This report documents systemic antisemitism across social work professional organizations, education and clinical spaces in the United States. The following is a report and testimonies outlining what Jewish social workers have been experiencing and are bearing witness to in our field since October 7. Social justice is foundational to social work, and a primary reason so many of us chose this profession. However, the current application within social work schools and professional spaces often leads to the harmful stereotyping of Jewish and Israeli individuals, categorizing them as ‘oppressors’ within a rigid binary. This approach or lens overlooks the complexities of identity and fails to recognize the unique challenges faced by Jewish communities, students, and colleagues. As a result, Jewish social workers are facing discrimination and urgent attention from our governing social work bodies is required.
Part I: Impact on Jewish Social Workers
Since October 7, Jewish social workers have experienced unprecedented silencing, gaslighting, exclusion, isolation, and public targeting in professional spaces. Even long before this writing, there existed a chronic avoidance of examining the Jewish lived experience, identity, intergenerational trauma and positionality.
For the past 23 months, Jewish social workers have been ignored, blamed, pathologized and gaslit. Dehumanizing language has overtaken our field, in which Jews and Israelis are categorized as, ‘oppressors’ within the anti-oppressive decolonial framework which puts forth a rigid binary of oppressor/oppressed. These fixed labels have overridden a healthy curiosity about the rich complexities that we all bring to any relationship as individuals, practitioners and students.
Antizionism and its Repercussions
Antizionism is also an extremely popular movement within the field of social work. This, despite the simple fact that Zionism is a movement for self-determination and statehood for the Jewish people in their ancestral homeland, the land of Israel. The vast majority of Jews around the world feel a connection or kinship with Israel, whether or not they explicitly identify as Zionists, and regardless of their opinions on the policies of the Israeli government. To clarify, antizionism is not the same as legitimate criticism of Israeli government policies. In fact, many Zionists, including thousands who have marched weekly in Tel Aviv, even before October 7th, actively protest the government, call for an end to the war, and demand the release of hostages. Antizionism is a fixation on Israel, on Jewish people, holding it and us to unique standards not applied to any other country. These double standards fuel the marginalization and dehumanization of Jews and Israelis.
Nevertheless, being a Zionist is now viewed as a slur similar to the old Soviet Union, where ‘Zionist’ was often used as a euphemism for ‘Jew’ in antisemitic propaganda. Natan Sharansky, put forth a framework to apply in discerning legitimate criticism of Israel and when that crosses a line into antisemitism. Known as the three ‘Ds,’ they are an important lens to use when determining antisemitic behavior:
Delegitimization – Denying Israel’s right to exist.
Demonization– Using antisemitic stereotypes/myths to portray Israel or Jews as evil.
Double Standards– Holding Israel to standards not applied to any other state.
The IHRA Working Definition of Antisemitism
The IHRA working definition of antisemitism can be viewed as a continuation of the ‘3 Ds’ framework. Adopted in 2016 and endorsed by over 40 countries and numerous institutions, it provides the most widely accepted international standard for identifying antisemitism, including when it relates to Israel. The following is a detailed description of the working definition of antisemitism:
“Manifestations might include the targeting of the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity. However, criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic. Antisemitism frequently charges Jewish people with conspiring to harm humanity, and it is often used to blame Jews for “why things go wrong.” It is expressed in speech, writing, visual forms and action, and employs sinister stereotypes and negative character traits.
Contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace, and in the religious sphere could, taking into account the overall context, include, but are not limited to:
Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of radical ideology or an extremist view of religion.
Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective — such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.
Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, or even for acts committed by non-Jews.
Denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (e.g. gas chambers) or intentionality of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its supporters and accomplices during World War II (the Holocaust).
Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.
Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.
Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.
Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.
Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis.
Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.
Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.
Antisemitic acts are criminal when they are so defined by law.
Criminal acts are antisemitic when the targets of attacks, whether they are people or property – such as buildings, schools, places of worship and cemeteries – are selected because they are, or are perceived to be, Jewish or linked to Jews.
Antisemitic discrimination is the denial to Jews of opportunities or services available to others and is illegal in many countries.
Current Tolerance of Antisemitism in Social Work
Despite the adoption of IHRA, antisemitism is increasingly tolerated, and even valorized in current progressive and leftist social work circles. Many of us were members of these communities until October 7. Nowadays, we and anyone showing compassion for Jewish people or Israelis can be accused of supporting far right or right wing ideology.
The horseshoe analogy is also relevant whereby antisemitism lives within the United States political right and left. As former Ambassador Deborah Lipstadt stated, “If you think about a horseshoe, the two ends meet together…very few prejudices come from different ends of the political spectrum, virtually none. They’re either one side or the other, but they’re not coming from both. And here, they come from both, they share the same template, because the antisemitic template is so old and so malleable, and they share that extremism.”
Another common tactic used against Jewish social workers is Holocaust Inversion 1 which is a form of antisemitism in which the Holocaust is distorted by portraying Jews or the state of Israel as perpetrators akin to the Nazis, rather than as victims of genocide.
Experiences of Jewish Social Workers
Jewish social workers have been:
Discriminated against, singled out as ‘privileged oppressors,’ and alienated in graduate school programs and clinical spaces.
Excluded as a marginalized group in anti-oppression anti-racist DEI frameworks.
Frequently denied publication in professional or academic journals or asked to tone down or ‘sanitize’ our writing so as not to ‘offend’ others.
Denied speaking engagements at trainings and professional events. See a note on NASW and testimony below in this report.
Called white supremacists when identifying as Jewish.
Shunned for naming antisemitism in clinical spaces.
Accused of causing harm simply by grieving the largest mass murder of Jews since the Holocaust.
Jewish social workers are also subject to harassment and public condemnation for expressing views that would be welcomed from members of any other minority group. There are almost no clinical spaces to talk about this, no professional acknowledgment and no institutional accountability. Jews who speak out are either ignored, dismissed, or targeted. This results in a culture of fear, isolation, and retraumatization, with devastating clinical implications and serious ethical violations. Many Jewish social workers we spoke with say they would not recommend the profession. They also relayed that they are always mindful of protecting their identity because of safety concerns and fear of retaliation.
There is a clear division between ‘the good Jew’ and ‘the bad Jew,’ in larger society and in social work whereby the only Jewish professionals platformed in the field are the small number who identify as antizionist who are then emboldened to insult Jewish or Israeli social workers for whom there is a lived connection to Israel.
Creation of Jewish Social Work Affinity Groups
In response to collegial alienation and unsafe professional spaces, we have created our own havens such as The Jewish Social Work Consortium and more. These affinity groups are free of hate but is this how we want our profession to function? Do we need our own groups to be safe? What does that say about the profession of social work at large?
Additionally, the Jewish people are not a monolith; we can be Mizrahi, Sephardi, Ashkenazi, Ethiopian, queer, trans, working class, multiracial, and multiethnic Jews. We are children of Holocaust survivors and grandchildren of survivors of pogroms.
Some of us are parents of young children, navigating how to keep our families safe. We are parents of college students who need our support as they navigate hate at their institutions.
Just seeking healthcare can be stressful as one might be thinking, does this medical professional harbor hate for Jewish patients? Seeking therapy is filled with similar anxieties.
Jewish people have been targeted and killed while attending an event in Washington, DC or marching peacefully for the return of our hostages in Boulder, CO. It is a frightening time here in the diaspora; these are issues we contend with daily as do our Jewish clients. After all, how can one know if the social worker you are meeting will be neutral or welcoming?
So many of us grew up listening to stories about dehumanizing language and exclusion from our parents/grandparents. We never thought it would happen again.
Part II: The Failure of our Institutions
Nearly every major clinical institution and progressive social work school has failed to acknowledge the trauma, grief and vulnerability experienced by Jewish and Israeli American colleagues and clients post October 7. We are often seen or portrayed as, ‘privileged’ and ‘colonizing oppressors.’
While we have seen other groups enveloped by community, listening sessions, resources, and public declarations of support, Jews have been met with silence. Jewish and Israeli American clinicians who have spoken out about antisemitism are ignored, gaslit, or told that supporting Jews is, ‘too controversial and must be contextualized.’ Jewish social work students were told they could not grieve publicly or mourn in community. Those who did were told they were racist, colonizing, or engaging in white supremacy.2‘
Social work faculties and leadership exhibit a deafening silence regarding antisemitism, highlighting the profession’s failure to address rising anti‑Jewish tropes and beliefs.
Curriculum and DEI Omissions
Antizionist and decolonizing methodology materials are assigned in required curricula and dehumanizing rhetoric has become normalized. At Columbia and other institutions, Decolonizing therapy frameworks are even required coursework. Jewish clinicians who raise concerns are accused of censorship or Jewish supremacy.
A petition was sent to the Council on Social Work Education and the Canadian Association of Social Work Education requesting review and modification of the worldview that currently girds social work practice, necessary in order to better train and service individuals from all ethnicities. The petition states that social work’s embrace of decolonization and ‘oppressor vs. oppressed’ frameworks is dangerous and that DEI curricula excludes antisemitism as a form of oppression thereby contributing to division and the actual disempowerment of communities which jeopardizes the moral credibility of the profession.
Since October 7, Jewish social workers have received hate mail, threats, and accusations simply for expressing grief. We have been called Nazis, colonizers, racists and baby-killers for referring to October 7. This onslaught of hate began on October 8th and, as stated above is oftentimes seen under the guise of antizionism. When we speak about Jewish identity, we are told we are ‘centering ourselves’ and engaging in Jewish supremacy. When we name antisemitism, we are accused of weaponizing trauma. When we ask for support, we are met with silence or rage.
The response from our field has not been trauma-informed. It has been traumatizing and lacking in cultural humility, a basic social work core ethic and a call to reflect on one’s own biases. .
Person in the Environment Framework and Jewish Inclusion
The Person-in-the-Environment(PIE) perspective is a foundational social work framework that, “emphasizes the importance of understanding an individual’s life experiences alongside their current context to provide more effective support among other factors.” We believe that to deny Jewish social workers inclusion in anti-oppressive frameworks is to contradict the core of person-in-environment thinking. It signals that some environments and some traumas are less worthy of acknowledgment.
True anti-oppressive practice, grounded in PIE and other vital social work values, must adapt (another core professional competency) to include Jewish experiences acknowledging both historical oppression and the ways antisemitism has shape shifted in these modern times.
Misinformation and geopolitical commentary about Israelis frame Israel in its entirety is as a ‘settler colonialist’ project and circulates widely among social workers while no resources on the diverse Jewish experience are offered.
While extremist elements exist in Israel, just like in any other nation, the sweeping generalizations about all Israelis erase pluralism, nuance, and context while revealing a troubling obsession. When Jewish social workers express dismay, they are dismissed as ‘colonizers’ themselves or told they must be having a “trauma response.” Meanwhile, Jewish clinicians are being doxxed, threatened, and hounded out of professional networks for expressing normative political views, or simply for being Jewish and having a connection to Israel as the majority of us do.
A Note on the National Association of Social Workers (NASW)
Silence and Negligence
The silence and negligence of NASW has been especially egregious. It wasn’t until December 2023 that NASW released a long-overdue statement condemning both antisemitism and Islamophobia in the wake of October 7. While we support NASW’s statements addressing other marginalized groups, this statement failed to give singular recognition to Jewish people and Israelis who were directly affected by the horrors of that day. Instead, it lumped Jewish individuals together with Islamophia and Muslims, obscuring the specific nature of the violence directed at Jews and Israelis in its immediate aftermath. The statement referenced, ‘people who are Jewish, Israeli, Muslim or Palestinian’ and cited statistics about antisemitic incidents, but it didn’t explicitly acknowledge that Jewish and Israeli people were the direct targets of October 7, nor that the global surge in hate was overwhelmingly directed at Jewish individuals and institutions. If an organization can name other communities with clarity and care, but defaults to vague generalities when it comes to Jewish people, the message is clear: our pain is politically inconvenient. Our grief can only be acknowledged if it’s paired with someone else’s. A simple statement of compassion, directed toward Jewish people in this moment, would have gone a long way. Offering such recognition would not have diminished or minimized the suffering Palestinians have endured.
By presenting antisemitism only in tandem with Islamophobia, NASW follows a familiar institutional pattern seeking to appear neutral while avoiding clear acknowledgment of the unique Jewish experience. This kind of ‘both-sides’ framing again functions as a form of erasure when it diminishes the singular nature of antisemitism reinforcing the idea that antisemitism is too politically fraught to address on its own terms. While NASW has rightly published anti-racism statements they have never agreed to or issued a stand-alone statement regarding antisemitism.
Jewish Heritage Month Incident
On May 9, 2025, NASW posted a benign acknowledgment of Jewish Heritage month. Within minutes, the post was overrun with antisemitic and hate-filled antizionist comments, some minimizing the Holocaust, others accusing Jewish clinicians of oppression, genocide, baby killing, and settler colonialism. NASW did nothing to moderate or respond. No follow-up statement was issued. No protection or sense of community was offered. Multiple emails asking for support were met with silence. In contrast, on a separate post on NASW’s Facebook page, a member of another marginalized group was responded to within minutes after expressing a need for institutional support.
Just imagine the social work community response if some of the statements made about Jewish people were instead made about a celebration of Black History or Pride Month. To be sure, they would rightly be condemned. In the current climate, though, Jewish people and Israelis who are harmed are not warranted any consideration at all.
National Conference 2024
In June 2024, NASW held its national conference. Despite this being one of the most traumatic years for Jews in recent history and despite multiple Jewish clinicians submitting proposals there was no programming on Jewish trauma, antisemitism, or identity. Not a single session.
A petition was sent to NASW leadership in advance of the conference about their choice of speaker, Maryum Ali, whose public social media posts, “exhibited one sided reports, partisan, and biased messaging, giving voice to age-old antisemitic tropes while also accusing Jews of shutting down free speech with supposedly false accusations of antisemitism.” The petition received no response. See specific examples and testimony section for more information about this event.
This experience exposes a troubling pattern: rather than confronting antisemitism head-on, NASW repeatedly deflects and downplays these serious concerns, effectively silencing those who call for accountability and leaving members vulnerable to harm within their own professional community.
Meanwhile, NASW has consistently centered the trauma of other minority groups when relevant. This striking omission sends a clear message: The Jewish lived experience doesn’t count.
This is not the first time NASW has failed its Jewish members. Over the years, it has platformed speakers who have shared antisemitic content and ignored proposals from Jewish clinicians for programming on antisemitism. While issuing swift, specific statements in support of other communities in times of crisis, NASW has continually failed to do so for Jewish social workers even when asked directly. This pattern cannot be explained by oversight; it is antisemitism.
Recently, another petition signed by almost 4,000 people was sent to NASW and their North American partner, the Canadian Association of Social Workers (CASW) to protest their silence following the IFSW’s ‘censure’ of the Israeli Union of Social Workers for allegedly, ‘not working to promote peace.’
We received conflicting information from NASW and CASW about whether or not they would be talking with IFSW. At the time of this writing, it has been has been several months with no formal response from NASW despite four follow-up emails.
PART III: Specific Examples and Testimonials
1. NASW platforms antisemitic speakers
NASW invited a speaker to their 2024 conference with a well-documented history of antisemitic comments and posts, oftentimes under the guise of antizionism.
A social worker shared a painful experience whereby she made multiple attempts over several months to raise concerns about this and other speakers who were platformed at the conference and at a separate event celebrating Juneteenth. This social worker’s concerns were mostly ignored and when addressed, met with dismissive and deflective responses from NASW leadership.
A poignant letter to the NASW CEO and President extending an olive branch and requesting a discussion with her and other Jewish colleagues was met with silence by NASW CEO. NASWs President responded to this member with the following email:.
“My apologies for being a day later than I promised to respond to you. I read over your email several times, and I can understand the pain and discomfort you must have felt in some sessions when anti-Semitic comments were made. Unfortunately, there are individuals in every organization who will make inappropriate comments in large gatherings, and it is impossible for either [NASW CEO] or me to make assurances about what might be said in a public meeting. NASW strives to be a vehicle for positive change and a place for differences to be shared in a way that is respectful and promotes understanding and collaboration. I hope you will remember the positive experiences you had at the conference and continue to advocate for communication and collaboration among nations presently involved in conflict.”
This response minimized the severity of the issue by equating a platformed speaker’s antisemitic statements with general “inappropriate comments” that might occur in any large event. It also failed to acknowledge the specific harm caused or take any responsibility, instead urging the social worker to ‘remember the positive experiences’ and continue advocating for ‘communication and collaboration’ amid ongoing conflicts or to create her own spaces.
Antisemitic Rhetoric by Educators and Social Workers
A study, Antisemitism in Social Work Findings from an Exploratory National Survey by Professors’ Carole Cox and Dana Marlowe reported on a national survey of social workers that details their experiences in school, practice and in the community. Recommendations included the integration of antisemitism into the social work curricula which is presently absent. As well as in ADEI programs.
Drs. Cox and Marlowe received 510 survey responses, offering a shocking yet familiar overview of the antisemitic encounters faced by practitioners and students alike. Among these, two examples display the entrenched antisemitism experienced in both academic and clinical settings.
Graduate Program Example
“I was referred to as a ‘loud bossy Jewish woman’ by a professor; was frequently told by classmates that I was racist simply because I identified as Jewish.”
Social Work Practice Example
“There was antisemitism at my agency where there were tremendous microaggressions, an employee made a Heil Hitler salute and people laughed, knowing I was Jewish…frequently heard, ‘Jew him down.’
Catholic University’s National Catholic School of Social Service
A Jewish MSW student raised serious concerns about an adjunct professor in a required Diversity course. Her experience mirrors others who encountered:
A panel on ‘whiteness’ that singled out Jewish students and accused them of being inherently racist and white supremacist.
A class trip to the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum that erased Jewish history. The Holocaust was not mentioned; instead, the visit focused on LGBTQ+ issues and generalized oppression. LGBTQ+ persecution and the murder of other marginalized groups who have historically been left out was rightly covered. However, to hear this professor tell it, it was as if 6 million Jews had not been systemically murdered.
Soon after October 7, the same professor began posting inflammatory and historically inaccurate content, including comparing Jews and Israelis to Nazis—engaging in Holocaust inversion.
Despite her track record, the professor continues to teach CEU (Continuing Education Unit) courses and serves as a public-facing educator.
“This professor took us to the Holocaust Museum and made no mention of the six million Jews murdered. It was like the Shoah had been wiped from the narrative.”
“After disclosing a personal trauma, I was publicly shamed in class as a symbol of ‘white Jewish privilege.’ I left class in tears more than once. I received my only low grade of graduate school in that course.”
Jewish Social Worker Silenced/Alienated at The New Washington School of Psychiatry (NWSP)
A Jewish social worker reported the growing hostility and one-sided political rhetoric on the NWSP listserv, leading to their eventual withdrawal from the organization:
Conflation of Jews, Israelis, and Zionists with white supremacy.
Justification or minimization of the October 7 attacks.
Erasure of the diversity and nuance within the Jewish community.
Failure to distinguish Hamas from Palestinians or Muslims.
Dismissive responses when clinicians raised concerns.
“The listserv no longer felt intellectually honest. I disengaged because it was no longer safe or respectful.”
Therapist Reading Group Incident
“A fellow group member refused to read a book by an Israeli author. I froze. No one said anything. Eventually, I left the group but felt too uncomfortable to say why.”
Erasure of Jewish Identity in DEI and Anti-Oppression Work
Jewish clinicians consistently report being excluded from anti-oppression frameworks. Common refrains include:
“Jewish people aren’t oppressed like Black or brown people.”
“Being Jewish means aligning with Israeli government policies.”
“Jewish people are white and therefore privileged oppressors.”
This reductionist framework erases Jewish ethnic and religious diversity, denies Jewish historical trauma, and excludes Jewish voices from DEI conversations.
“At a workshop on the alleged positioning of Jews and Asians as ‘model minorities,’ there was no Jewish speaker. I watched a non-Jewish presenter portray Jews as ‘white Jews’ and as the primary upholders of white supremacy and global oppression;’ my social work peers tacitly agreed.”
“Formerly close colleagues responded to my grief after October 7 by saying they only speak out for ‘the oppressed,’ implying Jews don’t qualify.”
Online Harassment and Hostile Listservs
DCTherapistConnect listerv
A Jewish social worker and founder of DCTherapistConnect (4,000+ members) described a sharp turn after October 7:
Posts flooded the forum about genocide and ‘decolonizing therapy,’ an antizionist approach. This modality has no clinical data showing that it leads to improved mental health outcomes.
Antizionist rhetoric made the space feel unsafe.
After instituting a no-politics rule that allowed for any resources and support groups for any and all identities, not excluding Palestinians in need, she was accused of racism.
“Clinicians told me supporting Israel equaled genocide. I was harassed for trying to make the space safe for everyone.”
Sample messages she received:
“I cannot continue to be part of a community that is overseen by someone with views and practices inconsistent with my principles of social justice and responsibility. As a seasoned BIPOC psychologist, I find it challenging to align with a platform led by someone whose mindset appears to be narrow-minded and judgmental. Having grown up in a dictatorship, I am particularly sensitive to the impact such leadership can have on fostering an inclusive and tolerant community.”
“Greetings, I wanted to express my frustration, anger and dismay on how the group of professional mental health workers continues to post hate. I have noticed a trend whenever someone posts a resource for SWANA and/or Palestinians immediately afterwards someone posts a pro Israel message where they dismiss the needs of a certain population or group to center the needs of themselves all while openly supporting the Genocide and ethnic cleansing of innocent Palestinians. To post a message regarding a March on Washington DC to support the genocide and apartheid occurring in Palestine is inappropriate at best and hateful at least. It’s disturbing that the listserv has continually allowed open solidarity with Israel genocides against innocent Palestinians. AntiZionism is NOT Antisemitism. In solidarity and for liberation.”
Again, the rules in place prohibited discussion about politics and antizionism. Any and all supportive resources for SWANA and/or Palestinian clients or any other group are soundly welcomed.
MyNASW listserv
The internal NASW listserv quickly became a space where Jewish social workers who are Zionists (again about 90 percent of the Jewish population) were met not with support, but with invalidation and blame. Rather than acknowledging the trauma of October 7th, some members engaged in comparative suffering or shifted the focus to other political narratives. Several comments directly blamed Jewish people and Israelis for the attacks. One member stated, “All this anti Semitism and anti-Israel talk is getting Palestinians killed around the world, but we can’t talk about that.”
In one especially troubling case, a member engaged in ongoing harassment of Jewish students and colleagues on the NASW platform. “I personally had an exchange with this individual, attempting to explain how their statements were antisemitic and harmful as they ignored Jewish cultural competency frameworks. Shortly thereafter, my professional Instagram account was doxxed. Someone took a screenshot of my business profile, placed a red “prohibited” symbol over it, and posted it with excerpts from the internal NASW feed, warning others not to follow me due to my ‘Zionist views.’ This targeted harassment has continued beyond that initialincident.”
7. Greater Washington Society for Clinical Social Work(GWSCSW)
Jewish GWSCSW members approached the Jewish Therapist Collective (JTC) for assistance because of ongoing antisemitism on their listserv. Comments such as, ‘One man’s freedom fighter is another man’s terrorist’ and frequent references to ‘genocide’ were not being moderated despite their numerous requests to leadership for assistance.
Additionally, the GWSCSW Board defended a member’s right to post about a book club organized by Lara Sheehi whose book clubs, hosted nationwide, are promoted through her USA Palestine Mental Health Network, an openly antizionist organization.
According to Professor Jon Mills, “Since October 7th, Sheehi has praised Hamas terrorists as “martyrs” and endorsed their ‘armed resistance.’ Although Sheehi has denied being antisemitic, despite evidence to the contrary, she has become a Hamas apologist and sympathizer after the October 7 massacre in Israel. She then left GWU in the lurch with its impending civil rights complaint in front of the US Department of Education after taking a new faculty position in Qatar, the lavish host of Hamas. Dr. Sheehi, who is currently president of the Psychoanalytic Division (39) of the American Psychological Association (APA), has yet to be terminated from her position by the Board of Directors of Division 39 or the APA, despite her support of a terrorist organization. It is incomprehensible how the APA leadership would continue to incorrigibly champion a defender of a terrorist group.
When GWSCSW received our complaint about the post, their Board responded, “silencing [this member] because she referenced a book whose authors some may find objectionable would subject her to all the wrongs that [we] strive to right.”
In this case, the GWSCSW board ignored the antisemitism in evidence and chose instead to support a project put forth by Sheehi. Additional concerns about antisemitic posts on GWSCSWs listerv have not been addressed.
After many emails over months, a GWSCSW representative finally agreed to a meeting to discuss possible trainings from JTC. A meeting was scheduled at a mutually agreed time. However, the representative did not join the meeting nor did they respond to inquiries as to what had happened and to see if they were okay. We had been looking forward to a respectful dialogue given all that had ensued. We have yet to hear back.
Conclusion: A Call to Action
In 2020, in the wake of George Floyd’s murder (2020), NASW published, NASW Calls for Social Work to Dismantle Racism in the United States in which they stated, “We have certainly made mistakes, but we are also a group of professionals committed to helping, lifting up, and advocating for oppressed and marginalized groups of people and fighting injustice in society. Social workers have an ethical duty to dismantle racism, both personally and professionally, and to demonstrate what it means to be antiracist.”
Now, five years later we are at another crossroads. Jewish people in the United States have been murdered and set on fire, Jewish schools and synagogues must arrange and pay for their own security to ensure community protection, Jewish people are not physically safe in the United States. Jewish social workers and their clients are not safe.
The facts shared in this report represent a systemic failure of our professional field to acknowledge, address, and combat antisemitism with the same urgency applied to other forms of hate and oppression.
The social work profession itself has abandoned their own stated ethics and values that ensure ethical practice. NASW and the other institutions listed above must agree to address the rampant antisemitism in the field of social work.
Next steps: We compel NASW and other social work institutions to act now and:
Acknowledge the systemic pattern of antisemitism in social work and mental health spaces.
Issue a public, formal condemnation of antisemitism from all social work organizations, institutions, and their listservs.
Adopt the IHRA working definition of antisemitism within professional frameworks.
Consult with those Jewish people who identify as Zionists in all meaningful discussion and planning to address our concerns and experiences.
Include Jewish people as an oppressed minority in any and all anti-oppression initiatives. Because Jews don’t fit into a binary model of race as they are an ancient people predating such a concept altogether, accommodations should be made. A commitment to understanding and reckoning with the age-old shape-shifting hate directed at Jews must be incorporated into anti oppression work.
Rectify and create safe and respectful professional spaces for Jewish clinicians and students. Jewish people account for only 2.4% of the US population and antisemitism has skyrocketed in this country. Jewish social workers deserve the same dignity, protection, and respect as every other marginalized group.
1 Holocaust Inversion falsely equates Israeli policies with Nazi atrocities and often aims to delegitimize Israel by weaponizing the memory of the Holocaust. It is especially common among anti-Zionist antisemites who seek to undermine Jewish historical trauma to justify hostility toward Israel or Jews more broadly. Most damning is that holocaust inversion became popularized just days after October 7th.
2 See article: Reflections of a Jewish Faculty Member at a School of Social Work by Amy Werman
3 See article: Antisemitism: Social work’s silence is deafening by Carole Cox, Dana Marlowe and Annette Poizner
Reported by:
Jennifer Kogan, RSW, LICSW and Andrea Yudell, LICSW, LCSW-C
Published by the Jewish Social Work Consortium
Carole Cox, MSW, DSW
Jennifer Kogan, RSW, LICSW
Dana Marlowe, LCSW, PhD
Annette Poizner, MSW, RSW, EdD
Jodi Taub, LCSW, PLLC
Leslie Yaffa, MSW, RSW, EdD
Andrea Yudell, LICSW, LCSW-C
This is fantastic. We would love to collaborate with you!
Brilliant as always. Has anyone posted it on the NASW listserv?