Specialized practice curricular guide for military and Veteran social work

Abstract: In 2010, the Council on Social Work Education (CSWE) published the first guidelines for advanced practice in military and veteran social work, describing core competencies central to specialized social work service to our nation’s military and veterans, along with their families. The introduction to the first guide laid out a thoughtful chronology of the relationship between social work and the military, dating back to as early as 1918. The scope of practice outlined in the first guide is grounded in knowledge that every war and conflict can impart lasting injuries on individuals, families, and communities. In 2018, the guidelines were updated to reflect the 2015 Educational Policy and Accreditation Standards (EPAS) and a deeper understanding as a profession, and a nation, that current systems were unprepared to support the complex consequences of more than a decade of war and reconstruction efforts. The Specialized Practice Curricular Guide for Military and Veteran Social Work is the next edition. It seeks to use the knowledge built over 2 decades of constant military and veteran engagement while prompting for critical evaluation of and discourse concerning gaps in scholarship and areas needing increased attention to include more focus on the wide array of military experiences outside war and combat. Military social work has continued to evolve to influence social and institutional capacities to care for those who have served. Through research, practice, and advocacy, military social work has made significant contributions to the development of interventions, programs, and policies that support veterans, service members, and military families. Military social workers have continued to advocate for the expansion of services for the military, veterans, and military families not otherwise eligible for healthcare and legal services. The number of social workers serving on active duty, working for Veterans Affairs (VA) and in nonprofits focused on the population, has climbed significantly with the expansion of services. Our comprehensive understanding of the injuries, issues, and strengths of service members, veterans, and military families has improved, and increased visibility has put military issues into the national dialogue. As society changes, so does the military, as it is both a contributor to and result of the sociocultural context in which it exists. Women are increasingly serving in combat and leadership roles and throughout the armed services. Military sexual trauma and openly serving LGBTQ+ service members continue to be politicized, debated, and discussed. With this revision, an intersectional lens was adopted across competencies to include and consider the varied, complex, and unique identities of the military population. Specialized education to prepare social work students and professional social workers to serve the military, veterans, and military families is as essential as it was in 2010. Through explicit coursework, field experience, and clinical supervision, specialized social work practitioners can remain at the forefront of research, practice, and advocacy in service of those who have served. Despite advances in practice since the publication of the previous edition, the core themes of all social work education remain as relevant and essential as ever: our ethical responsibility to our clients; our ethical responsibilities to our agencies, communities, and society; and the demand that we meet our clients where they are and commit to helping them with their goals without imposing our own worldview on them. It is important, too, to acknowledge the potential friction between some of social work’s core values and some of the themes and ideologies that military social workers will be working with. Military social work programs that engage in, and embrace, this dialectical balance, promoting complex reasoning in the face of conflicting values and challenges, are vital. This does not mean that we endorse war or aggression but rather that we extend meaningful help to those who have been affected. Military social work as a field of practice and research is critical to our relevance as social workers, to the advancement of new career options, and in our leadership among helping professionals. As social workers continue to exert their central influence in the midst of wartime and its aftermath, a revised, vigorous social work research agenda and appropriate training to effectively prepare military social workers are needed.

Read the full article
Report a problem with this article

Related articles

  • More for Policy & Practice

    Medical discharge from the UK Armed Forces and the role of combat injury: A short report from the ADVANCE-INVEST study

    The recent conflict in Afghanistan resulted in hundreds of serious injuries to UK Armed Forces personnel, necessitating their aeromedical evacuation. Due to the nature of their injuries, many individuals have been medically discharged from the Armed Forces. Using both quantitative and qualitative data from the ADVANCE and ADVANCE-INVEST studies, this report investigates the outcomes and experiences of those who were medically discharged, with a focus on those with combat injuries. The ADVANCE-INVEST study, a sub-study of ADVANCE, is a mixed-methods investigation of transition experiences and outcomes for those with combat injuries arising from the conflict in Afghanistan, funded by Forces in Mind Trust. The study used questionnaire data from over 500 ex-Service personnel who had sustained combat injuries, as well as 28 in-depth interviews regarding their perceptions and experiences of transition in the context of their injuries. Most participants who sustained a combat injury left the military via a medical discharge. Some of those who were medically discharged experienced an abrupt ending to their career and life in the military, contrary to their ambitions and expectations of a long career in Service. This was also true of those who believed the military would retain them in spite of the seriousness of their injuries and did not anticipate a medical discharge. The difficulties that some participants felt in relation to the rapid ending of their military career was exacerbated by a perceived lack of collaboration with the military regarding their leaving, something they felt they had little, or no, control over. The abrupt ending to their service was felt to be compounded by a lack of communication from their former military chain of command after they had left.UK Armed Forces personnel who were medically discharged were eligible for the highest level of support provided by resettlement services for their transition. Nonetheless they had lower rates of post-Service employment compared to those who left via other methods of discharge. This could have been due to the nature of their injuries; however, participants also reported a lack of tailored careers advice specific to the challenges they faced related to their injury. The pace at which participants engaged with future career planning was varied, and existing structures did not always have the flexibility to match the needs of the injured person. Transfer of medical records was still reported as being inconsistent, with some complaints of civilian medical practitioners being unable to access their full medical details, forcing injured personnel to retell their medical histories many times. Compensation for injuries was welcomed and could be seen to have benefits beyond merely the immediate material benefit to the injured person; for example, it provided acknowledgement of their injury, a buffer while seeking re-employment in the civilian job market and supported a healthy worklife balance in the context of ongoing pain and medical issues. Conversely, problems could occur when payment amounts and transfer dates were unknown, when a lack of tailored financial advice was provided, and/or when poor financial decisions were made. Some participants were engaged in lengthy tribunal processes to claim compensation, particularly those who were injured but did not sustain limb loss; these processes were emotionally demanding for them. Based upon our findings, a summary of our recommendations and the audiences they are aimed at is given.

    Mental Health Physical Health