Intro section:
The concept of human need goes to the heart of rational human development, since it draws its imperative from each person’s intuitive understanding of the requirements for individual survival. Although at the societal level human needs have often been obfuscated, the concept of human need is an important foundation for social work practice and societal social policy.
Theories of human need section:
Request for explanation of criticism of Maslow: Maslow’s theory has been subjected to widespread criticism for not being grounded in empirical research and for being a value-laden hierarchical list, rather than a theory constructed using philosophically rigorous methods (Cofer, 1986; Springborg, 1981a).
Revised sentence: For some time during the 1970s and 1980s, U.S. international development policy was guided by what was known as the basic needs model (Moon, 1991; Sartorius & Ruttan, 1989).
And in same section moved stuff about In a Theory of Human Need stuff from practice to end of this section, with no changes in content.
Social Welfare policy section:
Added at Terry’s suggestion, this is great new content, helps explain much!
For instance, although Nixon argued that there were built-in limitations on meeting human needs under monopoly capitalism (Nixon, 1971), others opposed taking a defeatist position towards the meeting of human needs under capitalism and suggested that radical reforms could meet working class and community needs (Dover, 1992, Olson, 1982). (3 new bib items, one by yours truly.)
Practice section:
In response to Terry’s suggestion:
The strengths-based model of practice stressed that social workers focus on the assets of clients. This model reflected concern that needs talk can reinforce stigmatize clients as needy, which could in turn lead to the disempowerment of clients (Saleebey, 2006).
Social and political action section, at terry’s suggestion, I explained Jeff Olson’s outlook, based upon my re-reading this evening of his key sections about need and on my extensive correspondence with him last summer:
Olson called into question the extent of social work’s commitment to social justice as an organizing concept (Olson, 2007). Drawing upon Maslow, he viewed the meeting of physiological and safety needs as the foundation of economic justice. Furthermore, he contended that satisfying work, education, and cultural development would meet human needs for love of others and for self-love. He proposed a professional project for social work based upon such a needs-based conceptualization of social justice.
Values and ethics:
No changes. I confirmed to Terry that no earlier encyclopedia had an entry on human need or human needs.
Needs, rights and justice section:
At terry’s suggestion, explained what Noonan was saying. This is based upon my reading of his book and several articles and a meeting with him and extensive correspondence last Summer:
However, while human needs and human rights concepts are often seen as reinforcing each other, Noonan stressed the centrality of meeting human needs for the development of democratic societies. He pointed out that conceptualizations of rights often give primacy of place to property rights in a way which can inhibit the meeting of human needs (Noonan, 2005).
Conclusion:
We deleted the last paragraph and at Terry’s suggestion improved that section. It begins the same through the Bremner quote, and then ends (preserving the Tucker dictation, pretty please, Tucker was my dissertation advisor at Michigan):
As we have sought to demonstrate in this article, recent developments in theory and research on human need in philosophy and the social sciences justify bringing an end to social work’s ambivalence towards fully integrating human needs concepts into our theory and practice. A more explicit use of human needs-oriented concepts has potential as a central component of social work’s future philosophical base. A fuller incorporation of human needs concepts would help fulfill social work’s more established commitments to human rights and social justice.
Human needs theory and research could also contribute to a unifying paradigm for social work practice. Doing so would help reduce the eclecticism which was seen as inhibiting the development of a new paradigm for social work (Tucker, 1996). Although the eco-systems perspective has been criticized on a number of grounds (Wakefield, 1996a, 1996b), the recognition that human needs are either realized or restricted at the intersection of the individual and the social environment would enrich the ecosystems perspective. If social work’s unique point of intervention is at that intersection, further development of needs-based theory and research in social work is essential. After all, social work theory should reflect the reality in which social workers work, a reality which is centered on human need.
New references:
Dover, M. A. (1992). Notes from the Winter of Our Dreams. Crossroads: Contemporary Political Analysis & Left Dialogue, 27(December), 20-22.
Nixon, R. A. (1970). The limitations on the advancement of human welfare under monopoly capitalism. Paper presented at the 78th Annual Meeting of American Psychological Association, Miami.
Olson, L. K. (1982). The Political Economy of Aging: The State, Private Power and Social Welfare. New York: Columbia University Press.
Wakefield, J. C. (1996a). Does social work need the eco-systems perspective? Part 1. Is the perspective clinically useful.Social Service Review, 70(1), 1-32.
Wakefield, J. C. (1996b). Does social work need the eco-systems perspective? Part 2. Does the perspective save social work from incoherence.Social Service Review, 70(2), 183-213.