Search

Social workers carry much of the frontline authority to define risk to children and discuss it with families. Assessment reports and other institutional documents record professional views about family information, and also have the potential to convey the 'voice' of the family to institutions. Social workers have responsibility for sharing these documents with families, yet little is known about how they do this. This paper focuses on episodes when social workers introduce institutional documents in home visits, and on the family responses elicited. These are high-stakes encounters which, when they go seriously wrong, emerge in the press as tragedies and scandals. For families, these documents carry an emotional depth-charge as intimate, potentially shaming and sometimes inaccurate details of their lives are inscribed in them by and for others. Latour's (1996) concept of interobjectivity sheds light on the use of documents, while concepts of epistemic authority (Heritage and Raymond, 2005) and epistemic injustice (Fricker, 2007) are employed to examine how social workers respond to parental testimony about themselves and their children. Learning how to present institutional documentation in ways that reduce the risk of emotional reactivity and treating family perspectives with epistemic justice may enhance social work practice. At a policy level, the design of documents warrants review, so that they facilitate rather than obstruct social workers' efforts to build what are already fragile relationships with families. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article is not a research paper in the conventional sense. Instead, it is a reflexive account of the building of a relationship which would not have happened without the existence of digital technologies and might not have happened but for the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic. It was through reading a digitised resource (an online PhD thesis) in the first UK 'lockdown' that Bob, now a semi-retired academic in the field of adult and organisational learning, began to reappraise his upbringing in a children's home in Scotland. Meanwhile, it was in getting to know Bob (through emails and Zoom meetings) and by accessing Bob's retrospectively digitised case record that Viv, the author of the PhD thesis and now a semi-retired social work academic, was stimulated to revisit her early research from a fresh perspective. We argue that our real-life example, serendipitous and unique as it undoubtedly is, demonstrates the democratising potential of the digital transformation that is currently being played out in child and family social work. Furthermore, it seems likely that digital technologies will continue to bring new and unexpected opportunities for forming such relationships in the future. Plain Language Summary: In this article, two older academics (one from social work and the other from management learning) introduce their meeting online during the Covid-19 pandemic and the relationship they have been building since then, from the very different perspectives of a social work researcher and a former resident of a children's home in Edinburgh in the 1940s and 50s. Bob and Viv describe coming together as an opportunity for shared learning, and they suggest that child and family social workers should be ready for, and welcome, such opportunities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper analyses social workers' moral agency in addressing child abuse and neglect. We argue that ethically sound social work requires the capacity to exercise strong, multidimensional moral agency. The contribution is based on a qualitative interpretative meta-synthesis of four studies representing different forms of child abuse and neglect in varied contexts. Drawing on our analysis, we identify three thematic categories of moral considerations in terms of social workers' moral work in addressing child abuse and neglect: genders and generations, agencies and responsibilities, and families and communities. We then proceed to posit four dimensions of moral work in child and family social work – individual; cultural and communal; societal and political; and global – and argue that if they are to exercise strong moral agency, social workers must negotiate these intersecting contextual dimensions. Recognising the salience of these dimensions, how they increasingly intersect, and what this demands of social workers is necessary for the profession. Social workers must embrace individually sensitive, culturally translative, politically engaged and globally aware moral agency. This is crucial in elaborating context-sensitive practice that critically engages with moral complexities when working with individuals, families and communities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This study compared the impact, challenges, and benefits of the Circle of Security-Parenting (COS-P) intervention across two delivery modes: group center-based (GCCOS-P) and individual home-based (IHCOS-P). Methods: This mixed-methods study compared the impact of the COS-P on parental reflective functioning and parental stress across two delivery modes: GCCOS-P (n = 7) and IHCOS-P (n = 7). It compared the challenges and benefits of each, from the qualitative perspectives of participants (n = 2 IHCOS-P; n = 3 GCCOS-P) and facilitators (n = 4). Results: Quantitative statistical analysis comparing pre- and postintervention measures suggest that each delivery mode was equally effective in reducing parental stress and generally noneffective with respect to parental reflective functioning. Challenges and benefits of each mode, inherent in the peer/shared learning environment of the GCOS-P and the individualized, flexible delivery of the IHCOS-P, were identified. Discussion: This study adds to knowledge about the widely utilized COS-P, highlighting challenges and benefits of two modes of delivery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]