1. Discussion: Mutual Aid and Conflict Mutual Aid refers to people helping one another think things through. The mutual-aid model of social work with groups is based on the belief we work with groups precisely because of their potential for mutual aid. Helping people engage in mutual aid is no simple matter, however. In its utilization of group process as the primary means for helping and so direct contrast to the “individual work in a group” style that overwhelms much of practice today, mutual aid work is truly group work (Steinberg, 2014).
Not only are the individual members our clients but also the group as a system is our second client (Shulman, 2011). Mutual aid needs a democratic humanistic culture (Glassman 2009), an environment in which everyone has the right to be heard and in which everyone needs and feelings are taken into account in all of the group’s decision-making processes. Mutual aid can be developed in any setting, in any group, under any circumstances. Mutual aid happens at many intensities and in many ways, both during the life of one group and across different groups (Gitterman and Shulman 1994).
Conflict plays an important role in mutual aid (Bernstein 1965). Conflict is often seen as a nerve-racking situation or a heated exchange that ends in turmoil. The thought of it tends to strike fear into the heart, and all possible means to either avoiding or putting a quick stop to confrontational moments. In reality, conflict is not in and of itself a violent state of affairs. It is merely the result of expressions of difference, and although commonality is one important facet of mutual aid, the opportunity to explore difference and entertain new ways of looking at old pictures is equally important (Steinberg, 2014).
This paper will discuss mutual aid and conflict that this student facilities at her place of worship in King George, VA on Wednesday nights. For the sake of this paper, the group will be called Ambar Church Group (ACG). 2. Description Commonalities are important to mutual aid, what members have in common helps members support one another, accept one another as resources, and sustain a sense of community in times of crisis (Steinberg, 2014). The commonalities consist of 15-25 African Americans. ACG consist of both heterosexual males and females.
ACG ranged differently in age, the age of each member ranged 15 years to 90 years. ACG socioeconomic status poor/working poor. ACG culture, the group consists of people having made a profession of their faith in Jesus Christ as Lord and is in agreement with the articles of faith and covenant of the church. According to (Doel and Kelly, 2014) ACG could be consider an Open, Organization, Learning, and Work Group. There is strong evidence, both from casework and psychotherapy research that clients are most apt to continue in treatment when they and their therapist share similar expectations (Briar 1996).
The purpose of ACG is to study the bible God’s holy word. To help group transform, through interaction with God’s word and one another, with the hope that lives of group members will be changed. Specifically, hoping that members, through scriptures, are drawn more intimately to the Lord, where members can most fully receive the gift of Go grace in each of their lives. The group dynamics are friendly mutual-aid process. ACG greets each other with hugs, kisses, and smiles. In addition to being a process, each member is comfortable with one another displays, shares common feelings, needs, and concern.
The mutual-aid climate is good in spirit and even-tempered. ACG has respect for each other, appreciates one another, and values each other’s opinions. By establishing a norm of speaking when there is something to say regarding the lesson at hand, ACG exercise the free floating mutual aid communication style, this pattern permits members to interact directly with one another ad to contribute to groups discussion (Middleman and Wood, 1996). As a learning group consisting of specific concrete questions concerning the bible each member, contribute to the common pool of knowledge.
The facilitator also contributes data (Shulman 2011). 3. Statement of structure ACG leader read out loud scripture reading John 14:2 King James Version – In my Father’s house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go prepare a place for you. After the reading of the word leader began to exhalt and encourage the members on the bless promise the children of God holds. The following Dialectic Process occurred. ACG Leader-sharing with the group how happy the members should be knowing that after this life there will be a mansion awaiting each of them.
Leader ask the question, is not that a wonderful blessing? All the members answered with yes and agreed with the scripture accept for one member for the sake of confidentially we will call him Minister F. Minister F debates with leader, he did not agree with the leader, he told the group it was interpreted wrong and there will not be mansions in heaven but there will be rooms. ACG Leader-in disagreement asks Minister F do you believe that the word of God is true. He states yes, well how come you feel that this scripture is not true?
The Minister continue to insist that the scripture means a room in a mansion not a mansion. The leader began to scan the room to see what the members thought about the scripture. Everyone agreed with the word of God. However, Minister Frefuses to let it go, eventually led to demand for work. The demand for work is to explore Minister Freasoning and thinking of the scripture reading 4. What precipitated demand for work #1 What started the demand for work? Conflict plays an important role in mutual-aid (Bernstein 1965).
The student leader became upset with Minister F. ACG Leader sees the Minister as the Monopolist who began to test her power. Minister F talks over the leader and proceeds to take over the group. At this time, the leader scans the room she noticed members frustration as they whispered among themselves, move around in their seats and displaying upsetting facial expressions. Leader could tell members are confused and concerned about the Minister’s comments. The group was torn between agreeing with Leader, Minister F, and most of all the word of God.
Leader took in consideration Minister Fage compared to her she is just a babe in Christ. Leader began to second-guess her compentence of the word of God. As the members look to her and her response, her esteem quivered to nothing. Finally, she just said Minister Fyou perceive the scripture as you do and we as a group perceives it as we choose to perceive it. Most writers agree that conflict in groups is inevitable and necessary for strengthening relationships and problem in solving skills among members (Bemstein, 1973).
Addressing conflict first as the leader and addressing Ministers F monopolist behavior as set in the ground rules. Leader now must step into leadership position. Doel and Kelly (2014) identify the need for social group work leadership to be both assertive, which they define as the “Capacity to inspire or persuade others to follow a particular course of action strategy” and facilitative, which entails the “capacity to direct the process, so that others are helped to decide on a course of action. It is the leader’s job to foster cohesion. The Leader invite the group as a whole to explore the circumstance at hand and ensuring groupthink does not occur doing the process. While leading, the leader must also remember the core value stated in Association for the Advancement of Social Work Groups, INC (IASWG), and the Code of Ethics of the National Association of Social Workers (NASW). Respect for person’s and their autonomy and Dignity and Worth of the Person.
Knowing how to handle conflict is crucial because, if handled poorly, conflict can lead to polarization and drop out among members (Camacho, 2002). Demand for Work #2 Leaders understanding the Keys to Conflict There is no doubt that practice begins with the mindset of the leader his or her general philosophy about life and human nature, the theoretical foundation to his or professional role, and other personal and professional characteristics that shape his or her approach to working with people (Steinberg 2014).
NASW reminds group leaders the value of service; Social workers primary goal is to help people in need. Social workers ervice to others above self-interest. Using problem solving, a method by which problems are carefully identified and analyzed, and strategies are developed to address the problem, with the intention of solving it or, at least, alleviating it (Doel and Kelly, 2014). Problem-solving will encourage this group to support one another, through a process of mutual aid, in addressing and overcoming the issue that got them to this catalyst moment.