‘(Dis)respect’ and ‘doing (no) harm’: Refugees’ Perspectives on Social Work Ethics

Overview: Globally, social workers are guided by the ethical principles of “respect” and “do no harm.” Yet, minimal scholarship explores the ways such constructs are conceptualized cross-culturally in formerly colonized societies. This presentation examines the perspectives of social work ethics from refugee young people living in an East African refugee camp.Proposal text: Background/rationale:
The field of international social work is guided by the ethical constructs "do no harm" and "respect for the inherent dignity and worth of all human beings" (IASSW & IFSW, 2018). Yet, minimal scholarly attention explores how such terms are conceptualized and understood from non-Eurocentric frameworks. For instance, based on sociopolitical context, culture, gender, colonialism, and power, respect in Brazil may not look the same as in Ireland (Sewpaul & Henrickson, 2019). Although an essential foundation for social workers, these ethical principles are generally abstract and often rooted in Western theory (Bilotta, 2021). This is especially apparent in social work practice and research with refugee populations, where the implications of settler colonialism on such subjugated communities are evident. As such, there exists a scholarly push to “decolonize” social work practice/research with forcibly displaced communities in formerly colonized societies (Anis & Turtiainen, 2021). By understanding the ethical concepts of “respect” and “harm,” according to refugee participants, global social workers may ascertain practices and methodologies that provide reciprocal and culturally-relevant support for refugee communities. This paper attempts to engage in such a process by collaborating with refugee young people living in Kenya to explore how “they” make sense of social work ethical codes.

Methods:
This qualitative study, rooted in critical decolonial and anti-oppressive theoretical prisms, draws upon 31 semi-structured, in-depth interviews and focus groups conducted in an East African refugee camp. The questions focused on understanding how refugee young people (18-35 years) conceptualized social work ethical principles of respect and do no harm. The research asked the question: Do social workers engage in respectful relationships with refugees in East African refugee camps? This analysis is part of a larger qualitative research project examining how social work practice and research ethics are understood in refugee communities.

Results:
For research participants, a reciprocal relationship between the social worker and refugee was tantamount to “respect.” However, the overwhelming majority of participants claimed that their previous experiences with social workers and social work researchers were “one-sided” and “dominated” by the social worker. According to many participants, social workers entered the relationship with their own agenda and theoretical understandings of well-being in the refugee camp. Moreover, several participants felt disappointed and that their expectations went unmet. Finally, participants stated feeling “disrespected” and “undermined.” This suggests that not only is a lack of respect present but also, by engaging in such hierarchal relationships, social workers may be causing harm.

Conclusions:
The data from this research suggests that moving forward, social workers should follow two steps to provide more culturally-sensitive relationships in refugee camps. The first is to engage in independent, critical self-reflexive processes by exploring how our practices may be linked to our oppressive ideologies, identities, and worldviews, which may vary from our participants. Secondly, a collective push to unpack all social work ethical codes is necessary to engage in reciprocal relationships. This process can be initiated by participatory and collaborative research between social work providers, researchers, and refugees to assuage power inequities in such relationships.