“It was those damn phones” will always feel familiar. Endless notifications, late-night texts, the glowing screen…. technology has become both our greatest helper and our hardest habit to break. For social workers, especially those in DFCS (I can speak from my own experience), our phones and laptops connect us to families in crisis, resources, and team members. They also keep us tied to work long after hours, pulling at our attention and our peace of mind.
In child welfare, technology can easily distort the truth. A parent comes to a meeting angry or afraid because of something they read online (think of the SNAP benefits problem we are having now), misinformation about how DFCS works, or exaggerated stories shared on social media. These digital distortions create barriers before conversations even begin. As social workers, we often find ourselves not only correcting misinformation but also repairing the trust that technology has broken. It is a reminder that our most powerful tool isn’t the internet. It is empathy and clear communication.
Technology not only affects how families see us, but it also affects how we see ourselves. The constant alerts, case management systems, and never-ending emails can trap us in a cycle of hyper-responsiveness. The Permanente Journal article on remote work and burnout found that mental health professionals working from home struggled to set boundaries and ended up working longer, more exhausting days. Many of us know that feeling all too well. The phone rings during dinner, and suddenly we are back at work. Setting digital boundaries like silencing notifications after hours, taking purposeful breaks, and remembering that rest is part of the job is not a luxury. It’s how we protect the part of us that gives to others.
Even the technology we use to make decisions can come with hidden risks. Predictive analytics and automated systems are increasingly used in social services, yet they reflect the biases of the people who created them. Algorithms might flag a family as “high risk” based on patterns that overlook systemic inequalities. That’s where our human judgment matters most. We must remember that behind every data point is a real story, and no algorithm can replace the understanding that comes from listening.
And while technology connects us, it also exposes everyone to harm. Many of the youth and families we serve face online bullying, exploitation, or exposure to hateful content. As social workers, part of our job is helping them build digital resilience, knowing how to stay safe online, recognize manipulation, and use technology in ways that strengthen rather than isolate them. The online world can be harsh, but it can also be a space for advocacy when we guide others through it with care.
I believe that’s what the poet meant: “those damn phones” made us forget to look up and look around (I repeat this all the time to my kids). The Ethical OS framework challenges us to question how technology shapes our work, our relationships, and our well-being. It’s not about rejecting/hating technology; it’s about using it with awareness and responsibility. No matter how advanced our tools become, the heart of social work remains the same. We are to show up, listen deeply, and hold space for human connection.
In the end, no screen, app, or algorithm can replace the presence of human relationships.
I agree with you. Technology can support our work while also draining our energy, distorting communication, and introducing risks that only human judgement can correct. Your reflection is an important reminder that empathy, boundaries, and genuine connection will always be important and powerful.
Thank you for discussing the real pragmatic ways in which we may be able to set boundaries in this profession. As I was reading through your post and the article that it is associated with, I came to realize that this is an issue that is not only felt in the Social Work field, but an increasing societal issue. Having worked from home in a hybrid capacity and seeing my wife work from home full time I could definitely see a shift in my own working habits and the difference between mine and hers. The more there is not a clear separation between a professional work space and home the less boundaries there seemed to be about engaging with late calls, emails, etc. I think it will be an important step as the next wave of social workers to practice what we preach by implementing these boundaries since it is very likely many of our clients will be dealing with a similar erosion of personal time and space.
Allison,
This is a great discussion of how we can manage technology’s impact on our profession, particularly in relationship to a specific field of practice. My problem is that you didn’t do any of the things I requested in the blog post instructions. In the iCollege module I say that the video is the instructions for this blog post. In my email that I sent to all of you, I tell you that the instructions for this blog post are included in the video. And then on the front page of the iCollege site for the class, I tell you again and re-post the actual video. If you had listened to the video to the end you would have heard these instructions:
Select four risk zones out of the 8. Then select 2 topics from our semester’s materials for each of the four risk zones that you think exemplify that risk zone. While I think your examples are well crafted, I have no idea what risk zone you are relating them to – why you chose that risk zone – and what you think about how the material we discussed shows how that is true or not true.
Dr P