President Reagan’s social policy
I believe President Reagan’s social policy did more harm than good to the social welfare profession. Firstly, the change weakened the profession’s capacity to timely respond to the growing number of people requiring social assistance due to significant budget cuts (Haynes & Mickelson, 1992). Therefore, this limitation meant that many charity organizations continued to face an accumulation of high caseloads. Secondly, I disagree with Reagan’s policy due to its disproportionate adverse impact on the social welfare profession. The policy helped to set the field behind other jobs by advancing the myth that social workers must be altruistic individuals dedicated to long hours of work, low pay, and negative public image (Haynes & Mickelson, 1992). Overall, the policy rendered social work less appealing than other professionals like doctors, lawyers, and nurses who received better compensation packages.
The Reagan social was consistent with the Charity Organizations Societies (COS)’ principle of worthy and unworthy. By emphasizing the need to offer social welfare services to deserving cases, the President’s policy reflected COS, which was founded on a similar philosophy. COS advanced the idea of distinguishing between deserving and undeserving poor, with the former prioritized for charitable help (Dorey, 2015). However, the two policies differed on their ultimate importance to recipients. While the Reagan policy weakened social work, COS aimed at assisting individuals to become self-independent (Dorey, 2015). This divergence notwithstanding, I admire the principles of worthiness as advanced by the two policies. The idea borrows heavily from the National Association of Social Workers (NAWS)’s policy statement, which emphasizes fairness, equality, and equity (NAWS, 2020). I like the philosophy because it ensures that social work resources are effectively utilized by focusing exclusively on the most deserving individuals in society.