are equally effective when looked at in the
context of the other three factors

12. Discussion
 Relationships central
 Trust takes time
 Breakdown & repair part of trust-building
 Have lots of info in your head
 Know you know nothing about families before you do
assessments
 Test what you know for fit with families & children
 Revise your understandings as you gain knowledge
 Reflection is central

13. References
 Drisko, James (2004). Common factors in psychotherapy
outcome: Meta-analytic findings and their implications for practice
and research. Families in Society, 85(1), 81-90.
 Lambert, M. (1992). Implications of outcome research for
psychotherapy integration. In J. Norcross & J. Goldstein (Eds.),
Handbook of psychotherapy integration (pp. 94-129) NY: Basic.
 The Signs of Safety Child Protection Practice Framework (2nd
ed.) (2011). Government of Western Australia, Department of
Child Protection.
http://www.dcp.wa.gov.au/Resources/Documents/Policies%20an
d%20Frameworks/SignsOfSafetyFramework2011.pdf
 Tunnell, Andrew (2009). Introduction to the Signs of Safety (DVD
& Workbook). Resolutions Consultancy. Perth: Western Australia.
Available at signsofsafety.net.