Social Policy and Advocacy: Violence Prevention As a social worker in a private nonprofit organization, I was hired to coordinate the activities of a newly formed countywide committee to explore and address violence prevention. The newly formed prevention committee was funded privately and managed by a local nonprofit, family service organization. As committee coordinator, it was my role to work with the committee to identify programmatic and policy interests that could be addressed in the community. The county demographics varied by region, from affluent suburban areas to impoverished urban areas. The prevention committee was composed of professionals and community members throughout the county. Social service workers, healthcare professionals, educators, law enforcement officials, domestic violence professionals, community members, and local government officials worked collaboratively on the committee. Through monthly meetings, I worked with members to collect data on various forms of violence within the county. Our goals were to gain a better understanding of violence in the community, clarify unmet needs, explore available services in place, and share knowledge on violence prevention with one another. By working toward these goals, we set objectives to 1) address unmet needs through collaboration and innovation, and 2) clarify a policy agenda the entire committee would be able to support. I examined trends and incidence levels of violence in order to identify unmet needs and narrow the focus of our policy agenda. I gathered qualitative data from all committee members regarding areas of violence prevention relevant to their work in the community. Initial feedback was widely varied as a result of the broad range of fields represented on the committee. After continued discussion with committee members, an area of common concern was found related to dating violence education in local schools. While it was found that several individual schools were utilizing educational curricula to address dating violence, there were multiple concerns regarding large service gaps as well as inconsistencies across the school districts and the county as a whole. The committee continued discussions on the topic of dating violence prevention, sharing research and knowledge on prevention programs. As the committee continued working, a new bill was introduced in the State General Assembly addressing the specific topic of dating abuse education in public school systems. The proposed legislation posited that each school district would be required to implement age-appropriate dating violence education as a part of the physical education and health curriculum. I proceeded with analyzing the contents of the bill by utilizing a social welfare policy analysis framework. I conducted additional research on the effectiveness of school-based dating violence prevention curricula. I compiled a body of peer-reviewed research demonstrating the effectiveness of educational progr.

1. Social Policy and Advocacy: Violence Prevention
As a social worker in a private nonprofit organization, I was
hired to coordinate the activities of a newly formed countywide
committee to explore and address violence prevention. The
newly formed prevention committee was funded privately and
managed by a local nonprofit, family service organization. As
committee coordinator, it was my role to work with the
committee to identify programmatic and policy interests that
could be addressed in the community. The county demographics
varied by region, from affluent suburban areas to impoverished
urban areas. The prevention committee was composed of
professionals and community members throughout the county.
Social service workers, healthcare professionals, educators, law
enforcement officials, domestic violence professionals,
community members, and local government officials worked
collaboratively on the committee. Through monthly meetings, I
worked with members to collect data on various forms of
violence within the county. Our goals were to gain a better
understanding of violence in the community, clarify unmet
needs, explore available services in place, and share knowledge
on violence prevention with one another. By working toward
these goals, we set objectives to 1) address unmet needs through
collaboration and innovation, and 2) clarify a policy agenda the
entire committee would be able to support. I examined trends
and incidence levels of violence in order to identify unmet
needs and narrow the focus of our policy agenda. I gathered
qualitative data from all committee members regarding areas of
violence prevention relevant to their work in the community.
Initial feedback was widely varied as a result of the broad range
of fields represented on the committee. After continued
discussion with committee members, an area of common
concern was found related to dating violence education in local
schools. While it was found that several individual schools were

2. utilizing educational curricula to address dating violence, there
were multiple concerns regarding large service gaps as well as
inconsistencies across the school districts and the county as a
whole. The committee continued discussions on the topic of
dating violence prevention, sharing research and knowledge on
prevention programs. As the committee continued working, a
new bill was introduced in the State General Assembly
addressing the specific topic of dating abuse education in public
school systems. The proposed legislation posited that each
school district would be required to implement age-appropriate
dating violence education as a part of the physical education
and health curriculum. I proceeded with analyzing the contents
of the bill by utilizing a social welfare policy analysis
framework. I conducted additional research on the effectiveness
of school-based dating violence prevention curricula. I
compiled a body of peer-reviewed research demonstrating the
effectiveness of educational programs similar to those supported
by the committee. The programs I researched were quite similar
to the proposal in the new bill. Prior to the next committee
meeting, I obtained approval from the executive director of the
sponsoring nonprofit organization to support this bill as the
committee’s policy agenda. The committee as a whole then
voted to support the dating violence education bill. We
collaboratively worked to draft a letter of support for the new
legislation. Each committee member then utilized the letter to
advocate for the new bill. Members sent letters to, called, and
arranged for meetings with their local assemblymen and
assemblywomen. I composed a letter on behalf of the committee
as a whole and distributed it to local government
representatives. I met with local school leaders and the county
domestic violence agency’s educational program staff to discuss
implementation of the new bill. The school leaders and the
domestic violence education staff publicly supported the bill;
the domestic violence education staff had already begun
working to ensure their curriculum met the requirements of the
new bill. As the legislative process continued, I tracked the bill

3. as it passed through the Assembly Education Committee. I
provided regular updates to committee members, and I
maintained communication with local legislators and continued
publicly supporting the bill when I attended community
meetings. The bill proceeded to the House, and with minimal
amendments the final dating abuse prevention legislation was
passed just as the prevention committee entered the second year
of work.
Publishing, Laureate. Social Work Case Studies: Concentration
Year . Laureate Publishing. Kindle Edition.
Social Work Policy: Children and Adolescents
Susana is a 15-year-old, Caucasian female who lives with her
parents and younger sister in a middle-class suburban
neighborhood. Her family has been involved with the county
Child Protective Services due to a persistent problem with
truancy attending public school during a 6-month period. The
school principal requested the agency’s intervention because
Susana had only attended school for 1 day during the fall
semester. Her attendance the previous year was also poor, as
she had missed a total of 64 out of 175 days. As the social
worker assigned to the case, I met with the school principal as
well as with Susana and her parents. The principal reported that
Susana, other than her recent persistent truancy, had a good
school record. He said that her teachers never reported any
unusual behaviors other than that Susana was somewhat quiet,
shy, and kept to herself during both class and recess times. Her
grades and test scores were above average during her
elementary and middle school years until last year when she
started to fall behind as a result of missing so many school
days. In accordance with school policy and state law (which
mandates that all children up to age 16 attend school), school
personnel called her parents and met with them on at least three
occasions about the excessive truancy. The parents were

4. described as concerned and cooperative but told the officials
that they were unsuccessful in motivating Susana to go back to
school. Eventually, the situation progressed to the point that the
parents were being assessed fines by local magistrates for the
continued truancy, and the case was referred to county family
court for further evaluation. When I conducted a home visit, I
found that the living conditions appeared good and that both
parents seemed to have a calm and relaxed approach in their
communication with each other and their two daughters. They
said they had always had good relationships with their
daughters and that neither had ever had serious disciplinary
issues. They said that Susana had always been more reserved
and less outgoing than her younger sister, who was 12 years old.
The father worked in a white-collar job, and the mother did not
work outside of the home. They reported no history of serious
physical or mental health issues or significant traumas that
might have prompted Susana’s recent pattern of staying away
from school. Susana seemed polite but also seemed reticent to
discuss why she did not want to go back to school. She had few
friends, seemed to stay at home all the time, and appeared very
much attached to her mother, especially when compared to most
other teens the same age. In contrast, her younger sister was
described as having many friends and being involved with
multiple extracurricular activities. I explained to both Susana
and her parents that school attendance was not only mandatory
but also essential to Susana’s future career development.
Because Susana seemed somewhat withdrawn and
nonparticipatory during the interview process, I also told the
parents to set up an appointment with her personal physician
and that I would provide a referral to the local community
mental health clinic for further assessment. In the meantime, the
truancies continued to accrue and the case was automatically
referred to a hearing before the local family court judge later
that same month. I prepared a recommendation to the court that
both the parents and teen be assessed at the local community
mental health center and that Susana be directed to return to

5. school as soon as possible. Both Susana and her parents said
that they concurred with these recommendations at the hearing
before the judge. The judge said that he would make a decision
and issue a ruling the following week. When the judge’s finding
and order were received the following week, the social worker
was surprised that instead of directing community-based
intervention, the judge said that Susana should be immediately
removed from her parents’ custody and placed in an
institutional setting (a Catholic girls’ school for delinquents)
located about 100 miles away. I requested a conference with the
judge, which was granted the following day. I explained to the
judge that institutionalization was not seen as warranted in this
case, and that the teen was quiet and withdrawn and would
likely react poorly to a crowded setting populated with
delinquent teens. Further, I added that Susana seemed very
attached to her parents, and I was concerned how she might
react if removed from the home. I advocated for her to remain
in the home, explaining that state and federal courts had ruled
since the 1970s that truancy is a dependent rather than a
delinquent act, and that dependent and delinquent youths cannot
be housed together. The judge responded angrily and said that
he made his final decision. I went to my supervisor to see if
there was any alternative course of action but was told that
there was no option but to follow the judge’s order and to
prepare a placement summary. I replied that I could not follow
through with these directives as I did not feel it was in the best
interest of the child. I was removed from the case, and it was
assigned to another worker to immediately carry out the order. I
was suspended for 5 days on a charge of insubordination.
Susana’s family quickly filed an appeal with a higher court,
which found the judge’s ruling unlawful. Susana was not
removed from her parents’ custody. I was still suspended
without pay.
Publishing, Laureate. Social Work Case Studies: Concentration
Year . Laureate Publishing. Kindle Edition.