Something that stuck out to me in Reamer’s article about maintaining boundaries in the age of technology was his discussion about communicating with clients and families outside of traditional work hours. My initial reaction was how complex this issue is and it is much more complex than simply asking the question, “should I respond?” Working remotely in admissions for a substance abuse treatment center, families and clients often have my cell phone number because they need my support during one of the most difficult times in their life. I have always considered accessibility a key component of delivering quality and compassionate care.
As I am reflecting on the potential boundaries issues, one example comes to mind that challenges my beliefs around accessibility. Around 11:00 pm one night, a mother I had spoken to about her daughter’s substance use issues texted me explaining a scenario and asked if she should call 911. I responded because it felt like the right thing to do to point her in the right direction. But after reading Reamer’s article, I am realizing this is exactly the issue he is describing where technology blurs the lines of professional boundaries. If I consistently respond to after hours texts, families will likely think I am always available. While I want to support them, I also need to recognize that I am not an on-call crisis specialist and it’s unrealistic and unhealthy to be available at all times.
I agree with Reamer that social workers need to think critically about how technology shapes professional relationships, but at the same time I don’t think the answer is avoiding communication outside of work hours all together. I think social workers should balance compassion with clear expectations about their availability.
If I had to explain my availability to a client or family, I would say, “I want to be a helpful resource for you, but I also have to be honest about my role and availability. I am not available 24/7 and it’s important that you know what emergency resources are available when I am not. Maintaining these boundaries helps me to continue showing up as my best self to you and all of my clients”.
Something I found interesting from Haidt’s TED Talk was the argument that smartphones didn’t just change how young people communicate, it also impacts how they form and develop relationships. I work with young adults in addiction treatment, particularly the “failure to thrive” population (I do not love that term but it is an industry-wide description). Many of our clients are in their early 20’s, financially dependent on their parents, and struggle to build meaningful relationships and function independently. They also happen to be one of the first generations to grow up fully in the digital age.
Haidt’s argument holds up pretty well with the population we serve. I regularly work with clients who spent most of their time connecting through a screen rather than developing in-person friendships, dating relationships, or interacting with the community. When they admit, a lot of the clients struggle communicating in person, resolving conflict, or tolerating the discomfort that comes with meeting new people. I don’t think that smart phones alone caused all of these issues, I do think they made it easier to avoid the experiences that help young adults develop confidence and the skills to be independent.
Where I think the issue becomes more complex is in addiction treatment. Many of our clients struggle with substance abuse, anxiety, depression, and trauma. It is difficult to know whether excessive technology use contributed to those problems, resulted from them, or both. I think Haidt sometimes suggests technology is the main cause, whereas my experience suggests it is sometimes just one factor of a much larger picture. In our field, it emphasizes to me the importance of helping clients reconnect with the real world. Recovery isn’t just about getting sober, it’s about building relationships, health communication, being part of a community, and being able to participate in face-to-face relationships. With this in mind, I think Haidt’s message goes way beyond adolescents and has important applications for working with young adults.
I agree that giving clients clear expectations help establish healthy boundaries and ensures they understand and agree to them. Even when a client tries to push those limits, staying firm communicates professionalism and consistency. What you said about not being an on‑call crisis specialist really resonated with me — I’m learning that same lesson. I can’t offer 24/7 availability, because that creates an unhealthy dynamic and ultimately affects the quality of my decision‑making. Maintaining balance is essential for both the client’s wellbeing and my own.
I agree that giving clients clear expectations help establish healthy boundaries and ensures they understand and agree to them. Even when a client tries to push those limits, staying firm communicates professionalism and consistency. What you said about not being an on‑call crisis specialist really resonated with me, as I’m learning that same lesson. I can’t offer 24/7 availability, because that creates an unhealthy dynamic and ultimately affects the quality of my decision‑making. Maintaining balance is essential for both the client’s wellbeing and my own.
Sorry Frances – I looked up and saw Dria’s name under her comment.
Your discussion of availability for some social work positions is important. There are some services that simply must be available beyond the regular 9-to-5 work hours. This is a description of the services – and therefore the responsibility of the organization. If a service organization determines that it is critical to make services (not an individual worker) available 24/7, then it will need to establish an organizational communication process to accomplish that goal. That process should not be your individual cell phone or social media account. It should be an after-hours on-call process that provides support to clients. And workers will rotate that on-call responsibility. That kind of organizational response takes this boundary burden off the individual worker, and places it where it belongs, on the organization.
There is lots of conversation and literature about the impact of technology – particularly algorithms – on young adults, both male and female. I think you are probably correct that there are lots of factors that influence whether an individual young adult becomes addicted to substances. But Haidt’s point is still very valid to me. The use of social media and technology, to the extent we allowed during their development, meant they didn’t develop the physical, mental, and social mechanisms that would have helped them build community. He sees it as a developmental damage. It’s an interesting point and there are lots of debates we will continue to have.
Good discussion.
Dr P