This cross-cultural study examines the relationship between perceived COVID-19 changes due to the impacts on everyday life by the pandemic with social exclusion and across 32 cultures and their levels in collectivism. With data from the start of the first outbreak from March 2020 to June 2020 (N = 9245), multilevel analysis indicated that as individuals perceive greater daily life changes induced by the pandemic, they experience heightened levels of social exclusion, with this association being particularly pronounced in less collectivistic cultures. These findings underscore the importance of considering cultural context in understanding responses to crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic, with implications for culturally sensitive interventions aimed at promoting social inclusion across diverse cultural contexts.
DOCUMENT
As a practitioner, a manager and a scientist in social work for 40 years, I am still intrigued by the social work positioning and legitimating processes. Its recognition by users and financiers is often diffuse and its fragmentation sometimes hinders effective interventions. In social work itself, we see a range of positioning processes, most of them either legitimating social work as a promoter of social justice, a supporter of emancipation and anti-oppressive practice, or positioning social work as a therapeutic approach, treating people with socio-psychological and psychiatric disorders. Social work is often promoted as a ‘real’ profession, in need of formal recognition and in need of a precise profile. In this article it will be argued that the core of social work is about supporting people in their social functioning and should position itself in the centre of the post-modern quest: the social-psychological disorientation, the lack of meaning, and the problems of isolation and exclusion. Modern professionalism is not about demarcating and regulating but much more about ‘Entgrenzung’ and openness.
DOCUMENT
Background and objective Public involvement in palliative care is challenging and difficult, because people in need of palliative care are often not capable of speaking up for themselves. Patient representatives advocate for their common interests. The aim of our study was to examine in depth the current practice of public involvement in palliative care. Setting and sample The study was conducted in the province of Limburg in the Netherlands, with six palliative care networks. Study participants were 16 patient representatives and 12 professionals. Method This study had a descriptive design using qualitative methods: 18 in-depth interviews and three focus groups were conducted. The critical incident technique was used. The data were analysed using an analytical framework based on Arnstein’s involvement classification and the process of decision making. Impact categories as well as facilitators and barriers were analysed using content analysis. Findings and conclusion The perceived impact of public involvement in palliative care in terms of citizen control and partnership is greatest with regard to quality of care, information development and dissemination, and in terms of policymaking with regard to the preparation and implementation phases of decision making. The main difference in perceived impact between patient representatives and professionals relates to the tension between operational and strategic involvement. Patient representatives experienced more impact regarding short-term solutions to practical problems, while professionals perceived great benefits in long-term, strategic processes. Improving public involvement in palliative care requires positive attitudes, open communication, sufficient resources and long-term support, to build a solid basis for pursuing meaningful involvement in the entire decision-making process.
MULTIFILE
