Practices of Care in the Everyday Lives of Groups and Individuals as an Expression of Resistance and Emancipation

Structural, institutional, and organizational crises manifest and unfold in everyday practices. The analysis of individual practices and narratives constitutes a key postulate within new family studies and disability studies. Ordinary practices—so-called “ordinary moments” (Gabb & Fink, 2015)—reflect the development of relationships. Dimensions of silent intimacy include practices such as spending time together, providing support, sharing material goods or knowledge, caregiving, and expressing affection. Practices of intimacy, care, and concern relate to parenthood, kinship, and marriage, along with the expectations and obligations tied to these forms of social organization (Morgan, 1996).

The concept of care is primarily associated with looking after close ones; it is inherently relational and context-dependent. The practical dimensions of care—though sometimes unspoken or invisible to the outside observer—may be viewed as acts of resistance and emancipation. In times of uncertainty and crisis, such practices connect individuals and groups to one another and to their social environment. A key issue emerges around the concept of care work, especially regarding caregivers’ access to the labor market and unpaid family labor, most often performed by women. What is the relationship between care and caregiving? While care work may express emotional concern (care as feeling), it may also take place without such emotion—as a form of institutionalized, public care.

Relevant in this context is the distinction between “care” and “care services” versus “assistance,” and the comparison of egalitarian versus paternalistic models of care (Mladenov, 2021). More broadly, we must consider the emancipatory processes of diverse groups within disability environments. Practices of care acquire new meanings when mediated by new technologies and “social engineering.” This includes questions about remote care, loneliness, and the implications of transhumanism—e.g., the replacement of caregivers by social robots in single-person households.

Practices of care take on particular significance in the processes of institutionalization and professionalization of social work in Poland. Focusing on “care about” in the context of social work enables the identification and analysis of such practices at multiple levels—within the social system, in both private and public spheres, and at the intersection of the two. Especially in relation to socially excluded groups, care practices foster both individual and structural empowerment. They sensitize researchers and practitioners to phenomena such as “symbolic actions,” “reversal effects,” and “seemingly evident or hidden problems” in social work.

The development of social work in Poland may also be interpreted through the concepts of “care elites” and “care leaders”, whose roles involve politicizing and advocating around social issues—acting as diagnosticians and advocates in the public sphere.

New forms of “care about” are also emerging as expressions of the emancipation of helping professions and the empowerment of local (territorial and categorical) communities—for example, through social service centers, personal assistance programs, community organizing, and team-based work models.

Equally important are the challenges related to the education and training of professionals in the helping fields. We hope that the concepts and discussion areas we propose will help structure and position social work in Poland within the broader international discourse on care in social work—an ongoing and dynamic debate (see: Payne 2021; 2024).

PROPOSED AREAS FOR DISCUSSION INCLUDE:

Caring for the carers and the cared-for – current challenges in educating future helping professionals

Care, caregiving, and care work – ongoing theoretical and conceptual challenges

Internalized practices of care in the sociologist’s toolkit – methodological and research dilemmas

Social conditions shaping care as emotion and practice – meanings and attributes

Realms of care – actors and recipients in both private and public domains

Technologically mediated care – relationships between care and surveillance

Invisible surveillance in caregiving

Global, regional, and local conditions of care about practices in social work

Practices of care about in the opinions of professionals and practitioners in Poland

Individual and structural empowerment in social work, social assistance, and social policy – methodological and research perspectives

Roles of care elites and care leaders in politicizing social issues

New forms of care about in the institutional and organizational field of social work