| Abstract: | Summary I read Baldock and Prior's article with interest in view ofthe shortage of studies examining day-to-day practice in socialwork, but the authors' analysis leaves me reflecting uneasilyupon the state of uncertainty into which social work has fallen.The authors conclude by describing as skilled,practices which they say resulted in confusion for clients andwhich only apparently reflected social work principles. We arenot told whether the authors checked their analysis with workersor clients and it is possible that the clients were not as confusedas we are led to believe, given their long term contact withthe workers. If, however, the picture is an accurate one, shouldit really be described as representing skilled social work?Baldock and Prior do so but neglect to examine the ends towardswhich interviewing skill should be directed in social work.The result is a strangely ambiguous statement about practice,particularly in the light of research findings on effectivenessand client satisfaction, and one which offers little scope forcomplacency. |
