Social Work and Human Rights: Uncrossed Paths Between Exposure, Engagement, Lens, and Methods in Professional Practice

Abstract

This article intends to demonstrate the interconnections between exposure, engagement, human rights (HRs) lens, and methods in social work. To achieve these aims, we used HRXSW, HRESW, HRLSW, and HRMSW index scales to carry out a survey amongst Portuguese social workers. This survey was sent to 4079 registered members (100%) of the Portuguese professional association, of which 259 were valid responses (6.3%). The results of this pilot study show that professionals are exposed to HR in the education system and in the professional practice and that the level of engagement with HR is strong. Professionals revealed that social problems and rights violations played a prominent role during their practices with clients; however, contradictions are noticed in relation with intervention methods. Their methods are mostly informed by individual rights and personal empowerment, collaboration, and accountability and, to a lesser extent, by non-discrimination, micro and meso approach, and activism. We conclude that professionals have the knowledge and courage to consolidate and promote HR; however, in order to advocate for and promote structural social changes that lead to the full realization of an HR utopia, they need to use methods based on structural and collective approaches.

1. Introduction

Human rights (HRs) refer to a set of values that guide human behavior, which are realized into norms and rules of living in democratic societies and underpin legal rules (Nickel 2021). The core of human rights is that human dignity is intrinsic to all members of the human family, and they are equal and inalienable, hence constituting the basis of freedom, justice, and peace (ONU 1948). The definition of HR is in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) and other important documents, such as the International Conventions on Civil, Political and Economic Rights and on Social, Cultural and Economic Rights in 1966, the Convention on Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination in 1966, Discrimination Against Women legislation in 1979, Against Torture in 1984, Children Rights in 1989, Migrant Workers in 1990, a People with Disabilities in 2006, and Against Forced Disappearances in 2006. These are identified because they are the most relevant in terms of global impact. But there are also other important regional references, such as the European Convention on Human Rights in 1950, the European Social Charter in1966, the African Charter on the Rights of Men and People in 1981) and the American Convention on Human Rights in 1969, amongst others (Hostamaelingen 2016).

The UN is the global guardian of HR, assuming that they are universal, indivisible, interdependent, and interrelated, as established in the Vienna Declaration in 1993. HRs are plural, individual, and collective at the same time; they are avant-garde and critical in reference to the state of things to transform, and therefore a contextualized approach to their understanding is often required. HRs derive their strengths, but also their complexities, from the awareness of the gap between the sense of humanity and the existing legislative translation. HRs are dynamic, interdependent, and sensitive to the social conditions of today’s world, especially when there are crises and disruptions; for instance, they are able to accommodate new rights, such as environmental rights.

Political and judicial authorities must be guided by HRs (Hostamaelingen 2016), but although HRs impose duties and responsibilities on rights holders, there is still no country that can be considered a human rights paradise (Hostamaelingen 2016).

IASSW et al. (2016) clearly confirm social work as an HR profession that promotes rights and social justice, based on models of professional practice developed between 1990 and the early 2000s when the UN considered it indispensable for professionals to move beyond needs-based approaches to an HR-based approach (McPherson and Abell 2020). This framework is currently influenced by the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) (McPherson and Abell 2020) and is therefore translated into the global agenda for social work (IASSW et al. 2016) where HRs are presumed to be global values (André and Vieira 2022).

Although social work and HRs are distinct disciplines, they are related, with some points of convergence, namely the shared historical context (struggle for HR); the congruence between their ethical values in relation to their positions of value and purpose, which includes their recognized role in society—ethos and telos; and the promotion of a fairer society and social wellbeing (Albrithen and Androff 2014; Cubillos-Vega 2019).

Social work is a social and human sciences discipline, and a profession focused on the person in society, and it is carried out by competent professionals with relative autonomy and with a social responsibility towards HRs and social justice frameworks (Carvalho and Pinto 2015).

As with HRs, social work is centered on the person (human dignity) and their context as part of the identity that influences daily practice (De Robertis 2018; Schmidt et al. 2020). Professionals promote people’s rights; respect human beings, their freedom and autonomy; guarantee people’s will and priorities; and offer guidance and support (Marqués et al. 2021). As Borowski (2022) argued, it is important for professionals to be aware that the client is a person with rights (intrinsic dignity), and so it is necessary to act in their favor (recognize dignity), and to be aware that the problems that affect them are rooted in the way society is organized and influence the realization of HRs. To do this, professionals must have the skills to assess and address the structural inequalities that affect people’s lives and understand that HR violation has a collective dimension (McPherson et al. 2017).

As Ife and Tascon (2016) argued, although the ideals of HR are incontestable in social work, the realizations of HR by professionals can be a ‘two-edged sword’, because HRs do not establish rules on how people should act but rather concerns with the conduct of public authorities in relation to individuals under their jurisdiction (Hostamaelingen 2016). HRs are guaranteed by states through legislation, in regulations and systems of the welfare in which social work is integrated, and in standards that govern professional decisions, such codes of ethics (Ife and Tascon 2016). So, professional decisions are influenced by policies normative procedures and by the theoretical, methodological, and ethical lens of the profession (Mareková 2017).

But the influence of HR legalism and the tendency of social work to modify the behavior of individuals towards the HR norms may imply professional decisions are a form of control, and yet professionals should be critical of these norms and procedures (Ife and Tascon 2016). When existing laws or policies cause or maintain disregard for HR, professionals must be able to examine and critically reflect about the adverse effects on clients and society (Dibbets et al. 2021). The legalistic approach of HR should be considered of limited usefulness in the daily practice of professionals (Schmidt et al. 2020). The HR approach in social work should focus more on human dignity and respect than legality in order to resolve the control/support dimension of the profession (Gabel et al. 2022; Krasniqi et al. 2022). To address this challenge, Staub-Bernasconi (2016) proposes that professionals should embrace their triple mandate that comes from the clients (when professionals represent their interests); the organization, where they exercise their profession considering policies, programs, and social projects; and the profession identity that is based on HR and social justice. HR should be seen as an opportunity to promote cohesion and bring society closer to equality through creating social opportunities for all (Alseth 2020). Professionals are challenged to use HR in theory and practice, as a tool against all forms of oppression and control of freedom and human autonomy in society (Stamm 2017).

The realizations of HR in social work should be guided by a set of multilevel actions (Reynaert et al. 2019), focused on the human wellbeing, which must include participatory, joint, and policy actions. This approach provides a framework capable of effectively transforming the discursive ideas of HR into professional practice (DeLuca-Acconi 2017), especially when they embrace their role as HR actors (Dibbets et al. 2021) and actively participate in social activism (Chen and Tang 2019). Professionals are challenged to address social injustices and HR violations in any context of practice, especially with particularly vulnerable groups (Evans et al. 2021; Karlsson and Jönsson 2020). To achieve these goals, it is important that professionals are sensitive to the ideas of HR in its fullness and embrace the HR utopia.

But to realize these changes, it is necessary to understand the interconnections of social workers with HR effectively. There are several studies that focus on understanding the relationship between HR and social work, looking at the main declarations, protocols, and conventions (Chen and Tang 2019; McPherson and Abell 2012; McPherson et al. 2017; McPherson and Abell 2020; Rosich and Caraballo 2022).

McPherson and Abell (2012) validated two index scales that measure Social Work’s exposure to HR (HRXSW) and Social Work’s engagement with HR (HRESW). Their study found that only 9% of students were involved in HR, and the level of social work education was not a significant predictor of HR exposure. The same scales were used by Cubillos Vega et al. (2019) in Spain, and similar results were obtained. McPherson and Abell (2012) state that these index scale can also be used in professionals. Additionally, McPherson et al. (2017) applied and validated other index scales to assess the ability of professionals to perceive individual and social problems resulting from rights violations (HRLSW). Their study demonstrated how professionals validate the experience of clients as having their rights violated or if the social problems in which they intervene is seen as an HR violation (e.g., living in poverty or not having access to health services). It is essential that professionals are aware that people are holders of rights instead of needs, instead of charity, or instead of social pathologies. In social work, it is important that problems are seen and understood in their wider social contexts (McPherson et al. 2017).

Rosich and Caraballo (2022) used the same index scale in Spain, applied it in a focus group discussion of professionals receiving HR training, and participants reported that this training was an important factor in changing their thinking about social work reality. In professional practice, a set of social work methods are used, varying according to contexts and realities.

McPherson and Abell (2020) validated an index scale that reveals some of these methods in relation to HR (HRMSW) and reached a conclusion that each method can be useful in promoting human dignity and principles of the right to participation, accountability, and non-discrimination. However, the results revealed that professionals tended to use social work methods that are more oriented to individual problems than to a collective and socio-political approach. Steen et al. (2017) corroborated this conclusion in their study that focused on students and their internship supervisors. They realized the profession in the context of poverty, discrimination, self-determination, autonomy, violence, respect, privacy, and freedom and emphasized strengthened advocacy and service delivery through understanding individual problem situations as well as awareness of threats to clients’ rights based on the nature of the worker–client relationship (Steen et al. 2017).

Social work is presently faced with global and complex social issues, especially the wider consequences of the post-pandemic period (Ramanathan et al. 2023), such as changes in the sociodemographic structure, migration, war, refugees (Chammas 2022), trafficking in human beings, especially children (Krishnan and Gokula 2023), violence, unpredictable welfare state models resulting from populism, disasters (Barney 2020), sustainability issues (Stamm 2023), and other circumstances that may constitute a violation or call into question HR (Quzack et al. 2021). It is essential that professionals use the HR framework in their daily lives, especially in situations where human rights are constantly violated, such as in countries without democratic values (Bhangyi 2024) or in situations of war and people displacement (Ballantyne 2019). Professionals should be creative if they are to apply HR in the defense of victims in such cases (Bhangyi 2024). This should be the time for professionals to challenge and dedicate themselves to HRs (McPherson 2020).

To achieve the utopia where HRs are realized in entirety, it is important promote HRs in social work education and construct professional needs considering emerging global challenges (Albrithen and Androff 2014; Amadasun 2020; McPherson and Libal 2019; McPherson and Abell 2020; Reynaert et al. 2019; Krasniqi et al. 2022; Sousa-Meixell et al. 2022). It is important also that professionals should be sensitive to HR and competent in their practice (Witt 2020) and constitute themselves as activists of the HR movement (Becker 2021).

To demonstrate the interconnections between HR and social work, in this article, we critically explore the Portuguese social workers’ HR exposure and engagement, their understanding of the HR lens, and the HR methods they use in their professional practice.

2. Methodological Framework

To address the objectives of this research, we conducted a quantitative study, where we carried out a survey amongst Portuguese social workers. We used a set of indexes validated by McPherson and Abell (2012), McPherson et al. (2017), and McPherson and Abell (2020), namely, (i) Human Rights Exposing Social Work—HRXSW, (ii) Human Rights Engagement in Social Work—HRESW, (iii) Human Right Lens in Social Work—HRLSW, and (iv) Human Rights Methods in Social Work—HRMSW. The use of scales did not imply a validation for the Portuguese context. The authors of the index scales consented to their use in this research and in the Portuguese context. These indexes are as follows:

(i)

The HRXSW (McPherson and Abell 2012) has 11 items and measures HR exposure, understood as the experience of professionals in social work training and the way the HR framework is integrated into their training. In the Portuguese translation, the last item was altered, replacing the NASW–(National Association of Social Workers) with its counterpart in Portugal, APSS (Portuguese Association of Social Workers).

(ii)

The HRESW (McPherson and Abell 2012) has 25 items; they are divided into three dimensions of analysis: commitment to the ideals of HR (1–9 items), the relevance of HR for the social work profession (10–18 items), and the application of HR in the practice of social work (19–25 items). Item 8 (Poverty is not a matter of HR) was weighted inversely. On this index scale, commitment to the ideals of HR was defined as being expressly in agreement with the principles of HR; relevance was defined as the belief that it is appropriate for clients to have access to HR; and the application of HR in practice was defined as the personal application (past, present, and future) in professional practice (McPherson and Abell 2012). The index was translated into Portuguese, with its content in line with the realities of social work in Portugal. All items were maintained, including the item that black men have a higher rate of incarceration. This is a similar reality in Portugal, because despite prison statistics not indicating the racial variations, a study report published in the Portuguese newspaper Público revealed that 1 in 37 citizens of African origin is imprisoned compared to 1 in every 367 men of native Portuguese origin; therefore, justice is seemingly harsher for black men (Público 2017). Both the HRXSW and HRESW indices measure HR attitudes and behaviors in social work and the engagement and exposure of professionals to HR. Both index scales—HRXSW and HRESW—can be used effectively with social work students, although they can also be applied to professionals (McPherson and Abell 2012), and this is exactly what was conducted in this research.

(iii)

The HRLSW has 11 items (which measures the ability of professionals to identify individual and social problems as resulting from violations of the human rights and social problems). This index is divided into two dimensions: (i) social problems seen as rights violations (i-6 items), (ii) clients seen as experiencing rights violations, (7–10 items), (iii) and a last one that refers to clients as rights holders (11 items). On this index, the item n.°5, “the lack of adequate employment in a community is not a matter of HR”, is reversely weighted.

(iv)

The HRMSW has 43 items (McPherson and Abell 2020); it measures rights-based professional practices. It is divided by a set of dimensions that are used to measure social work methods: (i) participation (1–5 items), (ii) non-discrimination (6–11 items), (iii) strengths perspective (12–16 items), (iv) micro/macro integration (17–22 items), (v) capacity building (23–27 items), (vi) community and interdisciplinary collaboration (28–32 items), (vii) activism (33–37 items), and (viii) accountability (38–43 items). Each dimension corresponds to a method of HR that professionals can use to promote human dignity and rights-based principles of participation, accountability, and non-discrimination. The translation of this index was literal, given Portuguese social workers are familiar with these methods.

In all indices (HRXSW, HRESW, HRLSW, and HRMSW), a scale of 1 to 7 points was used, in which 1 is the most negative value, while 7 is the most positive value. The questionnaire also included personal and professional biodata, such as gender, age, marital status, level of education and training, the type of organization where one works, the main field of practice, the years of practice, and the professional level. In this research, indicators such as disability, ethnicity, and race were not included because this questionnaire did not intend to highlight these issues. On the other hand, in Portugal, the ethnicity and race is omitted in official documents, such as identity cards.

2.1. Research Design

A survey was carried out on the target population, all members registered in the professional association and whose email addresses were valid, the total being 4079 contacts. These professionals were invited to participate, of which 284 professionals answered. Responses were carefully analyzed to ensure that all participants had answered all questions, of which 25 surveys that did not meet the standards were excluded. The number of valid surveys remained 259, providing a participation rate of 6.3% (259/4079). This rate is low, because as the survey was sent to a professional address, most of these professionals did not have authorizations from their organizations to participate in this type of study. Additionally, the survey was considered too long, and some professionals were left halfway through answering.

The data collected reflect the views of the respondents in the survey, and so, they may not be representative of the all Portuguese social workers. Data collection took place between 1 January and 30 May 2024 and was performed using a survey sent online using a CAOI (Computer Assisted Online Interview) method, which was accessible through a link and was answered autonomously by the participants.

2.2. Data Analysis

The collected data were subjected to quantitative treatment and analysis, for which, descriptive statistical methods were applied to estimate mean values, standard deviation, and proportions of the variables under study, including the overlapping relevant variables—in order to attain the objectives of the study. Furthermore, the results were analyzed using the correlation analysis (with Spearman’s coefficient), the reliability analysis (of the scales with Cronbach’s Alpha), and the calculation of the HRXSW, HRESW, HRLSW, and HRMSW index (and their dimensions) was obtained, using the weighted average of the items that make up the respective scale. Lastly, we used exploratory factor analysis to estimate the weight of the items included in the indexes. The data were processed and analyzed using the IBM SPSS Statistics 29 program accessed in Universidade de Lisboa, and the level of significance used was 5%.

2.3. Respondents’ Profile

The professionals were 91.9% female and 7.7% male, and 0.4% did not respond, which is in line with the gender profile of the profession in Portugal. The age ranged from 22 to 66 years (mean = 42.81 years).

They all had a degree, which is a requirement for one to be conferred the title of a social worker in Portugal according to the newly created Order of Professionals (Act 121, 99). In addition to a bachelor’s degree, 26.6% had a postgraduate degree, 19.1% a master’s degree, and 1.9% a doctorate. More than a half, 59.1%, became social workers before the Bologna reform and 40.9% after. The respondents came from all the districts of mainland Portugal and the autonomous region of the Azores and Madeira, totaling 19 regions, with the most densely populated being Lisbon 30.9%, Porto 11.6%, and Setubal 11.2%.

In total, 13.1% work in central government organizations (ministries and public institutions), 29.6% in local government (municipalities, city councils, and parish councils), 49.4% in the private non-profit sector, and 4.1% in the private profit sector. A total of 66.0% work directly with users in these organizations, 30.1% are coordinators and directors of services and/or projects, and 3.5% are professional trainees, teachers, researchers and others. These professionals had been working for between 1 month and 38 years, with an average of 13.44 years. The fields of social policy were mainly social action 61.4%, health 14.2%, social security 7.9%, housing 3.7%, education 3.4%, and finally sustainable development 1.9%, justice 0.4%, and employment 3.0%.

3. Ethical Issues

To ensure free and informed consent from the respondents, participants were informed of the purpose of the research, and so they expressed themselves freely. They were informed that their responses complied with the principles of autonomy and freedom of choice, and that the data collected were to be treated in respect to the principles of anonymity. Respondents participated in the research at their own free will.

4. Results

4.1. HRXSW

In the HRXSW index, a scale of 1 to 7 points was used, where 1 was the most negative value, while 7 was the most positive value. From the findings, the values ranged from 2.10 to 7.00 points, with a mean value of 5.39 points and a standard deviation of 1.021. The alpha was 0.867, presenting a good reliability for the 11 items of the scale. This value is higher than that of the McPherson and Abell (2012) study (0.734). The differences may be associated with the fact that this sample was made up of professionals and not students, who had more exposure to HR as a result of their professional practice.

Table 1. HRXSW.

	Mean	Standard Deviation	N
1 I have read the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)	5.81	1.443	259
2 My social work curriculum covered the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)	5.51	1.541	259
3 My education covered human rights violations that happen in Portugal	5.00	1.778	259
4 My coursework covered international human rights issues	3.80	2.138	259
5 Social work has been a good way for me to learn about human rights	5.86	1.297	259
6 I have heard or read about social and cultural rights	5.86	1.308	259
7 I hear about human rights from the media on an ongoing basis	5.18	1.484	259
8 I learn about human rights issues in my work	5.29	1.574	259
9 My friends and family discuss human rights issues with me	4.82	1.628	259
10 I am aware that the United Nations has a role in monitoring international human rights	5.99	1.261	259
11 I have heard that the Portuguese National Association of Social Workers endorses the Universal Declaration of Human Rights	5.73	1.479	259

summarizes the results obtained in each item of the HRXSW index.

In this index scale, the respondents underlined the items: 10, United Nations monitors international HR (5.99); item 5, social work being a medium of learning about HR (5.86); item 6, the relationship between social work and cultural rights (5.86); and item 1, professionals read the Universal Declaration of HR (5.81).

In the statistical analysis carried out, it was found that the variable “years of professional practice” stood out for presenting a negative correlation with HRXSW, although with low intensity (Spearman r = −0.124, p = 0.049). Those who graduated more years ago and have more years of professional practice do not recognize human rights in Social Work as much as those who have fewer years of experience. The professionals were trained from the mid-eighties, when HRs had not yet been completely adopted by the IFSW and IASSW as an important social work element (UN 1999; André and Vieira 2022).

4.2. HRESW

In this index, a scale of 1 to 7 points was used, where 1 was the most negative value, while 7 was the most positive value. The findings show that the values ranged from 1.54 to 7.00 points, with an average value of 5.94 points, and a standard deviation of 0.707. The Alpha (0.918) presents excellent reliability for the whole 25 items on the scale. This value is higher than that of McPherson and Abell (2012) (0.894), probably because of the fact that, as has been mentioned before, the sample is made up of professionals and not students, who often encounter HR issues in their practice—

Table 2. HRESW.

	Mean	Standard Deviation	N
1 I believe that equal rights for all are the foundation for freedom in the world	5.98	1.155	259
2 As a social worker, I pursue social change, particularly on behalf of victims of discrimination and oppression	5.96	1.287	259
3 The high rate of incarceration among of Black men in Portugal is a human rights issue that is appropriate for social work intervention	4.93	1.736	259
4 Sometimes torture is necessary to protect national security	1.54	1.261	259
5 It is unethical for social workers to ignore violations of their clients’ human rights	6.09	1.545	259
6 Domestic violence is an area of social work practice that is motivated by concern for the victim’s human rights	6.13	1.249	259
7 I would advocate for my client’s rights, even if that advocacy put me in a difficult situation	5.67	1.317	259
8 Poverty is not a human rights issue	5.64	1.886	259
9 I help my clients by educating them about their human rights	6.28	1.034	259
Total Endorsement (1 to 9 items)	5.35	1.385	259
10 Everyone has the right to reasonable working hours and periodic holidays with pay	6.44	1.060	259
11 It is social work’s mission to ensure an adequate standard of living for the health and well-being of the families we work with	6.17	1.149	259
12 When I think about my clients’ economic needs in terms of human rights, I can reduce the stigma of poverty	5.13	1.584	259
13 I believe that everyone has right to just wages and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection	6.22	1.210	259
14 I am committed to advocating for my clients’ human rights	6.46	0.886	259
15 Social workers should promote the human right to health care	6.53	0.864	259
16 I advocate for my clients’ right to high-quality, accessible health care	6.37	1.031	259
17 Mothers with young children are entitled to assistance from their governments	6.32	1.057	259
18 When my clients lack access to food, clothing, housing and medical care, and necessary social services—it is my responsibility, as a social worker, to intervene on their behalf	6.03	1.338	259
Total Relevance (10–18 items)	6.18	1.131	259
19 Social workers should advocate for their clients to have access to quality education, regardless of their race, income, or neighborhood zone	6.59	0.860	259
20 I believe that the right to housing requires adequate shelter, and also the right to live in security, peace, and dignity	6.54	0.840	259
21 Respecting clients’ freedom of religion is part of social work practice	6.63	0.836	259
22 When I work with clients, I acknowledge their inherent human dignity	6.59	0.860	259
23 I think that infectious disease is a human rights issue	5.27	1.669	259
24 Social workers should partner with their clients in the effort to access and uphold human rights	6.37	1.012	259
25 I am a human rights advocate	6.59	0.813	259
Total Practice (19–25 item)	6.36	0.984	259

.

In relation to the three dimensions of this index, the engagement with HR is more intense in professional practice: practice (items 19 to 25) (6.36), followed by relevance (items 10 to 18), (6.18) and lastly endorsement (items 1 to 9) (5.35).

The most rated items are in the professional practice dimension: item 21, respect for clients’ freedom of religion, with (6.63); items 19 and 25 relate to the responsibility of the professionals in advocating for clients’ rights (6.59). In the relevant dimension, item 15 stands out (6.53); it is concerned with the right to health care. Item 14 is concerned with the commitment to advocate for clients’ HR (6.46), and item 10 is concerned with the right to work and be paid for it (6.44). In the endorsement dimension, item 9, which concerns the education of client’s about their HRs, stands out (6.28), followed by item 6, which focuses on recognizing domestic violence as an area of social work that is motivated by the need to protect victims (6.13).

On the contrary, items that have less ratings are as follows: in the practical dimension, item 23, professionals assume that infectious diseases are not an HR issue (5.27); in the relevance dimension, item 12, professionals do not feel relating poverty to HRs can help fight the associated stigma (5.13); and finally, in the endorsement dimension, item 4, professionals do not accept the use of torture to protect national security (1.54).

The correlation between the HRXSW and HRESW indices (r = 0.503) and the endorsement, relevance, and practice shows that the numbers are similar to the findings of McPherson and Abell (2012) (r = 0.563), and so, it is significant—

Table 3. Correlation between HRXSW and HRESW.

	Correlations
		HRXW	HRESW	Endorsement	Relevance	Practice
Spearman of RI	HRXSW	--
	HRESW	0.503 **
	Endorsement	0.276 **	0.354 **
	Relevance	0.348 **	0.727 **	0.189 **
	Practice	0.247 **	0.476 **	0.147	0.345 **	--

**. The correlation is significant at the 0.01 (2-tailed) level.

. The HRESW items show that the correlations between the items are not so significant, but the relevance and practice stand out. Professionals seem to feel confident in using HR in practice while protecting and advocating HR for clients.

4.3. HRLSW

The HRLSW index measures the HR lens (McPherson et al. 2017). In this index, a scale of 1 to 7 points was used, in which 1 was the most negative value, and 7 was the most positive value. The findings showed the range as being from 1.19 to 7.00 points in the respondents and registered an average value of 4.86 points and a standard deviation of 1.039 points. The Alpha was 0.814, representing a high reliability.

This index was divided into two factors: (1) social problems as rights violations (items 1 to 6), which recorded an average value of 5.53 points; (2) clients as rights holders (items 7 to 10), which recorded an average value of 4.33 points—

Table 4. HRLSW.

	Mean	Standard Deviation	N
1 Hunger at the community level stems from the government’s failure to protect people’s human right to food	4.80	1.646	259
2 If the human right to housing were protected, many fewer people would be homeless	5.31	1.530	259
3 Lack of access to medical care is a human rights violation	6.31	1.084	259
4 Poverty is a violation of the human right to a decent standard of living	5.87	1.372	259
5 A community’s lack of adequate employment is not a human rights issue	4.59	2.091	259
6 Unequal access to goods and services in society is a human rights issue	5.80	1.473	259
7 It is common for Portuguese social work clients to experience violations of their hu-man rights	4.39	1.720	259
8 Clients’ needs are often related to violations of one of their human rights	4.24	1.601	259
9 When I look at my clients, I see rights violations where others may see failure or pathology	4.50	1.556	259
10 Clients generally need social services because their human rights have been violated	4.20	1.644	259
11 The problems I address in my social work practice tend to be violations of my clients’ human rights	3.88	1.722	259

. Factor 1: social problems as rights violations had 0.665, presenting a moderate reliability compared to (0.891) of McPherson et al. (2017), and factor 2: clients as rights holders had 0.866 compared to (0.841) of McPherson et al. (2017). Lastly, there is a slight difference in the Alpha of factor 1 in the study by McPherson et al. (2017).

Factor 1 integrated the highest-rated items: item 3, where professionals point out the lack of medical care as an HR violation (6.31); item 4, poverty is a violation of the right to a decent standard of living (5.87); and lastly, item 6, inequality of access to goods and services is an HR violation (5.8). Clearly, respondents suggest that social problems are rights violations.

Factor 2 highlights the least-weighted item: item 8 concerns clients’ needs being HR violations (4.24); and item 10, people generally acquire services because their HR have been violated (4.2); so, they do not see the rights holders are rights violations. The professionals focus on social problems as rights violations, and item 11 confirms this: “the problems I address in my social work practice tend to be violations of my clients’ human rights” (3.88).

When we correlated factor 1 with factor 2 and item 11, it shows that there is a significant correlation (p < 0.001), hence highlighting the relationship between factor 2 and item 11 (r = 0.643)—

Table 5. Correlation between HRLSW factors.

	Correlations
		Factor 1	Factor 2	Item 11
Spearman of RI	Factor 1	--
	Factor 2	0.457 **
	Item 11	0.336 **	0.643 **	--

**. The correlation is significant at the 0.01 (2-tailed) level.

. Just as was argued by McPherson et al. (2017), HR combines individual and collective rights; in fact, they are constructed as society evolves and as social issues manifest. It is easy for social workers to identify collective HR because they are part of the principles of the profession, promoting social well-being. Therefore, the position of professionals in regard to social problems reveals a collective dimension, and that the needs of clients are not only a result of violation of their individual rights (factor 2) but are rooted in the violation of collective HR—Factor 1.

4.4. HRMSW

The HRMSW index consists of 43 items that are separated by eight dimensions, measuring a set of social work methods associated with HR. In this index, a scale of 1 to 7 points was used, in which 1 was the most negative value, and 7 was the most positive value. The value obtained ranged from 2.92 to 7.00 points, with a mean of 6.16 points and a standard deviation of 0.793 points. Cronbach’s alpha for the 43 items was 0.972, which represents a high reliability and is similar to the one presented by McPherson et al. (2017), 0.934.

Table 6. HRMSW.

	Mean	Standard Deviation	N
PPARTICIPATION	6.32
1. Involve my clients as equals in service planning and delivery	6.32	1.013	259
2. Partner with my clients as we work together towards their goals	6.27	1.097	259
3. Follow my clients’ lead in the work we do together	6.37	0.961	259
4. Invite clients to suggest new ways of doing things	6.35	0.994	259
5. Advocate for clients to have a voice in agency policies and practices	6.30	1.094	259
NONDISCRIMINATION	6.01	0.884	259
1. Address the ways that race, gender, economic status, sexual orientation, ethnicity, citizenship status, and/or other aspects of identity create difficulties for my clients	5.46	1.659	259
2. Look for ways to make sure that a clients’ gender or ethnicity does not prevent them from receiving the highest quality of services	6.37	1.046	259
3. Help my clients see how poverty, age, or lack of education may affect their access to services	5.56	1.754	259
4. Help my clients challenge situations when their personal characteristics, like sexual orientation or ethnicity, negatively affect the quality of services they receive	5.75	1.650	259
5. Avoid language and behavior that puts me above my clients	6.54	0.907	259
6. Look for ways to reduce barriers that prevent clients from being able to access services at my agency	6.53	0.846	259
STRENGTHS-BASED PERSPECTIVE	6.41	0.836	259
1.Encourage my clients’ to see problems as sources for potential personal growth	6.22	1.017	259
2. Help clients recognize things they already do well	6.50	0.882	259
3. Focus on ways that clients have overcome problems in the past, so that they can apply those strategies to their current situations	6.25	1.068	259
4. Look for strengths and resources in the communities I serve and help my clients use those assets to support changes in their own lives	6.51	0.878	259
5. Suggest ways that clients can leverage community assets to help themselves	6.52	0.827	259
MICRO/MACRO INTEGRATION	5.94	0.973	259
1. Conduct assessments that identify problems in clients’ personal lives as well as in their communities	6.40	0.941	259
2. Intervene to help my clients with their individual problems and also to solve larger social problems in their communities	6.38	0.870	259
3. Ask clients whether their friends and neighbors are experiencing the same problems, and plan responses that can help the whole community	5.63	1.428	259
4. Address the larger social problems my clients experience by, for example, organizing community meetings	5.58	1.469	259
5. Expect to engage my clients’ problems on individual, family, and community levels	5.67	1.446	259
6. Advocate for change on a large scale while continuing to address clients’ immediate concerns	5.96	1.203	259
CAPACITY-BUILDING	6.29	0.933	259
1. Help my clients develop skills to advocate for changes that will help their community	6.32	1.012	259
2. Help my clients develop the knowledge they need to assert their rights	6.39	0.948	259
3. Help clients attain the skills they need to change personal and social conditions they see as unjust	6.42	0.926	259
4. Help clients understand our political and economic systems, so that they can participate in changing what they do not like	6.24	1.096	259
5. Work with clients and communities to promote political awareness	6.05	1.162	259
COLLABORATION	6.27	0.956	259
1. Engage social workers who specialize in methods other than my own (e.g., clinical, community, or policy practice) to help address clients’ concerns	6.23	1.117	259
2. Work with practitioners from other professions (e.g., medicine, law, advocacy) in order to create community-level change	6.47	0.920	259
3. Reach out to local government officials in order to help clients and create change	6.06	1.255	259
4. Participate in interdisciplinary collaborations to address the needs of the community where I work	6.31	1.140	259
5. Work with local community organizations in order to create change	6.28	1.061	259
ACTIVISM	5.60	1.187	259
1. Advocate for social and political changes that will benefit my clients	6.20	1.058	259
2. Feel comfortable joining with clients in political action	4.75	1.832	259
3. Urge community leaders to address the social and economic needs of my clients.	5.80	1.257	259
4. Get involved in campaigns for social change	5.43	1.517	259
5. Advocate for policy-level changes to promote social justice	5.79	1.404	259
ACCOUNTABILITY	6.26	0.690	259
1. Openly share information with my clients about what they can expect from our work together	6.25	1.071	259
2. Encourage my clients to give feedback to providers about the quality of services they receive from community agencies	6.12	1.150	259
3. Ask my clients for feedback on whether they feel that their rights and dignity have been respected in my work with them	6.10	1.185	259
4. Let clients know that their opinions are an important part of evaluating how well we are doing in our work together	6.32	0.981	259
5. Reflect on my own social work practice to ensure that my work promotes human dignity	6.49	0.904	259
6. Encourage my agency to evaluate its effectiveness in terms of promoting human dignity	6.30	1.008	259

summarizes the results obtained in each item of the HRMSW.

The following social work methods were emphasized—Figure 1: strengths-based perspective (6.40) focuses on skills, strengths, and capacities of individuals and their communities; participation (6.32) emphasizes clients as equal partners or even leaders during assessment, intervention, and evaluation, both at the individual and agency levels; capacity-building (6.28) emphasizes building clients’ skills at personal and political levels, to promote change in unjust personal and political conditions; collaboration (6.27) is concerned with alliances that cross professional and social boundaries to help clients and promote change in the community; accountability (6.26) implies creating a professional environment that promotes human dignity, being transparent to all stakeholders, and encouraging adequate service delivery and professional agency levels of reflection (McPherson and Abell 2020).

The least-weighted social work methods are in the following order: activism (5.58), which implies advocating for social and political change to benefit clients and promote their participation in the processes; integrated micro and macro approaches (5.93), which focuses on intervening at an individual (micro) and social (macro) levels to help clients with their immediate problems and prevent those problems at the community level; non-discrimination (6.03), which focuses on specific patterns of discrimination that operate in clients’ lives in order to create peace and harmony in the society (McPherson and Abell 2020).

The correlations between the social work methods (

Table 7. Correlations of methods.

Methods	P	ND	SP	MM	Ca	Co	Ac	ACC
P—Participation	1
ND—Non-discrimination	0.580
SP—Strengths-based perspective	0.638	0.527
MM—Micro/macro integration	0.667	0.620	0.629
Ca—Capacity building	0.697	0.554	0.678	0.739
Co—Collaboration	0.601	0.562	0.643	0.659	0.702
Ac—Activism	0.561	0.562	0.504	0.698	0.655	0.650
ACC—Accountability	0.681	0.634	0.711	0.703	0.740	0.670	0.659	1

Note: Spearman coefficients; all correlations is significant (p < 0.001); n = 259.

) show that accountability methods are related with capacity building (p = 0.681) and with micro/meso practice (p = 0.667) and lastly the strengths-based perspective (p = 0.638). The capacity-building method correlates with micro/meso practice (p = 0.739) and with strengths-based perspective (p = 0.678). Micro/meso practice is highlighted as a process of assessment and intervention conducted at the micro and meso level, as alluded in Table 6, item 11: “intervene to help my clients with their individual problems and also to solve larger social problems in their communities” (6.38).

The levels of HRMSW show paradoxes with the results of the previous index scales. Professionals have an excellent exposure, engagement, and understanding of HR and perceive HR as social problems as global HR violation. However, despite this perception, the professional methods used in practices are mainly oriented towards strengths-based perspective, focusing on individual capacities and individual rights (autonomy, freedom (McPherson and Abell 2020)).

This may be explained by their involvement with HR through the training they received and the exposure in their workplaces, as shown in

Table 8. Correlations.

	HRXSW	HRESW	HRLSW	HRMSW
HRXSW
HRESW	0.503
HRLSW	0.357	0.521
HRMSW	0.434	0.697	0.415

Note: Spearman coefficients; all correlations is significant (p < 0.001); n = 259.

—the direct correlation between HRESW and HRMSW (Spearman r = 0.697, p < 0.001). In this study, it is important to highlight that although the HRESW index scale has a significant correlation with HRXSW, as demonstrated by McPherson and Abell (2012), the direct correlation between HRESW and HRLSW is also relevant (Spearman r = 0.521, p < 0.001).

In this pilot study, we also sought to understand the relationship between the social work methods and the professional sector—

Table 9. Crossover between methods and professional sector—minimum values vs maximum values (scale 1 to 7).

Social Work Methods	Organizations (n: 257 Replies)
	Private Non-Profit (IPSS; NGOs, Social Economy Foundations) and Lucrative (143 Answers) Min-Max	Local Power (Municipalities—Parish Councils and City Councils) (79 Answers) Min-Max	Central Power— (Ministries and Public Institutes) (35 Answers) Min-Max
Participation	(2.38/7)	(2.39/7)	(5.41/7)
Strengths-based perspective	(2.42/7)	(3.61/7	(4.82/7)
Capacity building	(2.41/7)	(4/7)	(4.39/7)
Collaboration	(3/7)	(3.4/7)	(4.24/7)
Accountability	(2.81/7)	(3.5/7)	(3.83/7)
Micro/macro integration	(2.67/7)	(3.34/7)	(3.16/)
Activism	(2.76/7)	(2.56/7)	(3/7)
Non-discrimination	(2.38/7)	(3.72/7)	(4.4/7)
HR Lent	clients as rights holders	clients as rights holders	social problems as rights violations

. The results show the methods used and the result of the weightings (1 to 7), and the minimum value presented in each method is indicated. It also reveals that professionals who work in the central government identify themselves with methods that are more oriented for social problems as rights violations and professionals who work in local government or in private organizations, whether profit or non-profit, are more oriented by clients as rights holders—Table 9.

5. Discussion

The recognition of HR in social work is indisputable, and indeed, HRs constitute a significant value for the profession (McPherson and Abell 2012). In Portugal, professionals are exposed to the HR ideas, recognize them, and are engaged with them, especially with their collective dimension. The professionals demonstrate that they are familiar with the subject and disclose that they have the competencies that enable the classification of social workers as agents of HR promotion. The collective and individual HR dimensions are more visible in professionals with fewer years of professional practice, given it was not until the mid-nineties that the IFSW and IASSW assumed social work as an HR profession. A book published by the UN in 1999 and translated into Portuguese has been a reference for HR teaching in Portugal (André and Vieira 2022).

The involvement of professionals with HR is high, visibly more in the context of professional practice than in the relevance of HR (relevance) to the profession and in the ideals of HR in social work (endorsement). At the level of engagement, it was possible to assess, as Steen et al. (2017) did, that professionals recognize they act in order to defend the rights, provide services, critically understand the problematic situations, and lastly raise awareness in the community about the threats to clients’ rights. Professionals recognize that the focuses of social work are the persons and their rights and the system of life, hence constituting social problems in the contexts of the world system (Reynaert et al. 2022). This position is confirmed by the results obtained on the index that measures the social work lens to HR-HRLSW. Professionals recognize social problems as rights violations more than clients as rights holders. Although this first factor overlaps with the second, the result on the aspect of clients’ problems being taken as HR violations is 3.88 out of 7 points, one may conclude that this recognition is not so linear, especially when referring to professional practice with “their clients”.

According to McPherson et al. (2017), social problems are perceived as a violation of HR and clients are seen more as holders of (individual) rights; therefore, it is necessary to act in their favor. The violation of HR is one of the limiting elements of clients’ needs that arises when a client dissociates from the social and political conjuncture or social structure (McPherson et al. 2017). This viewpoint is also confirmed in this pilot study, from the analysis of the methods of social work–HRMSW.

Despite professionals being engaged with the HR utopia (collective and individual), the realizations of the HR by professionals is focused principally on respect for individual rights, based on recognition of the dignity of the person, and in defense of access to services in a just way—social justice.

HR is translated into professional practice in a way that reinforces individual rights, as they are provided directly to individuals with respect for their autonomy and freedom more than their collective rights (Marqués et al. 2021). The most used methods are strengths-based, participation, empowerment, and collaboration, which makes perfect sense in Portugal; that is, interventions tend to be unifocal, oriented towards a network of partnerships and institutional and professional collaborations. As well, accountability gains relevance because it is interlinked to the most identified methods of training and strengths-based perspective. The least-valued methods are associated with structural and radical interventions such as activism, micro and macro approach, and non-discrimination. In this respect, it is important to note that, in some countries, social workers are restricted in their professional right to engage in activism and protest, but this is not the case with Portuguese social workers.

Portuguese social workers are integrated in the social welfare system (health care policies; social security; education system, housing, justice), both at national and local level (community level). However, the welfare system is characterized by weaknesses in ensuring HR, especially in specific areas such as the right to housing, health, and adequate income to live with dignity (Estanque 2017). Social work interventions tend to follow the design of the programs and social projects that are often oriented towards a psychologist and personalized perspective of social problems, and therefore the methods the professionals adopt are framed in that context. The differences revealed when the methods were analyzed in relation to the sectors where the professionals realized the profession may be because of the fact that social workers are still predominantly implementers of policies, especially in the non-profit and for-profit sectors, rather than designers/conceivers of policies, as they are often not part of all the stages of the policy cycle (De Corte and Roose 2018). Their practice is predominantly at the micro and meso level, and so their involvement does not reach a multilevel dimension, especially at the macro level, as professionals only feel that they can change as far as “where their hand reaches”.

Although there is a clear identification and involvement with the ideas of HR, they are still seen as the rights of clients and not as a broader framework of societal and collective rights (McPherson 2020). It is important that the discourse between social work and HR is dictated by the principle of respect for the dignity of the person (substantive dignity), as a person with rights, but recognizing the fact that the violation of HR is rooted in the structures of society and has negative impacts on clients services, and it is at the societal level where changes need to be made so that people’s rights are realized and HRs are not violated (dignity of recognition) (Borowski 2022). HR ideas must be grounded in theories of social justice in order to deconstruct neoliberal ideology and populism that threaten some of its foundations, including collective social justice in globalized societies (Martinez Herrero and Charnley 2019; Reynaert et al. 2019).

Professionals must promote human dignity, not only in the substantive terms, but also by making this dignity recognized in the society through promoting social change based on social activism (Borowski 2022; Ferguson et al. 2018) or in political practice (Weiss-Gal and Gal 2020). It is important for professionals to question and promote changes in social structures, so that everyone can live a dignified life (Borowski 2022). It is only in this way that social workers can participate and play an active role in creating global systemic changes that lead to respect for HR (DeLuca-Acconi 2017).

To achieve the above goal, professionals should have access to continuous training on HR to enable them to act when faced with clients’ problems that are a result of societal shortfalls (Dibbets et al. 2021), and professional practice should be validated by the general framework of HR, both in its individual and collective aspects. It is thus important to continue to train and educate professionals on HR, emphasizing the respect for the collective aspect and for cultural and universalist diversity, so that professionals can affirm their role as actors in the HR movement (Dibbets et al. 2021), which eventually engenders equality and opportunities for all (Alseth 2020). Professionals should be aware that social problems are the responsibility of society and not just individuals, this implies that problems should be analyzed and understood in their broader social contexts (McPherson et al. 2017). It is necessary for social work to be involved with the ideas of HR in a detailed and comprehensive manner, by integrating HR in the international standards (Steen et al. 2017; Martinez Herrero and Charnley 2019) and national social work discourse (Albrithen and Androff 2014).

This pilot study generates some questions for future studies, such as: on how HRs as natural rights, legal rights, and as a social construction are realized in social work education? How social work methods framework incorporate HR? What kind of supervision is needed to ensure that HRs are realized in professional practice? How women, children, disabled people, refugees, and other conventions are implemented in professional practice?

6. Limitations and Contributions

This is a descriptive study, contextualized in time and space, and therefore its results cannot be generalized to the reality of social work practice in Portugal or other countries, because mainly the professionals registered with the Portuguese association of social workers do not represent all social workers in Portugal. These professionals do not represent all social workers in Portugal. Another limitation is related to the number of respondents. The survey was sent to professional’s addresses, but not all professionals had their superior’s authorization to respond in this type of study, which limited the results.

Another limitation was that the answers provided by respondents to the items on the scale were very similar, which did not allow for comparisons with some of the variables, especially the fields of professional practice versus the greater HR engagement. Lastly, concerns can be raised on the type of indexes used, because some of the items are mainly oriented towards universal conventions rather than regional conventions.

Despite these limitations, this study offers a significant contribution in understanding more consistently the relationship between social work and HR, both at the conceptual and practice level. Professional HR ideals are universal (individual and collective), but when professional and put into practice, they prevail over individual rights. Although this study is not comparative, the results can be compared with other national or international studies, for a similar methodology, especially in other countries. This study further reinforces the debate on the applicability of HR in social work intervention methods and enables the profession to reflect, engage, and transform in a more explicit way with HR. This study can also be a starting point for the education system and professionals to develop skills that encourage structural and critical methods in line with the ideals of HR.

7. Conclusions

The relationship between social work and HR is a scientific requirement but also an ethical and moral one. Contemporary times demand an effective response to the complexity of social reality and the constant violation of human rights. The interconnection between social work and human rights must be affected not only through society and its mandate but also through the mandate of public policies and people.

This research was revealing that, despite the fact that social work and social workers are engaged with HR as a universal standard, it is not only the context or the policies that influences their realization but also the methods they use in practice.

For social work to attain visibility and strengthen HRs in professional practice as well, it must be an active participant in the entire cycle of public policy and not only at their implementation. But, for doing this, the connections between the critical theoretical perspectives that explain exclusion, discrimination, and social, economic, and cultural injustices, with the rule of law as a guarantee of individual and collective rights.

Social work can be the catalyst between the life systems and the world in order to ensure that human rights are not only enforced but are also not violated. It is important to continue training the professionals in HR by revealing not only the old realities of poverty, exclusion, war, unemployment, migration, lack of health care, and education but also considering diversity contexts where human rights are violated, such as issues of race, gender identity, LGBTQI+, and indigenous communities, and how to achieve sustainability for all communities. This reinforces the need to use alternative methods that effectively promote human rights in complex contexts. It is only in this way that professionals can constitute themselves as leaders of human rights and concretize the recognition of the ideals of human rights in social work.