Search

The independent review of children's social care (2022) has proposed a radical reset of England's children's services, shifting a remote, assessment heavy system towards one that works alongside communities to help prevent statutory interventions. However, notions around the harnessing of community resources to deliver Early Help are often underpinned by assumptions regarding the voluntary, community and social enterprise (VCSE) sector and the ease with which such organizations can be integrated into preventative strategies. This paper reports findings from embedded research within a unitary authority in Southwest England during remodelling of its Early Help service to work more collaboratively with local VCSE organizations. The study generated data from ethnographic observations, semi‐structured interviews and focus groups with 95 participants, including local parents, service providers, VCSE organizations and Council leaders. The findings illustrate that families value the compassionate, responsive and flexible support available within many VCSE settings. However, differences in practice cultures, regulatory pressures on statutory providers, the need to (re)build trust in communities and sensitivities around power‐sharing and resourcing meant negotiating VCSE sector integration was fraught with complexities. Few studies have gained such privileged access to a Local Authority's remodelling of Early Help services, and this paper has significant insights for the debates surrounding the independent review of children's social care (2022) and its recommendation to bring services 'closer to communities'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The gathering of 'wishes and feelings' in UK child protection proceedings (s.53 Children Act 2004) should highlight the child's opinion of social work intervention and services provided. However, with no statutory social work guidance on participation currently in place, children frequently miss opportunities to be involved in their own child protection planning. This paper is drawn from a 3‐year study into participation in child protection social work. It includes findings from qualitative interviews, and one focus group, with social workers, parents, children and participation workers, from three local authorities in the United Kingdom. The findings revealed some examples of significant gaps in service provision, particularly from the perspective and understanding of the child. The skewed translation of wishes and feelings legislation, along with its subsequent (and often inadequate) application to practice, prevents children from understanding and responding to social work intervention and can lead to idiosyncratic practice. This paper provides recommendations for a practical response to practitioner dilemmas regarding wishes and feelings and bridges the gap between research and practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: This paper adopts a qualitative case study on the generalist service delivery model of I‐Care, a Durban‐based non‐governmental organization that works with male street children. Fifteen face‐to‐face interviews were conducted with 10 I‐Care employees and 5 former street children. A focus group was set up with I‐Care employees. Although existing literature is forthright about a generalist approach for children at risk, it remains unclear how to implement this approach in practice. This paper reviews a continuity of 5 fundamental social work practices for working with street children: (a) outreach work, (b) child–family and child–community mediation, (c) transitory care centres and programmes, (d) brokerage, and (e) mentorship and follow‐ups. The study analyses how these practices contribute to the capability and agency expansion of the street children and outlines challenges that service providers and former street children experience. The main challenges acknowledged are balancing between the agency and protection of street children and the adaptation of children to street life. The study proposes intervention strategies to overcome these challenges. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Child and family social workers in Britain are increasingly working in multidisciplinary settings such as Multi-Agency Safeguarding Hubs (MASHs). This article uses discourse analysis techniques to examine data from an ethnographic study of children's social workers and police officers working together in a MASH, considering the corporeal forms and movements that practitioners evoked in their talk about practice. Social workers used metaphors of slow movements and soft, small, and malleable bodies, in contrast to the fast movements and firm trajectories alluded to in police officers' talk. The paper draws on this analysis to identify differences in social workers' and police officers' forms of knowledge and ways of valuing practice implicit in their accounts of good practice. It contributes to recent discussions of space, mobility, and embodiment in social work literature and shows how discursive analyses can add to the developing knowledge about these matters. The paper suggests that evaluations of multiagency settings such as MASHs should attend to practitioners' distinctive forms of knowledge and imagination. [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 reports on a qualitative study of child protection in the UK. The research involved children's practitioners from a range of agencies, including social care, education, health and youth offending, who were asked about working together on complex child protection cases. The aim was to explore how participants talked about complexity in these cases, in order to deconstruct influential perspectives on interprofessional working. Interview transcripts were analysed using critical discourse analysis, a qualitative method that examines patterns of language use in relation to social structures of power and control. The findings identified three overall perspectives: clinical, expert system and relation‐centred approaches, which practitioners combined in various ways. These perspectives have a bearing on how the ‘team around the child’ is conceptualized in discourse about child protection. The paper links these findings to the assumptions of predictability and control currently embedded in policy and practice guidance, and explores their implications for social workers and other children's practitioners. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ABSTRACT Concern about the decision-making abilities of practitioners in child protection has led to the development and implementation of increasingly structured assessment tools, many based on forms of risk assessment. The positive and negative effects of such tools on practice have been widely researched and debated. This paper presents the findings from ethnographic research about the use of a particular set of decision-making tools that provide insights into how tools might affect the professional development of practitioners. The overall finding that the use of decision-making tools may impair professional development draws attention to the importance of the process of implementation, in particular how tools are regarded within an organization in relation to practitioner expertise. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]