See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/264932867

Social work practice from an ecological perspective

Chapter · January 2014

CITATIONS READS

8 156,754

1 author:

Barbra Teater
City University of New York - College of Staten Island
96 PUBLICATIONS   865 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Professional Identity of Social Work Academics View project

Restorative Peer Mentoring with Returned Citizens and Justice-Involved Youth View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Barbra Teater on 18 June 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Teater, B. (2014). Social work practice from an ecological perspective. In C.W. LeCroy (Ed.),
Case studies in social work practice (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole.

This section presents an overview of the ecological perspective by covering the ecological

theory and the application of the theory through the life model of practice. A theme

throughout is the interaction of people with their environment and the impact this has on

growth and development.

Questions

1. What was the social worker’s focus at the beginning of the work together?

2. Who identified the life stressors and goals for the work together?

3. How was the “environment” considered in the work with the client?

4. What other theories and methods might be appropriate to use with this client

alongside the ecological perspective?

Social Work Practice from an Ecological Perspective

Barbra Teater

Ecological theory is fundamentally concerned with the interaction and

interdependence of organisms and their environment. Likewise, the profession of social work

was built upon an acknowledgement that individuals, families, groups and communities

interact with their environments and are shaped by them. Individuals do not operate in

isolation but are influenced by their physical and social environments in which they live and

interact. Taking an ecological perspective towards social work practice involves taking into

consideration a person and the environment around her or him and is referred to as the

“person-and-environment concept” (Gitterman & Germain, 2008, p. 51). This chapter

explores the ecological perspective by describing the ecological theory and the life model of
social work practice. The chapter then turns to an illustration of how to apply the ecological

perspective to social work practice through a case example.

Theoretical Perspective

The ecological perspective was developed based on the biological science of ecology,

which views all living organisms within their social and physical environments and examines

the exchanges of people with their environments (Gitterman, 2009). Applying ecology to

human beings in social work practice settings involves holding a perspective that humans

interact with their physical, social, and cultural environments. Physical environments include

the natural world as well as the built world, which includes buildings and structures designed

and made by man. Social environments include the interactions with friends and family,

social and community networks, such as colleagues or through membership or involvement

with organizations or the community, and the societal structures that shape the way in which

the environment operates and orders itself, such as through political, legal, and economic

structures. The cultural aspect of the environment involves those values, norms, beliefs, and

language that shape the individual’s views, perspectives, and expectations. Taking an

ecological perspective would involve seeing the relationship and connection between the

individual, family, group, and/or community and the physical, social, and cultural

environments and how each influence and shape one another (Gitterman, 2009).

The influence and connection between the different parts of the environment is not

static but, rather, evolves over time taking into consideration the historical and cultural

influences. Gitterman and Germain (2008) describe how the ecological perspective goes

away from simple cause-and-effect linear thinking where A causes B, and, therefore, honing

in on A as the target for intervention. Rather, taking an ecological perspective would involve

focusing on the interactions and relationships between A and B, while also considering the

environmental factors that could influence A and B’s interaction and the ways in which they
are responding. A social worker might find that the target for intervention is neither A nor B,

but rather the family in which A and B belong (social environment) or the physical

environment in which they live, which could be the source of stress and strain.

The ecological perspective to social work practice requires a specific “ecological”

vocabulary, which includes such words as adaptedness, stress, and person:environment fit

(Gitterman & Germain, 2008). The ecological perspective assumes that individuals try to

maintain a good level of fit between themselves and their environment as they move through

the life course. Adaptedness refers to a positive and healthy fit between the person and

her/his environment. This is where individuals feel that their environment is providing the

necessary and useful resources to meet their needs and they, personally, have strengths,

resources, and the capability to grow, develop, and be satisfied. When individuals feel that

their environment is not providing the necessary resources, due to being unavailable,

inaccessible, or non-existent, and they believe and feel as if they do not have the strengths,

resources, or capability to grow and develop, then they experience stress. Experiencing stress

leads to a poor level of adaptive fit and often leads to individuals seeking help from social

workers. The social worker is tasked with collaborating with the individual to improve the

level of person:environment fit, which might involve changing the individual’s perceptions

and behaviors, changing the response from the environment, or trying to improve the quality

of exchange between the individual and her or his environment (Gitterman, 2009).

Practice Principles and Guidelines

When implementing the ecological perspective in practice, a social worker may use

the life model approach, which is an approach that aims to improve the level of fit between

people and their environments. The level of fit can be improved by either: (1) “mobilizing

and drawing on personal and environmental resources to eliminate or at least alleviate

to be responsive to people’s needs” (Gitterman, 2009, p. 232).

The ecological perspective assumes that individuals are striving to move through the

life course while maintaining a good person:environment fit, which will positively contribute

to their growth and development. The life model approach assumes that stress can arise

during this process, particularly when individuals encounter difficult life transitions (e.g.

puberty and adolescence, leaving home, having a baby, getting married or divorced) and

traumatic life events (e.g. death of a loved one, natural disasters), environmental pressures

(e.g. lack of resources and social provisions, such as money, housing, schooling, healthcare),

and dysfunctional transactions in family, group, and community life (e.g. conflicted

relationships) (Gitterman, 2009). This stress can occur during these times when the individual

believes that she/he does not have the strengths, resources, or capabilities to overcome the

transition, pressure, or deal with the event, and there is a lack of available resources from the

environment to overcome the obstacle.

In using the life model approach, social workers will need to holistically assess the

client for life stressors, as well as how the client’s environment is helping or hindering in

alleviating the stress and returning to an adaptive person:environment fit. Interventions may

then involve working with clients to change the ways in which they view themselves and the

world, intervening in the environment to improve relationships and interactions, and/or

intervening in the environment to challenge blocked resources or mobilize the environment to

create new resources.

The life model approach can be implemented through four phases, which are

described below (Gitterman, 2009; Gitterman & Germain, 2008). Each phase requires the

social worker and client to work collaboratively in partnership.

Preparatory
 This phase consists of the social worker preparing to enter the clients’ lives, which

will involve gathering information about clients’, their environments, and their cultural

influences. Expressing empathy is a critical component in this phase, which will enable the

social worker to hear and read verbal and nonverbal communication as well as encourage

clients to share their story.

Initial: Getting Started

This phase involves an identification and definition of the life stressor(s) present in

the client’s life. Clients should be encouraged to identify all life stressor(s) that they are

experiencing and then select the ones on which they would most like to focus. In some

situations, the client may be mandated to the service and the social worker will need to

address this with the client while also addressing any feelings of discomfort. Social workers

should also discuss and identify strengths, resources, and existing or previous coping skills of

the clients. Once, the life stressor(s) are selected to be the focus of work, the social worker

and client should establish an initial agreement that identifies goals, next steps, roles and

responsibilities, and any other arrangements for the specific work together. It is important to

note that oftentimes addressing one life stressor will lead to an automatic alleviation of

another life stressor.

Ongoing: Working toward Goals

This phase involves working with clients and/or the environment to strengthen the

person:environment fit by working through and resolving life transitional, environmental, and

interpersonal stressors. A variety of interventions can be utilized at this stage depending on

the identified life stressor(s). Interventions to address difficult transitions and traumatic

events could include individual work, such as cognitive behavioral therapy, solution focused

brief therapy, or motivational interviewing. Interventions to address environmental issues

could include community social work, community development, or advocacy. Interventions

therapy, mediation, or advocacy.

Ending: Bringing the Shared Work and the Relationship to a Close

This phase involves a formal closure to the work together where social workers and

clients deal with feelings of ending the work, evaluate the work that was undertaken,

recognize accomplishments, and develop a plan for the future.

Case Example

Michael Brown1 was a 17-year-old African American male who was referred to

outpatient counseling services by his foster care worker at Child Protective Services (CPS). I

was a social worker who provided outpatient counseling and therapeutic services to children

and families who were involved with CPS. The agency in which I was employed worked

from an ecological perspective and acknowledged that children and families cannot be

viewed in isolation from the political, social, and cultural environments that continually

shapes and influences their situations and growth and development. I had this ecological

perspective in mind when I received the referral for Michael and began to review his case

history and the “presenting problem” that lead to his referral to the agency. The work with

Michael followed the four phases of the life model approach from the preparation to ending

phase.

Preparation

I began applying the ecological perspective in my work with Michael from the

moment I received the referral. The referral stated that Michael was experiencing signs of

depression where he was not attending to his personal hygiene, slept throughout the day, did

not attend school, and remained in his room when at his foster home. CPS was working with

Michael to prepare for independent living, but he was “not engaging”. I quickly

1 All names and identifying information have been changed to maintain client anonymity.
acknowledged that Michael was 17-years-old, African American male who was in foster

care. I reflected on how our differences of age, ethnicity, and upbringing might impact on our

work together and how I, as a 33-year-old, White, female who was single with no children,

would need to take a position of curiosity with Michael in order to attempt to understand his

reality and perspective (Lee & Greene, 2009). Although our differences should not have

prevented us from working together effectively, I acknowledged that I would need to ensure I

did not assume Michael’s experiences, feelings, or reality and would need to consider how

his life experiences, environment, and culture would influence him in a different way to

which they influenced me as an adolescent. Based on this, I believed that the initial meeting

with Michael should focus on building a relationship, gaining his trust, attempting to

understand his reality, and assess for life stressors when Michael was ready to talk.

Our initial meeting together took place at the agency office. Michael showed up on

time having arrived by taking the bus from his foster home to the agency by himself, which

gave me an indication that Michael was willing to engage. Michael and I spent the first

fifteen minutes of our meeting having a general “chit chat”. I asked Michael about himself,

how he arrived to the agency, where he lived, and what he did during the day. Michael

looked at the bookcase in my office where I kept board games and pointed out that he was

very good at Chess; he had won the Chess tournament in middle school. During this brief

fifteen minutes, Michael’s body began to relax and he unfolded his arms. Although he

visually appeared apprehensive of talking with me, he continued in the conversation and I felt

as if we could move into the initial phase of assessment of life stressors.

Initial Phase: Getting Started

As Michael and I continued to talk, we moved the conversation to the reason for his

visit. I acknowledged that his foster care worker from CPS had referred him for counseling
and asked if he could tell me why he showed up. I began to assess for life stressors, what

might have contributed to the stress, and where the stress was coming from.

Michael told me that he went into foster care when he was 15-years-old. He had lived

with his mother who struggled with substance misuse for many years and he was the primary

caregiver of his three brothers and two sisters; he did not know his father. He explained that

the family never had any money and that any money they would receive would

predominately go to his mother’s addiction. Although Michael hated his mother’s drug

misuse, he told me that he resorted to selling drugs in the neighborhood to make some money

to buy food for his brothers and sisters. He talked about getting little sleep to make sure his

brothers and sisters were fed and went to school. He described his own attendance at school

as “a break”. When he was 15-years-old, CPS came to his house. His mother had been gone

for the past three days and he was there alone with the five other children. The police along

with CPS immediately removed him and his siblings and he went into a foster care home on

his own. Some of his siblings were placed together, but there was not a foster care home that

would take all six siblings. Since being in foster care, Michael described that he only visited

his siblings once a week and never saw his mother. Michael was soon to be 18 and had been

told by CPS that he should start to consider independent living.

Michael began to express a genuine concern for living independently. He stated that

although he pretty much “ran the house” when living with his mother, he did not know how

to run a house on his own. Since, being in foster care, Michael reported failing to attend

school regularly as he “didn’t have the energy”. He described staying up late at night to play

video games as that helped to keep his mind off of the anxiety of living alone and of

worrying about his siblings; he stated he felt “very low”. He slept well into the afternoon

missing school. He wasn’t sure why he would go to school anyway as he was “so far behind”.
He also told me that he had no way of making money. He didn’t have a job and if he could

get a job, he wasn’t sure what he would be able to do.

I aimed to establish a good working relationship with Michael and to build his trust. I

expressed empathy by acknowledging the difficult situations he experienced, the stress and

strain of taking care of his family, and the work required to prepare for independent living. I

had unconditional positive regard and remained nonjudgmental as he discussed his mother’s

addiction, his selling of illegal drugs, and his fears of living independently. I maintained

nonverbal language that indicated a willingness to learn about Michael and asked open-ended

questions and used reflections to illustrate my genuineness in hearing his story (Teater,

2010).

As Michael talked, I began to assess his current level of person:environment fit. It

appeared that Michael was experiencing stress that was coming from several factors and led

to a poor person:environment fit. Michael was experiencing a difficult life transition of

moving from foster care into independent living, which was a source of stress. Michael

identified that he had not been attending school, did not see that he had skills to gain a job,

and did not have a place of his own. The stress from this difficult life transition appeared to

be playing out through depressive symptoms, where Michael described feelings of anxiety,

feeling low, not having the energy to attend school, and sleeping most of the day. Michael

also appeared to not have the energy to attend to his hygiene. Michael was also experiencing

environmental stressors. Michael was a part of the foster care system where he was removed

from his siblings and was being “forced” (as he feels) to move into independent living. He

did not believe that his school had anything to offer as he was “too far behind” and did not

have access to money or the skills to live independently. Finally, Michael appeared to be

experiencing stress from his dysfunctional transactions between him and his natural family.

In particular, Michael explained that he was angry with his mother for putting him and his
siblings in this situation. He stated he did not want to see his mother and if he did, he’d “tell

her where to go.” Michael also explained that he missed his siblings and wished he could see

them more. His relationship with his foster family was “fine.” Michael stated that they are

nice and friendly and he knew he would stay in contact with them after he leaves.

I began to discuss with Michael how he felt his physical, social, and cultural

environments were helping or hindering him in overcoming the stress he was experiencing.

We discussed his physical living environment with his foster family. Michael stated that he

had the attic bedroom where he was removed from the rest of the family. Although, Michael

stated he liked his privacy, we discussed how this separation could also lead him to spend

more time on his own. As Michael stated he enjoyed being around his foster family, I began

to think that our work together might involve Michael spending more social time with his

foster family, such as watching TV in the family room versus in his bedroom. Michael’s

social environment was both helping and hindering Michael. He felt that he had a good level

of support from his foster family and his CPS social worker, but felt that the school was not

beneficial to him, became angry when thinking about his relationship with his mother and

siblings, and felt that the legal and economic systems were pushing Michael to live

independently without having a ease of access to income, and resources to live. Finally,

Michael’s cultural environment had set certain expectations on Michael. He was the head of

his family and felt as if he had failed his siblings by having to go into the foster care system.

Michael’s foster family are African American and were engaged in the African American

community and in the local Baptist Church, which Michael explained made him feel “more

comfortable”.

It was clear from our initial discussion that Michael was feeling a lack of strength and

capability in achieving independent living and felt as if his environment was not providing

the necessary resources to achieve this. Michael was feeling pressure to move into
independent living and was feeling anxious and low, and had a lack of motivation to attend

school or to take care of himself. Michael stated he was always in charge and the leader of

the family and now he needed to care for himself. This was scary for Michael; he was not

sure how to do this.

Michael and I ended the initial session by identifying the main life stressors that he

would like to work on in our work together. We discussed how I, within the agency, could

provide counseling and support, but that we may need to pull from other sources of support,

such as his foster care worker, school, and foster family to best meet his needs. Michael

identified the following three areas as the focus of work:

1. Moving into independent living (difficult life transition)

2. Going to school to gain skills for a job (environment)

3. Seeing his siblings and dealing with his feelings about his mother (dysfunctional

transaction)

Based on the three areas of work, Michael and I established an agreement on goals

and determined the next steps in working together. Michael identified the following three

goals:

1. Attend a school that I like

2. Get a job

3. Find an apartment to live in

4. Have more contact with my brothers and sisters

Michael and I agreed to meet one hour weekly for the next eight weeks at which time

we would review the work together. We identified that the work together would involve

exploring and talking about his feelings of living independently, his relationship with his

mother and siblings, and exploring schools, jobs, and housing to move towards

independence. I hypothesized that gaining confidence and skills to live independently and
dealing with feelings about Michael’s mother and siblings would alleviate the depressive

systems that he was experiencing.

Ongoing: Working towards Goals

I met Michael over the following weeks to focus on achieving the goals that he had

established in the initial session. Our initial focus was to explore new schools that Michael

might find more useful to him. Before our next session, I contacted his foster care worker at

CPS to discuss schooling options2. She had identified a new school within the area that

educated and trained students to gain skills necessary to enter the workforce within the

geographical area. In particular, the school focused on computer technology, cosmetology,

and housing construction. I wondered if Michael might be interested in the approach this

school was taking and made sure to discuss it when we first met. I also discussed with the

foster care worker Michael’s concerns about his lack of contact with his siblings. I asked that

the worker explore ways in which to increase the contact.

Michael arrived for our next session and after a brief catch up of the week, I informed

him of what I had found out about his new school. Michael seemed very interested,

particularly in housing construction, and commented about how he used to fix any problems

in his old house. The school would teach Michael about housing construction and then allow

Michael school-credits for working on actual building sites where he would make $10 an

hour. Michael looked at the information and agreed that he would go to visit the school with

his foster father the next week. Michael appeared to seem pleased that a school could

possibly provide him with useful skills while also allow him to make some money. I saw this

as the first step in improving Michael’s relationship and interaction with his environment and

in achieving Michael’s first three goals.

2 Michael had granted permission for me to talk to his CPS worker.
 Michael and I began to discuss his “ideal” living space. Although he stated he wasn’t

ready to move out on his own yet, he was interested in beginning to explore the options of

apartments and locations. Michael described having a place that was small enough to

maintain, but large enough to have his siblings come and visit. Michael expressed an interest

in staying near his foster family and agreed to look through the availability of rentals near his

foster home and bring some examples of “potential” apartments to our next meeting together.

Michael stated he would ask his foster parents to help him in his search.

Michael and I also began to discuss his feelings towards his mother and his siblings. It

appeared that his dysfunctional relationship was greatly prohibiting Michael’s growth and

development and his ability to engage with his environment. Michael did not want to meet or

see his mother, but there were many things he would “like to say to her.” I asked Michael if

he would be willing to write a letter to his mother expressing his feelings and to bring it to

our next session together versus mailing it to his mother. Michael agreed to the task.

Over the following weeks, Michael began to move towards accomplishing his four

goals and in enhancing his person:environment fit. Michael was able to keep to tasks,

particularly with the support from his social environment. His foster parents had become very

concerned about Michael prior to our initial meeting and, therefore, supported Michael

through the tasks and decisions in which he had to make. Michael had visited the school and

subsequently enrolled on the construction course. He was undertaking the necessary classes

before starting on his first construction job. Michael had also identified an apartment

complex near his foster family that he hoped to move into once he had “some money saved”.

The foster care worker at CPS had enrolled Michael on an independent living course and was

supporting him through this process. The main work in our sessions involved his

relationships and feelings with his mother. Each week Michael was able to express more

about his anger towards his mother and how this was impacting on his ability to “move on in
life.” Michael stated he would never have a relationship with his mother, but over the weeks

was able to accept his feelings and to put them to one side as to not serve as a roadblock in

moving forward. Although Michael acknowledged that he might have to revisit the feelings

on occasion, he was not going to allow his mother to limit him any further. Finally, the foster

care worker at CPS was able to increase Michael’s visits with his siblings from once to twice

per week and she also indicated that Michael may be able to have visits and overnight stays

when he moves into his new apartment.

Ending: Bringing the Shared Work and the Relationship to a Close

At the end of eight weeks, Michael and I met to review the four goals that he had set,

to evaluate our work together, and to acknowledge Michael’s accomplishments. Michael

reported he was attending a school that he liked and that the school was giving him the skills

necessary in order to gain employment. Michael had just started his first construction

assignment and reported that he felt that he was comfortable in the environment and was

“learning new things everyday.” Michael felt challenged by this type of work, which seemed

to be contributing to his growth and development and was creating a more adaptive

person:environment fit. I acknowledged Michael’s regular attendance at the school and the

start of his first construction job. Michael was earning $10 an hour for his work and he was

able to save most of his money, which was going towards his new apartment. This source of

employment seemed to fit Michael’s needs as he was doing something he enjoyed and was

challenged by, but it also met the need of providing income.

Michael’s goal of finding an apartment was an ongoing process. Michael had

identified an apartment complex near his foster family where he would like to live. Michael

was still apprehensive about moving out on his own, and because of this, Michael had

negotiated that he would apply for an apartment at the complex in three months time. His

foster care worker would continue to work with Michael on independent living skills and
work with Michael and his foster family to ensure that he had all the material resources in

place before he made the move. The foster family also reassured Michael that they would be

a source of support when he moved out. Michael reported feeling confident that his social

environment was supporting him in a strong way that would lead to a physical environment

that fully meets his needs. I acknowledged that moving out independently was a big step, but

Michael was making great progress towards achieving his goal.

Finally, Michael and I had spent a lot of time talking through his feelings towards his

mother. Although Michael acknowledged he would continue to struggle with his feelings of

anger, he felt more capable of addressing his feelings when they arose. He felt more at peace

with himself, and since knowing that he will see his siblings more often, he felt less anger,

less anxious, and less depressed. Michael reported that he felt he had more energy and felt as

if he could “see a future.”

The work together not only involved working with Michael to change his perceptions

and behaviors in regard to attending school, looking for a job and an apartment, and dealing

with his feelings regarding his mother, but also an intervention into Michael’s environment

where an appropriate school had to be identified that could best meet Michael’s needs and

provide the necessary resources to allow him to grow and develop. The interventions took

place while also considering Michael’s immediate social environment of his foster family and

foster care worker; those individuals that Michael trusted the most and whom could best

assist in ensuring Michael and his environment had the most productive and supportive

exchange. Michael and I both reflected on how the work together had been “successful” but

we also acknowledged that there are difficult challenges along life’s path. Together, we

identified Michael’s personal strengths and environmental resources from which he could

draw upon when things began to appear too “stressful.”

References
 Gitterman, A. (2009). The life model. In A. Roberts (Ed.), The social workers’ desk

reference (2nd ed.) (pp. 231-234). New York: Oxford University Press.

Gitterman, A. & Germain, C.B. (2008). The life model of social work practice: Advances in

theory and practice, (3rd ed.). New York: Columbia University Press.

Lee, M.Y., & Greene, G.J. (2009). Using social constructivism in social work practice. In A.

R. Roberts (Ed.), The social workers’ desk reference (2nd ed.) (pp. 143-149). New

York: Oxford University Press.

Teater, B. (2010). An introduction to applying social work theories and methods.

Maidenhead: Open University Press.

View publication stats