culture and coping for survivors of natural disasters: a strengths perspective

Culture and Coping for Survivors of Natural Disasters: A Strengths Perspective Lucinda A. Acquaye, MSW

Cudore L. Snell, DSWHoward University, Washington DC. USA

Outline• Introduction• Culture• Natural Disasters• Coping• Culture and Coping after the Disaster• Implications for Social Work• Conclusion

Acquaye, L.A. & Snell, C.L. (2012) Joint World Conference on Social Work and Social Development: Action & Impact:Stockholm, Sweden

Introduction• High prevalence of natural disasters

• The result:– High death tolls– Devastation to infrastructure– Displacement– Unplanned change

• Culture used by communities to cope

• Social Workers key players to connecting communities’ strengths to assist with coping


Culture• “Largely shared, unchanging and internalized sets of

beliefs, values, and practices which are transmitted across generations which is direct or constrain human behavior-in-context” (Vivjer & Phalet, 2004, p.219).

• According to the National Association of Social Workers Code of Ethics(2008), we have an obligation to be culturally competent.

• While it is impossible to become an expert in every culture, we are obligated to recognize the importance of its existence.


Natural Disasters• Definition: “A natural or human-caused catastrophe

that causes destruction, frequently including loss of life, with permanent changes to the environment and a community? (Halpern & Tramontin, 2007, p.3).

• “Over the last quarter of a century, more than 150 million people a year have been seriously affected by disasters” (Ehrenreich, 2001, p.5).

• “Cataclysmic natural disasters have stalled or reversed development gains in countries such as Haiti, Myanmar, Indonesia, and Pakistan and shaken confidence in the ability of nations with greater resources to cope with mass devastation” (Healy & Link, 2012, p.3).


Coping• Edler & Parker (1990) assign coping to 3 main

categories:– Problem-focused coping with

active problem-solving approach– Emotional-focused coping:

implied focusing on cognitive thinking of emotional reactions

– Avoidance coping: aims at avoiding the stressful situation

• Non-technical Approaches- Humor- Spiritual Connectedness- Physical Activity


Coping (continued)• Ehrenreich (2001) contextual understanding of

variations of coping:– Fatalism– Suffering should be examined

for their meaning– Use of family, church,

community support– Renewing of self-worth


Culture & Coping After the Disaster

• “A series of personal characteristics, no doubt mediated by learning and cultural contexts [italics added] may be relevant to cope successfully with traumatic events, preventing the development of negative psychosocial consequences and enhancing the likelihood of being receptive to the learning opportunities or personal growth that may occur as a result of trauma” (Vasquez, et. Al., 2004, p.315).

• Individualistic vs. Collectivistic cultures

• Resiliency defined


Implications for Social Work• “Most societies have become multicultural.

Immigration has become a presumably permanent feature in many countries” (Vivjer & Phalet, 2004, p.216).

• As such, social workers need to have a broad knowledge and awareness of the variety of cultures to develop successful treatment plans for these populations.

• Active involvement in disaster relief teams

• Communicate directly with community members


Implications for Social Work (continued)

• Cultural groups “may have various beliefs about death and injury and about health and mental health and may respond in unexpected ways to outside medical and mental health professionals” (Ehenreich, 2002, p,6).

• Integrated work with indigenous health workers, priests, traditional healers, union leaders, teachers, and community leaders.


Conclusion• Increase scholarly work on role that culture plays in

coping mechanisms amongst survivors of disasters.

• Emphasis on cultures vicariously affected by natural and human-made disasters; noting their ability to continuously cope as a teaching tool.

• Documenting unofficial “best practices”


ReferencesEhrenreich, J. (2001). Coping with disasters: A guidebook to psychosocial

intervention. Retrieved on November 22, 2010 from:http://www.crisiscounseling.com/TraumaLoss/Coping

WithDisaster.pdf

Endler, Norman S.; Parker, James D. (1990). Multidimensional assessment of coping: A critical evaluation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58(5), May 1990, 844-854.

Halpern, J. & Tramontin, M. (2007). Disaster Mental Health : Theory and Practice. Belmont, CA: Thomson, Brooks Cole.

Healy, L.M., & Link, R.J. (Eds.)(2012). Handbook of international social work: Human rights, development, and the global profession. New York: Oxford University Press.


ReferencesNational Association of Social Workers (2008). Code of Ethics. Retrieved on July 3, 2012 from: http://www.socialworkers.org/pubs/code/code.asp

Vazquez, C., Cervellon, P., Perez-Sales, P., Vidales, D., Gaborit, M. (2004). Positive emotions in earthquake survivors in El Salvador (2001). Journal of Anxiety Disorders. 19(2005), pp.313-328. Vjver, F., Phalet, K. (2004). Assessment in multicultural groups: The role of acculturation. Applied Psychology: An International Review. 53(2), pp. 215-236.Contact: Lucinda A. Acquaye, MSW [email protected] L. Snell, DSW, [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

culture and coping for survivors of natural disasters: a strengths perspective

Documents