Untangling the Web: A Phenomenological Analysis of Social Workers’ Critical Reflections on Racism in Social Work and Antiracism Efforts in Contemporary Practice

White Supremacy in Social Work

Social work has been shaped by the professionalization of white femininity and white dominance through a lens of colonialism (BlackDeer & Ocampo, 2022). Some scholars have argued that the social work profession has perpetuated the violence of imperialism through the whitewashing of its history, limited representation of notable contributions made by BIPOC social workers, and inadequately preparing practitioners to identify and confront racism in practice (Del-Villar, 2021). Social work educational approaches were created by white women in the United States who sought to address the problems of predominately white people (Wright et al., 2021). As such, many of the practices were perpetuated by the educational and service institutions that endorsed the cultural values, priorities, interests, and objectives of the white women (Wright et al., 2021). Although some service agencies, such as the Hull House, established by Jane Addams, were started with the intent to help all impoverished people, only a few Black people were served (Wright et al., 2021). The differences in racialized identities caused the reinforcement of negative stereotypic representations of BIPOC individuals within the settlement houses and limited interventions to only those that socialized to the American way of life (Park & Kemp, 2006; Park & Reisch, 2022). As a result, early settlements such as the Hull House held attitudes and practices that devoted limited time to the conditions and treatment of Black people (Carlton-LaNey, 1994).

The social work profession also has a history of being overtly supportive of policies that mirror racial bias, violence, domination, and social control, which would include past events such as the establishment of segregated settlement houses, obstruction of education for Black students, blocking Black American rights to vote, supporting eugenics theories and programs, helping to recruit Black men for the Tuskegee experiment, participating in the removal and relocation of Indigenous children from their families into boarding schools where so many died, and serving on intake teams at Japanese internment camps during World War II (BlackDeer & Ocampo, 2022; Brady et al., 2019; Wright et al., 2021). Given that the social work profession has remained predominantly white and consists primarily of women, it has tended to promote white supremacy in direct practice and through white savior ideologies (BlackDeer & Ocampo, 2022; Frey et al., 2021).

To some degree, contemporary social work has evolved and attempts to apply an anti-oppressive lens emphasizing an egalitarian and progressive value system. Nevertheless, it does not offer a perspective that seeks to reduce the detrimental effects of structural inequalities on the lives of individuals, families, and organizations (Strier & Binyamin, 2014). Despite this advance in practice and endorsement of interventions at the micro- and macro-levels to reduce overt oppressive practices, little has been done to address these embedded social problems (Brady et al., 2019; Frey et al., 2021; Mechanic, 2014). Focusing solely on the individual and their experiences, the profession’s reliance on the medical model as its treatment modality has tended to mask and obviate the need to address the impact of institutionalized racism and its harm on the health and mental health of BIPOC populations. The result has been that the responsibility for solution-finding defaults automatically to the affected individual—with little attention being paid to the institutions that perpetuate systemic racism or to the educational system that fails to sufficiently train social workers on how to address the underlying causes of racism in their treatment of trauma (Brady et al., 2019). Indeed, institutional racism not only excuses the underlying biases of the practitioner but also legitimates an accepted “socialized” version of white supremacy values.

Impact of Racism on Mental Health

The fusion of the collective traumas (enslavement, oppression, colonialism, racism, and segregation) has formed a trauma narrative that has become an integral part of the history and mental psyche of the Black and Brown communities (Chae et al., 2021). Historical trauma encompasses the legacy of traumatic events experienced by historically oppressed communities and the compounding effects of the psychological and social responses to these events over time (Hanna et al., 2017; Pieterse et al., 2012). Although the historical practices of slavery have been abolished, nonetheless, there has been a retention of negative societal attitudes toward Black and Brown individuals that have permeated many of the societal and economic structures in American society. The failure of mental health workers to address the cumulative psychological costs of racism and ensuing trauma has resulted in the underreporting of racial experiences and difficulty in ascertaining the causal relationship between the two (Brown, 2008; Chae et al., 2021).

Many minoritized groups experience higher rates of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms when compared with their European American counterparts due to the traumatization caused by racism, also referred to as racial trauma (APA, 2019; Williams et al., 2018). Indeed, racial trauma, also referred to as race-based traumatic stress, is an everyday experience for many BIPOC individuals and communities. Racial trauma is defined as the consequence of mental and emotional harm caused by encounters with racial bias and ethnic discrimination, racism, and hate crimes (Mental Health America, n.d.). These often cause poor mental health outcomes that include specific changes to the brain, such as the dysregulation of the cognitive-affective region, and in turn, increase the likelihood of a mental health condition (Mental Health America, 2022; Schouler-Ocak et al., 2021).

The social work profession’s lack of understanding of institutional and systemic racism and mental health impact is profound when examining the delivery of mental health services. Institutional racism refers to policies and practices that disadvantage the BIPOC populations (Potapchuk et al., 2005). The institutional policies do not directly target any racial group. However, the impact of such policies produces an advantage for whites and further perpetuates oppression as it directly disadvantages BIPOC (Potapchuk et al., 2005). Systemic racism highlights racially unequal access to life opportunities and treatment within social structures, institutional structures, and everyday interactions, which can impact emotional well-being. Systemic racism refers to the process and outcomes of racial inequality and inequity in opportunities and treatment (Banaji et al., 2021). The structures currently in place continually exacerbate racial and ethnic disparities.

Antiracism

The existing literature suggests there is a significant gap in empirical research regarding the use of antiracism in clinical social work practices. The literature has highlighted the close relationship between racism and trauma among BIPOC. However, it is still unclear how to address this in social work psychotherapy that acknowledges racism as a source of trauma.

Social work has historically sought cultural competence, diversity training, and cultural humility. Still, it has skirted directly addressing or even using the language of race and racism in its development of curriculum and training. Johnson and colleagues (2021) have suggested that there is an assumption made about the social work profession that we are motivated by advocacy, social justice, and the dignity and worth of a person and that social work is naturally an antiracist profession. However, this assumption is not only false, but the non-questioning belief in it has furthered racism by its lack of willingness to question professional practices critically.

Integrating antiracism within social work practice warrants social workers understanding the impact of racism on their clients and recognizing intersectional identities and how that plays a role in their lives. Social workers must be cognizant not to problematize the marginalization or devalue the experiences of minoritized groups. There must be a holistic understanding that looks past symptomology and seeks to understand better the cultural, political, economic, and spiritual aspects that individuals value (Gillborn, 2006). Incorporating an antiracist perspective and encouraging social workers to consider race and its impact on non-dominant groups can foster healing and advance transformative action. This approach challenges the misconception that clinicians cannot effectively champion individual and community advocacy for social justice(Apgar, 2021).

According to Kolivoski et al. (2014), implementing antiracism strategies can equip social workers with the necessary tools to address racial disparities, especially in the field of mental health. Many practitioners focus on providing individual-level interventions and treatments with limited exposure to broader advocacy work. As a result, these practitioners may overlook the impact of systemic racism and power dynamics on their clients’ overall well-being. Critical antiracism offers a more comprehensive approach, enabling direct practice social workers to consider the societal and institutional factors contributing to mental health challenges. Antiracist counseling should centralize taking action against racism and better understanding how we all are impacted by racism. It involves seven key components, including developing cultural competency, providing trauma-informed counseling, implementing feminist counseling, offering narrative counseling, providing psychoeducational counseling, using an intersectional approach, and examining the sociocultural impact of family, community, and societal influences (Lee & Boykins, 2022).

Theoretical Framework

While traditional counseling theories promote cultural sensitivity, they often overlook the impact of racism as a cause of mental health stress (Singh et al., 2020). Social workers must utilize critical reflection in their clinical work to address this issue. By exploring harmful assumptions and clarifying causality, critical reflection can help map out solutions (Askeland & Fook, 2009). Fook (2002) has suggested that reflection is not enough; it must be critical, meaning it should recognize the impact of power, control, and the entrenched nature of the status quo. Intentional critical reflection must address the individual and others, social location and identities, relational intersections—as well as social worker’s own biases, assumptions, and connection to power and privileges (O’Neill, 2015; Sakamoto & Pitner, 2005). Das and Ananad (2014) have posited that antiracism in social work practice is only possible when the practitioner engages in the internal work of critical reflection and, through the process, comprehends power, privilege, and inequality. Social workers’ commitment to antiracism must include being open to exploring one’s own deeply rooted assumptions about minoritized people and recognizing that training is not adequate without this level of self-reflection.

Adopting a critical social work lens requires social workers to focus on the dominant structures that affect social work practice (Fook, 2002). Limited or lack of understanding of the impact of these structural factors leads to gaps in theories and the ways social workers operationalize and implement such theories in practice (Fook, 2002). Critical reflection is a powerful tool for deconstructing the misalignment between theory and practice, raising awareness of those structures and how their continued buy-in and validation of those structures can result in harmful social work practice (Mattsson, 2014; Morely, 2004).

Frey et al. (2021) expanded on this concept (i.e., critical reflection), highlighting that there is no structural racism without everyday racism, further accentuating that to disassemble such racism, there needs to be a transformative shift through every part of one’s life. Critical reflection assists in performing this disassembly of embedded racism through the exploration of one’s thoughts, feelings, and assumptions about others—purposively learning to recognize and appreciate intersectional identities (e.g., culture, language, communication, spirituality, sexuality, and gender; Fook, 2002; Mattsson, 2014). It is an approach that supports social workers in deconstructing their own experiences and belief systems, allowing the social worker to understand better what role they may be playing in sustaining dominant systems (Askeland & Fook, 2009; Das & Anand, 2014; Fook, 2002; Mattsson, 2014). However, it is not a comfortable or easy process; unearthing the deeply rooted assumptions attached to cultural norms, different cultures, and subcultures makes deconstructing assumptions often quite difficult (Askeland & Fook, 2009).

Positionality Statement

Research team members agreed upon the importance of using reflexivity in research. Reflexivity refers to how our experiences as researchers impact how we understand the research process encompassing the concept (state of mind) and the practice (set of actions). The purpose of reflexivity is not objectivity but rather for the researcher to acknowledge and be aware of how their lived experiences impact how they interpret the research process, which increases rigor and trustworthiness (Mackieson et al., 2019). Reflexivity is connected to critical reflection as it seeks to explore attitudes and understandings. Reflexivity was used through analytic memos, writing down assumptions and biases as they arose, separation of researcher lived experiences to be able to centralize participant lived experiences, and checking with fellow researchers on their interpretation of data, quotes, theme, and the research process.

The first author is a Black feminist social work practitioner, scholar-activist researcher, and an aspiring antiracist social work educator. Despite being a member of a minoritized group, she recognizes that as a cis-gendered woman, she possesses her privileges. She would also like to acknowledge the privilege of being positioned within higher education and having opportunities to do this meaningful research. She is a social work practitioner who has witnessed harm in social work organizations when social workers do not support their BIPOC clients with appropriate practices. She is fiercely committed to social justice, anti-oppressive work, healing racialized trauma, Black joy, and liberation. As a researcher, she prioritizes amplifying and valuing the voices of minoritized groups. Furthermore, she remains highly critical of power dynamics and social dominance, recognizing these factors as potential barriers to the fair and effective dissemination of research findings. She approaches her research process with humility and treats participants as co-researchers.

The second author approaches this work as an intersectional educator, social worker, and community-engaged scholar. She recognizes her privilege as a cis-gendered, heterosexual woman and acknowledges the ways her identity as an Afro-Latina, daughter of immigrants, and first-generation college graduate informs her commitment to antiracist and anti-oppressive social work practice. Her practice, research, and teaching are influenced by her racial, ethnic, and cultural background as well as her experiences working with historically underserved and marginalized communities. She employs a social justice lens to examine issues of power and privilege as barriers to mental health service and delivery as experienced by BILPOC service users and practitioners.

The third author is an Afro-Caribbean public health social worker and aspiring social work educator. She understands her privilege of identifying as a cis-gendered, heterosexual woman. She is a social worker who has years of experience working within the criminal justice, domestic violence, and child welfare systems, specifically working with BIPOC children and mothers. She is committed to bringing anti-oppressive practices to populations that serve BIPOC families and communities and de-normalizing racial trauma. Her research approach is rooted in social justice, which aims to improve social conditions in Black communities and decrease barriers to mental health services.

The fourth author is a biracial (Jamaican American) male. He is a first-generation college student who has spent 5 years working in an underserved psychiatric crisis unit. His experience deepened his personal and professional awareness of mental health and institutional oppression, which provided him with the emotional release to reflect on the compounding barriers critically. His research is driven by a commitment to decenter himself and continue developing expertise to amplify other marginalized individuals’ voices and lived experiences. Deconstructing facets of his bicultural experience has required him to critically examine patriarchal structures, internalized racism, colorism, ableism, and misogyny. The ongoing learning process has shaped his critical lens, affirming that our interactions are shaped by power and values. He brings that curiosity to exploring how other social workers develop a critical consciousness around issues related to anti-blackness and racism. His perspective fuels interest in how knowledge is transferred through critical discourse and perspective building, requiring him to see research as equally unique and different than his own story.

Research Questions

In exploring the experiences of social work practitioners, our study is guided by the following questions: (a) What are social workers’ perceptions and understanding of how racism impacts social work practice? (b) To what extent do social workers understand antiracist social work, and have they been able to embark on and sustain their antiracist journey? (c) What organizational elements influence social workers’ ability to engage and incorporate an antiracist framework into their practices?

Research Design

This study employed a phenomenological approach to explore antiracist social work practice through narrative interviews with social workers. This method seeks to describe lived experiences. It conceptualizes the essence of phenomena by examining people’s perceptions, interactions, and how people make sense of the phenomena (Creswell & Poth, 2014). Using phenomenological research, the research aims to gain a deeper understanding of social workers’ relationships to antiracism and unearth their human experiences. This investigation will also lead to a novel understanding of existing organizational practices that can be reformed and improved through an antiracist lens (Creswell & Poth, 2014). Institutional Review Board approval for conducting research with human subjects was obtained before data collection.

Recruitment

To explore the aforementioned research questions, the first author recruited study participants after getting approval from University at Albany institutional review boards. Using a purposeful sampling approach, the first author recruited participants willing to discuss racism and antiracism in social work based on their lived experiences. Participants were eligible for inclusion if the following criteria were met: (a) at least 18 years old, (b) earned a master’s degree in social work, (c) have an active social work license in New York State, (d) currently engaged in clinical practice, and (e) have a basic understanding of racism, which involved asking all participants if they had an understanding of how racism shows up in the United States and if they were willing to talk about racism in the interview. Recruitment flyers were disseminated via email and social media (LinkedIn); one participant provided a referral. Prospective participants meeting the inclusion criteria were emailed an informed consent and were asked prior to the interview to provide verbal consent via Zoom. The informed consent described the study’s risks and benefits to the participants, the purpose of the study, confidentiality status, mental health emergency services resources, and how the information collected would be used and disseminated. Semi-structured interviews were scheduled with participants via email and held via Zoom. Participants were encouraged to ask questions before, during, or after the interview. There was no compensation for this study.

Sample

Study participants (n = 7) included a diverse group of social work practitioners employed by nonprofit and for-profit mental health organizations in New York State. Participants were asked to self-identify their racial identity and gender at the beginning of the interview using open-ended questions. As shown in Table 1, two participants identified as Black women; one worked in the crisis unit, and one worked in a hospital. Two participants self-identified as Black men; one worked in the crisis center, and the other worked in a hospital. Finally, the three white participants were all women who worked at a hospital, school, and crisis center.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 1.

Respondent Demographics.

Pseudonym	Gender	Race	Practice setting	Years in practice
Ashley	Female	Black	Crisis social worker	6 Years
Colin	Female	White	Crisis social worker	22 Years
Elizabeth	Female	White	Hospital social worker	1 Year
James	Male	Black	Crisis social worker	6 Years
Josie	Female	White	School social worker	3 Years
Kayla	Female	Black	Hospital social worker	11 Years
Paul	Male	Black	Hospital social worker	1 Year

Data Collection

During the interviewing process, critical reflection was used to delve into participants’ experiences in social work organizations. In real time, the social workers were able to explore how racism has impacted BIPOC service users and social workers, the impact of not being supported in their work, and their antiracist development. The authors used critical reflection as it closely aligns with phenomenological methods and considers the cultural context—both phenomenology and critical reflection are concerned with examining underlying assumptions and making sense of complexities through interpretation.

The first author completed all the interviews and the recruitment process. Data were collected from study participants through semi-structured narrative interviews exploring the following questions: (a) Do social workers feel comfortable discussing race and racism with their organization’s leadership? (b) How does white supremacy show up in the organization social workers work for? (c) Have social workers been able to embark on their antiracist journey, and if so, what does it look like? (d) How do social workers understand antiracism within the context of social work? (e) Has their organization provided tools for building antiracist professional/ personal development? (f) Is their organization supportive of antiracism? Over 2 months in 2022, seven interviews were conducted with each study participant via Zoom. Interviews were digitally audio-recorded with participants’ consent and lasted about 80 minutes. Participants were encouraged to discuss or share any additional information or topics the researcher did not ask about but felt would be an essential part of the study.

After each interview, the interviewer practiced mindfulness to be present with data before drafting analytic memos via audio recording and written narratives. Interview audio recordings were translated into written verbatim transcripts using transcription services. The transcriptions were reviewed for accuracy by a research team member—phenomenological principles with open-ended questions exploring lived experiences guided all seven semi-structured interviews.

Data Analysis

The data were analyzed using an inductive approach. Specifically, a thematic analysis was conducted to identify the meaning of participants’ lived experiences and better understand how they are interconnected (Clark & Braun, 2017). Thematic analysis is an analytic approach that allows researchers to identify and extract data patterns and prescribe meaning to the data in alignment with phenomenology (Clarke & Braun, 2017; Sundler et al., 2019). During this data analysis phase, the researchers sought patterns and how they could be organized into themes. Audio recordings of each interview were transcribed verbatim by a transcription service. The first author completed the first cycle of coding. The first coding cycle consisted of the researcher reading the data repeatedly to familiarize themselves with it, providing preliminary interpretations, and engaging in reflexivity memoing. Line-by-line coding was used to develop a code list and code eligibility criteria. The interview transcripts were then processed and labeled by identifying themes and writing analytic memos of the connection among themes using Microsoft Word. The coding process involved assigning labels or phrases to recur significant themes by highlighting the code in assorted colors to prescribe different meanings that supported understanding the broader scheme.

The first author completed the second cycle, which entailed uploading the verbatim transcripts from the semi-structured interviews to the ATLAS.ti web version for qualitative coding and analysis. The researcher began to generate codes from the first cycle and organize codes into groups based on their connection to each research question. The researcher then began to engage in the second cycle of coding, which meant coding the transcript line-by-line and generating more codes. The themes were refined, and the codes were renamed, readjusted, and deleted based on discrepancies. Based on the second coding cycle, the researcher generated over 70 codes.

The third cycle of coding was done collaboratively by the first and second authors. First, the researchers explored the data set together, talking through all the codes. Then, there was a discussion rooted in reflexivity regarding how to represent the participants’ lived experiences, and the eligibility criteria for codes were redefined. Together, the researchers generated codes until no new codes were generated. The researchers had a reflective discussion about what the data represented. The researchers began to collapse codes; once completed, the codes were then collapsed again into themes. The researcher divided over 70 codes into 16 codes and generated 5 themes representing the participants’ lived experiences. The participants’ quotes were chosen in agreement with all the researchers.

Impact of Systemic and Institutional Racism in Social Work Settings

The prevalence of racism and inequalities in mental health services usage and outcomes dissipate the trust of racial minorities in the health care system and, over time, undermines the health care system’s ability to deliver appropriate and equitable care to minoritized groups (Elias & Paradies, 2021; Schouler-Ocak et al., 2021). The participants spoke of how they have witnessed social work embrace both systemic and institutional racism and how that has impacted the BIPOC communities they serve. Colin, who is a white crisis social worker, described an example of the ways institutions meant to protect and support people embody systemic racism, triggering adverse mental health reactions among communities of color. She stated:

I think organizationally, the fact that one of our main responses in many of our cities and towns is the police, I think devalues the experience of Black and brown communities with the police. Furthermore, we’re not really acknowledging that. That really has to be a targeted systemic effort to recognize that, for many communities, the police are not a helper. They’re a trigger for trauma and depression. We really have to acknowledge that we’re not helping someone that way if that’s our automatic response. So, with our mental health responses, send the police, and it’s a trigger.

Participants firmly suggested that social workers must recognize the harm institutions perpetuate through policies and structural barriers and explore strategic ways to repair the damage caused by oppressive systems. Josie, a white school social worker, described her observations on the pathways to healing the impact of racism on service users by closely examining the relationship between systems in the community. She expressed:

Identifying ways in which racism is perpetuated by systems in our community, then figuring out ways like institutional policy and structure to repair the harm that’s already been caused. I would probably see it mostly on the institutional level [racism]. Trying to identify ways in which racism is perpetuated by systems in our community and figuring out ways not only to reverse those things but also repair the harm that’s already been caused and try to restore the things that have been damaged or harmed because of racism in those systems.

Participants expressed that to help BIPOC clients with their overall well-being, social workers must not only look at the presenting problem/symptoms but must dig deeper to understand holistically how racism has impacted their lives fully. Elizabeth, a white hospital social worker, wrestled with whether her Black clients would be experiencing such mental health distress in their lives if they were not living under conditions rooted in white supremacy. She stated:

There are two Black women that I’m working with now. I’m so curious about how our white culture is impacting them, you know, white supremacy, it’s affecting them. And you know, they come to sessions. They’re—One woman is, you know, often extremely distraught, and she’s working in a very high-pressure job and—I want to know, would she be experiencing these issues [mental health] to this magnitude or this degree if she were white.

Colin explored the conflicts caused by racial trauma. She expressed that there is retraumatization happening in BIPOC’s everyday lives, and although there may be mental health challenges, we must ask what lies beneath those challenges.

I can’t fully understand the extent of the trauma that Black and brown individuals experience in day-to-day life. All of that vicarious traumatization watching news shows, watching television, what they hear [BIPOC], what their neighborhoods may be like, what their experiences are walking into a store versus mine, there’s this whole other level of vicarious traumatization—that they experience daily. And there’s also like all of this lived trauma that gets stored somewhere and is the very part of the lived experience of a Black or brown person in this community. I think there’s a reality to that that we fail to recognize sometimes. So, when a Black or brown person says I’m depressed, I’m sad, I’m mad, I’m angry, I think we failed to recognize that that’s probably the last straw on layers, layers and layers of underlying trauma that they probably can’t even articulate to you. I always have to put that into my framework of thinking that underneath all of this, there’s this other whole layer of something that we’re not capturing, that’s contributing to anxiety or depression, or all of these other symptoms.

Interpersonal Critical Reflections: Becoming Actively Conscious

The National Museum of African American History and Culture (n.d.) states:

Being an antiracist results from a conscious decision to make frequent, consistent, equitable choices daily. These choices require ongoing self-awareness and self-reflection as we move through life. In the absence of making antiracist choices, we (un)consciously uphold aspects of white supremacy, white-dominant culture, and unequal institutions and society. Being racist or antiracist is not about who you are; it is about what you do.

Participants were asked questions about if and how they have been able to build an antiracist lens interpersonally. Participants stated that assessment of one’s own knowledge level and practice beliefs allows for interpersonal work and exploring how white supremacy has played a role in all our lives. Participants critically reflected on their positionality, the biases they once held, the ways in which they were complicit, and how they had grown to understand social injustices. Most participants suggested contributing to harmful thinking at some point in their lives and exploring the coming to awareness stage. Elizabeth was in the coming to the awareness stage of understanding the impact of racism. She had just started her antiracism journey by accepting that not all her beliefs were true, and that acceptance supported her in seeing the truth about racism. Specifically, she stated:

Suddenly, my own—narrative was challenged. And there was like just gory evidence right in front of my face that, you know, we were all watching together [George Floyd murder]. And when your narrative is challenged, everything is sort of like—what lies am I telling myself? Like, is everything that I believe, you know, not necessarily true?

Colin unearthed how she had been socially conditioned to think harmfully. She explored her journey and what it means to be an antiracist.

I think antiracism for me has been a personal evolution. Really examining what I’ve been taught. What are some things that we’re kind of programmed to think or say, and then challenging those beliefs and really thinking about when you’re anti-something [referencing antiracism], it’s an active process. Saying I’m not a racist is a passive process.

James, a Black crisis social worker, highlighted the complexities of his internalized racism as a by-product of his social conditions. Reflecting and being honest about his harmful thinking has led to the uprooting of whiteness.

I grew up with a lot of internalized racism—There were times I didn’t realize the racism behind my language. Here’s the realness to it, like being able to talk about the historical, sociocultural structures of racism—you know that I can’t backtrack my family generations like other people can or that I don’t have a lot of Black culture or Jamaican culture cause I’m Jamaican—in my family because my mother smothered that. And so, in all of this process of being able to, kind of deconstruct that [whiteness], it’s been a lot easier to talk about it [racism].

Kayla, a Black hospital social worker, explored the ways she has been complicit in challenging racism and stated that she’s experienced a racial awakening post-Geroge Floyd’s murder.

I think that I spent a lot of years just floating in my schools just trying to fit in [to white spaces]. You know, I just can’t deal with that stuff [challenging racism]. But George Floyd, I found myself walking out of my home in the middle of the pandemic and holding a sign that said Black Lives Matter. You know, my neighbor saw me walking down with my sign and my mask, you know. It felt so amazing [Laughter]—to be with people to say like, oh my God, we’re collectively outraged. I’m embarrassed to say that it—you know, it took that kind of thing for me to say, well, let’s get active.

Inadequate Accessibility to Antiracism Support and Resources

Participants were asked if their organizations supported them in developing antiracism strategies, providing antiracist practices, or providing other access to resources that would promote equitable practices. Most participants stated that they had yet to be given access to resources and did not feel their organization valued antiracist work. White supremacy continues to be relevant in social work settings by not pushing forth antiracism at an organizational level; for example, when asked if he was given access to resources about antiracism, James indicated he was not offered these resources. He stated:

Absolutely not [he was not provided with antiracist resources]. Nor were we provided with the resources to effectively mitigate issues of poverty, issues of lack of transportation, and issues of not having access to treatment or health insurance. A lot of the times, the churn and burn [high turnover] also happened within people coming in and out of the crisis unit.

When asked if her organization was supportive of antiracist practices, Kayla replied,

“No. It’s not even a discussion. Sadly.” When asked if she was given access to resources about antiracism, Kayla stated there was training that she felt did not adequately address racism.

We had an extensive multicultural training that was mandated by some insurance company, which I thought was hysterical. You know, it brought up great points, but it didn’t really delve into racism per se. But so, there was that. You know, I was like, okay, thank you for the multicultural training.

Elizabeth highlighted that her supervisor would support her in seeking antiracism training outside her job. However, seeking that resource would be her responsibility, which created barriers as she has much work, and seeking training would be additional work. She stated:

So if I were to, you know, seek, an antiracist training and tell my supervisor that I wanted to take the training, I believe that she would be supportive. The only barrier to that is the [high caseload] workload, is the actual, you know, amount of work that we’re expected to do in that role. It really is on—clinical social workers to—to, um, educate themselves and search for those trainings in their free time.

Similarly, when asking Josie if her organization provided tools to offer antiracist practices, she suggested that her organization had not provided any resources. She stated “Mm, no. Yeah. No, not at all.” When asking Josie, would you say that your organization supports antiracist practices, she stated:

Um, I think that they do to an extent. Like I, I do think that if I share with them what I’m doing and what I’m practicing, I think they would support me in that. But it’s like you already have to be doing it. They’re not gonna like help you get there. You have to get there on your own, if that makes sense.

Repressive System in Social Work Settings

The struggle to address social injustices can feel paradoxical as there is this tension between calling out racism and white supremacy within workplaces and being aware of the risk of challenging the status quo. Within a dominant structure, there is real life and systemic violence often perpetuated when speaking out against racial hierarchies, as there is often adverse impact on career and other harmful impacts (Rasool & Ahmed, 2020). When asked if the participants felt comfortable challenging the status quo within their organizational leadership, most said they felt uncomfortable. Most participants feared being targeted, marginalized, or retaliated against. When asking Josie if she felt comfortable challenging the status quo within her organization, specifically with leadership, she replied:

For me, personally, no. I would say more about, like I don’t want to like step on the toes of people that could make my life hell. I would say we do a lot of like things where we try to collectively like share messages with the higher ups and we kind of like work as a team to do that so it’s not like individual people who can be like targeted.

Elizabeth suggested that being quiet and privileged will prevent you from being targeted by your organizational leadership: “White people are pretty safe if they’re quiet. You can get a reputation for being troublemakers.” Kayla explored the complexities of pejorative labels that come with racism and stereotyping of Black women when they speak up. She stated when asked if she felt comfortable addressing racism with organizational leadership: “Listen, well, and it goes back to, look, I’m not an angry Black woman. I don’t know. Maybe I should just own my angry Black woman. I have no clue at this point.”

Ashley expressed having conversations regarding racism with people who are not defensive and are open to a discussion in her workplace.

I think it is situational. I think it depends on who the people are. And yeah, I don’t think I have a blanket yes or no response. So some people, hands down, would have that conversation with. Not everyone, because I don’t know how they will take it. And so, how they like spin it and make it about them where it’s like if I’m communicating something to you, it doesn’t have to be about you.

Disparities in Mental Health Treatment

Research suggests that racial mental health disparities persist due to racial minorities having lower accessibility to mental health services, being less likely to engage in mental health services—and because they often receive a lower quality of care—are less likely to be satisfied with services and more likely to drop out of treatment (Maura & Weisman de Mamani, 2017). All participants witnessed racism within their social work organization in some capacity, mainly when it came to how other social workers and staff were treating BIPOC clients, specifically providing not only decreased access to care but also harmful treatment. All participants expressed that this was alarming and stated that BIPOC service users are treated in ways that cause race-based stress and additional racial trauma. All social workers suggested working within social work systems that are actively causing harm to minoritized people.

When asked how racism shows up in your organization, Josie highlighted the discriminatory practices that she witnessed in her school. She stated:

Having like police involved with youth of color at higher rates, like using the police as a mechanism for like if a student is suicidal, if a student is, you know, having like a behavioral crisis, like relying on policing for disciplinary practices. Like recommending stronger disciplinary practices for students of color. I see social workers doing all of that in the schools every day.

When exploring with James the ways racism shows up in his organization, James discussed the harmful language often used by colleagues to describe BIPOC clients, “The unfortunate, like dehumanization of the Black clients or the staff being like—just all of these keywords like, you know, lazy, disrespectful.” Paul, a Black hospital social worker, expressed racism showing up in his workplace by the way Black patients were described in the emergency department.

At times, there would be children as young as about 15 that would be waiting in the emergency mental health blocks. And, because on paper, described to be “aggressive” or described to be “uncooperative” and—almost like, this young black girl is a mess and is just, a lost cause. I immediately felt in my soul that, hmm, no, first of all—I understand that not everyone is going to have ill feelings towards, people of color, or Black individuals. But because of what white supremacy has done to the perception of Black people as a whole, I was just like, you know what? I know she’s probably not going to be given a fair chance—I’m just like, no, I’m going to go in there and treat this patient like a decent human being and not treat them like they’re just an aggressive young Black girl.

Ashley suggested that BIPOC patients in the crisis unit are more likely to be physically restrained.

It is like flagrant. We have to get hands-on. I’ve noticed that in certain situations, we can try to talk the person down. You know, obviously the last resort, which is a failure, is if we have to put hands on someone to like physically restrain them, manually restrain them—So there’s a period of when we try to like talk and deescalate to use all these other least restrictive interventions before we get to the main part. I’ve noticed that when it’s people of color, it goes quick to that. Like it’s autopilot.

Echoes of Reflection

Many participants expressed gratitude for the opportunity to reflect critically. They stated that they had not been offered space to process their assumptions and experiences in social work, signaling the importance of a brave space. After the interview, one participant wrote a poem inspired by the discussion and her deep exploration of her deeply rooted beliefs. This poem signals the importance and value of critical reflection. After sending this poem, the participant stated, “Thank you for helping me dive deeper.”

Poem Title: Antiracism . . .

Antiracism implores us to notice you missing and ask, “Where are they?”

Antiracism is curiosity and believing.

A promise that invites trust.

In its absence, we become obscene, alien, and alone.

Untethered to the memories you bodied hold in fierce fever undue shame.

So that we might drift ever closer to a time that has not yet ended.

With it, we say we see you, and we hear you, and we take great care.

We are listening.—Elizabeth

Strengths and Limitations

The researchers approached the study with these antiracist principles in mind specifically. The researchers centered and highlighted Black voices in this study, empowering participants to explore their positionality and deeply rooted assumptions using critical reflection. Using a critical perspective, the researchers share the findings with those who support the pursuit of social justice. Another strength is providing white practitioners a dedicated space to critically examine their whiteness and how it manifests within their professional practice. There is no research without its limitations, and the limitation of this study is the small sample size. The sample reflects a small swath of social work clinical practice opportunities as the social workers work in different social work settings, such as three from hospital SW, one in school SW, and three in crisis unit. This may fail to capture the experiences of social workers providing clinical practice in other settings. Furthermore, during the data analytic phase, the first researcher independently completed the first two coding cycles, in which inter-rater reliability could not be tested.

Directions for Future Research

Even in the presence of an antiracist research framework that provides a comprehensive blueprint for social workers to incorporate antiracism into their practice, institutional racism and oppression have intentionally limited the scope of knowledge to explore these concepts, which has impeded broader structural changes. Within the culture of research, institutional biases and lack of support for antiracist research agendas often lead to disparities in funding, which means that we need to create more innovative, equity-focused antiracist research (Bryson & Lawrence-Webb, 2000; Clark et al., 2022). In research, it has been easier to identify racial disparities than to solve them. Our findings suggest that a more extensive study is required to explore further whether social workers have the necessary access to tools and resources to provide antiracist practices to the communities they serve.

Future research should focus on implementing comprehensive antiracist training, advocating for organizational change, and focusing on solution-focused approaches, which are essential to not only understand but also actively dismantle barriers to equity for BIPOC communities. As BIPOC researchers, it is crucial to pursue research that aligns with our vision, embrace critical perspectives to challenge structural inequalities, and build our support networks, engaging in community building as a form of self-care against the impacts of racism (Bowleg, 2021; Clark et al., 2022). To actualize an antiracist social work research framework, we must deeply engage with communities through participatory action research, seeing participants as partners and co-creators of knowledge while building trust and avoiding self-serving practices.

This study has emphasized the importance of social work researchers continuing to collect and analyze how frontline social workers conceptualize antiracism practice. Participant experiences highlight the real-time development of critical reflection, understanding the impacts racism has on well-being, and the need for support to encourage greater community engagement in clinicians’ personal and professional lives. Achieving transformative change to dismantle white supremacy requires a collective understanding of the phenomenon of racism and a commitment to acting on social justice with integrity. The point of antiracist social work practice and research is to disseminate the information for communities, policymakers, and academics alike to better strive for transparency and inclusivity in sharing knowledge compared with making performative changes through the ivory towers of academia.

Contribution to Social Work Policy

Focusing on the critical reflections of social work practitioners regarding the pervasive racism that clients face in social work settings allowed both the researchers and participants to gain a deeper understanding of the dominant cultures that have structural barriers to change. Policy advocacy is a multi-tiered approach, and our findings indicate a misalignment between social work values and the environments in which social workers function, impacting the local workforce. Even though professional organizations such as the Council on Social Work Education (CSWE) and NASW (2021b) pledge to promote racial justice, human service agencies often find their capacities constrained by an emphasis on evidence-based practice outcome measures and productivity, as noted by Abramovitz and Zelnick (2021). Insights from study participants serve as a reminder to researchers and educators of the adverse effects of structural racism on social workers’ capacity to engage in antiracism efforts, which is a crucial step in navigating transformative change. Effecting change in the workplace hinges on providing social workers with a sense of security, protection from workplace violence, and the resources to actively engage in these efforts.

It is important to note that there is no claim of authority on antiracism social work practice. Study participants provided valuable insights at the initial stages of developing antiracist approaches. Critical reflection and discourse are necessary steps in policy construction and the researchers’ inquiry process. Addressing racism effectively requires the social work field to acknowledge and confront the inherent resistance to change within the existing structures. Our approach aims to make micro-level changes by using the professional use of self to “practice what they preach” as defined by the antiracism research framework. By making micro-level changes in one’s own life, social workers can be influenced to better identify and transform racist systems, policies, and procedures (Clark et al., 2022).