Hartman stresses the visual power of the tool: "The connections, the themes, and the quality of the family`s life seem to jump off the page and this leads to a more holistic and integrative perception." They can be used by the social worker only, or as an aid in an interview with clients. Both can be used for assessment, planning and intervention. Her first contribution to social work was the introduction of the ecomap (often also called an ecogram) and the genogram as simple drawing techniques that enable social workers to depict social and family relationships. Both were already embedded in her first influential publication, an article that appeared in 1978 in Social Casework (later renamed Families in society) entitled Diagrammatic assessment of family relationships. Hartman made two related contributions to social work that still influence today’s practice. In 1986, she moved on to the School of Social Work at the Smith College in Massachusetts. She again became involved with family social work through the Ann Arbor Center for the Family and the National Child Welfare Training Center. From 1974 onwards, once she completed her PhD, she started working as a social work researcher and educator at the University of Michigan faculty in 1974. After receiving her master degree of social work, she moved on to work in mental health and family services in the New York area. Hartman started her career in 1959 as a caseworker for the Summit County Child Welfare Board in Akron, Ohio.
It is conceivable that these extensions may also have utility in a wide range of study including for example organisational, industrial and social psychology.It is probably safe to claim that not many social workers across the world know the name of Ann Hartman and the way she contributed to social work practice, although most know her contributions. As well, we propose an extended set of symbols, relational markers and conventions. This book describes the need for this from the point of view of a clinical practitioner working extensively in service systems that provide clinical and other supports to people with Intellectual disability. An extended set of symbols, relational markers and conventions may assist in recording and presenting structures associated with more formal support service systems. Despite the growing use of genograms the set of diagrammatic symbols and conventions (McGoldrick., et al) has not necessarily kept in step with this systemic thinking and therapies. Genograms and sociograms have been used effectively to support and facilitate such approaches as in the case of systemic consultation (Rhodes et al. More recently there has been an increase in the recognition and use of systemic therapies and methods to augment more traditional behaviour assessment, clinical formulation and case consultation. Even amongst practitioners with similar theoretical orientations there was only a lose consensus about what specific information to seek, how to record it, and what it all meant. Prelude Despite the widespread use of genograms by family therapists, psychologists and other practitioners, i a n n il he 1980 hen a more generall agreed-upon practice and diagraming convention came to be accepted.
Disclaimer: The material and views expressed in this publication are solely those of the author in his private capacity and do not represent the views of his employer and the disability sector.