|   Social work transformed help into 
              a professional activity. Because social workers have been the rank 
              and file workers in the world of adoption, endowing them with authority 
              and expertise was a prerequisite for the professionalization of 
              adoption. Making sure that family-formation would be overseen by 
              professionals was an important part of making adoption modern. 
            At the dawn of the twentieth century, social work did not yet exist 
              as a professional community. The first social work school in the 
              country, the New York School of Applied Philanthropy (which later 
              became Columbia’s School of Social Work), opened its doors 
              in 1904. In 1915, there were only five independent and two university-affiliated 
              social work programs in the United States. In 1921, the American 
              Association of Social Workers was founded and, in the 1920s, the 
              Russell Sage and Commonwealth Foundations offered crucial financial 
              support for institution-building in the new field. Yet amateur workers 
              remained the backbone of many child welfare organizations long after 
              formal training opportunities were established, and the shortage 
              of social work personnel remained a chronic problem for agencies 
              involved in child placement and adoption. 
             The first true professional in the world of adoption, Sophie 
              van Senden Theis, graduated from college in 1907. She never 
              earned a social work degree. Other important figures in adoption 
              history were members of the pioneering generation of social work 
              educators, including Jessie Taft (University 
              of Pennsylvania), Charlotte Towle (University of Chicago), and Dorothy 
              Hutchinson (Columbia University). Social work was a female-dominated 
              occupation from the start. 
             Social workers experienced gender troubles in their efforts to 
              professionalize child welfare. Although 
              a number of leaders in children’s work were men—C.C. 
              Carstens, Hastings Hart, and William Henry Slingerland among them—it 
              was not always clear why women would need specialized training to 
              do work that simply extended their natural, maternal responsibilities 
              to other people’s children. The first social work generation 
              was also frustrated by the tradition of nineteenth-century “friendly 
              visiting,” which defined helping as the responsibility of 
              all women with the means to do it. Social work was an expression 
              of women’s intuition and moral superiority, according to this 
              way of thinking, not a professional job. 
             In order to professionalize, social workers set out to affiliate 
              the work they did with science. In placing-out, 
              this often took the form of psychiatric casework and outcome 
              studies. By importing psychodynamic theories from medicine and 
              embracing sophisticated research methods as their own, social workers 
              hoped to turn ordinary care-taking tasks into authoritative, if 
              not actually masculine, careers. Therapeutic perspectives on child 
              placement and adoption grew out of this convergence between social 
              work and science. 
             The progress of social work was geographically and culturally 
              lopsided. It advanced most rapidly and effectively in cities in 
              the east and north. Professionally staffed agencies were still rare 
              or nonexistent in many parts of the country during the first half 
              of the century. In these places, most adoptions were still independently 
              arranged by relatives, doctors, midwives, lawyers, orphanage staff, 
              and other baby brokers who operated according to rules of commerce 
              and sentiment rather than a professional creed. 
             |