By Robert Schachter, Executive Director
(May 2001)
As last year's legislative session in the State capitol, Albany, drew to a close last June, legislative leaders determined that the social work licensing bill needed to be changed if it was going to pass. Subsequently, prior to making any revisions that NASW could agree to, the legislature ended, not to reconvene again until this past January for its six-month session.
Legislators were concerned that because the work that social workers do is so broad, the licensing bill, as it had been written, would prevent agencies from hiring needed staff who do not have degrees in social work. Given that there are many times more staff needed to fill positions than social workers with degrees at either the MSW or BSW levels, it was believed that licensing would have to be narrowed down.
NASW had already been in the process of identifying what could now be termed a shortage of degreed social workers and was attempting to find a solution so that licensing could move forward without having an adverse effect on the larger workforce, and ultimately, the provision of services to consumers.
A key legislative leader who has been working on getting licensing passed, based on his assessment of what he thought would garner enough votes, determined that any social work licensing bill could only go forward reflecting the more advanced level of social work.
In particular, it became clear to this leader that licensing BSW's would result in preventing others with bachelor level degrees from being hired. Regardless of the value of the BSW education, restricting practice at this level would result in significant shortages.
The bill that NASW and a coalition of organizations had been supporting would have licensed BSW's, MSW's, as well as "clinical" social workers.
The legislative leader determined that only clinical social work could be adequately circumscribed so that serious staff shortages could be averted.
Dilemmas for consumer protection and employment
There are serious dilemmas inherent in all of this. For example, there is a need to assure that consumers who go to the many public and voluntary agencies for services receive services from staff who are adequately trained. Having a social work degree is incredibly desirable to assure effective services, but requiring the degree as a condition of employment, as licensing would, will not work if there would be far too few staff to provide the services.
Members of the legislature understood this.
Another dilemma is that the legislature has been trying to license a range of mental health practitioners and to limit mental health services to those with licenses. While social work is much broader than mental health per se, the profession is at risk if legislation should move forward that did not include the licensing of social workers. By paring the licensing bill to clinical social work, the legislature was attempting to assure that all of the mental health providers move forward together.
Are there options for licensing today?
It has been a longstanding belief within the profession, at least since the 1920's, that social work is one profession and that the various components of the profession should not be separated out as licensing one group such as clinical social workers might do. If this were to be the sole guiding principle given the situation, NASW would choose to out of licensing. The question is whether we could choose to do this? Could we go without licensing social work? We already have the CSW. What would be so bad?
The answer to this is not simple. The legislature is a powerful policy setting body, and when it gets set to move forward, even when it might not act for years, once it does move, you can find yourself in a vulnerable position. If we chose not to not pursue licensing at this time because of the constraints that are being experienced, other mental health practitioners could wind up with licensing while social work would not. This scenario would result in social work losing its position in the mental health community.
On the other hand, if we were to choose to be in the bill, only as licensed clinical social workers, many of our non-clinical members would likely feel that we narrowed too far, split the profession, and did not address the needs of many consumers.
One of the things that I have come to understand about the social work profession is that dilemmas are a part of life. When working with consumers we often have to choose between problematic options. The reality is that we cannot not choose. So it is at NASW.
The Proposed Bill
NASW (the NYC and NYS chapters) has decided to propose the following licensing bill that addresses a number of the varied concerns.
Based on licensing in some states, the NYC and NYS chapters of NASW have put forward a proposal to create a license with two advanced levels: a "licensed advanced social worker" (LASW) and a "licensed clinical social worker" (LCSW).
A third title would serve as a provisional license for MSW graduates with no experience until they qualify for the more advanced license. This would be referred to as the "licensed master social worker."
The LASW would permit social workers to engage in clinical practice in organizational settings and in non-clinical activities, as well.
The LCSW would be required to engage in clinical practice outside of an organizational setting, in other words, in private practice.
This proposal should avoid the pitfalls of the original bill in that only a few social work functions would be restricted, primarily differential diagnosis and short and long-term psychotherapy.
The bill would recognize that social workers engage in activities that others who do not have social work degrees might also engage in, such as:
As is now the case with the State certification of social workers, there would be an exam for each of these titles. Such exams are already in use in many states across the country.
As in the prior licensing proposal, there are numerous provisions for what is referred to as "grand parenting" social workers who already have an MSW, the CSW or the "P" or "R" at the time the bill is passed into law.
Those who have an MSW plus five years experience but never received the CSW would be eligible for the LASW without taking a test. Those who posses the CSW and have 3,000 of post-degree experience will be eligible for the LASW, and those who have the "P" or the "R" would qualify for the LCSW, also without taking another test.
BSW's, while not specifically licensed under the bill, would be able to continue to practice as they do now, under social work supervision.
Prospects for Passage
There is still a long way to go for this proposal to move through the legislature this spring. As we have noted before in past issues of Currents over the years, getting legislation passed to license any profession is a very difficult task. It is all the more so when many types of practitioners and staff engage in many of the same functions.
The process is very political, there are those who disagree with what we are doing, both from within the profession and without, and no matter how well the case is made, there are frequently aspects outside of one' s control, especially in the legislature.
What is helpful is that we are working from within the NASW NY-1199/SEIU Social Work Alliance. As a result of 1199/SEIU's political influence, the Alliance has no doubt elevated the profession's standing in the State legislature. This will be a key element to enable passage.
Licensing is one part of legislative package
Along with getting licensing passed, NASW and the Alliance are working together on obtaining student loan forgiveness for graduates to encourage employment in areas where there are shortages. (See elsewhere in Currents.)
NASW is also working to obtain funding for increased salaries, recognizing the harm to consumers and workers when low salaries lead to staff recruitment and retention problems.
Every member of NASW can help be calling their State Senator and Assembly Member and making the following simple statement: "I want social work licensing, student loan forgiveness and increased social work salaries. Can I count on the legislator's vote on these three items?
All one has to do is get the legislator's local phone number, make the call and leave a message with a member of the staff.
For every call made, we will be one more step closer to strengthening the profession. As we say, every vote counts, every voice counts, every call counts.