Abstract
Neil Thompson’s work, particularly his Political Cultural Social (PCS) model analysis of the interplay between personal and structural explanations of discrimination, oppression and inequality will be very familiar to all those involved in social work practice and education. Thompson’s PCS model can be used in a somewhat reductive fashion. There is not always a focus on economic factors that combine to create social environments. Nevertheless, the PCS model can be an excellent starting point to examine these complex issues. Despite Michael Gove’s (2013) claim that in social work education theories “of society predominate over an effective understanding of child development, the cognitive damage that accrues through neglect and appropriate thresholds for taking children into care”, psychodynamic approaches tend to be dominant. It might come as a shock to those who view the social work academe as a ‘hot bed’ of radicals and progressives, but until ‘austerity’ fundamental issues, such as poverty, were increasingly marginalised on social work courses. Since the 2008 ‘crash’ there has, however, been a shift in focus towards work that examines and questions the impact of social inequality – The Spirit Level (Wilkinson and Pickett, 2009), Why We Can’t Afford the Rich (Sayer, 2015) and Austerity: History of a Dangerous Idea (Blyth, 2013) for example are key texts in this literature. From a social work perspective, the work of scholars such as Paul Bywaters has demonstrated that social work interventions need to be examined in the context of poverty and inequality.
I read Thompson’s book as an extension of or updating of the PCS model. In exploring the processes by which certain issues become defined, he extends the analysis provided by this paradigm. I think that the work is all the stronger for that. There is a much more explicit recognition of the impact of inequality and the fact that this is the result of neoliberal attacks on the social state. Thompson notes that without any structural context or analysis, there is an inherent danger that the causes of social problems become individualised. This is a dominant theme, in fact, of the ‘underclass’ discourse which presents poverty as the result of poor choices or a lack of morality rather than an issue of the distribution of resources or opportunities.
Social Problems and Social Justice is a very well structured book. The introduction and Part 1 explore the difficulties of definition of ‘social problems’ and ‘social justice’. These sections are excellent introductions to the topics. Part 2 is an examination of a range of social problems. As with any work of this nature, there are difficult decisions to be made about what to include and what to omit. It is interesting that the author includes a section on terrorism. Indeed, the debates about social work and other professions’ role in the Prevent strategy show that this is an area of increasing importance. Each of these chapters is clearly laid out with an introduction to the issue, a discussion of how it is affected by inequality and responses to the problem. The chapters also include exercises, areas to consider and voices from service users, practitioners and others working in the area. Thompson identifies seven themes which he captures in the acronym CHOICES that are at the root of the current set of social problems that we face. Here, O is over-reliance on the market. Choice is one of the key notions of neoliberalism, but also this acronym emphasises that we have a choice to do things differently.
This is an interesting and highly relevant book. It presents its arguments in a clear and logical fashion. It makes a significant contribution to work on social problems and social justice. In particular, I think that it acts as an excellent introduction to debates in the field. In the preface, the author states that his aim is to “provide a sound foundation of understanding of a range of complex issues relating to social problems and social justice and the relationship between them”. Thompson has certainly achieved this authorial aspiration.