Page | 65 with this source of influence is then made easier. However, although the concept of parents and ancestors having an effect on the present day relationship may resonate with Zulu couples, the Imago Intentional dialogue does not fit with the concept of ancestor veneration. The Imago Intentional dialogue may also not fit with the concept of ukuhlonipha, as although active, respectful listening skills are taught, the couple is required to validate and empathise with the other’s point of view, which could be counter to the expectations in a patriarchal society. Further discussion of the use of Imago Relationship Therapy will continue in response to this study’s results in the final chapter.
In concluding this discussion of the different types of therapy, it is important to note that they all have very different epistemologies that evolved in response to each other - moving from the linear model of cognitive behavioural therapy, to the circular thinking of Milan family therapy, to Narrative therapy with its concepts of multiple realities, the multi-systemic community family therapy, and then Imago Relationship therapy that uses biology and cosmogenesis to explore the relational space. In each of these methods, the exact process of therapy as well as the role of the therapist is different as they reflect their epistemology. However, of great importance is that in spite of this, the underlying philosophy for all of them is still based on the Western world view.
Page | 66 Africa for training and conferences from places like America, Britain, Europe and Australia. At these conferences South African psychology and social work clinicians were also presenting papers that described their experiences using these methods with their own indigenous clients. Examples, amongst many others, include the use a six- step problem solving process by Nell and Seedat (1989) who were working with families and primary health care workers in Soweto; Henning (1990) describes the use of different family therapy methods with families in a teaching hospital in Harare, Zimbabwe; Lifshitz, Kgoadi and van Niekerk (1990) worked with families in Mamelodi, and mention how firstly they had to market and gain credibility for their psychotherapeutic services by using drama with various community structures, and how this impacted on their own epistemology; Kasiram (2000) describes working with multi problem families the use of building hope through various means to empower both the family and the therapist; Rankin and Rankin (2000) describe the use of art within a narrative process where groups of people described and tell their story to art students who painted their interpretation of an aspect that resonates with them (the re-telling) and then the art students shared their pictures with the original group (the re-telling of the re-telling); and Appelt (2000) who described her journey using narrative processes with a group of adolescent girls who had suffered trauma and the resilience that evolved within a community of concern.. This implied that these Western therapeutic techniques were universal and could be transferred easily from one culture to another; from one world view to another with a little adjustment.
Lifschitz however, already in 1989, stressed that we need to not only adjust our ways of working with indigenous clients, but also we need to adjust our world view, ways of thinking, understanding, and our language so that our ways of healing are applicable to those people whose world-view is not Western. He stressed that African people have assimilated Western views, but their own world view has not been displaced. He added that such alternative therapeutic procedures need to draw from both Western and African approaches in order to form a “hybrid” (1989:50) in order to have the benefit of both worlds.
Page | 67 Nell and Seedat (1989:41) also mention that therapists who want to extend services to the majority of South Africans need to have “a sensitivity to power relations and the dynamics of social and cultural transformation”.
However, in spite of these therapists being aware of the need for cultural sensitivity, as well as the use of a variety of therapeutic modalities, of great importance is that they did not examine or use the cultural world view of the African people they worked with.
Interestingly Bar-On (2003) comments that social work, as practiced in the United States of America and in Britain, is now practiced throughout the world; and yet, although many writers have stressed that Western-based social work is irrelevant and ineffective in non-Western societies, there has been no comparative research of its application in different societies. “It remains unclear, therefore, what parts of its knowledge and ensuing interventions are universal and which might be particular to specific population groups” (Bar-On, 2003:27).
He looks at why there is a need for an African social work and suggests five different reasons. The first is that Africa’s social problems are different to those of the West.
Obviously some problems are similar, such as homelessness, addiction, and domestic violence; but some are unique – Africa suffers from disasters like drought, civil war, and unmanageable illnesses. Secondly, Africa does not have the material wealth to deal with its social problems in the same way that the West does. Thirdly, in richer Western countries, social work is part of a continuous formal and informal service network that includes schools and education, nursing and health care, and institutionalized social security. These all support each other, whereas in Africa these services are either not present or are “subject to bureaucratic mania and to ‘sticky fingers’” (Bar-On, 2003:29). Fourthly, in Africa there may be political interference as welfare provision is used to build loyalty. For example the people and the social workers need to curry favour with local chiefs in order to be allocated services.
Finally, the teachings of Western social work are seen to be Eurocentric, and do not take the African values and way of life into account.
Page | 68 Some of the issues mentioned by Bar-On (2003) against indigenizing social work include that we are all human, and therefore humanistic theories apply to everyone.
An example of this is Spangenberg’s article on the relevance of the Person Centred Approach to social work in Africa (2003). Another concern is that universal standards such as international human rights and issues of feminism need to be upheld, and indigenization may exclude these. Some suggest that because the social problems and their alleviation around the world are different, social workers are already using indigenous methods. Another important point is that social work is a world-wide profession and therefore needs a global body of knowledge. This would then allow social work students and lecturers, as well as qualified social workers, to be internationally competitive and have access to jobs and programmes in other countries that might not be available at home. This would include the possibility of exchange programmes so that people from other countries can contribute to this country; and through this opportunity for mobility, there would be a “decreased risk of academic
‘in-breeding’” (International Association of Universities, 2012). Thus there would be greater engagement not only with local, but also with national, regional and international issues. This would allow joint research collaboration with other organizations throughout the world, particularly research that assists with social development challenges such as rural development and food security (International Association of Universities, 2012).
If indigenization related to social work is to occur, how is it to occur? Bar On (2003) summarises seven proposals: The first is the suggestion that social work maintains its Western theories and practices but includes different cultural practices ; the second suggestion is to teach social work students practical rather than theoretical skills such as cooking, sewing and gardening so they can impart these to their clients in poverty reducing community programmes; thirdly, it may be useful to decrease the focus on individuals and families and rather focus on larger communities; the fourth suggestion is to expand social work services to include more preventative services such as primary health care, family planning and development; fifthly, advocating for personal and community income generation is suggested; the sixth suggestion is that social work should work at a political macro level in social policy; and the final suggestion is to challenge the political structures in welfare and allow greater input by
“the masses”.
Page | 69 Many of these ideas on indigenization are valuable, and in fact are already in practice.
When looking at FAMSA, it started using Western therapeutic methods for individual, couple and group counselling; but also offered preventative methods such as the Education for Living life skills programme in schools; and talks and workshops to couples, religious leaders, and other helping professionals. At this time, salaries of the social workers were subsidized by the various government social welfare departments.
However, in the 1990’s the government changed its subsidy system and stopped subsidizing individual salaries and rather subsidized welfare programmes. This resulted in FAMSA expanding to include more community development (including developing income generating projects) and outreach in its services. It therefore had a treatment programme that gave remedial assistance to individuals, couples and families; and a preventative programme. FAMSA were also very involved in the formation of welfare policy that related to social development and to the field of marriage and the family at both a local and a national level. However, my concern is that although these changes possibly allowed FAMSA to be more relevant and to reach a wider audience, the therapeutic aspects of the agency were still, to my knowledge, very much based on Western counselling methods. They did not seem to include the values that make up the African world view. Possibly this is due to the scarcity of teaching, of both the values and any techniques based on these Afro- centric values, at university level or in the continued education of social workers.
In their account of the history of the Association for Social Work Education in Africa (ASWEA), Gray, Kreitzer and Mupedziswa (2014) describe how the association, which ceased to exist in 1989, had investigated alternatives to the dominant Western social work thinking and practices as early as 1971 in an attempt at decolonization and indigenisation The ideas discussed in this organization obviously focused on social work training curricula and teaching skills; and illustrated that African students related better to community development and group work as these were more relevant to them, rather than the individual based case work. Up until the 1980’s, social work in Africa had tended to be urban based, after which rural development became more of a focus (Gray et al 2014). The move from a remedial social welfare model to social development was slow, and throughout the tenure of the ASWEA there was a constant debate about the balance between casework and community development. Of interest
Page | 70 is that in 1973/4 when Mali was in the process of indigenizing its social work training, the first step of training was for students to renew their knowledge and connection with both urban and rural life by interviewing people from both walks of life (Gray et al 2014). In many other African countries the students became involved in a wide variety of community development-based programmes, and membership to ASWEA expanded to include rural community development and other non-professional training centres. Gray et al (2014:109). stress that indigenization allows African social workers to fulfil the underlying universal social work values of respect for human dignity and worth, and the quest for social justice through “focusing on local issues and problems and seeking culturally relevant solutions.”
However, Gray et al (2014) describe how a research project in 2008 attempted to measure whether Mupedziswa’s model (2001) of indigenized social work education was being practiced. The model stresses indigenizing various curriculum-based activities such as the content of lectures, the use of interactive methods, and fieldwork; as well extra-curricular activities such as the production of indigenous research and materials. The research investigated the University of Johannesburg, the University of Botswana and the National University of Lesotho. It found that social development was well established in the curriculum of these universities, but that the extra- curricular activities were less evident, and therefore there was little local feedback into social development policies. The split between social policies and the university’s ‘ivory-tower’ therefore needs addressing so that local research informs welfare policy, possibly by involving local policy makers and local leaders in the research process, so that they have a vested interest in adopting the research recommendations.
Osei-Hwedie (2007) suggests that instead of an either/or situation where either Western social work theory or indigenous Afro-centric theory is taught, it is necessary to teach both. It is also necessary to develop a new theoretical framework that
“combines local and universal values and processes …and that accepts the local and the universal as equally important” (2007:113). This is certainly very relevant, and is similar to what Collins, Jordan and Coleman (2010) suggest when they stress the importance of knowing “the grand narratives” or world view of a culture, while being
Page | 71 sensitive to the fact that each person, couple and family have their own respective micro-narratives within that particular culture.
I agree with Bar-On (2003:31) when he says that we need to actively determine “to which values do different societies subscribe and, hence, what knowledge and resulting interventions and concomitant skills do they require to promote them?” He describes how the Western world view about the meaning of life is based on the individual, and therefore knowledge and policies are focused on the extent to which individuals gain autonomy and self-fulfilment. In contrast, in Africa social networks are more important; thus knowledge, the concept of society, and the meaning of life would be based on roles and concomitant duties and obligations, resulting in different policies. However, because Western theories, policies and practices are so entrenched, it is first necessary for all social workers to challenge their own ethnocentric beliefs and values; to become aware of different communication patterns, beliefs and values, as well as the specific cultural protocols from other cultures (Collins, Jordan, and Coleman 2010). In order to develop indigenous theory, policy and therapeutic methods it is also necessary “to engage in reflective learning with the persons who are most knowledgeable about what Africans require and how they best can be served”. H Bar-On suggests talking to, amongst others, clients as well as “aunts and uncles in the extended family” (2003:35). This is what this research study has attempted to do.