Author: Andre Coleman

According to Nelson (1980) social work was one of the first professions to recognise the importance of communications skills and the link to effective practice. Communication skills can be essential to the task of assessment, interviewing and later decision making for social workers. In practice, communication tends to be defined primarily as: ‘The verbal and nonverbal exchange of information, including all the ways in which knowledge is transmitted and received’ (Barker, 2003: 83 in Trevithick, 2005, p 116). The latter elements of communication, which can often translate the emotional content of the communication, are also referred to as interpersonal skills. According to Thompson (2002) social workers use such skills to communicate “ethically sensitive practice” (p.307). The purpose of this essay is to highlight the role and importance of verbal and non verbal communication skills involved in social work practice.

According to Koprowska (2008) communication is both interactive and context related. Therefore, careful consideration needs to be taken when communicating. There may be several barriers involved in communication, such as: authority; language; ability; personality; gender; age; and class (Thompson, 2009). True communication can only be achieved if the barriers are identified and removed. This can be attained by the practice of an anti oppressive and anti discriminatory approach to communication on the part of the social worker.

Verbal Communication

In practice good communication skills, practically listening and interview skills, are crucial for establishing efficient and respectful relationships with service users and lie at the heart of best practice in social work (Trevithick, 2005, p116). Social workers must demonstrate several skills while assessing or interviewing a client. Verbal communication is a key skill in social work practice and “refers to face to face interactions and involves the impact of the actual words we use in speaking” (Thompson, 2009, p100). It is importance for social workers to be aware of how and what they say in certain situations; for example, in regards to the issue of formality. If the social worker does not access the situation correctly they may be conceived as being too formal or informal and thus will inevitable create barriers. Further, many service users tend to come from vulnerable sections of society. It is possible that their involvement with social workers may invoke feelings of shame or fear. It is likely that this will then leave them vulnerable to feeling misunderstood and not listened to. It is therefore fundamental that social workers treat each client as an individual and assess their situation as a unique case. In order to build a good relationship with each client the social worker must demolish any power or untrusting issues that may be present. This power may be either perceived or real in certain situations. For that reason, congruence plays an important role during the interview process. It may not be completely possible to eradicate the power imbalance but it is a key skill to be aware of the need to achieve congruence. This can be active by using the appropriate language so that the client can fully understand and be listened to. It is through such skills that social workers can convey genuine warmth, respect and non-judgement for the service user. Indeed, verbal communication skills also play a major role when working with other colleagues and professions, and are essential for decision making and assessments (Cournoyer, 1991).

Non Verbal Communication

Non verbal communication is a major component for interpersonal skill repertoire and includes posture, facial expression, proxemics, eye contact, and personal appearance (Kadushin and Kadushin, 1997, in Trevithick, 2005, p120), and it can support or contradict verbal communication. The importance of non-verbal communication is not a new concept in the social work field, in an article by DiMatteo, Hays, and Prince (1986) maintained that there are two dimensions of nonverbal communication, firstly decoding or sensitivity and secondly encoding or expressiveness. According to DiMatteo et al “nonverbal decoding refers to the capacity to understand the emotions conveyed through others’ nonverbal cues such as facial expressions, body movements, and voice tone. Nonverbal encoding refers to the capacity to express emotion through nonverbal cues” (p 582).For example, much of the understanding of non verbal communication can be gathered through using observation skills. Observation skills can be vital for social workers interviewing a client. According to Kadushin and Kadushin (1997) “there are five thousand distinctly different hand gestures and one thousand different steady body postures so precise observation of non-verbal behaviour is important”(P 315). The client may tell the social worker they are coping fine and don’t need any help but by observing their facial expression or lack of eye contact they may contradict this. Sheldon stresses that social workers must be aware of their own “capacity for self-observation, although always somewhat limited, provides us with an opportunity to analyse our own role and impact.” (Sheldon 1995: 132-3 in Trevithick, 2005, p123).

Active listening

Research has verified listening as the most utilized form of communication. “If frequency is a measure of importance, then listening easily qualifies as the most prominent kind of communication” (Adler & Rodman, 1997, p. 283). Listening may appear to be straightforward but active listening skills need to be learned, practised in training, developed and refreshed for effective use in real situations. Active listening describes a special and demanding alertness on the part of the social worker involved in interviewing a client. For Egan, active listening is about being present psychologically, socially and emotionally, not just physically (Trevithick 2005,p.123). By using skills such as paraphrasing, reflective questioning and open and closed questioning the social worker can convey full interest and understanding to a vulnerable client.

Self awareness

The concept of self-awareness is important in social work interviewing. Burnard (1992) defines self awareness as “the process of getting to know your feelings, attitudes and values” (in Thompson, 2009, p.3). A key aspect of self awareness is being aware how we may be perceived by others. In regards to interviewing the social worker may believe they are being laid back, however for the client it may be conceived as being uncaring. Supervision is therefore an important tool to gain feedback and explored any issues. Further importance of self awareness included understanding how possible external factors may affect social workers. Social workers need to aware of concepts such as transference, triggers and blind spots during interviewing process. Thompson stressed that the worker can be affected by a situation without knowing. Therefore, the ‘use of self’ is extremely important.

Empathy

Empathy is another important communication skills involved in social work interviewing. This skill involves “understanding or appreciating the feelings of others, but without necessarily experiencing them” (Thompson 2009, p111). Social workers must show sensitivity and respect to the feelings of the client. There is however a difference between sympathy and empathy. Therefore there is a fundamental skill to achieving empathy not merely expressing sympathy.

It is clear from the above information that the failure to achieve efficient communication between the social worker and client can lead to serious consequences. Poor communication can contributed to the harm and inadequate care clients. For example, in recent times such failures of communication among a range of professionals have been highlighted in the public inquiries into the death of several children known to be in the care of social services.(rewrite)

Personal Learning

Self awareness, according to Wong (2003), means recognition of our personality, strengths and weaknesses and likes and dislikes. As a social worker, self awareness is an essential element to prepare oneself to encounter the clients’ personal matter, their attitudes, thoughts, etc. The essay is going to discuss the importance and significance of self awareness. Then talk about what I have learnt about myself, in terms of my personalities, attitudes, strengths, limitations and how my past experiences affect me. Finally correlate how self awareness can help my professional development as a social worker.

According to Rothman (1999), everyone has its own attitudes or viewpoints towards something. Our thoughts and values are shaped during the time of infancy, childhood, adolescence and adulthood. These thinking may be based on our own experiences, education received or society influences.

It is clear that our past experiences, social norms, values from the others, characteristics, prejudices or stereotypes shape

Knowing how my past experiences influence my own values helps me to be more aware of my own self. Having an uncle who committed suicide that made my family, especially my grandmother, sad and miserable, I personally hate people who have the intention to end up their lives. However, this hatred may make me unable to make the most appropriate decision when a client who has the will to commit suicide seeks help from me. Moreover, as suggested by Biestek (1961), the relationship between the social worker and the client has been called the soul of casework. It may be hard for me to develop appropriate relationship with the client. It is possible that I will have uncontrolled emotional involvement and judgmental attitudes towards the client. Without self awareness and knowing what experiences shape my thoughts, I will experience difficulty in providing sensitive and skillful services to the clients. I may also unknowingly reject the client and avoid talking too much about death unconsciously. However, by knowing what experiences are affecting my values and thoughts, Rothman (1999) suggested that it assists the worker to work with clients, and to control and minimize the influences of personal attitudes and beliefs that may be harmful and prejudicial toward clients.

Prejudices, biases and stereotypes may be great barriers on my professional development. It is common that when come to minorities such as prostitutes, homosexuals or the street sleepers, people may regard their behaviors as unethical. It may due to their personal values, cultural, religious and other beliefs which people take for granted to adopt when facing these issues. I also have prejudices and stereotypes on them and they may be expressed in conversations, acts or behaviours since they are hidden in the subconscious as suggested by Rothman (1999). I may unknowingly have words that harm them and make them defensive or not trust in me. Thus making it hard to develop good relationship with the client and hard to have intervention processes. For example, I have been exposed to a strong heterosexual bias and may incorporate some homophobic reactions such as discomfort or hatred of homosexual people. Without self-awareness and knowledge, I may not be able to provide skillful services to gay or lesbian clients. If a worker has religious belief, he or she may even have a strong belief that homosexuality is a sin. According to Sheafor and Morales (2007), one of the competences required for social work practice is the capacity to engage in ethnic-, gender- and age-sensitive practice. In order to achieve this, it is essential for a worker to find ways and methods to separate their personal belief system from their professional values, ethics and roles.

Knowing my strengths and weaknesses also helps me with my professional development. I am glad and patient to listen to others. At the same time, I am also empathetic to others’ experiences and difficulties. It makes the clients feel being respected and thus it is easier to develop a proper client-worker relationship. It is of utmost importance that the client trust you

Reflecting on our own experiences and developmental stages helps when working with clients. For example, I was shy and not willing to express my care towards others in my childhood. And I would have no opportunity to show my love to my grandmother who died years ago. The losses in my life make me re-think the way I used to be and strive for a change, that is, be more outgoing and caring to others. I can thus draw on my personal experience when working with young people and guide them in the changing process. However, it also makes me consider my limitations, that is, when working with elderly clients. I can relate my experience that is similar to a teenager’s, however, it is impossible for me to have certain difficulties faced by elderly clients such as the aging process. As suggested by Berman-Rossi(2001), a social worker thus must develop aging relevant knowledge, self awareness, sensitivity and skill. Knowledge about aging demographics, age-related changes and developmental tasks is essential.

Although there are limitations to my service provided, there are ways to minimize the inadequacy.

Increased openness to other ways of thinking

My family is a blissful one, sometimes having some conflicts but still harmonious on the whole. I once thought that it is normal to have the kind of family like mine, and at least most of the families are alike. However, it is wrong as there are diversities in family structure. Some families are single-parented, while some may have huge communication problems among family members or having family members that are drug addicts that greatly affects the family.

Sharing own feelings and thoughts among a group of peers helps to make up one’s own viewpoint towards the population. By listening and sharing, one can know more about the peers’ attitudes on the issue, to examine their own attitudes and to exchange opinions in an overview. One can also have a broader view on an issue and

Social workers must confront their own prejudices and stereotypes about minorities.

Making myself known about losses in my own life helps me to understand what past experiences or feelings are affecting my own values and thoughts today.

Children are de¬?ned as ‘in need’ when they are “unlikely to achieve or maintain, or have the opportunity of achieving or maintaining, a reasonable standard of health or development”; or whose “health and development are likely to be signi¬?cantly impaired, or further impaired” without the provision of services under s.17(10); o are disabled as defined in s.17(11); or those who are in specific need of safeguarding under Part V of the (CA)(1989).

Ann had recently been separated with her husband due to domestic violence and is currently living in a women’s refuge with her 12 years old daughter. She had reported feeling depressed and lack resources. The development of a definition of domestic violence in Yemshaw v Hounslow LBC [2011] UKSC 3 (SC), decision by the court set a precedent that was used in meeting the needs of families. Children witnessing domestic abuse have now been included in the definition of harm under s.31(9) of the CA (1989).

Section 17(1) of the CA (1989), places a ‘general duty’ on Local Authorities (LA) to “safeguard and promote the welfare of children within its area who are in need”. It is based on the presumption that so far as it is consistent with their duty, children upbringing should be promoted within the family with an emphasis on ‘parental responsibility’ as defined under s.3(1) of the CA (1989). This is complemented and reinforced under s.10(3) of the CA (2004), which requires LAs to have “regard to the importance of parents and other persons caring for children in improving the well-being of children”. LAs are directed through their “specific duties and powers” specified in Part 1 of Schedule 2 to provide services ‘considered appropriate’ to meet the needs of ‘children in need’ with the aim of avoiding the need for care proceedings . This includes homelessness, the psychological effect of witnessing abuse and disruption with school. Under s.17(6) the LA’s can provide accommodation, counselling or as in the cash of domestic violence, assistance in cash.

Social workers are charged with discretion in making ethical decisions and should therefore use case law for additional guidance (Brammer, 2010: 190). In R v Nottingham City Council [2001] EWHC Admin 235, it was established that assessment is not a discretionary duty. Additionally, In R. (on the application of MM) v Lewisham LBC [2009] EWHC 416, it was held that “the consideration given to the referral fell far below the standard required by law”.

The CA (1989) stipulates the legal framework within which Social Work practice with children in need is situated. Its child-centred approach is embodied in the welfare paramountcy principle s.1 and the welfare checklist s.1(3) states factors that must be considered with respect to determining the child’s best interest. This welfare principle is also evident in s.3(5) and s.17. It adopt the principle that any delay s.1(2); “in considering whether to make, vary or discharge” s.31 and s.8 orders, s(1)(4); is likely to prejudice the child’s welfare; and no order should be discharge except it is unequivocally in the child’s best interests.

The complexities and uncertainties of family life have brought about evolving policies and guidelines to complement the legislative framework (Davis, 2009). An understanding of children’s needs requires a multidisciplinary evidenced-based assessment, which is prescribed under The Framework for the Assessment of Children in Need and their Families (DoH, 2000). This is conferred under s.7, LA Social Services Act (1979) and requires LAs to comply with their duties. The Every Child Matters (DfES, 2003) led to the enactment of the CA (2004): it requires LAs under s.11(4) to “have regards of statutory guidance” to cooperate and make arrangements to “safeguard and promote the welfare of children”.

Working Together to Safeguard Children (DCSF, 2010) specifies how agencies should work together: it states unequivocally the proactive early identification of additional needs and the provision of appropriate services. The complexities and tension of multi professional perspective is recognised in The Common Assessment Framework (CAF) (DfE, 2009) and based assessment on consistency and coordination between agencies (Brammer, 2010).

There are potential dissonances between legislative framework and the ethical frameworks, which informs social work practice. Parton (2006) noted the complexities of balancing child empowerment and professional judgement, and suggested that Social workers should advocate for children through their active participation in accordance with s.17(4A and 4B). Graham (2011: 1541) highlighted a substantial cultural shift to include children in planning and decision-making through the construction of the “social model of childhood”. This principle sought to reconcile the concept of child autonomy and right, with professional accountability and responsibility (Williams, 2008). The concept of best interest and the welfare of the child set out in s.1(3) and A8 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989) is also embodied in decision-making (Butler and Hickman, 2011). In a speech at the Institute of Public Policy Research, Educational Secretary Michael Gove claimed that safeguarding children is inundated with “optimism bias” (Media, 2012).

The law confers both a discretionary and obligatory duties, and the prediction of impairment is given emphasis under s.31 and s.17. It is therefore critical for social workers to have an ethical consideration when discharging their powers and duties, and reflect social work values in their proportionality of intervention under the Human Rights Act (HRA) (1998) which is seen as “an additional scrutiny of practice” (Brammer 2010: 114).

The value of outcome focus needs analysis and multi-agency working is compatible with social work values. It recognise the complexities and sensitivity of domestic violence, and emphasis on the compounding effect of stereotypical assumptions and stigma faced by individual and families (Sheppard, 2006). Social workers’ conceptualisation according to Connolly, et al (2006) is invaluable in promoting social inclusion. This is particularly relevant to Ann’s situation.

Assessment should not be based on a single event; careful consideration must be given the long-term effect of domestic violence (Williams, 2008). It must be conducted sensitively with an emphasis on “respectful uncertainty”, flexibility, openness and honesty about professional involvement (Laming, 2003).

Strafford,et al (2010:13) locates the process of assessment in the context of a “Systems approach”. Social workers need to be aware of the likely impact of any intervention on the family. Social workers are required to adopt a principled approach based on negotiation and partnership.

The CA (2004) requires LAs to coordinate services with relevant agencies: this gained explicit recognition in the Working Together to Safeguard Children guideline and reflects an acknowledgement that disadvantage occurs within a context of multiplicity of interlocking factors and social dynamic of the family (Graham, 2011). Social workers must therefore, integrate best-known evidence to inform professional judgement to accounts for the uniqueness, uncertainties and potential value conflicts (GSCC, 2003).

Anti-discriminatory and anti-oppressive practices are integral to social worker practice and enshrined in law. The GSCC (2003: 1.5) code of practice stresses the importance of “respecting diversity and different culture and values”. Further, s.22(5) requires due consideration to be given to a child’s religious persuasion, racial origin and cultural and linguistic background which is also encapsulated in A.14 of HRA (1998), the right not to be discriminated against. The amendment of parental responsibility by the Adoption and Children Act (2002) to include “adult with real relationship” accounts for value placed on recognition of diversity of families to combat social exclusion (Strafford,et al 2010: 16).

Millar and Corby (2006) highlighted the positive effect of a detailed assessment: Munro (2011) and Wise et al (2011: 95) are however, critical of the bureaucracy and the “prescriptive nature” of the Assessment Framework, which distracts social workers from their core therapeutic function. This presents a dilemma of balancing the need of a more rigorous assessment framework with the CAF (Crisp, et al, 2007).

Social inclusion and integration are intrinsic to social work, however, Palmer (2003) and Goldthorpe and Monro (2005) notes that there is concern amongst social workers that the high eligibility criteria have seen a shift from family support to reactive child protection practice thereby further excluding and marginalising families. This have led social workers to question the concept of ‘needs led’ service provision.

Stafford, et al, (2011) reports on the conflicts and complexities around issues of confidentiality and information sharing within multidisciplinary teams. This posed a dilemma between the welfare of the child and Ann’s right to confidentiality.

Domestic violence occurs within the context of both civil and criminal domain. This present are a wide range of shared and diverse models of knowledge and practice amongst professionals involved with children and families (Graham, 2011). O’Loughlin and O’Loughlin (2008: 41) noted the complexities of balancing the “rights and responsibilities of parents” and the “rights and needs of children”. This present a dilemma between a principled welfare approach and s.8 orders as highlighted in Debbonaire (2012).

Cleaver et al (2010) noted that whist children’s needs occur within the family and environmental context and often interlinked with those of their parent: It is crucial that practice is child-centred and needs considered separately through children’s “active participation” (Mullender 2002: 121). The complexities of parental contact from the perpetrator of abuse might expose the children to witnessing more abuse.

The legislative framework and policies have an enormous impact on social work practice. The complex interplay of skills, values and knowledge; the prevailing social attitudes; and the conflicting and overlapping imperative, have been analysed as the range of dilemmas and conflicts faced by social workers. What is most noteworthy, however, is the need for sound professional judgement and ethical consideration.

Social Workers work with some of the most disadvantaged and vulnerable people in Society, those who have been possibly subjected to oppression in their daily lives. ‘Most would agree that Social Work is a diverse and shifting activity’ (Jones 2002’41) in response to the situations presented within society. The society that we live in can be seen as one with many divisions, due to individual difference, people are categorised in due to these differences such as gender, race, class, age and disability. These Social Divisions can result in certain groups being oppressed.

Barker (2003’306-307) defines oppression as

‘The social act of placing severe restrictions on an individual, group or institution. Typically a government or political organisation that is in power places these restrictions formally or covertly on oppressed groups so that they may be exploited and less able to compete with other social groups, the oppressed are devalued exploited and deprived of privileges by the individual or group that has more power.’

Oppression can be fully understood through attention to ‘race,’ gender, class, disability, sexuality and age. Society can attribute to these differences by defining people and their roles based on their different experiences in relation to the power, status and opportunities in society.

Northern Ireland is seen as a multi-cultural society with inhabitants from many different backgrounds and cultures. The roles and expectations that society assumes for different group of people is immersed on a cultural level, thus creating common values about what is ‘normal’ which creates perceptions of social norms. Through these perceptions of ‘social norms’ oppression comes to the forefront.

Recurring discrimination leads to oppression. Thompson (1998’10) says this is: “inhuman or degrading treatment of individuals or groups; hardship and injustice brought about by the dominance of one group over another, the negative and demanding exercise of power. Oppression often involves disregarding the rights of an individual or group and is a denial of citizenship.”

It is important that it is recognise that oppression is not intended solely to refer to situations where a powerful person or group exerts tyranny over others it also refers to the structural injustices that can arise from often unintentional oppressive assumptions and interactions which occur as a result of institutional and social customs, economic practices and rules. (Clifford and Burke 2009)

For the purpose of this assignment I am going to focus on racism and the oppression faced by Travellers as an ethnic minority group. Travellers are an indigenous minority in Ireland and enjoy a distinctive culture, value system and common language. (O’Connell, 2006:4)

Travellers’ nomadic lifestyle follows a routine based on economic practices and religion. According to the Government, Travellers “have shared histories, a nomadic way of life and distinct cultural identity” (Department of Justice 2005; Cited by O’Connell 2006’4)

One notable feature about the discourse of Travellers is the tendency to associate traveller oppression with the terms ‘discrimination’ and ‘prejudice’ and not racism, a tendency which is reflective of a broader resistance among some members of the Irish public and some policymakers and politicians to naming the treatment of travellers as racist. (Exchange House Travellers Service, 2005, www.exchangehouse.ie) (accessed 14/10/10)

The failure to acknowledge traveller oppression as racism may be stemming from failure to acknowledge travellers as a distinct ethnic group. ‘While travellers are visually racialised in society by their normandism, they were also marked through their physical, not structural whiteness. This failure to associate the marginalisation of travellers in Irish Society with racism supports a false understanding of racism as pertaining exclusively or primarily to people of colour’ (Downes & Gilligan 2007’249) despite definitions such as Burke and Harrison’s (2000? 283) who believe:

‘racism is a multidimensional and complex system of power and powerlessness, a process in which powerful groups are able to dominate, which can be seen in the differential outcomes for less powerful groups in accessing services in the health and welfare, education, housing and the legal and criminal justice systems.’

This notion of ‘power’ can demonstrate the segregations in society, and can heighten the oppression faced by those of ethnic minority groups.

‘The development of racial ideology does not reflect the state of knowledge about racial differences but an aspect of social conflict.'(Ely and Denny 1987’4) Racism is a negative term with negative connotations and can be seen as a socially constructed ideology rather than a biological entity. (Thompson 2006) The impact of racism on ethnic minority groups can be detrimental, it can place many restraint on the lives of the individuals such as being restricted in what services they can avail of, the lack of knowledge about the provisions and opportunities available to them. ‘Racism damages those it oppresses socially, economically and politically.’ (Dominelli 2008’65)

Thompson (1993, p19) states that:

“P refers to the personal or psychological; it is the individual level thoughts, feelings, attitudes and actions. It also refers to practice, individual workers interacting with individual clients, and prejudice, the inflexibility of mind, which stands in the way of fair and non – judgmental practice.

C refers to the cultural level of shared ways of seeing, thinking and doing. It relates to the commonalities, values and patterns of thought and behaviour, an assumed consensus about what is right and what is normal; It produces conformity to social norms, and comic humour acts as a vehicle for transmitting and reinforcing this culture.

S refers to the structural level, the network of social divisions; it relates to the ways in which oppression and discrimination are institutionalised and thus ‘sewn in’ to the fabric of society. It denotes the wider level of social forces, the socio-political dimension of interlocking patterns of power and influence.

At the Personal Level Travellers can be seen to be oppressed in many ways, the impressions that Travellers are dirty, criminal

As a minority group, Travellers suffer discrimination and oppression; they are marginalised and excluded by people of the ‘settled community.’ Poverty is seen to be part of daily living within the travelling community and many of the ‘settled’ community feel that it is due to their Normandic way of life and that it could be solved by settling down and getting a job. (De Burca & Jeffers 1999; Cited in Downes & Gilligan, 2007:249)

Rather than offering a structural explanation for traveller poverty, or an understanding of these experiences from the travellers’ point of view, the views and interpretations of the dominant cultural group are usually imposed on travellers. (Downes & Gilligan 2007) However the oppression faced by travellers cannot be seen just from a personal point of view, it needs to be viewed in a broader context. Racism manifests itself in many different ways in society. Thompsons (2006) PCS model provides an understanding to how racism des so; it can be seen to operate at three different levels, the personal, cultural and structural. Clifford and Burke (2009’18) believe that ‘Oppression operates at both structural and personal levels at the same time.’

Since the formation of the Welfare State many changes have come about which have resulted in positive actions in attempting to challenge racism and the oppression faced by people in Society. Social Policy plays an important part in promoting integration in society. ‘One of the functions of the Welfare provision in general, is to promote the integration of individuals in society.’ (Oliver 1996’78) These policies may be interpreted as responses to perceived social needs. The policies evolve within an environment where problems come to the forefronts that are seen to require political solutions and pressures occur for new political responses. (Hill 2009)

Social Work practice is transforming through the creation of social relations, fostering equality and justice in moving toward an anti- racist approach, a political stance against racism is adopted on the personal, institutional and cultural levels within policies, practice, education and Social Work organisations. (Dominelli, 2008)

O’Connell (2006’5) states that ‘Travellers have been victims of violence and intimidation and have been subject to exclusion from services, giving rise to many cases under the Equal Status Act.’ This Act covers discrimination on the grounds of gender, race, age, marital status, family status, religion, sexual orientation, disability and membership of the Traveller Community. ‘Deconstructing power relations and privileging within professional relationships can begin the processes of changing professional and organisational structures.’ Dominelli (2008:77)

The Traveller Education strategy (2006) seeks an end to separate Traveller provision in education to be replaced by inclusive provision in main stream services.

The need to respect Travellers’ rights is a logical element of the new human rights and equality architecture established since 1998: the creation of an Equality Authority to promote equality, an Equality Tribunal to hear discrimination cases, the National Consultative Committee on Racism and Interculturalism (NCCRI) to give expert advice on these issues, and the Irish Human Rights Commission (IHRC) to promote human rights. Ireland has adopted new anti-discrimination legislation (1998 Employment Equality Act and 2000 Equal Status Act), and most recently the State has announced a National Action Plan against Racism (Department of Justice 2005).

Anti-racist initiatives are reflected in Social Work education and practice, many Social work organisations engaged with what is known as Race Awareness Training. These initiative target Social Work education as well as service delivery. CCETSW implemented an anti racist policy which was aimed at looking at ways to educate student and practitioners of anti-racist practices. (Llewellyn 2008)

Families and individuals have to overcome new challenges due to disability and chronic illness. Families have suffer financial burden related to providing health facilities, education and buying appropriate equipment for the disabled or chronically ill member of the family. Some times house needs to modified to accommodate the needs of affected individual. Sometimes families and affected individuals get financial help from social services but getting the whole procedure and paper work done puts an extra burden while caring for the affected family member. Sometimes the situation is more worse when affected families and individuals suffer because they are unaware of the facilities and help they can get from government institutes

Stress:

Caring for the affected member of the family on daily basis puts family members under constant stress, anxiety, and depression and also physical fatigue. Family members and the affected individual become uncertain about the future.

The affected individual also suffers from the frustration of disability and losing function.

Gender:

Disability affects family members differently- female family members tend to be more considerate and affectionate towards the affected person while male family members tend to provide financial support. Most families who are responsible for the care of disabled/chronically ill members of the family find this division of labour according to gender an easy way to manage and cope with challenges.

Gender also affects disabled individual- female and male individual show different attitudes towards physical disability or chronic illness/pain. Women do not feel comfortable outside their home anf find it dangerous while men tend to adapt to their reduced function and still tend to be as functional as is possible. Disabled females tend to be more dependent on family and friends compared to disabled males.

Relationships:

Often relatioships change their meanings within the family responsible to care for a disabled member. The person who is mainly responsible for the care/ entertainment/ diet and necessities of the disabled person tends to take more important position in the family and the rest of the family becomes less involved in decision making. If a mother is more involved in the care of a disabled child this can lead to father being less involved in the care responsibilities and tend to indulge himself more in work or activities outside home- this can sometimes lead to conflicts within the families with one member feeling overburdened.

Lifestyle:

Most of the resources (money, time etc) of a family with a disabled member are spent in the care of the disabled leading to an overall lower quality of life. Families have to give up entertainment plans such as holidays due to lack of resources, facilities and extra responsibility of care.

Friends, neighbors, and people in the community may react negatively to the disability by avoidance, disparaging remarks or looks, or overt efforts to exclude people with disabilities and their families. Despite the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act in 1990, many communities still lack programs, facilities, and resources that allow for the full inclusion of persons with disabilities. Families often report that the person with the disability is not a major burden for them. The burden comes from dealing with people in the community whose attitudes and behaviors are judgmental, stigmatizing, and rejecting of the disabled individual and his or her family (Knoll 1992; Turnbull et al. 1993). Family members report that these negative attitudes and behaviors often are characteristic of their friends, relatives, and service providers as well as strangers (Patterson and Leonard 1994).

Social stigma:

Families with disabled member and disabled individual themselves feel isolated from the society. Friends, neighbours and other family might not play their supportive role effectively

Overall, stress from these added demands of disability in family life can negatively affect the health and functioning of family members (Patterson 1988; Varni and Wallander 1988). Numerous studies report that there is all increased risk of psychological and behavioral symptoms in the family members of persons with disabilities (Cadman et al. 1987; Singer and Powers 1993; Vance, Fazan, and Satterwhite 1980). However, even though disability increases the risk for these problems, most adults and children who have a member with a disability do not show psychological or behavioral problems. They have found ways to cope with this added stress in their lives. Increasingly, the literature on families and disabilities emphasizes this adaptive capacity of families. It has been called family resilience (Patterson 1991b; Singer and Powers 1993; Turnbull et al. 1993). Many families actually report that the presence of disability has strengthened them as a family-they become closer, more accepting of others, have deeper faith, discover new friends, develop greater respect for life, improve their sense of mastery, and so on.

While there are many commonalities regarding the impact of disabilities on families, other factors lead to variability in the impact of disability on the family. Included in these factors are the type of disability, which member of the family gets the disability, and the age of onset of the disability.

Disabilities vary along several dimensions, including the degree and type of incapacitation (sensory, motor, or cognitive); the degree of visibility of the disability; whether the course of the condition is constant, relapsing, or progressive; the prognosis or life expectancy of the person; the amount of pain or other symptoms experienced; and the amount of care or treatment required. John Rolland (1994) has outlined a typology of chronic conditions based on some of these factors and has described the psychosocial impact on families based on these factors. His argument, and that of several others (Perrin et al. 1993; Stein et al. 1993), is that the variability in the psychosocial impact of chronic conditions is related more to characteristics of the condition than to the diagnosis per se.

Consider the course of the condition. When it is progressive (such as degenerative arthritis or dementia), the symptomatic person may become increasingly less functional. The family is faced with increasing caretaking demands, uncertainty about the degree of dependency and what living arrangement is best, as well as grieving continuous loss. These families need to readjust continuously to the increasing strain and must be willing to find and utilize outside resources. If a condition has a relapsing course (such as epilepsy or cancer in remission), the ongoing care may be less, but a family needs to be able to reorganize itself quickly and mobilize resources when the condition flares up. They must be able to move from normalcy to crisis alert rapidly. An accumulation of these dramatic transitions can exhaust a family. Disabilities with a constant course (such as a spinal cord injury) require major reorganization of the family at the outset and then perseverance and stamina for a long time. While these families can plan, knowing what is ahead, limited community resources to help them may lead to exhaustion.

Disabilities where mental ability is limited seem to be more difficult for families to cope with (Breslau 1993; Cole and Reiss 1993; Holroyd and Guthrie 1986). This may be due to greater dependency requiring more vigilance by family members, or because it limits the person’s ability to take on responsible roles, and perhaps limits the possibilities for independent living. If the mental impairment is severe, it may create an extra kind of strain for families because the person is physically present in the family but mentally absent. This kind of incongruence between physical presence and psychological presence has been called boundary ambiguity (Boss 1993). Boundary ambiguity means that it is not entirely clear to family members whether the person (with the disability in this case) is part of the family or not because the person is there in some ways but not in others. Generally, families experience more distress when situations are ambiguous or unclear because they do not know what to expect and may have a harder time planning the roles of other family members to accommodate this uncertainty.

In addition to cognitive impairment, other characteristics of disabilities can create ambiguity and uncertainty for families. For example, an uncertain life expectancy makes it difficult to plan future life roles, to anticipate costs of care, or to make decisions about the best living arrangements for adults requiring assistance in the activities of daily living. For example, from 1970 to 1991, survival for children with cystic fibrosis increased 700 percent, to a life expectancy of twenty-six years in the United States (Fitzsimmons 1991). These young adults now face difficult family decisions, such as whether to marry and whether to have children. In more extreme cases related to severe medical conditions, persons may have their lives extended by using advances in biomedical science and technology. When this happens, families can be faced with very difficult decisions about what techniques and equipment should be used, for how long, with what expected gains, at what cost, and so on. Society is facing new issues in biomedical ethics, but there is no social consensus about how aggressively to intervene and under what circumstances. Family members who bear the emotional burden of these decisions do not always agree on a course of action and, furthermore, may be blocked by hospitals and courts from carrying out a particular course of action. While these kinds of cases may not yet be widespread, they have sparked intense debate and raised the consciousness of many families about issues they may face.

In addition to type of impairment, there is variability in the severity of impairment. The degree to which a person with disability is limited in doing activities or functions of daily living (e.g., walking, feeding oneself, and toileting) can be assessed and is called functional status. The lower the person’s functional status, the more assistance he or she will need from other people and/or from equipment and devices. Family members are a primary source of this needed assistance (Biegel, Sales, and Schulz 1991; Stone and Kemper 1989). Providing this assistance can create a burden for family caregivers, which may result in physical or psychological symptoms of poor health. For example, parents, especially mothers, experience more depression when their children with disabilities have lower functional status (Patterson, Leonard, and Titus 1992; Singer et al. 1993). For elderly caregivers, physical strain may be a limiting factor in how much and for how long assistance can be provided for the disabled individual (Blackburn 1988).

The age of the person when the disability emerges is associated with different impacts on the family and on the family’s life course, as well as on the course of development for the person with disability (Eisenberg, Sutkin, and Jansen 1984). When conditions emerge in late adulthood, in some ways this is normative and more expectable. Psychologically it is usually less disruptive to the family. When disability occurs earlier in a person’s life, this is out of phase with what is considered normative, and the impact on the course of development for the person and the family is greater. More adjustments have to be made and for longer periods of time.

When the condition is present from birth, the child’s life and identity are shaped around the disability. In some ways it may be easier for a child and his or her family to adjust to never having certain functional abilities than to a sudden loss of abilities later. For example, a child with spina bifida from birth will adapt differently than a child who suddenly becomes a paraplegic in adolescence due to an injury.

The age of the parents when a child’s disability is diagnosed is also an important consideration in how the family responds. For example, teenage parents are at greater risk for experiencing poor adaptation because their own developmental needs are still prominent, and they are less likely to have the maturity and resources to cope with the added demands of the child. For older parents there is greater risk of having a child with certain disabilities, such as Down syndrome. Older parents may lack the stamina for the extra burden of care required, and they may fear their own mortality and be concerned about who will care for their child when they die.

The course of the child’s physical, psychological, and social development will forever be altered by the chronic condition. Since development proceeds sequentially, and since relative success at mastering the tasks of one stage is a prerequisite for facing the challenges of the next stage, one could anticipate that the earlier the onset, the greater the adverse impact on development (Eisenberg, Sutkin, and Jansen 1984).

There are many ways in which the accomplishment of development tasks is complicated for persons with disabilities. This, in turn, has an effect on their families as well as on which family roles can be assumed by the person with disability (Perrin and Gerrity 1984). For example, in infancy, disability may frighten parents, or the infant may be unresponsive to their nurturing efforts such that attachment and bonding necessary for the development of trust are compromised. The parent may feel inadequate as a caregiver, and parenting competence is undermined. For a toddler, active exploration of the social environment, needed to develop a sense of autonomy and self-control, may be restricted because of the child’s motor, sensory, or cognitive deficits. Parents, fearing injury or more damage to their young child, may restrict their child’s efforts to explore and learn, or they may overindulge the child out of sympathy or guilt. If other people react negatively to the child’s disability, parents may try to compensate by being overly protective or overly solicitous. These parent behaviors further compromise the child’s development of autonomy and self-control.

As children with disabilities move into school environments where they interact with teachers and peers, they may experience difficulties mastering tasks and developing social skills and competencies. Although schools are mandated to provide special education programs for children in the least restrictive environment and to maximize integration, there is still considerable variability in how effectively schools do this. Barriers include inadequate financing for special education; inadequately trained school personnel; and, very often, attitudinal barriers of other children and staff that compromise full inclusion for students with disabilities. Parents of children with disabilities may experience a whole set of added challenges in assuring their children’s educational rights. In some instances, conflict with schools and other service providers can become a major source of strain for families (Walker and Singer 1993). In other cases, school programs are a major resource for families.

Developmental tasks of adolescence- developing an identity and developing greater autonomy-are particularly difficult when the adolescent has a disability. Part of this process for most adolescents generally involves some risk-taking behaviors, such as smoking and drinking. Adolescents with disabilities take risks too, sometimes defying treatment and procedures related to their condition, such as skipping medications or changing a prescribed diet. Issues related to sexuality may be particularly difficult because the person with disability has fears about his or her desirability to a partner, sexual performance, and worries about ever getting married or having children (Coupey and Cohen 1984). There is some evidence that girls may be at greater risk for pregnancy because of their desire to disavow their disability and prove their normalcy (Holmes 1986). Teens with mental impairment may be subjected to sexual exploitation by others.

When disability has its onset in young adulthood, the person’s personal, family, and vocational plans for the future may be altered significantly. If the young adult has a partner where there is a long-term commitment, this relationship may be in jeopardy, particularly if the ability to enact adult roles as a sexual partner, parent, financial provider, or leisure partner are affected (Ireys and Burr 1984). When a couple has just begun to plan a future based on the assumption that both partners would be fully functional, they may find the adjustment to the disability too great to handle. The development of a relationship with a significant other after the disability is already present is more likely to lead to positive adjustment. Young adulthood is that critical transition from one’s family of origin to creating a new family unit with a partner and possibly children. When disability occurs at this stage, the young adult’s parents may become the primary caregivers, encouraging or bringing the young person home again. The risk is that the developmental course for the young adult and his or her parents may never get back on track. This is influenced in part by the extent to which there are independent living options for persons with disabilities to make use of in the community.

When the onset of disability occurs to adults in their middle years, it is often associated with major disruption to career and family roles. Those roles are affected for the person with the disability as well as for other family members who have come to depend on him or her to fulfill those roles. Some kind of family reorganization of roles, rules, and routines is usually required. If the person has been employed, he or she may have to give up work and career entirely or perhaps make dramatic changes in amount and type of work. The family may face a major loss of income as well as a loss in health and other employee benefits. If the person is a parent, childrearing responsibilities may be altered significantly. The adult may have to switch from being the nurturer to being the nurtured. This may leave a major void in the family for someone to fill the nurturing role. If the person is a spouse, the dynamics of this relationship will change as one person is unable to perform as independently as before. The partner with the disability may be treated like another child. The sexual relationship may change, plans for having more children may be abandoned, lifestyle and leisure may be altered. Some spouses feel that their marital contract has been violated, and they are unwilling to make the necessary adjustments. Children of a middle-aged adult with a disability also experience role shifts. Their own dependency and nurturing needs may be neglected. They may be expected to take on some adult roles, such as caring for younger children, doing household chores, or maybe even providing some income. How well the family’s efforts at reorganization work depends ultimately on the family’s ability to accommodate age-appropriate developmental needs. In families where there is more flexibility among the adults in assuming the different family roles, adjustment is likely to be better.

The onset of disability in old age is more expectable as bodily functions deteriorate. This decline in physical function is often associated with more depression. An older person may live for many years needing assistance in daily living, and the choices of where to get that assistance are not always easily made. Spouses may be unable to meet the extra caretaking needs indefinitely as their own health and stamina decline (Blackburn 1988). Adult children are often in a position of deciding where their elderly parent or parents should live when they can no longer care for themselves. Having their parents move in with them or having them move to a nursing home or seniors’ residence are the most common options. However, each of these choices carries with it emotional, financial, and social costs to the elderly person as well as to his or her adult children. This responsibility for elderly parents is not always shared among adult children. Adult daughters are more likely than adult sons to be involved in providing direct care for their elderly parents (Brody 1985). The many decisions and responsibilities can be sources of tension, conflict, and resentment among extended family members. This period of disability in old age can go on for a very long time, given the medical capability to sustain life. While the practice is still not widespread, more elderly people are preparing a living will, which is a legal document preventing extraordinary means from being used to prolong their lives.

Unaccompanied asylum seeking children (UASC) are amongst the discriminated and oppressed social groups in the UK .They are vulnerable but this is not always well matched with their access to services (Kohli and Mitchell, 2007) and they are just children in need (Howarth 2001).This essay shall explore some aspects of discrimination that affect them, the legislative and policy context in which discrimination is located and how organised systems in policy and law attempt to address this reality. Reference shall be made to direct experiences from unaccompanied asylum seeking children and also link their experiences to those of the broader asylum seekers category in order to establish the prospects of equality in the context of social services support.

One of the core elements in the effective support of vulnerable people is to treat every person /child/adult as an individual. In this case, each child has their own narrative which must be looked at holistically in order to create necessary support structures which would trigger the necessary welfare provisions for the individual to be safeguarded and supported through their crisis. Hynes (2011) argues that asylum seekers are far removed from the perception of being ordinary people.

‘Instead, they continue to experience extraordinary circumstances in the UK, with the common experience of being socially excluded and with little opportunity for these experiences to be understood’ (Hynes 2011:p.42).

Kohli (2007) reiterates that in guidance for working with this vulnerable group, the dominant theme must be one of seeing them as ‘children in need first’ and as asylum claimants later. UASC’s extraordinary experiences cut across all facets of life, across time, across continents, access to services, through detention, lack of adequate supportive information, language barriers, tough procedures and negative social labels.

The term ‘unaccompanied asylum-seeking children’ is used to describe individuals who arrive in the UK under the age of 18, without a parent or other adult relative or guardian who is prepared to take responsibility for them, and who make an application for asylum in their own right (United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR,1994)

Home Office (2012) figures issued show that ‘In 2011, 6% (1,277) of main applicants were UASC. Almost a third (30%) of UASC applications were made by male nationals of Afghanistan; and overall 82% (1,049) of applications were from male applicants. UASC annual applications continue to fall and fell by 26% between 2010 (1,717 applications) and 2011. This decreasing trend has been influenced by falling applications from nationals of Afghanistan’. There are direct drivers of the migration of unaccompanied minors like war and civil unrest, rape and torture which rise beyond the economic argument that is often painted by the media.

Where UK born children are treated and understood as innocent, UASC are defined by their immigration status and suspicion (Kvittingen, 2012, Sales, 2007). It’s extremely difficult for UASC to navigate through the system of immigration to welfare. In the same environment there are two forces at work, social work practice versus political and economic environment. The initial hurdle is the immigration process which is restrictive and controlling. An example would be that of the age assessment process. Cemlyn & Briskman (2003) argue that there are limited resources for social work teams which inevitably shrink the resources with which the social workers have at their disposal. The unfair outcome includes high % of age disputes that often exclude UASC from the welfare provision under the Children Act 1989, Section 20 for looked after children. From such processes, difference in treatment emerges and discrimination and oppression are experienced.

Discrimination and oppression

Thompson (2012) characterises discrimination as a process where difference is identified and the difference becomes the basis ‘of unfair treatment’ (Thompson 2012:7) Experiences resulting from such treatment locate the individual in a disadvantaged position. Thompson adds that this ‘discrimination then becomes a source of oppression. The process of identifying some people as ‘different’ and when they receive inhuman or degrading treatment’ is that key moment which social work practice must stand and challenge (Thompson 2012). Discrimination is therefore understood in its sociological, political and psychological contexts (Thompson 2012) by centrally considering inherent power dynamics between the vulnerable asylum seeking child and the service provider located at the centre of welfare distribution and care.

From arrival, UASC must be understood as children in search of safety, as individuals with positive ambitions and as individuals in need of support (Kohli 2007). The social work intervention process has been implicated for being oppressive by Humphries (2004);

Social work has been drawn into implementing racist policy initiatives whilst maintaining its unreflective, self deceiving ‘anti-oppressive ‘belief systems (p95)

It is always important to realise that whilst there is great emphasis on good practice as anti-discriminatory practice, ‘The relationship is a double edged one, consisting of elements of care and control. It is double edged in the sense that it can lead to either empowerment or potential oppression. The state through its machinery can control people to the extent that they become discriminated and oppressed. ‘Social work interventions can help or hinder, empower or oppress’ (Thompson 2012:8). There are inherent power dynamics in operation, with the UASC occupying the weak needy position versus the state and its range of oppressive machinery. Moral obligations rather than differences must take precedence in the provision of services. There are numerous levels at which the difference of UASC are treated differently. Khohli (2007) argues that there have been numerous concerns raised regarding shortfalls in the areas of education, health provision and immigration practices and how social work policies reinforce these disparities.

There are socially constructed perceptions and structural determinants in the discrimination and oppression of UASC worth looking at .Thompson’s model of understanding how inequalities and discrimination feature in people’s lives within their interactions by way of a PCS model (Thompson 2012) which emphasises on the Personal, Cultural and Structural determinants and levels at which discrimination operates. From the moment that the children arrive in UK they are bombarded with administrative processes that are complex, processes that include age assessment, and face a restrictive immigration system which stands as an enormous wall potentially blocking their access to welfare. Crawley (2007) argues that all these processes are more focussed on border control than on welfare provision.

Part of the key procedure on entry for welfare provision is the age assessment, this is carried out by social workers and the determination on the assessment can determine the UASC’s life. Age assessments are not always accurate and there are medical error margins of up to 5 years either side (Lenvenson& Sharma 2004). Suspicion, doubt, lack of trust and general prejudice about asylum seekers is a reality that the media has successfully propelled. Thomas, (Guardian, 2012) British Red Cross head of external relations proved that the public perception of asylum seekers is primarily painted as ‘scroungers’. Professionals must support UASC without such prejudices and the social constructions which hinder the diversity agenda and structural tools which are designed to fail these children must be abandoned and these children must be seen as children first.Collett (2004) argues that ‘social workers are increasingly drawn into the dirty work of social policy, where we reinforce the oppressions that we should be challenging’ (2004;88).Humphries (2004)adds that the role of social work has shifted towards control, restriction, surveillance and ultimately exclusion. There has been a gravitational shift of social workers into pseudo immigration officials. The cost of which has been the loss of the humanistic, companionship and welfare element which are core in cultural tolerance and diversity in social work practice.

Besides the systems’ restrictive nature, the asylum process is stressful for children who have just escaped a traumatic past in the hope of finding help and support (Kohli, 2007). There is sufficient evidence examined regarding the ever shifting ‘goal posts’ system for asylum seekers intended to squeeze them out and deter application influxes. An example is UASC’s housing needs processing which reinforces the differences between UK born children where some UASC are being housed in hostels where there is evidence of low level support and detachment. UASC are often sacrificed through fast track housing provisions as demonstrated in Solihull where Wellman (2011) argues that teenage asylum seekers were to be treated ‘less favourably’ than local children under plans by Solihull Council to fast-track them from foster care into supported housing.

Watters (2008) examines the position of unaccompanied asylum seeking children in the UK tracing their experiences from ports of entry and highlights that safety and security are key aspirations for these children in an environment that is not hostile, a place to call home and enjoy life as a child. There is a ‘aˆ¦pervasive culture of disbelief among immigration and welfare institutions in receiving countries’ (Watters 2008:71) of UASC. It is important to understand their pre-departure experiences. Against this background of aspirations reality is often different, the welcoming description at pre-departure often vanished as children faced a stark reality of having no food, no money and oftentimes unable to speak the language. More so, there is often lack of support during the early parts of the asylum screening interview, yet this later forms the basis of whether the application is successful or not (Watters 2008).

Being a foreigner in the UK must be understood as a package that has a host of attachments to it, some often face multiple discriminations e.g. black asylum seeking children could lead to being racially maltreated in communities/context of where they are accommodated after care. This perpetuates the cycle of social exclusion and discrimination. Thompson’s PCS model would here be referred to in the context of how community’s social construction and media perceive UASC and resultant repulsive treatment.

According to the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC 2012), UASC often find the situations exacerbating their social category of oppression and discrimination in that the conditions in immigration screening centres are not child-friendly. Oftentimes there is very little or no knowledge and a lack of understanding about the specific issues relating to child-specific forms of persecution because of the remoteness of where they are coming from. An Independent Guardian in this case would help in establishing support bases for the young people and to be a disclosure point. It is difficult for young people to share their innermost life story to strangers, communication depends highly on relationship and having this support relationship helps the young people’s presentation of their case (NSPCC).

UASC’s transition into adulthood has another host of challenges in which they need support to be ready enough for life on their own .The NSPCC argues that ‘the National Asylum Support System (NASS) prevents vulnerable children from falling through the net (NSPCC). If there is lack of support, then the outcome can either be their disappearance or exploitation. This means that it is of paramount importance to extend the support so that the system cushions the young people rather than leaving them to fall into uncertainty where poverty, social exclusion, discrimination and oppression can take over. Any failing by the state through its range of support machinery for young people would perpetuate the cycle of poverty and the oppression of UASC.

In cases where age assessment determines the UASC as over 18, this leads to detention where their treatment transforms to that of an adult and welfare support deficit is experienced. NSPCC has an example in the stories of two boys in contact with one Young People’s Centres. ‘The boys had their age disputed for more than a year. One of these boys was placed in National Asylum Support Service (NASS) accommodation. He was a vulnerable child, yet he was placed in unsupported accommodation with adults. Neither of the boys was able to receive support from the local authority and as such their safeguarding and emotional wellbeing needs were not met’ (NSPCC). Such an experience affects the child, and as this essay has argued, it’s because of structural reasons, tools and processes that not always accurately capture the reality of children and their lives, this affects service provision. Fast tracking this contested age category for housing can be counterproductive and oppressive as it fails to account for the individual child’s needs.

The dispersal model applied in the UK for asylum seekers extends the idea of what Carter and El-Hassan (2003:10-11) term ‘institutionalised seclusion’. Hynes (2011) describes the dispersal situation as ‘betwixt and between’, in a country but outside mainstream society. The incremental exclusion of asylum seekers through this method has been patterned through the service allocation system saliently eroding the individual rights of asylum seekers who receive support as a homogenous group in chosen isolated locations.Overall, the system is a deterrent immigration strategy. Hynes (2011) adds that ,’The exclusion of asylum seekers from ordinary living patterns through exclusionary practices and the inability to restore normal routines during the dispersal process meant that they occupied luminal spaces’ (p.178). The same can be applied to children who are allocated accommodation in areas where there are few or no support services for them. Dispersal without considering the welfare and interests of the child is administratively and structurally discriminatory; safeguarding the children should still remain a core element in the child’s service provision considerations as part of aftercare support.

Part of the systemic discrimination is a result of limited training for social workers which makes it appear as if UASC are difficult to reach, when in actual fact it is a group that is easy to ignore! At community level UASC are viewed with disgust, racist abuse and educational underperformance. At school, Rutter argues that ‘central government needs to acknowledge school children’s under-achievement also has causes that lie outside the school’ (Rutter 2006:208)

Legal Framework for UASC

In order to protect the rights of the UASC and be professionally consistent, they must be treated as children first and foremost and the Children’s Act 1989 becomes relevant. Of importance from The Children Act 1989 are clauses stating that the welfare of children must be the paramount consideration when the courts are making decisions about them and local authorities are charged with duties to identify children in need and to safeguard and promote their welfare. Also importantly stated is the fact that delays in deciding questions concerning children are likely to prejudice their welfare. Local authority must provide welfare by seeing UASC as children first. This law provides a safety net for all children within the UK borders. The conflict emerges where Immigration law meets children’s rights legislation and a radical shift emerges emphasising more on controlling borders than welfare provision (Fell, Hayes, 2007).

UASC must be assessed by the Framework for the assessment of children in need and their families and accommodated under Section 20 of the Children Act 1989 (NSPCC). As a result of lack of clarity on children’s available support, some children have been placed in bed and breakfast accommodation without support, mixing with adults whose criminal history is often not held. This exposes the vulnerable children to abuse and exploitation. Such a system again demonstrates how structural procedures discriminate and oppress UASC. The semi-independent living option is also not a better option for those just over 16. Their vulnerability levels are high and support is highly needed to safeguard them in their development and transition into adulthood.

The Human Rights Act is a guiding legal framework applied in the UK and is core to how UASC in particular and refugees in general are supported. Asylum seekers are to be treated as individuals with rights namely the Right to life, Freedom from torture, Freedom from slavery, Right to a fair trial, Freedom of speech and Freedom of thought, conscience and religion.

The Human Rights law is a universal safeguard and UASC can be protected from discrimination by its application. In a study carried out by the Independent Asylum Commission, Sir Waite said,

“The overuse of detention, the scale of destitution and the severity of removals are all areas which need attention before the system can be described as fit for purpose. The detention of asylum seekers is overused, oppressive and an unnecessary burden on the taxpayer, and the detention of children wholly unjustified”. Dawar (2008) [The guardian]

Its only by appealing to law that such progressive challenges can be made.

The NSPCC (2012) campaigns and supports these children on the basis of equality arguing that the protection and welfare of asylum-seeking and refugee children is the same as that afforded to other children. The Children’s rights must be considered as core elements in the planning, assessment and service provision for this vulnerable group considering the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child particularly instruments for the right to maximum survival and development ,the right to identity ,the right to family unity and the right to participate .The right to protection from all forms of violence, injury, abuse, neglect or exploitation as well as the right to special assistance if the child is deprived of their family .The right to be protected from economic exploitation and the right to protection from violence, abuse, exploitation, trafficking is only realisable where the UASC are supported fully without falling through the safety net. Issues around the limitation of detention as a measure of last resort are important in working with UASC. The duty of the government to take measures to ensure that child victims of armed conflict, torture, neglect or exploitation receive treatment for recovery and social integration is important as part of the therapeutic support necessary for their wellbeing.

Policy and Practice guidance’s on working with UASC

By use of legislation and practice guidance’s, UASC can be safeguarded and supported. Instead of describing them as UASC’s these young people view themselves as (and rightly so) ‘footballers’ ‘doctors’ ‘teachers’ ‘president’. They are ambitious and determined to live outside this discriminatory environment and label. Payne (2005) argues that, ‘Some people dislike being called minority or oppressed groups, or being associated with any groups at all. Sometime because it might imply being seen as a victim of categorisation, which the person does not accept’ (2005:289).

Conclusion

Practical, political and procedural realities are scattered on the social worker’s professional pathway. Kohli (2007) rightly paints the complexity of being an UASC and being a social worker in the UK. The needs of vulnerable UASC remain a stark reality, leaves the social worker on the margins by either not being good enough or being too harsh (Kohli 2007). A young person from Glasgow said “Home is home – if it was better there I would have stayed”. Understanding UASC past, building relationships with them in humane ways and safeguarding them by use of law can enhance anti-oppressive practice. This can be the basis for challenging discrimination of this vulnerable child group. Social workers cannot achieve this alone, voluntary sector agencies like the Refugee Council and NSPCC can work in partnership with the UKBA to set intervention strategies for this vulnerable group with the care and sensitivity due for any child in need in UK.

Human Services Worker is a generic term for people who hold professional and paraprofessional jobs in such divers settings as group homes and hallway houses; correctional, mental retardation, and community mental health centers; family, child, and youth service agencies, and programs concerned with alcoholism, drug abuse, family violence, and aging (Harris, Maloney, and Rother, pg. 205). Human services have helped lots of people to manage their life or get them back on their feet. Human services are broad, and contain a lot of job titles. One thing that human service workers all have in common is their desire to help others. The primary purpose of human service worker is to assist individual and communities to function as effectively as possible in the major domains of living (NOHS, 2012). They are people who have the patience, understanding, and caring in their dealings with others is highly valued by employers (NOSH, 2012). Case worker refers to an individual who possesses a degree in social work from a school or program accredited by the Council on Social Work Education (NASW, 2010). Case worker, is a primary method of social work that is concerned with the change and improvement of helping people towards a satisfying human relation.

Case worker are employed by large number of organizations. In America, most government agencies that provide social services to children in poor or troubled families have a staff of caseworkers, each of whom is assigned a proportion of the cases under review at any given time (Enwikipedia, 2012). Case worker does a lot each day depending on where the work and their level of expertise. The kind of services that they provide varies widely. They can work with people who are without shelter or home, ill, or with family that has issues. Case worker provides resources to the people who are in need of them. An example would be like, providing families a parenting class that can help fix their family difficulties. They set up programs that will provide some sort of help. There are many case workers who give out counseling help. Case worker (social work profession) has increasingly highlighted the importance of racial diversity and cultural competency training in social work education and practice (Freeman, 2010). There are two types of case worker (social worker): direct-service social worker who help people solve and cope with problems in their everyday lives, and clinical social workers, who diagnose and treat mental, behavioral, and emotional issues (Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2012).

Direct-service case workers usually help address everyday problems from finding work or applying for government aid. Direct-case social workers typically do the following (Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2012):

Identify people who need help

Assess clients’ needs, situations, strengths, and support networks to determine their goals

Develop plans to improve their clients’ well-being

Help clients adjust to changes and challenges in their lives, such as illness, divorce, or unemployment

Research and refer clients to community resources, such as food stamps, child care, and healthcare

Help clients work with government agencies to apply for and receive benefits such as Medicare

Respond to crisis situations, such as natural disasters or child abuse

Advocate for and help clients get resources that would improve their well-being

Follow up with clients to ensure that their situations have improved

Evaluate services provided to ensure that they are effective

Direct-service workers and clinical case workers both help out people to improve their living situation in some ways, but the services they provide can be different as well. Clinical case workers generally help address mental health problems. Clinical case workers typically do the following (Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2012):

Diagnose and treat mental, behavioral, and emotional disorders, including anxiety and depression

Provide individual, group, family, and couples therapy

Assess clients’ histories, backgrounds, and situations to understand their needs, as well as their strengths and weaknesses

Develop a treatment plan with the client, doctors, and other healthcare professionals

Encourage clients to discuss their emotions and experiences to develop a better understanding of themselves and their relationships

Help clients adjust to changes in their life, such as a divorce or being laid-off

Work with clients to develop strategies to change behavior or cope with difficult situations

Refer clients to other resources or services, such as support groups or other mental health professionals

Evaluate their clients’ progress and, if necessary, adjust the treatment plan

They both can be employed in a variety of settings like in the government agencies, nonprofit agencies, school or the hospitals. Case workers are employed to help people direct the social services that are available to them. They both work as an encouraging help for people to become emotionally and financially stable so they can support themselves. In order to build a good relationship with their client, there are specific needs that clients would need to know.

The principles of building a good relationship with a client are crucial. According to Diane Depanfilis and Marsha K. Salus (2003):

The client has a need to be treated as a unique individual rather than a case, a type, or a category. Clients need to express both negative and positive feelings.

Clients need sympathetic understanding of and response to the feelings expressed. There is a delicate balance between being personally and emotionally involved with a client and maintaining a degree of professional objectivity.

Clients need to be accepted as people of worth and inherent dignity regardless of personal problems and past failures.

Clients have a need to be neither condemned nor judged for the difficulties in which they find themselves.

Clients have a need to make their own choices and decisions.

Clients have a need to keep personal information as secret as possible.

It is important to have this kind of relations with their client as their case worker. Before we can fully understand what case worker’s do, we need to know the history of case worker (social worker) in the United States and its roots in the struggle of society to deal with problems that are associated with them.

Case worker developed in the United States reflected on an ongoing mixture of ideas derived from different kind of cultures throughout history. Just as social workers appreciate the necessity of viewing individuals within context- be they social, cultural, or physical- so social work as a practice and a profession must be viewed within its sociohistorical context (Pozzuto & Arnd-Caddigan, 2008). Even before the American Revolution, services to the poor, to children, and to the mentally ill had been established in North America, many used the poor laws that were established in England to define who should receive services and the content of those services (SagePub.com, 2012). By the early 19th century, it was said that the states had begun providing relief through towns and counties. Their efforts were often poor and were self-help organizations that began to add-on to their efforts. There were lots of social welfare policies and programs that were taken for granted that occur within United States history. Since the first social work class was offered in the summer of 1898 at Columbia University, social workers have led the way developing private and charitable organizations to serve people in need (NAWS, 2012). Social workers continue to address the needs of society and bring our nation’s social problems to the public’s attention. The case worker profession devised standards and training and advocates social research and scientific methods. Their profession lead to a more consistent and focused on care for individual who are in need and a desire for social change. Our states take in responsibilities for distributing relief from towns and counties. Many of the benefits were taken for granted came about because social worker working with families and institutions spoke out against abuse and neglect (NASW, 2012):

The civil rights of all people regardless of gender, race, faith, or sexual orientation are protected.

Workers enjoy unemployment insurance, disability pay, worker’s compensation and Social Security.

People with mental illness and developmental disabilities are now afforded humane treatment.

Medicaid and Medicare give poor, disabled and elderly people access to health care.

Society seeks to prevent child abuse and neglect.

Treatment for mental illness and substance abuse is gradually losing its stigma

Case worker falls under the human services that are broadly define in maintaining to improve the quality of life services to the populations has standards that must be followed or met through the National Organization for Human Service Education (NOHSE).

The National Organization for Human Service Education (NOHSE) developed the Ethical Standards of Human Services Professionals. Case worker functions in many ways, carries many roles and responsibilities. Case workers have a long tradition with the concern of ethical dilemmas. There are several methods for dealing with ethical dilemmas. One of the most common and accepted method is the development and implementation of a professional code of ethics. The development of a code of ethics for the purpose of ethical dilemmas is involved in the development and recognition of a profession by society. Professional ethics are concerned with the correct course of professional actions when dealing with ethical dilemmas. Human Services ethics are designed to help case workers decide whether two or more challenging goals are the correct one for the given situational background. Case worker makes decisions that may affect only a few but in some case their decisions may also affect a crowd of people. There is no sure way of resolving ethical dilemmas but by knowing and honoring the ethical standards will help the case worker in making decisions that will be of the greatest benefit for the client. The ethical standards of the human services professional are a set of fifty-four guidelines developed by NOSHE to outline the human service professional responsibility to clients (NOSHE, 2012). There are lots of ethical issues and dilemmas that case worker will face, such as confidentiality.

Case worker must have a capacity to handle any situation. As a case worker, they need to make sure that their clients are aware of their rights and responsibilities, such as confidentiality. By maintaining confidentiality of information is very important. The rights and responsibilities are often laid down in legislation, codes of practices and policy documents. Case worker should always think carefully before talking to their colleagues and clients, and always ask whether a person really needs to know about your client. The confidentiality must be kept within certain borderlines, and can be broken when other service user’s rights come into conflict. Case worker should respect their client’s right to keep any information private. There may be certain information that may need to be passed to a senior member of the staff when there is someone who might be in danger. Clients can expect that you do not discuss their details with anyone else without their permission. Trust is very important.

Case worker does provide a variety of resources and help to the people who need it. Human service profession is one that promotes improved service delivery systems by addressing not only the quality of direct services, but by also seeking to improve accessibility, accountability, and coordination among professionals and agencies in service delivery (Harris, Maloney, & Rother, pg. 205). Case worker is here to assist people towards a better life as possible. They are there to help people overcome problems and make their lives better. They might work with people who are homeless, sick, or having family problems. They should be prepared to challenge attempts to undermine the profession’s traditional values through case work that will withstand commitment to vulnerable and worried people. They can work within government agencies, non-profit agencies, to school and to the hospitals. They must attempt to anticipate the emergence of ethical issues that, while perhaps unimaginable today, are likely to arise in the future as a function of societal and other changes. Maybe perhaps as a result of technological developments that may have ethical implications.

The aim of this essay is to use knowledge of human growth and development to critically discuss the theories a social worker might employ to assess a family and better understand their behaviour. A family profile will be provided and two family members selected for further discussion and the application of appropriate theories. These theories will be critiqued in terms of how they might assist social workers in making informed assessments, as well as where the theories are limited in their application.

Family Profile

The family within this case study comprises five members, all of whom live together in Elsie’s home. Table 1 presents the name, age, family position, and nationality of each family member.

Sylvie and Greg met when they were 19-years of age. They had been together for 5-years when their daughter Molly was born. They split up when Molly was 1-years old, but got back together 6-years later when Molly was 7-years of age. Greg said that they split up because he was unable to handle Sylvie’s total lack of trust in him. This caused huge arguments between them, with Sylvie constantly questioning where he was and his commitment to his family. Sylvie said that she was devastated when Greg left, but knew that it was going to happen. During their time apart Sylvie turned to alcohol and drugs, but sought counselling and support for this and the issues in her past. As a result, she has been drug and alcohol free for over 4-years.

Greg always maintained a good relationship with Molly during the 6-year separation and she lived with him and her paternal Grandparents at different points when Sylvie was not coping. Molly said that she was happy that her parents got back together.

Mason was planned and both Sylvie and Greg felt they had resolved historic issues and were committed as a family unit to having another child. Mason was born with Global Developmental Delay, which is a condition that occurs between birth to 18-years of age and is usually characterised by lower intellectual functioning and significant limitations in communication and other developmental skills. Sylvie blames herself for Mason’s condition, believing that it must somehow be linked to her ‘wild’ years of drinking and drug binges. Despite being reassured to the contrary by medical professionals and a social worker, she remains low in mood and feels that she has let everyone down. Sylvie has found bonding with Mason difficult and she feels frustrated by him not meeting his developmental milestones. Mason is in nappies, he is not yet talking, he is very unsteady on his feet and he lacks co-ordination. As a result, he still requires feeding at mealtimes and has not begun to develop independent skills. Sylvie has said that she feels like ‘sending him somewhere.’ Greg, on the other hand, feels very attached and protective towards Mason and Sylvie feels that he ‘lets him get away with anything.’ Conflict has developed between Sylvie and Greg, resulting in Greg staying at work longer and meeting up with his friends more in an effort to avoid the arguments and tension at home.

Elsie, mother to Greg, owns the large family home in which they all live. Sylvie and Greg decided that they would move in with her shortly after they got back together, as Greg’s father died very unexpectedly. The plan was that they would all support one another financially, practically and emotionally. Elsie is very involved with the children as both parents work. However, recently Elsie has been forgetting things, such as collecting Mason from the specialist childminder and this has caused tension between the adults.

There have been some difficulties with Molly at school. Sylvie was called in to Molly’s school last week as a result of Molly using racist language towards another student. The school state that Molly is very close to being excluded, as a result of her angry and disruptive behaviour. Sylvie broke down upon hearing this and explained about her low mood, feelings of despair and worries about Greg’s mum. Sylvie cannot understand the change in Molly’s behaviour and said that she and Greg need help.

Applying Human Growth and Development to Social Work

As part of this essay, there will be a focus on two members of this family: Molly and Elsie. The two theories of human growth and development to be applied to Molly are Attachment Theory and Life Course Theory. The two theories of human growth and development to be applied to Elsie are Ecological Theory and Disengagement Theory.

Anti-oppressive practice will underlie the critique and has been defined as “a form of social work practice which addresses social divisions and structural inequalities in the work that is done with ‘clients’ (users) and workers” (Dominelli, 1993, p. 24). Anti-oppressive practice is a person-centred approach synonymous with Carl Rogers (1980) philosophy of person-centred practice. It is designed to empower individuals by reducing the negative effects of hierarchy, with the emphasis being on a holistic approach to assessment. Practising in an anti-oppressive way requires valuing differences lifestyles and personal identities. This goes against common sense socialisation which portrays differences as inferior or pathological and which excludes individuals from the social world and denies them their rights.

MOLLY
Attachment Theory

Attachment Theory is a psychological theory based on the premise that young children require an attachment relationship with at least one consistent caregiver within their lives for normal social and emotional development (Bowlby, 1958). Attachment is an emotional bond between an individual and an attachment figure, usually the person who cares for them. Psychologically, attachment provides a child with security. Biologically, it provides a child with survival. Ainsworth et al. (1978) formulated four types of attachment that provide a tool for social workers to assess and understand children’s emotional experiences and psychosocial functioning: secure; insecure, ambivalent; insecure, avoiding; and disorganised.

Molly appears demonstrates insecure, ambivalent attachments, where parental care is inconsistent and unpredictable. This type of attachment is characterised by parents who fail to empathise with their children’s moods, needs and feelings. Indeed, Sylvie cannot understand the change in Molly’s behaviour, indicating an inability to empathise with Molly.

Children with insecure and ambivalent attachments often become increasingly confused and frustrated. They can become demanding, attention seeking, angry and needful, creating trouble in order to keep other people involved and interested. Feelings are acted out, as Molly has been doing at school. This is because insensitive and inconsistent care is interpreted by the child to mean that they are unworthy of love and unlovable. Such painful feelings undermine self-esteem and self-confidence and an understanding of this can ensure that social workers resist stereotypes of the moody, anti-social teenager, and instead explore the underlying reasons for changes in mood.

For Molly, the development of an attachment figure was likely to have been compromised during her early developmental years. In particular, when Molly was between the ages of 1 and 7-years old, her mother was addicted to drugs and alcohol and thus was emotionally and physically unavailable. Despite living with her father and paternal grandparents for a period of time, the overall insecurity within her family unit is likely to have impacted her ability to attach to others. If Molly did develop an attachment figure it is most likely to have been with her father or maternal grandparents, who were not unavailable due to drug or alcohol abuse during this vital developmental phase of Molly’s childhood.

Taking this into consideration, there are a number of significant changes that have occurred in Molly’s life and that involve potential attachment figures who have provided Molly with much-needed security and safety. For example, Molly’s father, whom Molly has remained close to throughout drama within the family, is no longer at home as much in an effort to avoid arguments with Sylvie. When he is at home, the tension is likely to impact the duration and quality of time spent with Molly. Indeed, marital conflict has been found to influence adolescents’ attachment security by reducing the responsiveness and effectiveness of parenting (Markiewicz, Doyle, and Brendgen, 2001). Strained marital relationships can also lead to increased marginalisation of the father who can become distanced from their children, as has been the case within this family (Markiewicz, Doyle, and Brendgen, 2001).

In addition, Molly has recently lost her grandfather, which her grandmother is also trying to come to terms with. Not only has Molly lost her grandfather, but her grandmother’s behaviour is likely to have changed as she comes to terms with her own loss. All of the key attachment figures in Molly’s life are either emotionally or physically unavailable at present. It is important to consider this within the context of Molly’s current developmental stage, which is that of adolescence.

Attachments to peers tend to emerge in adolescence, but the role of parents remains vital in teenagers successfully achieving attachments outside of the home. It is a time when parents are required to be available if needed, while the teenager makes their first independent steps into the outside world (Allen and Land, 1999). Molly’s recent problems at school could be the result of this lack of availability from adults in her life. She might also be anxious about losing her father again, creating anticipation and fear about separation from an attachment figures. The anger she expresses at school could be transference of the anger and fear created by her unstable circumstances at home. The fact that she has become racially abusive might suggest that her anger lies with her mother, who is of dual nationality.

The main critique of Attachment Theory has been in the guise of the nature versus nurture debate, the former being genetic factors and the latter being the way a child is parented. Harris (1998) argues that parents do not shape their child’s personality or character, but that a child’s peers have more influence on them than their parents. She cites that children are more influenced by their peers because they are eager to fit in. This argument is supported by twin studies showing that identical twins reared apart often develop the same hobbies, habits, and character traits; the same has been found with fraternal twins reared together (Loehlin et al., 1985; Tellegen et al., 1988; Jang et al., 1998). It is likely that nurture plays a greater role in the younger years, when parents and caregivers are the child’s primary point of contact. On the other hand, when a child enters adolescents and engages with society more, nature might take over.

Another limitation in Attachment Theory is the fact that model attachment is based on behaviours that occur during stressful separations rather than during non-stressful situations. Field (1996) astutely argues that a broader understanding of attachment requires observation of how the caregiver and child interact during natural, non-stressful situations. It is agreed that behaviours directed towards the attachment figure during separation and reunion cannot be the only factors used to define attachment.

Despite these limitations, the theory does provide valuable information regarding relationship dynamics and bonds, which social workers can use to better understanding the individual being assessed. It is, however, important to remember that what is seen as healthy attachment will vary culturally. Consideration of this is crucial to anti-oppressive practice.

Life Course Theory

Life Course Theory has been defined as a “sequence of socially defined events and roles that the individual enacts over time” (Giele and Elder, 1998, p. 22). Within this theory, the family is perceived as a micro social group within a macro social context (Bengston and Allen, 1993). According to Erikson’s 8 stages of human development, Molly is in stage five, which is characterised by a conflict between identity versus role confusion. Being of dual heritage might cause issues within this stage and within Molly’s search for identity. Evidence within the literature has shown that adolescents of dual heritage report more ethnic exploration, discrimination, and behavioural problems than those of single heritage (Ward, 2005). Indeed, this could explain why Molly is being racially abusive, in an effort to determine her own thoughts and feelings on ethnicity and the confusion it can cause. The racial abuse directed at other children might even be representative of her own anger at being of dual heritage.

Adolescence is difficult to define, but it is traditionally assumed to be between 12-18 years of age and characterised by puberty (i.e. the transformation from a child to a young person). During this time, hormones strongly influence mood swings and extremes of emotion, which might explain Molly’s difficulty controlling her anger at school. Adolescence is also when an individual starts to develop socially, increasing their independence and becoming more influenced by peers. During this time, according to Piaget’s (1964) theory of cognitive development, an individual enters the ‘formal operational stage’ and starts to understand abstract concepts, develop moral philosophies, establish and maintain satisfying personal relationships, and gain a greater sense of personal identity and purpose (Santrock, 2008). Risks to social and cognitive development include poor parental supervision and discipline, as well as family conflict (Beinart et al., 2002), showing this to be an important time to intervene with Molly.

It is these biological and social changes during adolescents that can create the stereotype of the moody, anti-social teenager. It is important that social workers do not allow negative stereotypes to influence their expectations of Molly. Instead, they need to take a holistic approach and examine where she is on the life course as well as what the character and quality of Molly’s behaviours and relationships tell them about her internal working model, defensive inclinations, emotional states and personality. This ant-oppressive approach will also allow social workers to identify links between past and present relationship experiences.

ELSIE
Ecological Theory

Bronfenbrenner’s (1977) Ecological Model of human development posits that in order to understand human development, an individual’s ecological system needs to be taken into consideration. According to the theory, an individual’s ecological system comprises five social subsystems:

Micro-system – comprising activities and social roles within the immediate environment.

Mesosystem – processes taking place between two or more different social settings.

Exosystem – processes taking place between two or more different social systems, at least one of which does not involve the individual but indirectly affects them.

Macrosystem – includes ideology, attitudes, customs, traditions, values and culture.

Chronosystem – change or consistency over time in individual characteristics and environmental characteristics.

Ecological Theory is, overall, a model of how the social environment affects the individual, with these five systems interacting and thus influencing human growth and development.

Elsie’s ecological system has been continually changing for many years. At one point she was living with her husband, son, and her granddaughter. This was followed by living alone with her husband. On losing her husband, Elsie’s son moved in with his wife and two children, one of whom has a disability. There has been very little environmental stability within Elsie’s life, at least over the last 7-years or more. It is perhaps understandable that her health has started to deteriorate. She has recently lost her husband, experienced continually fluctuating environmental conditions, and is now living in a tense atmosphere due to issues within her son’s marriage. It is also important to note that, children’s behaviour and personality can also affect the behaviour of adults; Elsie’s behaviour might be negatively affected by her granddaughters struggle through adolescence and her grandson’s disability. Taking into consideration Elsie’s ecological system highlights the importance of not making assumptions that Elsie’s increased forgetting is a sign of dementia; her symptoms may be the result of stress within her ecological system.

Despite the relevance of this theory to understanding Elsie’s situation, the critique does highlight limitations in its operationalisation (Wakefield, 1996). In particular, since past experiences and future anticipations can impact an individual’s current well-being, lack of inclusion of this element of human growth and development within the Ecological Model is a serious limitation. In addition, the emphasis of the model is on adaptation and thus it has been argued that the theory can be abused and used to encourage individuals to accept oppressive circumstances (Coady and Lehman, 2008). Social workers using this theory in their assessments ideally need to be aware that oppression and injustice are part of the environment that needs to be considered in an ecological analysis. With this consideration, the theory offers social workers a way of thinking about and assessing the relatedness of individuals and their environments; the person is assessed holistically and within the context of their social circumstances.

Disengagement Theory

Disengagement has been described by Cumming and Henry (1961) as “an inevitable mutual withdrawal . . . resulting in decreased interaction between the ageing person and others in the social systems he belongs to” (p. 227). Within their theory, they argue that older people do not contribute to society with the same efficiency as the younger population and thus become a societal burden. In order to function, therefore, society requires a process for disengaging older people. By internalising the norms of society, older people become socialised and take disengage from society due to a sense of obligation. The theory further purports that the extent to which an individual disengages determines how well they adjust to older age. In other words, continued withdrawal from society in later life has been deemed the hallmark of successful and happy ageing.

Applying this theory to Elsie’s situation, it could be that the problems surrounding her forgetfulness in collecting her grandson from school is a step towards social disengagement. Furthermore, it could be theorised that this disengagement was prompted by her husband taking the most extreme form of disengagement, which is death.

There has, however, been much critique of this theory, including the fact that many older people do not conform to this image and remain actively involved in life and in society. Hochschild (1976) has criticised the theory with what has been termed the ‘omnibus variable.’ Hochschild points out that while an older person might experience disengagement from certain social activities, such as retiring from work, they are likely to replace this with something else that is socially engaging such as being more involved in the community or becoming more family-oriented. Indeed, Hochschild’s biggest challenge to Disengagement Theory was the presentation of evidence from Cumming and Henry’s own data showing that many older people do not withdraw from society.

Disengagement Theory creates a picture of older people as lacking freedom to act on their own, thus ignoring individual ageing experiences and describing the ageing process in a purely social context (Gouldner, 1970). Indeed, Estes et al. (1982) argues that disengagement is often forced upon older people, which supports the notion that old age is just as much a social construction as it is a biological process. Older people are, in many ways, socialised into acting ‘old.’ Thus, older age is strongly related to Labelling Theory (Rosenthal and Jacobson, 1968). For example, making assumptions about old age and having low expectations of older people can become a self-fulfilling prophecy. This again raises the importance of not assuming that Elsie’s forgetting is a sign of dementia; despite being seen as a natural consequence of ageing, only a minority of people develop dementia (Stuart-Hamilton, 2006).

In many ways, Disengagement Theory serves to legitimise the marginalisation of older people and is, it could be argued, ageist and discriminative. Ageism is the application of negative stereotypes and includes actions such as categorising older people separately from ‘adults.’ This has created immense debate within social work practice, with it being believed by some that distinguishing older people from adults is oppressive and can exacerbate social isolation. Tackling social isolation is being encouraged in efforts to prevent deteriorating health in older age, suggesting that disengagement is far from the ideology purported by Cumming’s and Henry (DH, 2010). The introduction of the Equality Act 2010, which replaces the existing duties on the public sector to promote race, disability and gender equality, now comprises a single duty to promote equality across eight ‘protected’ characteristics, one of which is age. The Act also includes provisions allowing the government to make age discrimination in service planning and delivery unlawful. This is likely to be implemented in 2012 and thus it is crucial that social workers make anti-oppressive practice in the form of tackling ageism a priority. There needs to be a move away from viewing older people as an homogenous group characterised by passivity, failing health, and dependency, as highlighted within Activity Theory.

Activity Theory (Leont’ev, 1978) is a direct challenge to Disengagement Theory in that it suggests that life satisfaction is related to social interaction and level of activity. Nevertheless, as with all theories discussed within this essay, Disengagement Theory can be applied to understanding Elsie’s situation without being oppressive and without taking the extreme position that originally inspired the theory. More modern approaches to human growth and development clearly show the benefits of social engagement versus disengagement; however, disengagement remains a key factor to consider due to ageist attitudes and the socialisation of old age.

Conclusion

This essay has utilised theory and knowledge of human growth and development to demonstrate how social workers can make an informed assessment of a complex family situation. The strengths and limitations of these theories have been discussed, drawing in particular on their application within anti-oppressive practice. All theories offer a better understanding of human growth and development, with some requiring specific adaptation to encompass the core values of social work practice. Such adaptation is not necessarily a disadvantage if the key strengths of each theory are utilised alongside the knowledge and expertise of the social worker.

Discuss how oppression related to your chosen area can manifest itself in institutions and societies, and how it can impact on the lives of individuals and communities. Consider and make specific reference to the social policy response.

The term oppression is not simple to define. It is complex and can take many different forms. Sometimes it is clearly visible and at other times more subtle and difficult to identify. The purpose of this research will be to explore oppression and how it can manifest itself in institutions and societies and how it can impact on the lives of individuals and communities. In order to explore oppression this research will use people with a learning disability at its focus. Firstly this research will look at what oppression is and how oppression of people with learning disabilities has come to manifest itself in institutions and societies. This research will then explore the oppression faced by people with a learning disability and the legislation that challenges oppression. Theory such as Thompson’s (2006) PCS model will be explored in order to aid an understanding of how oppression and discrimination operate within society. Finally this research will explore vales and ethics necessary to promote anti-oppressive practice. Throughout the assignment a social policy response to oppression will be considered.

Thompson (2006) describes oppression as the inhuman or degrading treatment of individuals or groups. It is the unjust and unfair treatment of these individuals or groups of people through the negative and degrading exercise of power, both individually and structurally (Thomas and Wood: 46). “Power is used to implement unfair judgements, often widely, over specific people or groups within society” (Thomas and Wood: 46). At a personal level oppression can lead to demoralisation and a lack of self-esteem, while at a structural level it can lead to the denial of rights and citizenship (Dalrymple ad Burke 2006: 121). Any factors which may perceive a person as being different from the majority increase the possibility of oppression.

Discrimination and oppression are often found when considering people with learning disabilities. This could be due to the confusion between mental illness and learning disability and also the way people with a learning disability have been perceived over time (Thomas and Woods 2003: 49). Thompson suggests a four part models that can be used to inform institutional and societal views and provide an understanding of how people with learning disabilities are viewed (Thompson 1997: 151). The four models include the threat to society model, the medical model, the subnormality model and the special needs model. Thompson (1997) highlights that the first model illustrates the majority view of society at the beginning of the 20th century. “Social and cultural constructs manifest themselves in a fear of abnormality in relation to disability” (Llewellyn, Agu and Mercer 2008: 17). This societal view believed that people with physical or learning disabilities should be contained in special institutions as they were a threat to society. This model led to the medical model which believed in using a scientific approach to manage people and control and contain what society saw as abnormal behaviour (Llewellyn, Agu and Mercer 2008: 14). The medical model became predominant in health and social care and conflicts between the medical model and social model are still apparent in social policy for vulnerable groups (Llewellyn, Agu and Mercer 2008: 14). The third model Thompson suggests which can be used to inform institutional and societal views which provide an understanding of how people with learning disabilities are viewed is the subnormality model. This model is the measurement of medical impairment and the ability to achieve academically (Thomas and Wood 2003: 49). An IQ test was invented to be used to diagnose a learning disability and to identify whether the IQ level was below normal (70), if it was below normal subnormality was diagnosed highlighting differences leading to oppression (Thomas and Wood 2003: 49). The final model Thompson used in gaining an understanding of how people with a learning disability are viewed is the special needs model. This model considers integration into society but relies on the identification of the special needs of the individual (Thomas and Wood 2003: 49). By using this model, similar to the subnormality model, people’s differences are highlighted, making integration into society more difficult. Integration into society is difficult due to the fact that “people are fitted into society and society does not adapt or change to accommodate them” (Thomas and Wood 2003: 49). Thomson suggests that elements of each of these models may affect current societal attitudes. Each could play its part in explaining the reason for discrimination and oppression towards people with a learning disability. “What all these models have in common is a tendency to marginalise and disempower, to a greater or lesser extent, people with a medical impairment” (Thomson 1997: 152).

As mentioned earlier the medical model and social model for understanding people with learning disabilities is still in conflict. Historically perspectives on cure, research and treatment have heavily influenced how disabled people are viewed and treated within society (Llewellyn, Agu and Mercer 2008: 59). The focus on the medical model rather than the social model can be seen in language up until very recently. Terms such as ‘spastic’ and ‘retard’ can be seen in policy and medical procedures throughout the nineteenth and twentieth centuries implying lack of function and therefore lack of worth (Llewellyn, Agu and Mercer 2008: 259). The medical model seems to focus mainly on the impairment and ignore how society reinforces barriers for disabled people and so the social model of disability emerged (Llewellyn, Agu and Mercer 2008: 260). From the social model perspective it is society and structures that are the more significant problem rather than the illness or disability itself (Llewellyn, Agu and Mercer 2008: 261). The media is a powerful institution for shaping societal views and continues to portray people with learning disabilities negatively which majorly contributes to structural inequalities and oppression (Llewellyn, Agu and Mercer 2008: 262). The Marxist perspective on sociology saw the industrial revolution and the rise of capitalism as increasing widespread social oppression. With labour power at this time seen as such a huge commodity and “as society is about the relationship between capital and labour, the disabled person is of no use or value” (Llewellyn, Agu and Mercer 2008: 262). Learning disability made it difficult to work which led to institutionalisation and segregation. Statistics show that fewer than 5,000 disabled people in England were confined to asylums but by the 1900’s this had increased to 74,000 (http://www.isj.org.uk/?id=702). Oppression from this perspective must be challenged by looking at key structural issues such as political or economic organisations, the media and areas such as employment (Llewellyn, Agu and Mercer 2008: 261). It is these barriers to participation in society rather than the disability itself that leads to societal and institutional widespread oppression of individuals and communities (Llewellyn, Agu and Mercer 2008: 261). The social model of disability rejects the medical model stating that it is society that causes disability not impairment (Llewellyn, Agu and Mercer 2008: 262).

Having explored how oppression of people with learning disabilities has sociologically developed over time and the types of oppression faced by people with learning disabilities, this research will now explore legislation which challenges oppression and attempts to promote anti-oppressive practice and empowerment. The Disability Discrimination Act 1995 was introduced to alleviate discrimination on the grounds of disability. Disability in this Act is defined as “physical or mental impairment which has a substantial and long term adverse effect on ability to carry out normal day to day activities” (Brayne and Martin 1997: 416). This Act creates legislation which deems discrimination on grounds of disability in employment unlawful except for certain circumstances such as the police or armed forces and highlights guidelines of how disabled people should be treated at work or in places of education (Thomas and Wood 2003: 52). The Human Rights Act 1998 was created to attempt to promote individual rights. For people with learning disabilities this means that the Act may help them to live fully and freely, on equal terms with non-disabled people (Thomas and Wood 2003: 52). In terms of economics The Independent Living Fund and the Community Care Act 1996 aim to help disabled people to control and organise their own care and budgets (Llewellyn, Agu and Mercer 2008: 259). Disabled people have become more politicised and campaigned for change, an example being the Disability Rights Commission which advocates for a rights to independent living (Llewellyn, Agu and Mercer 2008: 264). The Adults with Incapacity Act 2000 introduces a new way of supporting adults who do not have the capacity to make decisions for themselves due to impairment (Thomas and Woods 2003: 53). This Act realises that although some complex decisions may not be able to be made other more simple and straightforward choices can be. The Act enables adults with incapacity to maximise their own ability, encourage the development of new skills and ensure that whichever intervention is provided is the least intrusive possible (Thomas and Woods 2003: 54). There is much limitation within legislation through weaknesses of wording and restricted implementation which does not always reflect anti-oppressive practice towards people with a learning disability, however when used positively the law can be used to promote self-determination, equality and rights, key aspects of deconstructing a socially and culturally oppressive society. (Dalrymple and Burke 2006: 91).

Thompson (2006) saw anti-discrimination and anti-oppressive practice as occurring on three levels: personal, cultural and societal and developed a PCS model to challenge oppression. He believed that in order to both understand and tackle oppression looking at the individual alone is not enough, a consideration of the individual, cultural and structural factors is necessary (Thompson 2006: 30). The personal level is the individual level of thought, feelings, attitudes and actions (Thomson 1997: 20). As individuals we have our own beliefs and values which are “heavily influenced both by our past experiences and our current understanding of ourselves and the society in which we live” (Parrott 2006: 13). Individual values and beliefs are learnt from a variety of sources including family, school, culture and religion as well as the society in which we live, political influence and the media (Thomas and Woods 2002: 55). Personal values are intrinsic to the culture in which we live and in each culture certain social and cultural values will be exercised (Thomas and Woods 2002: 55). These cultural values influence our individual ideas of what is acceptable behaviour and how to treat people who are different and so cultural values can underpin how we act towards people with a learning disabilities which may lead to discrimination and oppressive attitudes (Thomas and Woods 2002: 55). The structural level of oppression refers to the network of social divisions and relates to the ways in which oppression is institutionalised and ‘sewn in’ to the fabric of society (Thomson 1997: 20). People with learning disabilities can be affected through social division and the power of society in deciding what is acceptable behaviour and which groups of society require and deserve support (Thomas and Woods 2002: 56). By showing how “society influences cultural views, which may in turn impact upon personal values and beliefs” Thomson highlights the importance of recognising all three levels at which discrimination and oppression operate (Thomas and Woods 2002: 56). In order to challenge and combat oppression it is essential to have an awareness of the types and ways oppression can occur. At a personal level it is important for social workers to critically reflect on the different values they may hold in order to facilitate a greater ability to challenge oppression and re-evaluate practice (Thomas and Woods 2002: 56). At a cultural level the ability to change attitudes becomes harder however it is essential for practitioners to attempt to promote anti-oppressive practice at this level as well as structurally. Thomson (1997) states that in order to promote anti-oppressive practice on all three levels individuals must collectively challenge the “dominant discriminatory culture and ideology and, in doing so, playing at least a part in the undermining of the structures which support and are supported by that culture” (Thomson 1997: 23).

As mentioned previously, values are intrinsic to practitioners being able to practise and promote anti-oppressive practice. Guidelines for professional behaviour have been developed through professional values into a code of ethics which describe behaviours in the form of standards and multi-disciplinary reference points for social care practitioners. The values associated with social work are incorporated within the British Association of Social Workers (BASW) code of Ethics and Codes of Conduct for Social Care Workers and their Employers published by the Northern Ireland Social Care Council (NISCC) in 2002 (Dalrymple and Burke 2006: 87). According to Brayne and Carr (2005) “Practitioners have statutory duties, underpinned by professional codes and personal values to support the most vulnerable members of society” (Brayne and Carr 2005 cited in Dalrymple and Burke 2006: 97). Through these various codes of ethics the promotion of rights, choice, positive education and awareness in society are highlighted which challenge oppression with people with learning disabilities as well as many oppressed groups within society (Thomas and Woods 2002: 61).

Social work promotes social change, problem solving within human relationships and empowers and liberates service user’s to enhance their well-being. Social work practice takes place where service users interact within their environments and involve employing theories of behaviour and social systems; essentially social work concerns itself with service users and wider society. This requires social workers to engage with vulnerable people who are finding difficulties in participating fully in society.

“Social work practice seeks to promote human well-being and to redress human suffering and injusticeaˆ¦..Such practice maintains a particular concern for those who are most excluded from social, economic or cultural processes and structuresaˆ¦.Consequently, social work practice is a political activity and tensions between rights to care and control and self-determination are very much a professional concern” (O’Connor et al, 2006, p.1)

In summary, Social workers in effect walk a thin line between supporting on behalf of a service user who has been marginalised, whilst being employed by both the social and political environment that may have played a key role in that marginalisation (aˆ¦aˆ¦aˆ¦aˆ¦aˆ¦.).

The Brown family case study will be referred to throughout the essay in an attempt to explore and discuss the lived experiences of service users. With such an array of difficulties faced by the family, in order to be able to provide analysis and critique, some of these difficulties and their correlation within social work practice will not be explored. The essay will begin with examining the political background from Margaret Thatcher to the current Coalition government and emphasize their continued functionalist ideologies. It will also discuss sociological constructions of the family, and refer to some of the factors that impact upon the Brown family’s day to day life.

Functionalist Perspective

There are many different perspectives in which to analyse society but this essay does not provide enough scope to discuss each perspective and will therefore view society from a functionalist perspective. This views society as a large system that is sustained by the institutions and individuals that belong to that system. In order to keep the system sustained Durkeim (aˆ¦..) suggested that a key issue was social order and that that this can be established when there is a mutual set of rules values and beliefs (Cunningham & Cunningham, 2008).

The Neo-Liberal ideology of both Margaret Thatcher and New Labour undoubtedly support this functionalist perspective.

This ideology could have a detrimental impact upon the Brown family. The Coalition government have increasingly remained vocal concerning the public functionalist rhetoric. Therefore, the Brown family become a target for scrutiny and negative attention that is only exacerbated by media perceptions of the deserving and undeserving.

Shipman (2011) refers to Iain Duncan Smiths view that the institution of ‘family’ is fundamental to maintaining a stable society.

It is important to also consider how this Neo-Liberal Functionalism can have an effect on social work practice. The rhetoric that is consistently provided can unknowingly influence or change an assessment or alter the type of interventions that may be offered to a family. When simply browsing through the case study, certain issues that the family have attract attention and perceptions of these issues may start to cloud the a professionals judgement of the family before face to face contact has even been made

Social policy has long been associated with an interest in politician’s efforts to try to change the behaviours of complex and troublesome populations and welfare has remained the method for promoting the desired changes in behaviour (Deacon, 2002). The 2011 Welfare Reform Bill guarantees robust measures to make certain that work pays and terminate welfare dependency. In order implement this, the government will be increasing penalties and introducing new restrictions for people who do not abide by the measures (Department for Work and Pensions, 2010). Despite the fact that politicians imply that work is the responsibility of individual, they also place noticeable importance on the fact that work can produce rewards that are not just concerned with remuneration. These include significant enhancements in mental health and well-being, physical health and improve opportunities for children (Department for work and Pensions, 2008). Essentially, they advocate that ‘work is the best form of welfare’ and this expression is accepted by both the New Labour and the Coalition. Facilitating people back into work is considered by the Coalition to be a key factor in attempting to fix ‘Broken Britain’.

The prolific cases of the deaths of Victoria Climbie and Baby P led to such media scrutiny and a downward turn in public perception of social workers. As a result, this has led to changes in social work practice with children and families.

Due to the current austerity measures, social workers gatekeeping of resources and having to meet stringent thresholds often result in limitations being put on families and creating what aˆ¦aˆ¦aˆ¦aˆ¦aˆ¦..describes as a revolving door syndrome. The Brown case study refers to there being intermittent involvement from social services over several years, which supports the suggestion of a revolving door syndrome. Although the case study is not explicit, I think it would be safe to assume that issues faced by the Brown family may have suggested that they meet the section 47 threshold set out in the Children Act which would have triggered social work involvement with the family. However, if the involvement has been intermittent, this would suggest that once significant risk had diminished the involvement with the family was stopped which suggest risk led practice was employed rather than a needs led (Axford, 2010).

Munro’s recent review of child protection (2011) included 15 recommendations. There is not scope to discuss each recommendation but she urges the government to accept that there will inevitably be an element of uncertainty, to allow professionals to have a greater freedom to use their professional judgement and expertise, and to reduce bureaucracy. The response from government is to accept 9 out of the 15 recommendations (DfE, 2011)

Poverty

The case study highlights that the Brown family are dependent on welfare benefits and that they find it difficult to manage their finances. Therefore, they are essentially living in poverty. Poverty can be described as a complex occurrence that can be caused by a range of issues which can result in inadequate resources. It impacts on childhoods, life chances and imposes costs on society

“Child poverty costs the country at least ?25 billion a year, including ?17 billion that could accrue to the Exchequer if child poverty were eradicated. Moving all families above the poverty line would not instantly produce this sum. But in the long term, huge amounts would be saved from not having to pick up the pieces of child poverty and associated social ills.” (Hirsch, 2008: Joseph Rowntree Foundation,p.1)

Cross national studies have suggested that child poverty is not a natural occurrence. Moreover it is a political occurrence, the product of decisions and actions made by the government and society. Attention concerning a dependency culture has filtered through different political parties and have been utilised with renewed enthusiasm since the formation of the coalition government in 2010. These assertions of dependency create propaganda about the attitudes of the workless and they give the wrong impression of the previous efforts of the Labour government to tackle child poverty who focus was to direct increased welfare payments towards those people who are working in low paid jobs. The coalition is currently reducing benefit payments to families in work. As a result of these cuts, many children will evidently be thrust back into child poverty (aˆ¦aˆ¦aˆ¦).

A possible contention is that the coalition government argue that they seek to treat the symptoms of poverty, rather than the causes. However, their analyses of the causes are at best partial or incomplete. While in-work poverty is acknowledged, it is often buried beneath the rhetoric of welfare dependency (ESRC, 2011). The suggestion that previous methods to tackle child poverty have inevitably robbed people of their own responsibility and therefore led them to become dependent on the welfare state that simply hands out cash is absurd (Minujin & Nandy, 2012).

Work is frequently referred to as the favoured route out of poverty. Although the government have introduced numerous policies to ‘make work pay’ there are countless families that still do not earn enough money to attempt to lift their family out of poverty (Barnardos, 2009). More than half of all children currently living in poverty have a parent in paid work (DWP, 2009). The Brown family have both parents out of work, with Anne having never been in paid work and Craig struggling to find regular employment since leaving the Army 8 years ago. Both parents have literacy difficulties and so require a complex package of support to enable them to improve their life chances of gaining employment that pays above the minimum wage in order for their family to no longer be living in poverty.

According to the code of practice (HCPC, 2012) social workers are required toaˆ¦aˆ¦aˆ¦aˆ¦aˆ¦aˆ¦aˆ¦aˆ¦aˆ¦aˆ¦aˆ¦aˆ¦aˆ¦aˆ¦aˆ¦aˆ¦aˆ¦aˆ¦aˆ¦aˆ¦aˆ¦aˆ¦aˆ¦aˆ¦aˆ¦aˆ¦

As mentioned previously, successive Neo Liberal governments uphold a functionalist ideology that frequently locates poverty in terms of personal responsibility and deficits.

Managerialism

As mentioned previously, services have changes over the past 20 years and this can be explained by the emergence of a managerial approach to how services are being delivered. Intrinsically, managerialism is a basic set of ideas that transpired from the New Right criticisms of welfare and is founded on the notion that public services need to be managed in the same way as profit-making organisations (Harris & Unwin, 2009). In the UK there has been a rise in managerialism which can often lead to weakening the role and autonomy of social work practice. In the pursuit of becoming accountable and impartial, managers are attempting to control or prescribe practice in increasing detail which inexorably leads to reducing the opportunity for practitioners to implement individual reasoning (Rogowski, 2011). As a result, this leads to policies that represent rules that can often be described as inept and insensitive for the service user. Therefore, the tussle between the managerial and the professional control in social work practice is often a contested issue (Munro, 2008). As managerialism takes more control, then a shift towards defensive practice develops which results in procedures that are insensitive to the needs of families. In essence, the professional role of a social worker can be progressively reduced to a bureaucrat with no possibility for expertise or personalised responses

In addition, a managerial approach causes conflict, as it emphasises the need for targets that will assess performance and the delivery of services (Brotherton et al, 20120). Furthermore, there is a correlation with an apparent distrust or autonomy of professionals. This has led to an upsurge in scrutiny by a variety of inspection bodies such as Ofsted and this has been extremely significant in the area of child protection following the high-profile cases of the deaths of Victoria Climbie and Peter Connolly.

Housing

The case study draws attention to the socially deprived area in a large city where the Brown family are currently residing and that they are living in private rented accommodation. Recent statistics indicate that increasingly high costs of renting can thrust households and in particular families with children, into poverty or further into poverty. In comparison with other tenures, and with the cost of housing taken into consideration, approximately 54% of children who live in private rented houses are currently living below the poverty line (Harker, 2006).

“Fundamental to all of this is the need for Government to fully recognise the importance of housing as the foundation of people’s lives. Housing must move up the parties’ political priority lists, and become a key part of all policy debates on poverty, standards of living and future economic prosperity. Without this happening, we run the risk that we will damage the fabric of society, and create a bleak future for many.” (Turffrey, 2010, p.25)

According to Shelter, living in poor or insufficient housing can have an immense and possible lasting effect on children’s chances in life. There is also an related shared cost amongst a wide selection of policy areas. In spite of this, policy has afforded little thought to the influence that housing can have on a family. The Every Child Matters agenda offers a unique prospect to improve children’s services, nonetheless it is crucial that housing is incorporated at the core of this agenda. By attempting to tackle unfit or inadequate housing conditions, the government will support children to thrive and it will additionally play a part in the target for the government to end child poverty by 2020.

Education

As previously mentioned, the Brown family live in a socially deprived area of a large city and research has shown that children from deprived areas are often left with modest access to resources and less experienced teachers, as staff with more expendable income chose to relocate to more affluent areas. Therefore, the location in which the Brown children live could have a detrimental influence on their educational opportunities (Barnard, 2011). The case study states that both parents have literacy problems which raise issues about the educational opportunities that they had access to as a child and whether or not the area in which they lived may have contributed to their opportunities. Finally, the case study also highlights the erratic attendance of Holly, Ben and Kirsty at primary school. One could suggest that this may be as a result of their parents own personal scepticism about the educational system and what their children have to gain.