Cited by 5Social Work Education and PracticeSocial Sciences and PoliciesRural development and sustainability

The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.

Multiple Relationships: Maintaining Professional Identity in Rural Social Work Practice

Open access
Brownlee, Keith, Halverson, Glen, Chassie, Ahlea·2012·Journal of Comparative Social Work

Abstract

Working in a rural community locates the professional in a wider social network as community members often expect more from their professionals; not only as service providers, but also as engaged members of the community. This can result in the rural social worker being highly visible both personally and professionally and it can also lead to overlapping relationships. These higher expectations can place stress on the worker in terms of maintaining accepted professional roles and a sense of professional identity. This qualitative study explores the first-hand experiences of a cross-section of service providers in more than a dozen communities within northwestern Ontario and northern Manitoba, Canada. The responses of the participants provide some insight into how rural practitioners maintain their professional identity when working within the unique demands of the rural and remote context. Recurring themes from the interviews suggest that these professionals craft their own informal decision-making processes to address intersecting roles, community gossip, and personal isolation, even while, in some cases, practicing in their home community. The findings provide greater understanding of the pressures and realities of working in small remote towns and the challenges of responding to the expectations and realities of relationships including the expectation of working with friends and family members of friends or colleagues: issues that have not been adequately studied in the literature to date.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.31265/jcsw.v7i1.82

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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 7 · Cited by 5

Metadata

Authors
Brownlee, K., Halverson, G., & Chassie, A.
Affiliations
Lakehead University (CA)
Corresponding author
Brownlee, Keith
Venue
Journal of Comparative Social Work
Published
2012-04-02
Volume
7
Issue
1
Pages
81-91
ISSN
0809-9936 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4250179506
Cited by
5
References
7
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2020: 1
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Comparative Social Work (publishedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Public Administration › Social Work Education and Practice
  • Social Sciences › General Social Sciences › Social Sciences and Policies
  • Social Sciences › Geography, Planning and Development › Rural development and sustainability
Keywords
multiple relationships, rural social work, professional identity, professional boundaries, rural communities, professional isolation, remote communities, northwestern Ontario, northern Manitoba

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