Search

This article examines the accounts given by child protection practitioners of how the current economic climate has impacted on their practice. We build our discussion on empirical findings emerging from a small but rigorous qualitative research project conducted by one of the authors. This original study examined Scottish and Finnish social workers' perceptions of their abilities to engage effectively with children and families in what many have described as an "age of austerity." It set out to explore challenges encountered in daily practice through a cross‐national comparative thematic analysis. The paper illuminates practitioners' shared reality of frontline practice in Scottish and Finnish contexts. Despite differing socio‐political environments, participating practitioners found austerity measures to impact negatively on both their professional resources and on the communities they work with. Significantly, practitioners regarded themselves as the key resource, taking individual responsibility to ensure families received a quality service. For many, austerity had resulted in greater empathy for families and awareness of the wider economic and structural impact on their lives. The increased centrality of social justice was pivotal to everyday practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents a qualitative analysis of front‐line practices regarding emergency removals in Finnish and Irish child protection. It examines how the responses to children's immediate danger are framed by legislation and how front‐line practitioners assess the child's situation and make emergency placement decisions. The data consist of interviews with 16 Irish and 33 Finnish social workers. These child welfare protection systems respond differently to a task that appears to be similar. The Irish team‐based practice rests on the social workers' shared assessment of the child's needs, and the formal decision is made by the courts (or police officers at night‐time); and the Finnish practice involves only one single social worker who makes both the assessment and the removal decision. The Irish system is tightly time regulated, whereas the Finnish system provides a more flexible time frame. Both approaches put a lot of stress on social workers' practice, which also includes creative workarounds (e.g., "planned emergency removals" in Finland). Future research will need to explore these features from the point of view of a child's right to protection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores the practices concerning family relations as described by women inmates in Finnish prisons. The aim is to study how family relations are experienced as family practices in relation to institutional interference on the basis of qualitative interview data ( n = 17). The study demonstrates that the prison stay of a family member means an exceptional institutional intrusion in the family's everyday life. A prison's task is to organize a sentence. At the same time, the institution modifies the practices of being a family by allowing or restricting the relations between family members. Consequently, this can be seen as a question of governing the family relations by appraising and standardizing the family. The study demonstrates, firstly, that there is a need to acknowledge and explore the diversity of family relations on the practical level and, secondly, that a wider perspective of family relations in an institutional context can be captured by combining the concepts of institutional and family practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]