Child Protection Work and Family Support Practice in Five Family Centres

Academic interest in the work of family centres in the United Kingdom has largely been concerned with categorising the work of such centres in terms of issues of childcare ideology, working practices and degree of service user control. Meanwhile, the re-focusing of child protection services in order to develop child welfare services has largely dominated childcare social work in recent years, with scant attention paid to the role of family centres in relation to this debate. This study is concerned with examining the perspectives of staff and service users in five 'client focussed' family centres in Northern Ireland in relation to how child protection issues are understood and dealt with. It was found that staff enter into negotiations with both referrers and service users to conceptually reframe child protection work as family support practice. This leads to the development of partnership relationships between staff and service users based upon mutual high regard. The work of such centres leaves them well placed to provide integrated services to children in need in line with current government priorities, but could leave some children vulnerable where child protection issues are not amenable to conceptual reframing along family support lines.

Child Welfare Interventions: Patterns of Social Work Practice

Some 10 years ago one of the authors embarked on a research study examining the potential for social workers to shift from a child protection to a child welfare practice orientation (Spratt, 2000; 2001; Spratt and Callan, 2004). The research reported here develops that work; examining how social workers respond to ‘child care problems’ (CCPs). The results indicate that Northern Irish Health and Social Services Trusts (equivalent to Local Authorities in England and Wales) have responded to social policy goals to balance the protection of a lesser number of children whilst meeting the welfare needs of the greater by reducing the number of referrals designated ‘child protection investigations’ (CPIs) and increasing the number of CCPs. Closer analysis reveals, however, that a filtering system has been developed by social workers to address perceived child protection risks within CCP cases. Paradoxically, this leads to early closure of the more concerning cases, with service provision largely confined to the least concerning. The authors argue that the ways in which social workers balance social policing and supportive functions in practice may indicate possible responses to an increase in referred families anticipated within Every Child Matters (Chief Secretary to the Treasury, 2003).

Developing critical social work in theory and in practice: child protection and communicative reason

This paper argues that a critical analysis of the ideologies that inform contemporary child care has been missing from the ‘re-focusing debate’. Such an analysis points up the necessity of reasserting a critical social work position in order to provide a basis for reconstructing practice and engaging with other social actors and their ideologies in an open and creative fashion compatible with Habermas’ aspiration of ‘communicative reason’.

Identifying families with multiple problems: Possible responses from child and family social work to current policy developments

In the development of family policy under New Labour there has been a growing tendency to identify groups who are likely to be high in lifetime costs to the state. Investment in such groups is seen as crucial. Whilst the economic case for current investment is compelling, idenitiying one of these groups, ‘families with multiple problems’ raises complex research problems and ethical issues. Reseach indicates that families with multiple problems may be identified on the caseloads of child and family social worker and there are claims that key events such as the registration of a child on the child protection register may indicate such multiple problems. This offers new opportunities for child and family social work to embrace less incident based ways of working in favour of longer term provision of services to address longer term risks.

History of Child Welfare and Protection Social Work in Northern Ireland: Finding Continuity amongst Discontinuity in Case Files from 1950-1968

This article reports on research carried out on 200 child welfare files from the largest welfare authority in Northern Ireland from 1950-1968. The literature review provides a commentary on some of the major debates surrounding child welfare and protection social work from the perspective of its historical development. The report of the research which follows offers an insight into one core, and less well-known period of child welfare history in Northern Ireland between the two Children and Young Persons Acts (1950 & 1968). Using a method of discourse analysis influenced by Michel Foucault, a detailed description of the nature of practice is offered. This paper is offered as a work in progress, with further work being planned for dissemination of more detailed analysis of the method and outcomes. The research seeks to ask a few core questions based on problems identified in the present with our current understandings of child welfare and protection histories. While recognising the limitations of this study and the need for broader analysis of the wider context surrounding child welfare practice at the moment, it is argued that some salient conclusions can be drawn about continuity and discontinuity in practice which are of interest to practitioners and students of child welfare social work.

The work lives of child molesters: A phenomenological perspective

To understand the work experiences of men who sexually offend against children, the authors conducted a qualitative study on a sample of 8 outpatients in mandated treatment. The results, based on both interview and quantitative data, highlighted the reciprocal influence of work and sexual offending and ways in which the offense affected participants' psychosocial and career stability. Participants who were rated as making the most favorable progress by their therapists ranked work as less salient than home and family, leisure, and community service, although they were relatively satisfied with their current jobs. Work was more salient than other life roles, but less satisfying for participants who were making less progress in treatment. Participants reported a loss of job security and career status, as well as restricted opportunities for vocational change and advancement.