Group work's place in social work: a historical analysis

Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare, Dec, 2001 by Janice Andrews

Grace Coyle (1955, 7) announced in The Group: "Having decided by vote of the membership to throw in our lot with social work, we have accepted wholeheartedly an identification with its aims and its place in the community." Yet, she warned that "... it has been clear, as the process of merger went on, that members of specialized groups must continue to have opportunity to study their specialized problems, to confer among themselves to develop research and written materials, and to represent their specialized interests in dealing with the field of practice and the other parts of social work."

Most group workers nonetheless applauded the creation of NASW. They believed that the union would enable them to continue to study their specific group work issues in the newly created practice sections of NASW. As the merger played out, it became clear that group work as a distinct philosophy would be diminished.

Catherine Papell (1997, 6) refers to that time as a "renaissance, a period filled with a new vitality in social work's professional journey and a thrust toward integration, toward unification and finding the essence of the social work helping process." At the same time, she acknowledges that there were "consequences for engaging so eagerly in the generic thrust" because "[g]roup work was a sector of the generic whole that was neglected" (9).

While Gisela Konopka later would reflect with concern about the merger and its consequences, she wrote in the first edition of her book, Social Group Work: A Helping Profession (1963, p. 13) that

   One of the insights gained from work with groups is that any person
   entering a group constellation changes through his interaction with others:
   Social group work changed through its close association with the profession
   of social work and also with the older method, social casework. In turn, it
   changed the profession and widened the concept of the social welfare field
   ... The recent trend of a more aggressive and more outgoing approach in
   casework is related, for example, to the original more informal and
   neighborhood-related practice of group work while the more conscious
   purposefulness seen in modern group work practice is influenced by the
   clear and more formalized approach of social casework.

She added, in parentheses, a criticism: "Caseworkers and group workers do not always credit each other for the help they gain from each other. Sibling rivalry also exists in the realm of ideas."

At the time of the merger of these organizations into NASW, the membership of AAGW was 2,846 representing 44 chapter in major cities, a small minority of the larger social work membership of around 22,000. The small numbers made it difficult for group work to maintain its focus despite Harleigh Trecker's (1955, 5,6) assertion that group work was merging at a time when it was at its' strongest. He declared: "Never before has our Association been stronger. It has vigorous potentials for a rich and a growing future ... [There will be] an opportunity for the group work section to concentrate on the development of group work practice, the enrichment of group work skill, and the deepening of group work research."