The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.
Relational Autonomy and Service Choices in Social Worker–Client Conversations in an Outpatient Clinic for People Using Drugs
Open accessAbstract
This article focuses on how clients’ self-determination is accomplished in social worker–client conversations when discussing choices of clients’ future services in a low-threshold outpatient clinic in Finland targeted at people who use drugs. Self-determination is approached from the point of view of relational autonomy, meaning that choices are never made completely independently but within certain societal and interactional contexts. The article applies interactional analysis to data from ten social worker–client conversations, which include forty-eight instances of ‘choice talk’. The results demonstrate how social workers work hard to promote clients’ self-determination, and how this is carried out with different emphases within the frame of relational autonomy. Social workers do not perform ethically questionable manipulation practices. Quite the reverse, their contributions in the conversations can be interpreted as endeavours to increase clients’ self-confidence and autonomy competencies. However, a concern from an ethical point of view is that real service options are rather scarce for the clinic’s clients. This considerably reduces the clients’ capacity for self-determination. Furthermore, it also reduces the autonomy of social workers, who have limited opportunities to organise the services their clients desire and that the social workers themselves consider are the best options.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 20 · Cited by 20
Research works printed but not linked: 25
- Banks, 2012, Ethics and Values in Social Work, 10.1007/978-0-230-37592-5 · DOI
- Beckett, 2017, Values and Ethics in Social Work: An Introduction
- Benson, 2000, Relational Autonomy: Feminist Perspectives on Autonomy, Agency and the Social Self
- Berlin, 1969, Four Essays on Liberty, Oxford
- Biestek, 1957, The Casework Relationship
- Burkitt, 2016, Relational agency: Relational sociology, agency and interaction, European Journal of Social Theory, 19, 322, 10.1177/1368431015591426 · DOI
- De Montigny, 2007, Ethnomethodology for social work, Qualitative Social Work: Research and Practice, 6, 95, 10.1177/1473325007074168 · DOI
- Dodds, 2000, Relational Autonomy: Feminist Perspectives on Autonomy, Agency and the Social Self
- Donati, 2011, Relational Sociology
- Drew, 1992, Talk at Work: Interaction at Institutional Settings
- Ejaz, 1991, Self-determination: Lessons to be learned from social work practice in India, The British Journal of Social Work, 21, 127
- Ewalt, 1995, Self-determination from a Pacific perspective, Social Work, 40, 168
- Hall, 2014, Analysing Social Work Communication: Discourse in Practice, London
- Mackenzie, 2014, Relational Autonomy: Feminist Perspectives on Autonomy, Agency and the Social Self
- Mackenzie, 2000, Relational Autonomy: Feminist Perspectives on Autonomy, Agency and the Social Self, 33, 10.1093/oso/9780195123333.001.0001 · DOI
- Matarese, 2018, I’m gonna ask you about yourself, so I can put it on paper’: Analysing street-level bureaucracy through form-related talk in social work, The British Journal of Social Work, 48, 714, 10.1093/bjsw/bcx041 · DOI
- McDermott, 1975, Self-Determination in Social Work, 1
- McLeod, 2000, Relational Autonomy: Feminist Perspectives on Autonomy, Agency and the Social Self
- Midgley, 2011, The Myths We Live By, 10.4324/9780203828328 · DOI
- Ruch, 2018, Relationship-Based Social Work: Getting to the Heart of Practice
- Ruch, 2018, Relationship-Based Social Work: Getting to the Heart of Practice
- Sennett, 2012, Together: The Rituals, Pleasures and Politics of Cooperation
- Spicker, 1990, Social work and self-determination, The British Journal of Social Work, 20, 221
- Walter, 2014, Relational autonomy: Moving beyond the limits of isolated individualism, Pediatrics, 133(Suppl, S16, 10.1542/peds.2013-3608D · DOI
- Virokannas, 2019, Treatment barriers to social and health care services from the standpoint of female substance users in Finland, Journal of Social Service Research
Metadata
- Authors
- Juhila, K., Ranta, J., Raitakari, S., & Banks, S.
- Affiliations
- Tampere University (FI)
- Durham University (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Juhila, Kirsi
- Venue
- The British Journal of Social Work
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2020-02-26
- Volume
- 51
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 170-186
- ISSN
- 0045-3102 (ISSN-L)
- 1468-263X
- OpenAlex
- W3006806435
- Cited by
- 20
- References
- 20
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4
- FWCI
- 5.25
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- Licence
- Locations
- The British Journal of Social Work (publishedVersion)
- Durham Research Online (Durham University) (acceptedVersion)
- Durham Research Online (Durham University) (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
- Durham Research Online (Durham University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Tampere University Institutional Repository (Tampere University) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- The Academy of Finland (307661)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › General Social Sciences › Social Sciences and Policies
- Social Sciences › Public Administration › Social Work Education and Practice
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics and bioethics in healthcare
- Keywords
- relational autonomy, self-determination, drug users, outpatient clinics, service selection, manipulation, social work ethics, interaction analysis, low-threshold services
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Relational Autonomy and Service Choices in Social Worker–Client Conversations in an Outpatient Clinic for People Using Drugs. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/bjsw/bcaa011
- The paper
- Juhila, K., Ranta, J., Raitakari, S., & Banks, S. (2021). Relational Autonomy and Service Choices in Social Worker–Client Conversations in an Outpatient Clinic for People Using Drugs. The British Journal of Social Work. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcaa011