V diplomski nalogi s pomočjo metode avtoetnografije predstavim tri analize, v katerih se opiram na literaturo in na lastne dnevniške zapise, ki so nastali v dveh letih mojega prostovoljnega dela v azilnem domu z otroki (2015/16) in ženskami (2016). V prvi analizi jezika v dnevnikih ugotovim, da sta jezik in diskurz med odločujočimi dejavniki družbenih sprememb. Pri tem se oba spreminjata, njun pomen pa o družbi razkriva vrednote, stališča, strukturo in odnose. Diskurz se pojavlja tudi v formalnopravnih izrazih (kot so npr. tujci in tujke, begunci in begunke, migranti in migrantke, prosilci in prosilke za azil ipd.) in v socialnodelovnih zapisih. Primer tega so tudi moji dnevniki, v katerih sem ljudi pogosto naslavljala z uporabo svojilnih pridevnikov in pomanjševalnic. To analiziram tudi z antropološkim fenomenom »mojih ljudi«. Svojilne pridevnike sem namreč uporabljala zaradi občutka posebne posvečenosti v njihova življenja (zgodbe) in strahu, da bi s pisanjem o tem, kar so mi ljudje (ženske) dali, to zlorabila. Kljub temu ljudje niso (bili) moji, temveč so samo svoji – individuumi, in zato to naslavljanje ni korektno. S tem se jih namreč diskurzivno »polastimo« kar pa je v nasprotju s stroko socialnega dela. Ker je pomembno predstaviti okolje, v katerem so ljudje, s katerimi sem delala, živeli in znotraj katerega smo se srečevali, v drugi analizi predstavim azilni dom skozi Goffmanov koncept totalne ustanove in ga podkrepim z izseki iz lastnih dnevnikov. S tem pokažem načrtno procesiranje ljudi, izgubo dostojanstva, zasebnosti in človečnosti. Pokažem tudi negotovost, ki vpliva na slabšanje duševnega zdravja ljudi in kršenje ostalih pravic. Pokažem tudi, kako ljudje, ki podajo vlogo za mednarodno zaščito, postanejo predmet oblasti in kako sem to v času dela z njimi postala tudi sama. V zadnjem delu, analizi ženske skupine v azilnem domu, pokažem pomen kontinuitete obiskov v azilnem domu za vzpostavljanje stikov in graditev intimnih delovnih odnosov, pomen sporazumevanja – za katerega je bila bistvena antirasistična perspektiva – in načine opolnomočenja žensk. Najpomembnejši izmed njih so bili: vzpostavitev varnega prostora, raziskovanje njihovih želja in potreb, evalvacija, uporaba psiholoških vaj za spodbudo, da govorijo o svojih čustvih in doživljanjih, učenje jezikov, vaje za skupinsko sproščanje, razgibavanje, uporaba vključujočega jezika, empatije (čutenje in priznanje njihovega čustvovanja in doživljanja) ter dovoljenje za spontanost kot odgovor na takratne potrebe žensk. Rezultat skupinskega dela je bila tudi skrb, ki sva jo s kolegico Ano namenjali ženskam (z druženjem, časom, pogovorom, empatijo, zagovorništvom in humorjem), skrb, ki sva jo namenjali druga drugi (s pogovori, spodbudami, kritičnimi refleksijami in empatijo), skrb, ki so jo ženske namenjale druga drugi (z varovanjem otrok, pomočjo pri kuhanju in premagovanju dolgčasa) ter skrb, ki so jo ženske izkazovale nama z Ano (s sočutjem, naklonjenostjo, pogovori, pripravljenostjo za zagovorništvo, tolažbo in s tem, da so nama pustile prostor, ko sva ga potrebovali). Na podlagi ugotovljenega predlagam, da si v socialnem delu z ljudmi, s katerimi delamo, dovolimo priti blizu. To pomeni, da v delovne odnose vstopimo kot ljudje in si dovolimo zaupati in prejemati (ne pa samo dajati). Da uporabljamo vključujoče izrazoslovje in kritično refleksijo prevladujočega diskurza (tudi lastnega) ter da se borimo proti sistemu nadzorovanja mobilnosti ljudi in s tem tudi za socialno pravičnost. Proti nasilnemu sistemu se moramo namreč boriti tudi takrat, ko delujemo znotraj njega. In my thesis I present three analyzes, using the method of autoethnography, in which I rely on scientific and non-scientific literature and my personal diaries that were written during two years of my practice placement at the asylum home, focused on children (2015/16) and women (2016). In my first analysis, on language of my diaries, I find out that language and discourse are one of the pivotal factors in social changes. Language and discourse reveal values, attitudes, structures and relationships in society. Discourse also occurs in legally formal terms (such as: aliens, refugees, migrants, asylum seekers, etc.) and in social work records. An example of this are also my diaries, in which I have often addressed people by using peculiar adjectives and diminutives. With the help of the anthropological phenomenon of »my people« I critically evaluate myself in this matter. Reason for doing so was the sense of a special commitment in their lives (stories) and the fear that by writing about it, I would abuse all what people I worked with (especially women), gave me. Nevertheless, people are (were) not »mine«. They are unique individuals therefore this kind of addressing is not professional. In doing so, they are »discursively« being »owned«, which is in contrary to the profession of social work. Because it is very much important to present the living environment of the poeple in which we worked together I present, in my second analysis, the asylum home through Goffman's concept of a total institution and back it up with excerpts from my own diaries. I demonstrate the deliberate processing of people, the loss of dignity, privacy and humanity. I also show insecurity that affects people's mental health and other rights, and how people who apply for international protection become subject to power and nevertheles how, while working with them, I became that as well. In the last part, in my third analysis of the women's group at the asylum home, I show the importance of continuity of visits for establishing contacts and building intimate working relationships and the importance of communication - for which an antiracist perspective and ways of empowering women were most essential. The most important ways of empowering women were: establishing a safe space, exploring their desires and needs, evaluation, using psychological exercises to encourage them to speak about their emotions and experiences, language learning, group relaxation exercises, exercising (sport), using inclusive language, empathy (feel and recognize their emotions and experiences) and permission for spontaneity in response to women's needs at the time. One of the results of the group work was also care that my colleague Ana and I devoted to women (by socializing, time, conversations, empathy, advocacy and humor), care that we devoted to each other (by conversations, encouragement, critical reflections and empathy), care that women have given each other (by babysitting, help with cooking and overcoming boredom), and care that women have shown to me and Ana (with sympathy, affection, conversation, willingness to advocate and by giving us space and consolation when we needed it). Based on my findings I suggest that in social work, we allow ourselves to get close with people we work with. This means that we enter into working relationships as people and allow ourselves to trust and receive (not just give). In addition I suggest the use of an inclusive terminology and critical reflection of the dominant discourses (including our own) and that we fight against the system that is controlling people's mobility, which is a fight for social justice. We should fight not only against a violent system, but also within it.