Families are as unique as the individuals who form them. While you may utilize the same or similar techniques while working with family systems (through the steps in the GIM and related practice skills), it is also important to recognize that each family has its own unique needs and experiences in the world. The empowerment perspective states that an essential aspect of working with individuals and families is to address their feelings of powerlessness and oppression. Empowerment is a process; one part of that process is to gain an awareness of the oppressive structures evident in our society. Oppression, in the form of racism, sexism, classism, and homophobia, can impact a family’s quality of life and ability to thrive. In this Discussion, you consider the many aspects of working with diverse families.
To prepare: Select a diverse family system, such as a family with differences in sexual orientation, a family with differences in race or ethnicity, or a family with members who are managing a disability. Then, consider potential barriers they might encounter in society. Think about how a social worker might address one of these barriers on an individual, family, organizational, group, or community level. Next, visit the Walden Library to conduct research on barriers and intervention approaches for working with this type of family. Support this post using peer-reviewed article(s), in addition to the assigned resources.
Provide a brief description of the diverse family system you selected.
Explain potential barriers or challenges this family might encounter that is related to diversity.
Provide evidence from scholarly resources to support the existence of this barrier.
Explain how a social worker might address this barrier on an individual, family, organizational, group, or community level.
Provide evidence from scholarly resources to support social work approach.
As of now, the Arab – Israeli clash was a stop. Regardless of the progressing endeavors of the UN, harmony dealings were ineffective. Middle Easterner pioneers had arrived at an agreement that there ought to be no acknowledgment, no harmony, and no arrangements with the State of Israel. This set the setting for PM Pierre Trudeau to set up another methodology towards Canada's bit by bit changing national interests. Much like the past timeframe, keeping up moderately adjusted relations between both the Arab countries and Israel was a profitable position for Canada. The distinction notwithstanding, exists in the manner in which Canada approached accomplishing said balance. Instead of be deliberately fair, Canada opened relations with both the Arab states and the Israeli's. Trudeau wished to "expand its household advantages abroad." This paper calls this new approach "dynamic relations." Let us first look at the slight changes in quite a while, trailed by instances of how dynamic relations sought after these objectives. For one thing, it was in this timeframe that Canada started considering financial relations just like a factor in international strategy making. This required encouraging ties with the two sides of the contention. Second, mollifying the United States stayed a need in any international strategy choice. Keeping the United States cheerful implied dependability for both Canada's economy and security. Ultimately, paying little respect to the implausibility of carrying harmony to the area, trying such endeavors stayed valuable to Canada. It enabled Canada to keep up its great remaining with the UN, and its reputability as a center power with better than expected impact. It is essential to take note of that in accomplishing these national interests, they cover when outlining dynamic relations. They are not solidly separate interests. In light of that, let us start by outlining dynamic relations through monetary ties and it will segue into different interests. In 1973, Canada held its first since forever gatherings with different Arab delegates to authoritatively create relations with their countries. This was because of the impacts of the 1973 Yom Kippur war. Egypt and Syria drove individual Arab countries in an assault against Israel in order to regain an area lost during the 1967 Six-days war. To lessen potential help for Israel, Arab individuals from the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) started an oil ban on Western states. Accordingly, Canadians were contrarily influenced by the lofty ascent in oil costs, making great relations with Arab countries progressively important. While partaking in gatherings epitomizes dynamic relations, what genuinely hardened the methodology was Canada's acknowledgment of the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) during these gatherings. In comparative style, Canada looked to set up more grounded financial ties with Israel. In 1976, Canada and Israel framed the Joint Economic Commission (JEC). Subtleties on the first JEC are constrained in light of the fact that in 1993, the Canadian government reestablished and patched up the understanding. The JEC comprises of three financial objectives. To begin with, expanded participation among Canadian and Israeli private areas; second, encouraging explicit ventures or associations between organizations that may prompt innovative work; third, more noteworthy business and modern relations. These instances of financial ties demonstrate that Canada kept up their fair position in the contention. In addition, Canada did so not through unprejudiced nature, however through dynamic relations with the two sides. This equalization was undermined in 1979 when Joe Clark moved toward becoming PM. Like John Diefenbaker, Clark needed to move Canada's international safe haven from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Canada's international strategy producers were never again the just a single's reproachful of Clark's expectation. There was reaction from Canadian>GET ANSWER