It is important to respond when third parties try to question our competences, attempt to belittle them, or the questioning itself leads to confusion of roles.
This response derives from a Forensic Social Report issued by Firma Quattro's team of experts, at the request of the Official Association of Social Work of the Region of Murcia (COTS-R.M.), which asked to appear as a party in litigation where functions inherent to social work were being questioned.
THE JUDICIAL CONTEXT
- Jurisdiction: Administrative litigation. Chamber of the High Court of Justice of the Region of Murcia.
- Claimant party: Official Association of Psychologists of the Region of Murcia.
- Defendant party: Regional Ministry of Family and Equal Opportunities of the Region of Murcia.
- Co-defendant party: Official Association of Social Workers of the Region of Murcia (COTS-R.M.).
- Social experts: Firma Quattro's team.
WHAT WAS AT STAKE
The Association of Psychologists challenged several administrative acts on the orders and requirements of public aid called by the Regional Ministry, seeking, among other things, that psychology professionals be recognised the right to certify situations of social risk or exclusion. It argued that the contested orders set a "competence monopoly" in favour of social workers.
On learning of the claim, COTS-R.M. requested a Forensic Social Report as evidence, with the expert aim of "identifying the disciplinary competences of social workers in relation to the diagnostic certification of social risk and exclusion, vulnerability and situations of special difficulty".
THE HEARING AND THE JUDGMENT (No. 55/2022)
With the hearing held, the social experts ratified their Report and submitted to the Court's questions. In its Sixth Ground, the Chamber recognised that the social worker is a suitable professional to provide comprehensive social care and that the Social History and the Social Report are instruments specific to social work, essential to diagnose the inclusion/exclusion category. The Court assumed, in the same terms as the Report, that certifying the risk situation falls to the Social Worker as the reference professional.
THE RULING
The Chamber dismissed the administrative-litigation appeal. The Association of Psychologists could have filed a cassation appeal before the Administrative Litigation Chamber of the Supreme Court, an appeal it did not lodge.
A CONCLUSION FROM THE REPORT
"Diagnosing and certifying the situation of social risk and/or exclusion is the essential result of observing and interrelating the multidimensionality of vital functioning, which reinforces that the discipline of Social Work is the one competent for that diagnosis." We closed the Report by stating that the conclusions, endowed with logical and empirical reasoning, were the basis that supported its argument.
It is a sample of the forensic social work we carry out for various jurisdictions. More in Forensic social report.