Social Work Today E-Zine

A Film by Heidi Ewing and Rachel Grady

Inner city Baltimore may provide a powerful backdrop for some of the best drama on television, as in HBO’s The Wire, but it’s no place to raise a child or be one. Within a short 84 minutes, filmmakers Heidi Ewing and Rachel Grady reveal the harsh interaction of social, educational, and family problems facing a group of 12-year-old Baltimore students as they attempt to change the course of their lives.

The Boys of Baraka follows 20 at-risk students from inner city Baltimore as they move to a boarding school in Baraka, Kenya. Four of these youths become the film’s primary focus: Richard, a thoughtful, sensitive 13-year-old; Romesh, his 12-year-old academically-inclined brother; Devon, a 12-year-old aspiring preacher; and Montrey, a 12-year-old with tremendous math potential and a bad temper. By moving to Africa to finish middle school, these youths are removed from the significant but familiar troubles of their homes and neighborhoods. They must adapt to a new culture within a strange, rural environment that doesn’t even have full-time electricity—while also adjusting to a stricter school that expects more academic success and self-control.

The first scenes of this documentary reveal children after dark in rundown Baltimore neighborhoods and homes. The nighttime images are eerie, and violence encompasses the children’s activity as they play what appears to be “cops and robbers.” At first, it is unclear as to whether viewers are watching a play or real scene of a policeman beating and handcuffing a suspect. Soon after, a scene opens in a middle school auditorium as a recruiter for the Baraka program talks to a group of 12- and 13-year-old boys. Viewers are then told that 76% of African-American boys in the Baltimore school system never graduate high school. The recruiter tells the boys that they have three choices: an orange jump-suit (denoting prison), a black box (denoting early death), or a cap and gown. Since only 24% of these boys are going to graduate, viewers must assume that most of these boys will end up in prison or an early grave.

Throughout this documentary, a maddening fatalism remains a vital part of the social facts facing these youngsters. Everyone knows the consequences of growing up in this environment—the schools are failing and the neighborhoods are poisonous. Despairing parents and grandparents embrace the idea of a strange school in Africa because they see no worse alternative for their children than the present reality. But is it really necessary for these children to travel 12,000 miles to find hope and opportunity?

It would appear that it is necessary for an alternative school to be far away geographically, as well as socially and culturally. In the first months of the school year, the film portrays Romesh—bags packed and threatening to walk to the airport—because he wants to hop on the next flight back to Baltimore. He is experiencing homesickness and cultural shock and wants to go home. He reconsiders after his brother and other boys talk to him, but the impossibility of his ability to leave is the primary factor that keeps him at the Baraka school. It is fortunate that he does stay because he, along with others, eventually thrives.

The Baraka school is not an African school, but one run by American volunteers who chose Kenya, among other reasons, because it is cheap and "boys can live the lives of boys"—creating games, exploring, running, swimming, climbing, and playing with pets. In Baltimore, it can be dangerous for boys to go outside, so most stare at televisions and play videogames. Overall, while at school in Baraka, the boys’ behavior is transformed as they improve academically and think differently of themselves.

When the boys return to Baltimore for summer vacation, they encounter the threats of their old neighborhoods. They also receive the bad news that the Baraka school will not reopen in the fall due to regional politics and security threats. This news is difficult for parents, too, as one frustrated father points out that his son has a greater chance of being killed on a Baltimore street corner than in a terrorist attack in Africa.

The Boys of Baraka then follows the four youths into the future where there is a great deal of disappointment for the boys and their families. Viewers hear again from the recruiter who initially introduced the Baraka school idea; she is visibly pained and pessimistic as she discusses her assessment of the dismal prospects for the boys. In the end, the movie provides a mixed and conditional account of where the boys are headed.

Fortunately, most people who see this film will be watching it on DVD with the added opportunity of viewing special features: A more recent update on the status of these boys is provided, which is decidedly more positive and optimistic than the movie ending. The DVD also offers a commentary by the filmmakers. Their strong affection and genuine concern for the children and their families comes across in the filmmakers’ comments. Also provided are insights into the boys and their families that are not obvious from the film.

The DVD also contains comments by Bill Cosby. The famous comedian takes an uncompromising position—as he has publicly for the past few years—that personal responsibility is the answer to many of the problems facing inner city Baltimore. He flatly states that most people ignore or make excuses for problems the boys of this film are facing. His comments challenge residents of inner city Baltimore, the social and political powers-that-be, and particularly social workers who have a professional obligation to reexamine what can be done for children like Richard, Romesh, Devon, and Montrey. The dilemma for these children is captured in Randy Newman’s profoundly sad song entitled Baltimore: “Oh, Baltimore! Ain’t it hard just to live . . .”

Robert DeLauro, MSW, ACSW, is an organization development consultant at Saint Vincent Catholic Medical Centers in New York City. He is also president of the New Jersey chapter of the Martin Scorsese Fan Club.

A Film by Davis Guggenheim

Over the past few years, feature length documentaries that have a clear-cut moral sensibility and an activist perspective have been gaining wider releases. These documentaries provide superb, and in most cases explicit learning opportunities. We most certainly learn about the documentary’s primary topic, (i.e., global warming, racism, corporations, etc). But there are other lessons to be learned, particularly for the social worker, from these documentaries. One is the complex ways that resistance to change manifests itself and the variety of ways it is addressed. A second learning focus is the pervasive issue of communication – how can we be more effective, efficient, and persuasive as we practice this skill daily?

One of the most popular and successful of these documentaries available in some theatre venues for the past couple of months is An Inconvenient Truth. This documentary film by Davis Guggenheim follows Al Gore as he travels throughout the United States and the world, presenting a slide show that describes the reality and threat of global warming. At the heart of the movie is the former Vice President’s stylish multimedia lecture, in which he indisputably correlates CO2 emissions with rising temperatures. Interwoven with the slide show, which he says he has presented more than 1000 times, are Gore’s personal reflections and musings. Through these comments we gain an understanding for why he is tackling this issue and a respect for his commitment.

Gore has said that as a practicing politician, he failed to turn global warming into a hot button issue. Apparently, he had to be away from electoral politics to find the dedication and confidence to become a true global warming warrior. But in spite of Gore’s success with this movie, Democratic party leaders have not made planetary rescue a significant topic. Why, in 2006, are politicians not comfortable showing the way on this issue?

Kurt Lewin’s concept of force field analysis can be useful for understanding what is at work when attempting to change something as significant as American energy policy and its impact on global warming. Lewin assumes that in any situation there are both driving and restraining forces that are influencing change. Driving forces like this film are pushing for change. Evangelical ministers who have pronounced global warming a moral issue, corporate executives at General Electric, Wal-mart, and other companies who are championing environmentally-friendly activities as good for business, Mother Nature’s extreme weather (i.e., Hurricane Katrina) and the media coverage surrounding it, and insurance companies who are worrying about paying significant claims as a result of global warming-induced storms are restraining forces.

Restraining forces act to restrain or decrease the driving forces. For example, the automobile and fossil fuel companies have used their vast resources to influence public opinion about the validity of global warming science, the priority that it should be given in a free market, and the “inconvenience” involved with addressing it. The apathy and hostility expressed by the Bush administration toward environmental activists, are also restraining forces. The popular notion that Americans have a sacred right to cheap gas is another tough restraining force.

For Lewin, equilibrium is reached when the sum of the driving forces equals the sum of the restraining forces. The equilibrium can be raised or lowered by changes in the relationship between the driving and restraining forces. But this model requires viewing short term and long-term goals. The drug addict is traditionally viewed as ignoring any long-term goals for the purpose of the short term “fix”. Even President Bush is saying the American public is “addicted” to oil. The current relationship between driving and restraining forces may allow American society to maintain an equilibrium of addiction, but only through the shifting of these forces do we have a chance for an equilibrium of survival.

An Inconvenient Truth shows Gore paying tremendous attention to communication – not only through his use of media technology but also through his use of self. A great deal of the technology that Gore uses in his compelling slide show is not fancy and is available to social workers. He has contrasting photographs, taken 40 years apart that show lake Chad in Central Africa virtually drying up. He has photos of the receding snows of Kilimanjaro and the evaporating glaciers in Glacier National Park. He has spent significant time learning how to communicate his message effectively. He mixes humor with seriousness, Mark Twain with Upton Sinclair, statistics with art. There is nothing mysterious about how effectively he communicates. He has combined passion, intelligence, and hard work to spread his message and this film shows it all.

Robert DeLauro, MSW, ACSW, is an organization development consultant at Saint Vincent Catholic Medical Centers in New York City. He is also president of the New Jersey chapter of the Martin Scorsese Fan Club.

A Film by Zana Briski and Ross Kaufman

There are times when watching a movie that you want to immediately have certain significant others share your experience of the film. Born Into Brothels was this type of movie for me. After watching it for the first time, I was ready to purchase ten copies for distribution to various friends and family. A look at my post-Christmas Visa balance stifled my enthusiasm for this initial impulse, but I still intend to spread the word about this terrific documentary.

Born into Brothels won the 2004 Academy Award for best documentary feature. It follows Zana Briski, a Western photojournalist, who initially comes to Calcutta to learn about the women working in the brothels. During the process, she becomes acquainted and thoroughly engaged with the children of these women. The children of Calcutta’s red light district are enthusiastic and joyful, which is a sharp contrast to their squalid and depressing environment. Briski provides the children with point-and-shoot cameras as well as weekly photography lessons. The results are amazing

The eight children, ages 10 to 14, use the cameras to capture the ugliness of the poverty surrounding them and the beauty sneaking through. Photography provides an expressive outlet and an opportunity to share wisdom that seems far beyond their years.

It is fascinating to listen to the children talk about the process of taking their photos—in particular, the resistance they face from their families and community. They are insightful about what the photographs capture and also insightful when critiquing each other.

Briski becomes determined to help these children who have very little hope of living outside the brothel. The film documents her activism with the children. She takes them on trips to the zoo and the beach. The excursions not only provide a chance to take more interesting photographs but the children are given an opportunity to see a larger, richer world.

One of the children, Avijit, is a twelve-year-old boy with significant artistic talent. He has gained some recognition and won numerous awards for his paintings. Avijit is bright, sensitive, artistic, and also has a strong self-image. These qualities help sustain his ambitions amidst his tragic home environment. Avijit has been invited to Amsterdam to participate in the 2002 Children’s Jury by the World Press Photo Foundation. Briski decides to take on the Indian bureaucracy standing between Avijit and the passport that is necessary to make the trip. In the best social work tradition, Briski works to make the governmental and bureaucratic systems responsive to the needs of the child. But the people, paperwork, and power she confronts are like something out of Saturday Night Live—absurdly long lines, comatose workers, and stacks of paper so old they are turning yellow.

Briski also pursues boarding schools for some of the children. She speaks about breaking the cycle these families are caught in. Although life as a prostitute—referred to as life “on the line”—is not shown in much detail, the film introduces us to the parents, grandparents, and in some cases, great grandparents who are involved in this work and the activities (drug use, moon-shining) surrounding it. Some of the film’s most disturbing scenes capture the parents’ verbal abuse and poor behavior toward their children.

Attending a boarding school would not only provide the education needed to establish a professional career, but the children would also be removed from the chaotic, impoverished home environment that severely limits their potential. Upon pursuing this, Briski confronts an educational bureaucracy that throws up various roadblocks such as HIV status and the parents’ criminal record. Briski also faced resistance from the parents. Although they may want a better life for their children, some parents wouldn’t allow their children to leave the red light district.

Although Briski is not a social worker, what she does for these children is an excellent example of social work practice. After taking the time to gain trust and establish a strong relationship with the children, she is persistent, organized, and passionate. She pays attention to detail, respects the families even though they challenge her goals, and inspires hope in the children. Not only does her documentary become part of her advocacy for the children, but her work continues through a foundation she has established—Kids With Cameras. Visit www.kids-with-cameras.org</a> to learn how this story of hope continues.

— Robert DeLauro, MSW, ACSW, is an organization development consultant at Saint Vincent Catholic Medical Centers in New York City. He is also president of the New Jersey chapter of the Martin Scorsese Fan Club.

A Film by Joe Fab and Elliot Berlin

How does one comprehend an event that defies comprehension? Elie Wiesel, renowned author and Nobel Peace Prize winner wrote of the Holocaust: “I who was there do not understand.” But he also spent most of his life affirming that it is the moral responsibility of all people to fight hatred, racism and genocide.

In the tiny town of Whitwell, Tennessee, middle school students collected paper clips as part of a curriculum focused on the Holocaust. They chose this project because they discovered that that the paper clip was invented in Norway, and during WWII the Norwegians expressed their opposition to the Nazis by wearing paper clips in their lapels. Struggling to comprehend the magnitude of six million – the number of Jews exterminated by the Nazis – the students decided to collect six million paper clips to help them understand the extent of crime and to commemorate the lives of the Jewish victims.

In their excellent documentary, Paper Clips, Joe Fab and Elliot Berlin follow the progress of this middle school project. It is fascinating to watch the project build momentum and provide unique learning opportunities. The Whitwell students are contacted by people from all over the world who have heard about the project and donate paper clips to remember their loved ones. National and International news media are drawn to the school. Celebrities and politicians send their congratulations and best wishes. Holocaust survivors visit the town and in some of the more stirring scenes, talk about their experiences. Eventually a Holocaust memorial is established by the Whitwell community that includes a German railway car once used for transporting people to the death camps.

The initial energy and direction for this educational undertaking came from two teachers and the middle school’s strong-willed principal. They wanted to teach not only about European Fascism, but the more expansive and immediate issues of diversity, prejudice and tolerance. Throughout the documentary, these educators discuss and demonstrate some of the qualities required for a successful learning project. They recognize they have an exceptional educational idea with tremendous potential. Their passion for the paper clips project is unmistakable. They work hard to involve not only as many students as possible, but adults in the community as well. And they take risks to expand the scope of the learning.

The opportunity for education is one of the exciting aspects of our current golden age of documentaries. More filmmakers are capturing and presenting interesting subjects within the documentary format. Their films are successful at both educating and entertaining. It is a wonderful paradox of documentary films that they can explain complex ideas, portray deep emotions, and provide temporary relief from both. In addition, these films are reaching a wider audience by way of DVDs, public broadcasting stations and premium cable channels like HBO. On occasion a documentary will even become a hit and play for months in mainstream theaters, like Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 911.

Given the current explosion of documentary films, social workers should seriously consider the opportunities created by this medium. We know that entertainment and media in the right hands, can be a force for social good. Images on the screen have the ability to influence values, behavior, and human relations. Although not a documentary, consider that more people saw Schindler’s List on NBC television in one night than had ever seen the film before. This means that television allowed information about the Holocaust to reach people who had never heard of it or who possibly didn’t believe that it happened. This is an example of a movie having the clear opportunity to strengthen our moral environment. When viewing television how often has your moral sensibility been trampled by political spin and pompous talking heads? The social work profession should be more involved in creating, showing and promoting films that influence people in a positive way.

There was another consideration that Paper Clips raised for me. If the intention of the middle school was to teach students about the dangers and consequences of prejudice, why did they focus only on Nazi Germany? More obvious and closer to home teaching examples would have been the history of black slavery in the United States, the post civil war experience of the Jim Crow laws, or Martin Luther King and the civil rights movement. After all, the documentary makes the point that Whitwell, Tennessee is located very close to the birthplace of the Ku Klux Klan. For all the talk about the life changing lessons that the paper clips project generated, there is only one example of a teacher who draws a connection between the racism he grew up with, and the prejudice at the core of Nazism. The point of Paper Clips – both the school project and the documentary film – is that there are steps we can take toward overcoming bigotry. My disappointment with both the film and the project is that they don’t explore the roots and reasons behind bigoted thinking.

—Robert DeLauro, MSW, ACSW, is an organization development consultant at Saint Vincent Catholic Medical Centers in New York City. He is also president of the New Jersey chapter of the Martin Scorsese Fan Club.

Film by March Achbar, Jennifer Abbott, & Joel Bakan
Reviewed by Robert DeLauro, MSW, ACSW

The Corporation, an excellent documentary available on DVD, considers the complex nature and dramatic rise of the corporation—the prevailing institution of our time. The film has won numerous awards including the “Audience Award for Documentary in World Cinema” at the 2004 Sundance Film Festival.

Based on the book The Corporation: The Pathological Pursuit of Profit and Power, by Joel Bakan, this film explores the character of corporate institutions and illuminates their influence on all of us. Using a bit of black humor, the film reviews corporate attitudes and behaviors, concluding that corporations fit the criteria for a diagnosis of psychopath. The added irony of taking this clinical view of corporations as disordered personalities is that, under the law, a corporation is not an object but a person. In the 19th century, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled, in a decision based on the 14th amendment to the Constitution, that corporations have the rights of individuals in our society.

The film’s directors, Jennifer Abbott and Mark Achbar, use footage from pop culture, TV news, advertising, and corporate communications to highlight the many ways corporations grip our lives. They do not shy from corporate malevolence and crimes that have occurred over the last 200 years—unfair labor practices, pollution, abusing and misusing natural resources, genetic manipulation, and the explosion of various cancers and birth defects. Snappy graphics and lively editing buffer the emotional shock of these topics and ensure that the tone of the film is not depressing or angry.

The Corporation includes numerous interviews with critics and corporate insiders, including Naomi Klein, Noam Chomsky, Michael Moore, and Milton Friedman. These celebrity commentators provide more than information; they articulate impassioned, thought provoking arguments—usually in an entertaining manner. At times, a surprising perspective is heard. For example, Roy Anderson, the CEO of Interface—the largest rug manufacturer in the world—is also an enthusiastic and committed environmentalist. His comments, interspersed throughout the film, directly attack the values and behaviors of most corporations. He admonishes his fellow executives for plundering the globe. In contrast, he has established ambitious, environmentally sound, production goals for his company.

Although The Corporation is a little longer than it should be and its politics may turn some people off, the film should be mandatory viewing for social workers in both practice and in training. The film challenges our practice approach, which is unique among the various helping professions. We are committed to the social functioning of people, but this means more than addressing the strengths, weaknesses, and unique spirit of each individual. The scope of social work also includes an individual’s environment—the complex web of social, familial, and organizational relationships persistently impacting peoples’ functioning. As practitioners, we must ask ourselves: What are we doing to address the corporate power and influence that contribute to the problems our clients face on a daily basis?

The answer to this macro-practice question may not be too difficult to answer if we consider that, in the past 25 years, social workers have established a significant presence in corporate America through our work with Employee Assistance Programs (EAPs), Work-Family Balance Programs, Human Resources, Organization Development, Wellness Programs, and Managed Care Companies. Many corporations recognize the value social workers bring to the workplace through their clinical expertise, communication skills, and systems-thinking approach. There may be some “pangs” of conscience amongst occupational social workers about irresponsible or inhumane corporate behavior, but social work has continued to make significant inroads into the corporate workplace as a practice setting.

It is unfair to criticize social workers if they have not mounted macro-interventions against corporations. The case finding that results from EAP and wellness activities is extremely effective. People who would not otherwise have an opportunity to get help for alcohol addiction, a dysfunctional relationship, an abusive spouse, child-rearing issues, depression, and a range of other personal and social problems, are able to get help because of social work’s presence in their workplace—and it is often a corporate workplace.

In addition, supervisors, managers, and corporate leadership are now exposed to social work values and practices through workplace training and consultation. As an organizational entity, the corporation may be character disordered, but this doesn’t mean a supervisor can’t improve his communication with the workers who report to him; or a manager can’t gain insight into the ways he is enabling a chemically dependent employee; or an executive can’t change her notion that a corporation's social responsibility is satisfied by maximizing profits for its shareholders.

—Robert DeLauro, MSW, ACSW, is an organization development consultant at Saint Vincent Catholic Medical Centers in New York City. He is also president of the New Jersey chapter of the Martin Scorsese Fan Club.

Reviewed by Robert DeLauro, MSW, ACSW

Watching Three of Hearts: A Postmodern Family reminded me of a song I hadn’t thought about in a very long time—“Triad” by Jefferson Airplane— written by David Crosby, who performed with the Byrds and Crosby, Stills, and Nash. Listening to it now, I hear Grace Slick, adorned by the promise of the sixties, singing to the two men who love her, and whom she loves:

I don’t really see. Why can’t we go on as three?

The documentary Three of Hearts asks the same question. And offers some useful observations—to quote another David Crosby song:

The door shuts before you get to the dreams you see.

Sam Cagnina, in his early twenties and the oldest son of a Mafia hit man, meets and falls in love with Steven Margolin, a handsome 19-year old college student. We learn about the early period of their relationship through interviews with both, since the film documentation of their lives does not begin until much later. They discuss their early years together as pleasurable and filled with love. Sam—energetic, charismatic, and affecting—expresses an interest in bringing a woman into the relationship. Steven is easy going and agrees to the idea. They spend the next seven years dating and looking for a woman with whom they can both fall in love and who will agree to live in a “trio” relationship.

There are a couple of missteps before they meet Samantha Singh. Even in a city the size of New York, finding a love to fit specific conditions is no easy task. Eventually Sam meets Samantha and they fall in love. Samantha meets Steven and they fall in love, too. During this happiest portion of the film, we follow the trio as they explore their relationship. It is undoubtedly a lot of work, but it is also filled with excitement, promise, and satisfaction. Observing how they manage their communications with their families of origin is particularly interesting. Their efforts to be open about their sexuality, along with the non-traditional shape of their relationship, lead to eventual acceptance (but bafflement) by parents and other family members.

In addition to the relationships these three people have as intimate partners, they also have a business together. They own a successful wellness center in New York City. Sam and Steven are wellness practitioners and Samantha manages the office. Their business seems an extension of the vigor and positive outlook they have with each other.

To a large extent, the stresses and strains that eventually split up the trio of Sam, Steven, and Samantha are like those that most traditional couples face. Samantha becomes pregnant and gives birth to a baby girl. The identity of the baby’s father is uncertain and all three talk as if it doesn’t matter if it is Sam or Steven. Though, as with many of the proclamations that are made throughout this film, what appears to be candor is mistaken for truth.

The work and responsibilities that come with caring for a child are a challenge for all new parents and it seriously impacts the relationship balance for Sam, Steven, and Samantha. Personality traits that were tolerable or endearing prior to the birth become unbearable under the new circumstances. It appears that Samantha and Steven take most of the parental responsibilities because Sam is not mature enough to do so. The child is one more source of fun and excitement for him.

The trio decides to have another child. As the paternity of their first child is determined (by blood tests) to be Steven, Sam becomes the father of the second child. However, two days before the birth of their second child, Steven leaves the relationship.

The director, Susan Kaplan, was already in post-production when she received word that Steven had left the relationship. She decided to film the continuation of the trio’s story. The aftermath of any broken relationship is often ugly and difficult, and what we get to see through this film is no exception. Pettiness is prevalent. Communication breaks down. Hate fills the vacuum left by love. But with time, childcare arrangements are made and business matters are eventually worked out. Sam and Samantha stay together and make plans for their future and their children’s future.

Three of Hearts is an example of the many exceptional, full-length documentaries that are becoming more easily available to the public (e.g. The Fog of War, Spellbound, Super Size Me). Their theatre releases are short, but they can usually be found on DVD. These documentaries provide authentic film entertainment but they also contemplate thought-provoking social concerns. They are worth the search.

(Theatrical release date for Three of Hearts is October 19th)

—Robert DeLauro, MSW, ACSW, is an organization development consultant at Saint Vincent Catholic Medical Centers in New York City. He is also president of the New Jersey chapter of the Martin Scorsese Fan Club.

By Robert DeLauro, MSW, ACSW

Director: Jennifer Dworkin
Women Make Movies, Inc.
New York, NY
http://www.wmm.com

Although the length of Jennifer Dworkin's excellent documentary, Love and Diane is daunting, viewing it is well worth the time spent. It combines real life drama and social documentation to provide the viewer with a fascinating narrative and a rich assortment of educational opportunities.

Love and Diane looks at three generations of a family in Brooklyn, New York. Diane is a recovering crack addict who had her children taken away because of her neglect. We are introduced to her as she is reunited with her children, who have spent the last ten years in foster homes and institutions. Her eighteen-year-old daughter, Love, has just given birth to a son, Donyaeh. Love is HIV positive and Donyaeh has been born HIV positive but that status can be reversed with proper treatment.

Diane works hard to help and take care of her grandson. At the same time, as the initial elation due to Donyaeh's birth subsides, Love seems to disengage from her son and become more agitated and angry. We learn that she has a history of clinical depression. Donyaeh is taken from Love when the Department of Protective Services is notified of her increasingly neglectful and erratic behavior. Love must now deal with the same ordeal her mother, Diane faced: trying to prove to the authorities that she is a fit mother and that her child should be returned to her custody.

Love is only a teenager as she attempts to regain custody of Donyaeh. But she is also a bright, young woman with talent as a writer. She has enthusiastic support from her family, particularly Diane, and she receives care and direction from a very dedicated and unruffled legal aid attorney.

The documentary follows the long and erratic road that Love travels in her custody bid. At the same time, Diane is documented dealing with her own guilt about her past neglect. She attempts to atone for her past behavior and improve her present and future life. When considering all the obstacles that these women are facing - drug addiction, health problems, poverty, unemployment, poor housing, educational deficits, psychiatric illness, and a bitter family history - it is inspiring to watch how they cope, persevere, and even progress.

Love and Diane has tremendous potential as a social work educational resource. It attacks stereotypes and explores the complexity of the main characters. It shows empathy without shying away from their failings. By providing such an inside, intimate look at this family, the film reveals the interchange between the people and their environment in enlightening and instructive ways.

In this documentary we are observing private ills and public troubles. For educational and practice purposes, the traditional social work perspective of viewing the person-in-environment is an essential and beneficial vision. Powerful interventions, such as psychotropic medications and psychotherapy never take place in a vacuum. This film shows how the context of a person's health, family relationships, and social milieu are enormously influential on treatment compliance. At the same time, we see how the availability of a germane, community-based vocational program for Diane has far-reaching consequences for her self-esteem, future outlook, and family.

- Robert DeLauro MSW, ACSW is an organization development consultant at Saint Vincent Catholic Medical Centers in New York City. He is also president of the New Jersey chapter of the Martin Scorsese Fan Club.