In this thesis I examine the contemporary social work gaze and social work knowledge as a practice of government. The data for this thesis is derived from qualitative analysis of interviews with children and social workers from two local authority social services departments in which they described their practices. In addition I have carried out analyses of social work guidance and regulation.
The professionalisation of social work, and legislation to mandate its activities coincided with, and was intimately linked with a post-war politics of consensus. It was part of a more general governmental strategy of alleviating problems, which were understood as social in character by supporting the family through a blend of welfarist measures and a therapeutics of the family. Analysis of policy and legislation over the last five decades reveals that the conceptual currency of social work, the focus and subject of its gaze have been transformed. It is the priority of protection, which dominates contemporary social work practices.
Contemporary social work and its problematisation of intervention into the private space of the family has become characterised by, on one hand, a concern to render visible the `at risk' population through multi-disciplinary strategies of risk management and surveillance, and on the other hand, by discourses of `partnership', in which parents are enjoined to work with social workers in the interests of the welfare of their children. I argue that partnership represents a new imagining of the social worker in terms of a reflexivity vis a vis his/her power and a tentativeness vis a vis the legitimacy of her intervention in the family. Attempts to scientise and systematise the social work gaze do not recognise the extent to which social workers' techniques of knowing both make possible at the same time as they limit the subject of social work practices.
In March 2020, the ‘Everyone In’ initiative was introduced by the UK government as a public health response to COVID-19. This initiative sought to temporarily accommodate people experiencing rough sleeping in hotels in all local authority areas throughout England. In London, ‘Everyone In’ involved the procurement of vacant accommodation in over 100 hotels and temporarily re-housed approximately 2000 individuals. A rapid qualitative study was undertaken within two hotels to explore experiences of the initiative from the perspective of people accommodated in the hotels. This article describes how standard qualitative methods were adapted and implemented to complete the study whilst meeting COVID-19 social distancing guidelines. The research involved a longitudinal design of a two-stage qualitative interview that sought to capture residents’ experience of ‘Everyone In’ at two points in time (while in the hotel and when residents had left the hotel). Adapted qualitative methods were employed by a team of 13 researchers. These adaptations included socially distanced leaflet dropping, telephone-based participant recruitment, a remote, multistage, longitudinal qualitative telephone interviewing and rapid framework analysis. 35 hotel residents were recruited into the study (two subsequently withdrew participation). A total of 299 (of a possible 330) short interviews were completed by 33 participants (26 male and 7 female) as part of the multi-stage, longitudinal design of the study. This study indicates that adapted qualitative research methods employed during a pandemic can be successfully applied to obtain insights and experiences (of individuals and groups) otherwise difficult to reach and/or complex to understand.
Aims: In February 2012, new sentencing guidelines for drug offences became effective in all courts in England and Wales. An explicit aim was to reduce the length of sentences for drug "mules" and so make them more proportionate. Methods: This article examines their early impact drawing on data from the Court Proceedings Database and the Crown Court Sentencing Survey for importing/exporting a Class A drug. Findings: Overall, the guidelines have achieved their intended aim. The length of the average custodial sentence for drug trafficking fell following the introduction of the guidelines, largely due to taking defendants' roles into account. Notably, three-quarters of those in "lesser" roles received sentences less than four years, representing an important change. Nonetheless, around 10% of mules received very long sentences due to the continued use of drug weight in sentencing. Conclusion: The new guidelines represent an internationally important innovation in drug policy reform.
Introduction COVID-19 restrictions created barriers to “business as usual” in healthcare but also opened the door to innovation driven by necessity. This manuscript (1) describes how ADVANCE, an in-person group perpetrator program to reduce intimate partner violence (IPV) against female (ex)partners by men in substance use treatment, was adapted for digitally-supported delivery (ADVANCE-D), and (2) explores the feasibility and acceptability of delivering ADVANCE-D to men receiving substance use treatment. Methods Firstly, the person-based approach and mHealth development framework were used to iteratively adapt ADVANCE for digitally-supported delivery including conceptualization, formative research, and pre-testing. Then, a non-randomized feasibility study was conducted to assess male participants’ eligibility, recruitment, and attendance rates and uptake of support offered to their (ex)partners. Exploratory analyses on reductions in IPV perpetration (assessed using the Abusive Behavior Inventory; ABI) and victimization (using the revised ABI; ABI-R) at the end of the program were performed. Longitudinal qualitative interviews with participants, their (ex)partners, and staff provided an understanding of the program’s implementation, acceptability, and outcomes. Results The adapted ADVANCE-D program includes one goal-setting session, seven online groups, 12 self-directed website sessions, and 12 coaching calls. ADVANCE-D includes enhanced risk management and support for (ex)partners. Forty-five participants who had perpetrated IPV in the past 12 months were recruited, forty of whom were offered ADVANCE-D, attending 11.4 (SD 9.1) sessions on average. Twenty-one (ex)partners were recruited, 13 of whom accepted specialist support. Reductions in some IPV perpetration and victimization outcome measures were reported by the 25 participants and 11 (ex)partners interviewed pre and post-program, respectively. Twenty-two participants, 11 (ex)partners, 12 facilitators, and 7 integrated support service workers were interviewed at least once about their experiences of participation. Overall, the program content was well-received. Some participants and facilitators believed digital sessions offered increased accessibility. Conclusion The digitally-supported delivery of ADVANCE-D was feasible and acceptable. Remote delivery has applicability post-pandemic, providing greater flexibility and access. Given the small sample size and study design, we do not know if reductions in IPV were due to ADVANCE-D, time, participant factors, or chance. More research is needed before conclusions can be made about the efficacy of ADVANCE-D.
Studies have shown rates of IPV-perpetration among men in substance misuse treatment at rates far higher than the general population. There is poor evidence for the effectiveness of IPV perpetrator programmes. An analysis of drugs and alcohol policy documents 1998–2015 was conducted using discourse analysis to examine how English drug and alcohol policy has addressed IPV among substance misusers. Transcripts of interviews with 20 stake holders were analysed thematically. How policy 'frames' IPV-perpetration among drug and alcohol misusers has implications for service provision. IPV has increasingly been framed in terms of its implications for child safeguarding, and has been 'folded in' to policies targeting Troubled Families. With increasing 'localism' in English drug and alcohol policy there has been little specification of services for substance misusing IPV-perpetrators. Policy and literature produced by IPV perpetrator and victim organisations has framed IPV-perpetration as an individual choice with intoxication as a post hoc excuse for violence with limited implications for effective service development. Interviews with stake holders indicate a range of understandings/explanations for IPV among substance misusing men. Stake holders suggest that not all staff have the confidence or skills to ask men about their relationships and that there are few referral routes for substance misusing men who seek help for their IPV perpetration. There are gaps and contradictions in the extent to which English drug and alcohol policy has sought to address IPV-perpetration among substance misusers. Recent National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidance provide an opportunity to include domestic abuse training for all front line social care staff including in the substance misuse sector. There is a need for further research into effective services for substance misusing perpetrators and the development of training for front-line staff.
'%3e%3cpath fill='%23012169' d='M0 0v30h60V0z'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23fff' stroke-width='6' d='m0 0 60 30m0-30L0 30'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23C8102E' stroke-width='4' d='m0 0 60 30m0-30L0 30' clip-path='url(%23b)'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23fff' stroke-width='10' d='M30 0v30M0 15h60'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23C8102E' stroke-width='6' d='M30 0v30M0 15h60'/%3e%3c/g%3e%3c/svg%3e)