Summary

There is a growing movement within social work known as anti-carceral social work, an adjunct term to abolitionist social work. Drawing from anti-carceral feminism, anti-carceral social work critiques carceral approaches within social work, advocating for practices that resist rather than reinforce carceral systems. This approach emphasizes community-based, non-punitive interventions aligned with social justice principles.

Social work scholars, practitioners, and activists are rethinking interventions beyond law enforcement in four primary emerging practices: transformative justice, school-based diversion, anti-carceral advocacy, and harm reduction.

Transformative justice is a comprehensive approach that seeks to address interpersonal violence by fostering community accountability and healing, rather than relying on punitive measures. Organizations like Generation 5 utilize community-based strategies such as pods to support survivors and hold aggressors accountable within their communities. Community resource hubs like Creative Interventions provide toolkits and accountability frameworks to help guide communities in creating safer communities without reliance on carceral systems.

School-based diversion initiatives aim to counter the criminalization of students, particularly Black students, by advocating for alternative disciplinary measures and reallocating funds from school police to student well-being programs. The Police-Free LAUSD coalition’s successful campaign serves as a notable example, redirecting funds to the Black Student Achievement Plan.

Anti-carceral advocacy within social work involves movements like the National Association of Abolitionist Social Workers and the upEND movement, which challenge the role of social workers in the family policing system (child welfare) and advocate for community empowerment and support structures as alternatives.

Harm reduction, rooted in activism from the 1970s, emphasizes client self-determination and aims to minimize risks associated with behaviors like substance use through non-punitive approaches. Examples include low-barrier shelter models that prioritize safety and support over strict behavioral regulations, as seen in programs like Safe Harbor in San Francisco.

These innovative approaches face challenges and limitations, however. Funding dependencies on government and nonprofit sectors can co-opt anti-carceral practices, potentially compromising their radical intentions. Moreover, regulatory constraints like mandated reporting requirements present barriers to fully implementing anti-carceral approaches in social work practice, particularly in contexts involving substance use or past harms.

A deeper interrogation of social work’s entanglement with carceral systems is needed, along with advancing anti-carceral praxis to align with social work’s ethical imperatives of social justice, dignity, and self-determination. Practitioners and scholars must continue innovating and advocating for transformative change within the profession.