Since 2020, blatant forms of state violence within the United States have reignited attention in the field of social work, where numerous calls have been made to realign and reconsider our standing ethical values and principles. Individually, social workers are beginning to reckon with the field's role within the carceral ecosystem and reimagining practice outside the confines of the carceral state. Institutionally, however, social work's professional organizations have reacted in contradictory ways. The National Association of Social Workers (NASW) in particular has been overtly inconsistent; touting support for racial justice while also broadcasting long-standing support for and partnerships with police. Furthermore, the NASW purportedly upholds a set of professional ethics and values that center social justice while also supporting tactics that surveil and criminalize marginalized communities. This disconnect between espoused ethics and actuality of practice undermines the professional legitimacy of social work. The profession must either acknowledge the current Code of Ethics as performative or take action to bring practice into alignment with professed ethics that affirm abolitionist practices. Using institutional social work statements, this article presents a conceptual exploration of the ethical potentials and limitations of abolitionist praxis in social work, culminating with a call to action.

The contemporary Defund the Police movement has renewed interest in social work’s role in public safety, leading some to call for increased police–social work collaborations. However, claims regarding the potential virtues and pitfalls of social work–police collaborations are largely ahistorical. To contextualize current debates, a systematic investigation into the evolution of social work and its relationship with law enforcement is necessary, particularly the impact that gender norms have had on this relationship. Drawing from the National Conference on Charities and Corrections proceedings, we examined how gendered underpinnings have shaped social work’s relationship to law enforcement and the understanding of social work’s role in public safety. During the Progressive Era, social workers acted as an intervention to reform police by infusing ‘rehabilitative’, ‘protective’, ‘preventative’, and ‘quarantining’ approaches in law enforcement. What emerges from the archives is a chronicle detailing how using social work as a gendered intervention for police reform during the Progressive Era fell short of addressing the root causes of carceral issues, drawing parallels between the Progressive Era reforms and today’s contemporary reforms.

The social work profession in the US espouses commitments to equity and justice while also being complicit in systems of racial and social oppression, revealing a persistent accountability crisis within the profession. This article traces the historical and contemporary dimensions of that crisis, asking: To whom is social work accountable? Through archival research and analysis of contemporary case studies, we trace how professional bodies have defined, regulated, and enforced accountability since the 1970s. We argue that professional regulation, codified during this period, aligned social work with state power by prioritizing risk management and professional legitimacy politics over accountability to marginalized communities. Amid authoritarian resurgence and the suppression of marginalized communities, these alignments demand renewed scrutiny. Using accountability as a central analytic, this article contends that ethical practice in social work requires moving beyond compliance with state regulation and toward collective responsibility to communities.

Demands led by the Movement for Black Lives in the United States to defund the police in 2020 spurred a critical reassessment of anti-Blackness and police violence, particularly in schools. This study examines the perspectives of youth and community organizers who engaged in Police-Free Schools Campaigns across Los Angeles County, focusing on their redefinitions of safety and alternatives to policing. Through semi-structured interviews, this study highlights the interconnectedness of safety and care, revealing that participants advocate for community accountability, relationship building, and resource allocation as essential for a safe environment. Rejecting traditional punitive approaches, organizers emphasize safety rooted in abolitionist care, prioritizing emotional support and communal responsibility as key facets in creating safe schools. This redefinition challenges existing notions of safety, advocating for investment in supportive structures and divestment from policing within schools. By redefining safety in terms of abolitionist care, participants in this study seek to foster life-affirming schools and communities.