toptermpaper.com

With reference to changes in Government policy and ideologies of welfare, debate the significance of the shift from Victorian Pauper to 21st century service user and its impact on social work practice and values.

This assignment has used a historical timeline of Governmental changes to policies and laws as a background to debate the shift from Victorian Pauper to 21st century service user. The divide between the rich and poor has always been an issue that different governments have faced, dealing with it differently, for example Clement Attlee’s labour Government in 1945 introduced the welfare state to give every British citizen cover, regardless of income or lack of it. Those who lacked jobs and homes would be helped.

The definition of a Pauper according to the Collins dictionary is someone who is relatively poor, in comparison to the general population or historically eligible for public charity.

The definition of a service user is someone who at some point uses or receives health or social care services. (General Social Care Council)

The term service user is criticised, as critics Adams et al (2009) believe it focuses on one element of the individual, implying dependency, without taking into account other aspects and argue that the term places the service user in a disempowered position in their relationship with a professional, with power residing with this professional. The National Network of Service Users: Shaping our lives however sees the term service user as positive, it’s an individual who uses the services, they confer power creating a stronger voice and having a greater ability to shape services. (Levin 2004)

Modern British social policy has its foundation in the Poor Laws, dating from 1598 to 1948.

The Poor Law (1601) provided a compulsory poor rate and helped set the poor to work. However as the Parish was the basic area of administration, and laws were enforced differently from parish to parish with no set standards of care causing inconsistencies between areas. The Poor Law amendment act (1834) modified the existing system. Poor Law Unions were introduced, parishes were grouped together, and those Unions would be the responsibility of a Board of Guardians. The Guardians were responsible for the administration of poor relief for their locality, rather than leaving the responsibility of administration in the hands of individual parishes and townships. Workhouses were introduced and encouraged, one workhouse in each union to give poor relief. This Act stated that no able bodied person was to receive any other help other than in the workhouse. The purpose of the workhouse was to let individuals enter and leave as they liked and they would receive free food and accommodation, however as time passed concern grew with regard to the seeming ‘overuse’ of the workhouse. As a result the eligibility criteria for entry to the workhouse was then altered. Life in the workhouse was to be made as cruel as it was outside. The wretched existence offered, and the stigma attached to being an ‘inmate’, ensured that only the truly deprived used them. A ‘jail style’ system of segregation for men and women meant that even families had to be separated, altogether different from 21st Century social work values which espouse a stronger commitment to keeping families together, with child protection services and child welfare agencies providing support to ensure family preservation. (Payne, 2005)

It was in 1869 that The Charity Organisation Society (COS) was formed to unify the many smaller sources of relief and make provision more efficient and effective. The COS perceived that charitable assistance was needed and believed that their aim was to reach all families, but were unsure how the money had previously been spent. COS set out a scheme of financial help, introducing local committees, who then raised funds and distributed these to families in need. Similar to many charities today, there are still many families who don’t ask for help because of religion, language, pride or because they are not aware that help may be available. (Family Action) The aim of COS was to persuade charities to converge their resources, which might then be distributed more systematically. However the individuals helped had to be deemed capable of becoming self supporting. Worthiness was considered before any charitable help was given. Those who weren’t considered worthy were left to destitution, the Society effectively deciding that as they deemed there to be no hope for their redemption, that to help them would be a waste of limited resources which would be better spent elsewhere with individuals or families who could subsequently lift themselves out of poverty and dependence. (Campling, 1996) The COS model was pioneering in taking into account the consequences if they helped every individual, as they thought this would lead to dependency and exaggeration in order to receive money.

COS was also formed with the objective of achieving a decrease in the charitable expenditure as a result of greater efficiency and the economy of scale, and in this sense the COS reflected the wider ideology of the industrial revolution. Current Social Work objectives similarly seek to achieve ‘value for money’, with the Audit commission defining value for money as the best possible balance of economy, efficiency and effectiveness. Whilst the 21st century social worker endeavours to deal fairly with the needs of everyone, nevertheless, the distribution of needs is uneven and changes constantly. To ensure quality is consistent care plan reviews are monitored and service users may be involved in quality circles, engaging them in deciding what’s best. Direct payment schemes are also offered to a minority group of service users to let them decide on and customise their own social care. The main problem Social Services face is the potential impact of the dynamic and variable economic and political environment in which they must function. Whilst trying to provide individualised care packages they have to ensure that it’s effective in respect to cost. Also there is growing recognition that a number of minority groups may be excluded from accessing services such as Social Work services and, also those services which have previously not been provided in culturally appropriate ways. (Making ends meet, 2010) Appropriate steps will therefore need to be taken to enforce anti discriminatory practice and anti oppressive practice, when considering how to provide help in accessing services for minority groups.

The COS quickly found that more than financial aid was needed to help paupers. Emotional and other practical help was also required, for example help with finding employment. COS volunteers were trained to offer such additional help and, therefore, the formal training offered by COS can be seen as the forerunner of modern social work training and qualifications. They adopted an approach which attempted to analyse the problem. Working with the individual and family to help them achieve a lasting solution so all could be kept in their familiar environments. This approach was very time consuming, and the approach the worker took to investigate the individual was very objectionable.

This approach is the basis of the current Social Work casework approach which is now highly criticised. Holman (1993) suggests that the casework approach only masks social and political obligations in individual’s lives, therefore helping to maintain their situation. There are now other approaches that focus on reducing inequality. Which investigate the social and political reasons as well as the individual’s as to why they are in poverty. A new manifesto for Social Work now highlights the need to use a collection of approaches as the need to combat poverty and discrimination is greater than ever.

Many who tried to use the COS principles found it difficult to disregard individuals who needed help. Other approaches were latterly introduced to help more individuals. The Settlement House Movement (1884) was one of these. Its principles focused on university volunteers working with the poor in their spare time, offering education. Its aim was to achieve mutual respect between the classes. This approach focused on empowering the poor, helping them to help themselves. Society also benefitted from this model. It focused on a more structured analysis of poverty and its impact on human behaviour by practising interventions at a community level. This is needed now to help small communities and the individuals within it. The nature of social work practice then changed and focused on individuals. A significant element was hearing client’s voices and the incomparable knowledge of the professionals working with them to help whichever way they could. (Adams et al, 2009)

Using these models the Government laid the basis of the future social services. The major concern being that all areas should be given the same services. These new services were provided away from The Poor Law to evade the association. Current Social Work still has its inconsistencies, however the White Paper Tackling Health Inequalities Programme of Action (Department of Health, 2003), focuses on a number of ways to equalise access to healthcare, for example working with people who face overlapping health problems for instance older people who have ill health and are in poverty. Social Workers are focussing on secondary prevention, as this type of prevention can impact more individuals.

A major report produced regarding the welfare of individuals was the Beveridge Report (Department of Health, 1942). This report focused on how Britain could be rebuilt after the war. In 1945 labour was elected and promised to introduce a welfare state. The welfare state involved introducing new services. These included the National Health Services and Housing Acts. The welfare state was produced to encourage the provision of services for the public. (Laybourn, 1995)

Glasby (2005) looked at previous reforms and how the future would be in adult social care. It evaluated all important reports to see how social work could be improved. One report that impacted policy and practice during the 1960’s was the Seebohm report (1968). This report highlighted the problems of poverty and was tasked to review the organisation and responsibilities of the Local Authority Social Services in England as well as to consider what changes were desirable to secure an effective family service. (Seebohm, 1968, pg11.) Prior to this report Social Work was spread across various Local Authorities and different Government sections. This caused inadequacies in the quality of provision. Access was very difficult. For example, range and quality of provision of services were inconsistent also the Seebohm Report highlighted a poor coordination of information between these services. The report recommended “a new Local Authority department providing a community based and family orientated service, which would be available for all”. When this recommendation was brought into action new Social Services Departments were formed. The Seebohm Report did highlight potential problems. It stated that having separate departments for children and adults might subsequently make it difficult to treat the family’s needs as a whole.

The Barclay Report (1982) looked into the role of a social worker. In its opening line it stated that too much was expected of social workers. It found that it was a profession that was confused about its role and because of intense media scrutiny was struggling with work load. It found that there was an ongoing need for social workers to fulfil many functions including promoting community networks, working with other services and acting as an advocate for clients. The report did criticise social work departments for “taking a reactive stance towards social problems, dealing with those needs which are forced upon their attention but failing to develop overall plans which link the voluntary, statutory and private services in an area into a coherent plan” which is still a problem today. (Department of Health, 1982, pg.38) Social Services Departments find it difficult to help every need as they don’t have limitless resources. They need to use other services and work with them closely, the help of Interprofessional education will ensure that other professionals have an understanding of social workers’ roles. The Barclay Report produced very similar recommendations to that of the Seebohm Report (1968). Although it highlighted that the community approach may have more success now, as there is a greater capacity for individuals to be more autonomous and make their own decisions. The community approach focuses on the local community and social workers would observe individuals in the context of their community. This approach uses local centres and pools resources, creating less impact on the Social Work services so their resources can be spread further.

Reports such as these have highlighted how important good social work is, and how much it is needed. There are many problems involved in the profession. There is still stigma attached to the term service user just as there was to the term pauper. Whilst researching the different acts and welfare ideologies that have been introduced throughout the timeline I have used (see paragraph one, page one) I have found that individuals still have problems accessing help. There are families who still may be disinclined to ask for help because of the stigma of doing so. New approaches have introduced service user involvement by asking them what help they want and defining the quality of help they receive. A recent report by Beresford, Shamash, Forrest and Turner (2007) researched service users’ future vision for adult services. They found that the process of accessing social care was frequently negative for service users furthermore the assessments were very dependent on the quality of the staff carrying it out. All social workers should work to one high standard. It shouldn’t be a lottery of if you get a good one or not. A universal tool could be implemented so that all service users were asked the same questions and could highlight their specific problems and needs whilst using the tool. Service users also highlighted the fact that access to their social worker was low and many of the service users questioned had gaps in their services making them feel insecure.

Reports researched for this assignment have all found that service users know what they want and can easily highlight the problems they face or have had previously. One report found that while welfare bureaucracy has been condemned by governments for a long while, service users still identify problems (Shaping Our Lives, 2007). There is still social exclusion. Social Services Departments may contribute to it as they help individuals just enough, finding the quickest way to help them not necessarily the best way in the long run because of finite resources. Using different approaches, for example the community approach would help at different levels so less emphasis is on Social Services Departments resources. Vast improvements are still needed. For example child poverty is getting worst. The Report Monitoring poverty and social exclusion (2009) found that children who live in low-income households, where at least one adult works, is at the highest it has ever been. This increase has affected the Governments child poverty targets. The recession affected reaching the targets greatly. It is vital now to recover from the recession but also to recover from underlying problems that were there previously before the economic downturn began.

Reports like Shaping Our Lives (2007) found that service users feel more responsible and confident about the help they are receiving when they have been more involved in the decision processes. A report by Beresford et al, (2007) found that service users would like a watchdog with a board of service users and professionals so they could be involved in judging the quality of care they receive.

The Race Equality Act (2006) sets the context for anti- discriminatory practice within which social workers operate. However, whilst it could be critiqued that some progress has been made as a result with respect to those of different culture and religion, continuing inequalities would suggest much more progress remains to be made.

To conclude social work has changed significantly and progress to help all individuals needs to continue. However as a profession it needs a larger voice to talk about the problems they face therefore getting extra help to ensure that service users and paupers have even fewer similarities. There has been a great shift from pauper to service user. Service users have much more freedom and rights now. Albeit there are still similarities which need to be focused on to improve the services available. Social Service Departments also need to refuse to let policies be imposed when they don’t improve on what is already implemented. Rights are now benefitting service users but we need to ensure this continues.

There are many competing pressures to direct the service in ways that may not be consistent with Social Work principles towards greater penal and correctional models. It is therefore essential to have a clear understanding of the policy and legal framework that creates the remit and legitimacy for the operation of Social Work in the Criminal Justice process (Whyte, 2001, p.7).

Statute law is created by Acts of the UK and Scottish Parliaments and relies upon rulings made in Court Hearings to set precedents that define and interpret key terms i.e. Case Law. Understanding the law is fundamental to practice in Criminal Justice settings. Criminal Law is a powerful instrument of social control and sanctions and the Criminal Courts have the potential to impose restrictions of liberty of individuals. Social Workers have a responsibility towards the general public and the courts to protect the public and ensure their wellbeing however, there is also obligation towards those who are in the Criminal Justice process who may be vulnerable and in need of services provided by Social Work. It is therefore essential that all workers have an understanding of the legal frameworks that govern Criminal Justice Social Work and are aware of the scope and limitations of their mandate (Whyte, 2001). However, law is subject to change and ‘criminal justice policy is more liable to sudden, politically motivated changes of direction than is social policy in other fields’ (Smith, 2002, p.309)

The law defines what a crime is, rules of evidence and criminal procedure. However, discretion is given to those involved and therefore, the criminal justice process is not systematic. The judiciary, police and social work have differing roles, agendas, values and beliefs which are shaped by training and cultures which can make working within the system difficult due to lack of shared understanding of common aims and individual roles.

Social Work involves working with the marginalised and disadvantaged and can be both vulnerable to crime and susceptible to criminalisation and practice involves work with victims or offenders. Local Authorities have statutory responsibility to provide Criminal Justice Social Work Services to support the Criminal Justice Process through assessment of individuals, information to the Courts and supervision of offenders.

Scotland differs from the rest of the UK in that there is a unique cultural and political heritage and a separate legal system. Social Work therefore, has a central role within the Criminal Justice process in Scotland which is in contrast to England and Wales where probation work is commissioned by the National Offender Management Service (NOMS) which is separate from Local Authority control and Social Work functions and shows a difference in their approaches in responding to crime. As McAra (2005) suggests a more welfare orientated approach has been adopted due to its legal culture and political history.

The legal framework outlining powers and duties of Criminal Justice Social Work is the Social Work Scotland Act 1968 (as amended). Section 27 of this Act outlines the duty by Local Authorities to provide specific Criminal Justice services (e.g. social background reports, supervision of offenders on an Order or Licence) in respect of central government funding however, it does not explain the objectives of these services or provide guidance on their exercise. Section 12 gives Local Authorities (LA’s) discretion to provide additional services (e.g. victims) as part of the general responsibility to ‘promote social welfare.’

Probation or offender services became the responsibility of the Local Authority Social Work Departments in 1968 and had a general duty to ‘promote social welfare’ in their locality (S12, Social Work (Scotland) Act 1968). This was due to the Kilbrandon Committee (Kilbrandon, 1964) being appointed to investigate increasing juvenile crime. The Kilbrandon Report recommended a new approach to children’s services based on the needs of children and families and those who offend should be treated the same as those children requiring care and protection. Kilbrandon also suggested diversion and early voluntary intervention as crime prevention and one department for children and adults. This merge of work with adult offenders was pivotal in recognising work with offenders as having a welfare component admittedly with a level of control. Although the Kilbrandon philosophy followed trends of the time which advocated rehabilitation and treatment of offenders and an awareness of the social causes of crime, this is still highly relevant to today’s practice.

From the 1980’s onwards Criminal Justice in Scotland has undergone major legislative and

policy change due to successive governments. As there was concern for public protection

and community disposal effectiveness in 1991, 100 per cent central government funding was

introduced and the National Objectives and Standards were published which set out

core objectives, service provision and guidance on their delivery (Social Work Group, 1991).

This resulted in the government committing to Social Work delivering this role. This policy

arrangement outlined by Rifkind in 1989 has survived changes in political administration

although, it has been suggested that devolution has caused a ‘sudden and dramatic

politicisation’ of Criminal Justice issues and could undermine the welfare tradition (McNeill

and Batchelor, 2004: Croal, 2005).

Social Work with offenders should aim to address and reduce offending behaviour. Whilst the law provides a framework for practice, effective work with offenders requires Social Work skills such as communication, therapeutic relationships in supervision, assessment and risk management. The task is therefore, varied and complex as Social Workers have the power to control the individuals who are referred via the Courts and enforce any Court Orders but must also work with an offender in a holistic, inclusive way to have a positive impact on their offending behaviour and this can be through support and assistance in relation to personal and social problems but also the individual taking responsibility for their actions. Effective and ethical practice is therefore, about considering and managing the needs and rights of the Courts, the general public, victims and offenders. Although Social Workers have statutory duties and powers to interfere in people’s lives this is not always welcome but is necessary in promoting public safety. Under the Scottish Social Work Services Council (SSSC) Code of Practice Social Workers have an obligation ‘to uphold public trust and confidence’ and the Criminal Justice Authorities (CJA’s) are required by Scottish Executive guidance to develop a strategy to address this (Scottish Executive, 2006b). This strategy includes both offenders and their families and Social Workers should engage these individuals and recognise their views in the development of services.

Both Criminal Law and Social Work recognise the autonomy of individual’s choices on how they lead their lives and with this capacity is criminal responsibility. Those of which who lack capacity (e.g. children and the mentally disordered) are not culpable in the eyes of the law and may be treated differently. It is therefore recognised that criminal behaviour is not just a choice but may be about social circumstances to which they have minimal control. Social Workers should assist in allowing individuals to improve their capacity for making choices together with consequences to their actions (ADSW, 1996a).

Although Social Workers are obliged to protect the rights and interests of service users’ there is a belief amongst the general public that they have forfeited these rights when they have offended. All Criminal Justice agencies must comply with the Human Rights Act 1988 which incorporates into domestic law the fundamental rights set out in the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR). Public Authorities are required to respect all of the provisions however, the two articles with particular relevance to Criminal Law and Social Work are ‘the right to liberty and security’ (Article 5. ECHR) and ‘the right to a fair trial’ (Article 6, ECHR). However, the state can impose restrictions on those who breach criminal law or are a threat to public safety as long as the detention is authorised by law and there is a balance between the individual, their victims and the general public. The Social Worker must assess this balance through rigorous assessment and analysis of risk. The Social Work role requires respect to offenders as individuals and ‘ensure that the offender’s ability and right to function as a member of society is not impaired to a greater extent than is necessary in the interests of justice’ (ADSW, 1996a).

Criminal Justice Social Work services are delivered in partnership with various statutory and non-statutory agencies and this can present challenges due to conflicting professional values and aims. The Management of Offenders etc. (Scotland) Act 2005 was introduced to improve joint working and co-ordinate the management of offenders especially in the transition from custody to community supervision and places a duty on Criminal Justice Authorities (CJAs) to have an information sharing process in order that relevant information is shared between agencies (s.3 (5)(g)) for improving offender and risk management. However, sensitive personal information must be handled carefully and be under the principles of the Data Protection Act 1988 and local agency protocols. Practitioners within Social Work must ensure that any information sharing decisions are fully explained and understood by the offender even when their consent to disclosure is not required.

Organisations who deliver public services have general duties to eliminate unlawful discrimination and promote equality of opportunity on the grounds of race (Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000), sex (Equality Act 2006), and disability (Disability Discrimination Act 2005). Individuals who are involved with Criminal Justice organisations are entitled to the protection of discrimination laws which relate to sex, race, disability, religious beliefs and sexual orientation, with exception to exercising judicial functions or carrying out Court orders. In these circumstances it may be within Article 14 of the ECHR which prevents to the right to liberty and security of the individual or the right to a fair trial being interfered with on a wide range of discriminatory grounds. Criminal Justice is still influenced by prejudicial and discriminatory views.

Research has been carried out by both the Social Work and Prisons Inspectorate for Scotland (1998) which highlighted concerns about the treatment of female offenders in the Criminal Justice process. In addition to this, several inquiries in England and Wales in relation to racial discrimination by the police and prison services has subsequently raised public awareness (Macpherson, 1999; Keith, 2006). The Scottish Government has a duty to publish information of discrimination of any unlawful grounds (s.306 (1)(b) Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995) and therefore, all workers need to practice in an anti-discriminatory way.

The law outlines the limits of Social Work intervention and knowledge of the law is essential to anti-oppressive practice. ‘The only legitimacy for intervening in the life of the individual within the criminal justice process is the individual’s offending behaviour…if individuals have social needs which require to be met but are not crime related or crime producing, or if the offence is not sufficiently serious to fall within the criteria of the ‘twin-track’ approach, services should be offered, as far as possible, through voluntary provision…No-one should be drawn into the criminal justice processes in order to receive social work help’ (Moore and Whyte, 1998, p.24).

Rehabilitative intervention is not just about helping; it imposes limitations on the rights of the individual who is subject to the intervention. Risk assessment and offence based practice is an ethical approach. It aims to ensure that ‘the most intensive and potentially most intrusive services are focused on those service users who pose the greatest risk of causing harm to others (ADSW, 2003) and to prevent socially disadvantaged individuals being taken further into criminal justice control which can result in further social exclusion.

Criminal Justice Social Workers must take note that the role involves work with disadvantaged social groups. Certain types of crimes and offenders often criminalise the young, deprived, unemployed and undereducated male with an experience of the care system and this is clear from Social Work and prison statistics (Croall, 2005; McAra and McVie, 2005). There is often a complex relationship between social exclusion and offending behaviour and often the Criminal Justice process displays existing injustices within society. It is important that issues in relation to class, age and social context should be recognised together with vulnerability to discrimination.

The Social Worker’s role should be to address issues of social exclusion and empower individuals to lead law abiding lives by addressing their offending behaviour. Social Work can help offenders develop capacity to make informed choices by actively encouraging their participation in the supervision/change process and their engagement with improving their current social situation (McCulloch, 2005; McNeill, 2004). Assisting offenders to focus on their strengths as opposed to their risk and needs can have a positive impact as they learn to recognise the value in their own lives and respecting the value of others.

The sentencing stage in the criminal justice process generates the majority of Criminal Justice Social Work through provision of information to the Court in the form of Social Enquiry Reports (SERs) and the administration of community disposals, with the exception of liberty orders (tagging). SERs have no legal basis but there is a statutory duty on criminal justice social work to provide reports to the Court for disposal of a case (s.27(1)(a) SWSA 1968. ‘Reports provide the court with the information and advice they need in deciding on the most appropriate way to deal with offenders. They include information and advice about the feasibility of community based disposals, particularly those involving local authority supervision. In the case of every offender under 21 and any offender facing custody for the first time, the court must obtain information and advice about whether a community based disposal is available and appropriate. In the event of custody, the court requires advice about the possible need for a Supervised Release order or Extended Sentence Supervision on release’. (Scottish Executive, 2004d, para. 1.5)

The Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 sets out when the court can or must obtain an SER. Failure to request a report, where required by law, can result in a sentence being quashed on appeal. The Court is not obliged to follow recommendations or opinions in the SER however, Social workers can have a direct influence on the sentence passed.

‘Preparing SERs demands a high standard of professional practice. It requires skilled interviewing, the ability to collect and assess information from different sources, and the art of writing a report which is dependable, constructive, impartial and brief’ (Social Work Services Inspectorate (SWSI), 1996, Foreword).

The law imposes time limits in compiling reports. The Courts require a report within three weeks (s.201(3) (a) if an offender is remanded in custody and within four weeks if the offender is on bail (s.21(3)(b) of the 1995 Act). This means in practice that there are increased demands on a worker’s time that places increased pressure in the preparation of SERs especially if there are high numbers of worker absence due to leave or whether the worker knows the offender and their individual circumstances. Whilst conducting interviews the worker must ensure that the offender understands the purpose of the report, the relevance of questions (health, addiction issues, and personal relationships) and the limits to confidentiality of this information. Social workers must balance between an informed recommendation and an awareness of the severity of the offence. The report author should be impartial and not minimise the seriousness of the offence and its impact (NOS, Scottish Executive, 2004d, para 5.5) and phrases that imply moral judgements, label or stereotype offenders should not be used (para. 5.1).

When compiling an SER workers are required to consider the suitability of disposals in relation to the risk posed by an offender and to target appropriate resources which are most appropriate and successful in addressing offending behaviour. Guidelines for the assessment and management of risk are outlined in the Management and Assessment of Risk in Social Work Services (SWSI, 2000) and there are also additional risk assessment frameworks which specifically relate to serious violent and sex offenders. In Criminal Justice the focus has moved from risk of custody to risk of reoffending and risk of harm. Risk assessment is complex and there has been a shift from concern for the offender and their needs to concern about public safety and the offender being a potential source of risk to others. Although the legislation is not explicit about offending behaviour, National Standards state that SERs should provide ‘information and advice which will help the Court decide the available sentencing options…by assessing the risk of reoffending, and…the possible harm to others. This requires an investigation of offending behaviour and of the offenders’ circumstances, attitudes and motivation to change’ (Scottish Executive, 2004d, 1.6).

Risk is defined by Kemshall (1996) as ‘the probability of a future negative or harmful event’ and assessment of risk includes: the likliehood of an event occurring, who is likely to be at risk, the nature of the harm which they might be exposed and the impact and consequences of the harmful event.

Risk assessment has changed over the years and prior to the introduction of risk assessment tools workers relied on clinical methods or professional judgement which was based on an offender’s history. These methods were criticised for being too subjective, inaccurate, open to worker bias and dependent on information given by the offender. In the 1990’s workers moved towards objective and empirically based risk assessment tools (actuarial) to support their assessment. Actuarial risk assessment tools rely on static (historical) risk factors together with dynamic (criminogenic) risk factors and to assess the risk of reoffending.

The static factors (which cannot change) take into account gender, age at first conviction, number of previous offences and custodial experiences, school progress, previous employment and personal history. The criminogenic factors (focus on current areas) include current employment, personal relationships, peer associates, use of time, substance use, mental health and attitudes and behaviour. All of these factors impact on the risk of reoffending (Bonta, 1996). The most widely used assessment tool, The Level of Service Inventory – Revised (LSI-R) devised by Andrews and Bonta (1995) incorporates both static and dynamic factors. However, it does not assess risk of harm and this shows that both actuarial and clinical risk assessments are crucial for an effective and comprehensive risk assessment. Clinical methods combine knowledge of the offender’s personality, habits’ lifestyle and an analysis of the circumstances of the offending behaviour and are therefore, the most appropriate assessment tool at identifying those who are likely to cause serious harm. Although more time consuming and require more in-depth analysis of both the offender and the offence risk is assessed on predispositions, motivation towards certain behaviours and triggers that may contribute to harmful behaviour.

Actuarial tools are not totally accurate (Kemshall, 1996) and although this is improved upon through use of clinical methods in decision making, professional judgement is also crucial. Social workers must be aware that social disadvantage plays a part and this can contribute to a higher assessment of risk and need and to be cautious about the total reliability of these factors when making recommendations that may affect an offender’s liberty.

Risk assessment and intervention or supervision should be informed by valid, reliable and ongoing assessment and Social Workers should familiarise themselves with research emerging in this area and the many assessment tools and change programmes available (Levy et.al., 2002).

To support change Social Workers have to not just think about what work is done with the offender but how that work is done. ‘Offenders under supervision have very high levels of need. Moreover, although most offenders have many needs in common, there are also significant variations that necessitate the thoughtful tailoring of individual interventions if the effectiveness of practice is to be maximised. In delivering effective practice, the accumulated weight of evidence…drives us towards recognition that practice skills in general and relationship skills in particular are at least as critical in reducing re-offending as programme content’ (McNeill et al., 2005, p.5). This recent review of core skills required for effective Criminal Justice Social Work practice raises challenges in practising ethically and effectively but when applied critically and reflectively this could achieve positive outcomes that are in the interest of the public, victims and offenders.

Although the law is crucial in framing Social Work practice in the Criminal Justice process it is equally important that Social Work skills and values are central to effective interventions as the role is both demanding and rewarding. Crime has become increasingly prominent both in the public and political agenda and therefore, Social Work has become more prominent and complex. Social Workers have a professional responsibility towards victims, the Court, community and offenders. To fulfil this role effectively, Social Workers must have a clear, confident understanding of their role, the legislative and policy context and a commitment to increasing and developing knowledge, skills and values required for effective and ethical practice.

With reference to changes in government policy and ideologies of welfare, debate the significance of the shift from Victorian ‘Pauper’ to 21st century ‘service user’ and its impact on social work practice and values.

This assignment has used a timeline of government changes and policies as a background to debate the shift from Victorian pauper to the 21st century service user. The divide between poor and rich has always been an issue that all governments have tried to diminish using different policies and laws. However there is still that divide that seems to be increasing. Has much changed since the Poor Law was implemented? Are individuals given more choice and rights now? Will there always be stigma attached and social exclusion that comes from using these words, do they still have the same meaning? This assignment will attempt to answer these questions using references to policy and ideologies of welfare.

The definition of a Pauper according to the Collins dictionary is someone who is extremely poor or historically eligible for public charity.

The definition of a service user is someone who uses or receives health or social care services. (General social care council)

According to Sen, 1999 the term service user was introduced because of gained strength of powerless people during the 1980’s. This term indicates an acknowledgement of the government and public, understanding that service users have a positive role. They still have capabilities and can realise their potential, they are not just individuals who are entitled to help via the services we offer. Although this term was produced by the individuals who use the services it still highlights that they work with professionals and that the power still resides with them. (Adams, Dominelli and Payne, 2009) The National network of service users: Shaping our lives believe that the term service user is positive, it’s an individual who uses the services, they confer power creating a stronger voice and having a greater ability to shape services. (Levin 2004)

The changes in policy from Pauper to service user have been vast. British social policy’s foundation is from the Poor Laws, the first one passed in 1598 the last 1948.

The Elizabethan Poor Law of 1601 provided a compulsory poor rate and helped set the poor onto work. However as the Parish was the basic area of administration laws were enforced differently in that area, meaning the operation of the Poor Law was inconsistent between areas, the beginning of the postcode lottery. The Poor Law amendment act of 1834 modified the existing system that was in place, it was implemented at a higher stage not just at Parish level ,Poor Law unions were introduced the development of the workhouses was encouraged, one workhouse in each union to give poor relief. This act stated that no able bodied person was to receive any other help other than in the workhouse. This law’s primary problem was to make life inside as bad as outside of the workhouse, this was difficult as some would have had to be starved to meet what they met outside. There was a stigma attached though and it was that reputation that stopped everyone from using a workhouse, they produced jail style segregation men and women and even families had to be separated.

As the government thought this was the best way to help the neediest families they saw no problems with this Act. In fact the neediest families still weren’t using the help and going into a workhouse because they didn’t want to be separated. Not unlike families today that still don’t ask for help because of the stigma or because they don’t know or understand the system implemented to help them as much as possible.

It was in 1869 that The Charitable Organisation Society was formed to make charities more effective, they understood that charitable assistance was needed but believed that their aim was to reach all families, they were also unsure of how the money from charities had previously been spent. They set out financial help introducing local committees, these then raised funds and distributed to families in need. Also very similar to many charities today, there are still many families who don’t ask for help because of religion, language, pride or just weren’t told. (Family action)

COS found that it wasn’t just financial help that people needed, so they started to offer emotional and practical help too. When they had many families needing help they knew there volunteers would need training, this became the pioneer in the profession of social work, something that our foundations are based on today. The main foundation of COS was to change policy to help the people suffering the effects of poverty, something that social workers do now, the general council of social workers are still working to help those suffering the most and work towards giving help to those who have unable to find help elsewhere and give social work support as well as signpost to other services that may help them further.

From this time more acts were introduced including the Public health act of 1872. During this time poverty was never really defined they understood what brought it about like unemployment or illness, if they had defined poverty it may have helped introduced different acts to prevent it.

In the 1900’s poverty was ever increasing, the settlement movement started its idea was to establish settlement houses in poor areas with the idea that the middle class would volunteer to live with them, sharing their knowledge and help alleviate the poverty of their poor neighbours. From this movement many initiatives emerged and helped to improve conditions of all poor areas of society and help all individuals. This movement focused on the causes of poverty providing a number of services including education and health services. This settlement movement is another foundation of social work practice today, no we don’t live with the individuals in need, but the whole reason of social work is to use our education and knowledge to alleviate the problems they have and help them emotionally, practically and financially, which is just what these volunteers did. Although some argued that this was normative because some wanted the divide between the poor and higher classes. (Laybourn, 1995) Although this movement was important the more powerful COS submerged as the controversial nature of social work, there was individuals that were not eligible for help these were still at the workhouse, and most of these individuals were women who bore children out of wedlock. Although the settlement movement was also necessary in society in focusing on poverty, it focused on a more structured analyses of poverty and its impact on human behaviour by practising interventions at a community level, which is needed now to help small communities help each other as well as individually. The nature of social work practice then focused on individuals and a significant element of this time is the elimination of hearing client’s voices and the incomparable knowledge of the professionals working with them. Only now is the service user’s voice being recognised again. (Adams et al, 2009)

The Poor Law was the basis of the development of services for the 20th century, including the national insurance act, these new services were introduced to avoid having to rely on the Poor Laws. (Alcock, 2003) The government laid the basis of the future social services, the major concern was that all areas should be given the same services, these new services were provided away from The Poor Law to evade the association. Even though these new ideologies were introduced to provide services to all individuals there was still a stigma attached, even now there is still a stigma attached to the term service user, although governments have changed their policies to use different terms some still have the same meaning.

A major report produced regarding the welfare of individuals was the Beveridge report. This report focused on how Britain could be rebuilt after the war. In 1945 labour was elected and promised to introduce a welfare state. The welfare state involved introducing new services these included family allowances, the national health services and housing acts to name a few. The welfare state was produced to encourage the provision of services for the public not as a response to poverty. (Laybourn, 1995) this is where a major criticism lies within debates regarding the welfare state within current governments. In the 1950’s the provision of welfare state services became problematic, government interventions at the time didn’t help and caused further problems so the Conservative government took over and cut the help given to the poor and sick. This then made the distribution of income more imbalanced and although attempted to make the poor more hardworking and self sufficient it didn’t work.

One report that impacted policy and practice during the 1960’s was the Seabohm report 1968, this report re-introduced poverty. This paper was tasked to review the organisation and responsibilities of the local authority personal social services in England and to consider what changes are desirable to secure an effective family service. (Seebohm, 1968, pg11.) Prior to this report social work was spread across various local authorities and different government sections, because of this the report found that there was inadequacies in the quality of provision and access was very difficult. The report recommended “a new local authority department providing a community based and family orientated service, which will be available for all” When this recommendation was brought into action new social services department were formed. Seebohm did foresee problems which were highlighted in the report, it stated that having separate departments for children and adults would make it difficult to treat the family’s needs as a whole.

Another important Report was the Barclay Report, 1982 that looked into the role of a social worker, in its opening line it states that too much is expected of social workers. It found that it was a profession that was confused about its role and because of intense media scrutiny was struggling with its work load. It found that there was an ongoing need for social workers to fulfil many functions including promoting community networks, working with other services and acting on client’s behalf and to act as resources for all individual who need help. The report did criticise social work departments for “taking a reactive stance towards social problems, dealing with those needs which are forced upon their attention but failing to develop overall plans which link the voluntary, volunteer, statutory and private services in an area into a coherent plan” (p.38) which is still a problem today.

Although these reports have all highlighted how good social work is and how much it’s needed there are so many problems involved in the profession. Firstly because every government have changed the way the work as soon as they get used to it, it changes again, yes the changes could be for the better but are these just changes for changes sake? The labour government have imposed new policies and directives for social work but after 8 years there are still problems within social work some which could be easily acted upon. We will only know if these new policies and new social work task force works over time.

As its been highlighted earlier in this assignment there is still an implication involved in being a service user just as there was being a pauper. Whilst researching the different acts and welfare ideologies that have been introduced throughout the timeline I’ve used I’ve realised that there are more similarities than comparisons between a services user and pauper. They still have problems accessing help and there are many families who still don’t ask for help because of the stigma. However new approaches have introduced service user involvement by defining what help they want and defining the quality of help they receive. A recent report by Beresford, Shamash, Forrest and Turner, 2007 research service users vision for adult service they found that the process of accessing social care was frequently negative for service users, the assessments were very dependent on the quality of the staff carrying it out, which shouldn’t be happening all social workers should work to one high standard it shouldn’t be a lottery of if you get a good one or not. Access to communicating with the social worker was low and that many of the service users questioned had gaps in their services making them feel insecure.

A major problem through history has been a struggle to get good support for these individuals. Whilst researching this topic I realised that service users know what they want and can easily highlight the problems at the minute one report found while welfare bureaucracy has been condemned by governments for a long while service users still identify problems. One individual said that we shouldn’t have to fill out forms to be made to feel like beggars, not unlike The Poor Law and paupers opinions. There is still social exclusion, the poor will stay poor because they have just enough to get by so they won’t stop, think and revolt. But do social workers maintain this, because they help them just enough, finding the quickest thing they can do to help them not necessarily the best way in the long run. New Labour has had so much time to make improvements and rectify social exclusion but child poverty is getting worst.

How much have rights helped service users, many reports have found that they feel more responsible and confident about the help they are receiving when they have been more involved in the decision processes. Although some still feel like they are hidden away from society and when they have more experience of their disability they need to be acknowledged. The report by Beresford et al, 2007 also found that service users would like a watchdog with service users and professionals and they should be the judges of quality.

One dilemma that social workers face is working towards anti discriminatory practice, equality should be the core of provisions of service, and it needs to take into account religion and backgrounds. Yes some progress has been made involving diversity for example the race equality act, still lots of progress needs to be made.

There are many barriers when considering the major historical events that brought about social work and the values it has now. We see that welfare state is a necessary condition of social work flourishing and to defend it or is it temporary in which internationally social work will then erupt from something else. One barrier when understanding which major events affected what social work is today is our understanding of the history of social work, the history isn’t concrete it changes daily. Most of the history of social work comes from COS as its origin and its methods are still used today. However Laybourn, 1997 has found other methods that were used that have yet to be examined this may have been because COS was used in London and this would have an effect on the history, power will always influence history.

To conclude social work has changed significantly and is still very important and we will progress to help all individuals, we need a larger voice though to talk about the problems we face as a profession to ensure that service users and pauper have fewer similarities. I believe that service users have shifted from paupers as they have much more freedom and rights now, yes there are still similarities which need to be focused on to improve our system and we could probably be a better service if problems hadn’t occurred along the way to affect how we work, we also need to refuse to let policies be imposed on us when they don’t improve on what were already doing. Rights are now benefiting service users but we need to ensure it stays like this. Whilst working towards anti discriminatory practice and equality for all we need to ensure our values are the same that we contribute to a fairer society by reducing disadvantage and exclusion and promoting fair access to resources. Many policies and acts have been the bedrock of what social work is today and without them social work would be very different.

Methodology

This chapter will outline the manner in which the research was planned and completed, with reference to literature when necessary. Furthermore, it includes an important discussion of some of the ethical dilemmas that had to be considered during the sampling and subsequent interview processes.

Approach

This piece of research aimed to explore the experiences of managers in social work, and set out to cast light in surprisingly under researched areas. One of the central aims of this piece of research was to obtain data that was readily analysable (Arksey and Knight 1999) and valid (Whittaker 2012).

The nature of the research meant a qualitative approach was used to explore the various themes that emerged from the review of the literature. This was preferred over a quantitative method, particularly as the latter usually requires larger samples for generating statistics and quantifiable data. Qualitative methods focus on seeking out and interpreting the meanings that people ascribe to their own actions (McLaughlin 2007), and allows for exploration of opinion and experience (Shaw 2003). Interpretative topics were at the core of this research; core values, which despite being substantially constant across societies and throughout history, is inherently subjective. A qualitative approach enabled the collation of data that is rich in description, detail and character (Neuman 1997).

Social work research is required to enhance and develop knowledge (McLaughlin 2007), and can help explore people and communities, paying particular focus to the wider social and structural issues that affect them (Cheetham 2000). The profession is embedded in practice; therefore research that informs behaviour and questions the known and unknown elements of practice is vital to encourage lateral thinking and dynamism amongst frontline workers, as well as going someway towards boosting the professional status of social work (Bledsoe et al. 2005). With this in mind, it was interesting to note some of the barriers to accessing informants, not from social workers themselves, but from organisations. Dealing with rejection from one local council was personally frustrating, but has wider consequences for the profession.

“To understand social work… we must understand how knowledge is validated within the profession” (Askeland and Payne 2001:14)

Furthermore,

“Social work research is about social workers, what they think, what they believe, what knowledge they claim and what they do with it.” (Butler 2002:241).

With this in mind, the implications of a blase attitude to research, albeit a small project such as this one, are significant. One of the themes that arose from the interviews, as will be discussed in more detail later, was the increasingly diverse and heavy workload of managers. Lack of time is a commonly quoted barrier to research participation amongst practitioners (Sheldon and Chivers 2000), and this is one of the reasons research remains a low priority for workers in the field (McLaughlin 2007). Furthermore, as is commented on further at the end of this chapter, having to go through organisational protocol first has implications for anonymity, and arguably has consequences on worker willingness to take part (Lewis 2003).

Literature review

Research into the topic of core values started with certain core textbook readings, which expanded into their recommended reading lists and cited articles. A range of literature databases including Ingenta, Social Sciences Citation Index, Social Services Abstracts were searched using keywords such as “core values”, “social work manager”, “social work management”, “managerialism and social work”, and “performance indicators” in various different orders. The search extended to databases such as Oxford University Press Journals, SocINDEX, SwetsWise and Academic Search Elite. Furthermore, using university’s Searcher Electronic Database it was possible to search a plethora of databases at one time. This was further augmented with internet searches and the use of Google Scholar. Initially, there was not a lot of research regarding retention of core values among managers, indeed this was indicative of social work as an under researched area in general. Nevertheless, broadening my search using the above keywords and Boolean operators such as OR and AND proved to be more fruitful.

Interview sampling

The dearth of research available in this area, and regarding social work managers more generally, proved an impetus to focusing on a particular sample. Interviewees were approached a couple of months before the interviews took place, and had been chosen specifically due to their current management related roles. Having a purposive sample avoided the common issue of ending up with a large amount of irrelevant or disconnected data (Thurlow – Brown 1988) as such a method usually means that the sample has a certain level of knowledge and experience in relation to the topic (Smith 2009).

A total of six interviews took place over a four week period, with all working in hospital social work at management level. This represents a small sample, but it was within the limits of this piece of work, and since qualitative methods are not reliant on large samples for credibility unlike quantitative methods (Anastas 2004), coupled with the level of research undertaken, meant a greater understanding of the issues could be uncovered (Denscombe 2007). Working with a smaller sample allows for more depth and detail of meaning, and subsequently avoids a more general and abstracted level of explanation (McLaughlin 2007). Indeed, it allowed for a more sharpened focus of this study, particularly as all the informants were in very similar roles.

During the interview process, informants offered recommendations of others to interview, otherwise known as snowball sampling (Knight 2002). Whilst this was appreciated, the recommendations involved other areas of social work. Although this would have generated further data, it was felt that having a random sample would obfuscate more pertinent findings from the core interviewees and affect the generalisability of the findings. The criticisms of using a convenience sample are well noted, particularly the impact this has on generalisability to the wider population (Bryman 2012). Using informants who are already known to the researcher may have its drawbacks, but it is argued that these are outweighed by merits of such projects being used to further larger studies (Herr and Anderson 2005).

Interviews

Interviews were arranged through email, at which point the respondents were told of the nature and purpose of the study and what was going to be covered in the interview. This involved a general overview of the main themes that were to be explored. It was not felt necessary to give the informants a copy of the interview schedule for fear that this would impact on the conversational flow that was being aimed for.

Interviews followed a semi-structured model and enabled the investigative process to remain mostly conversational and informal; the inherent flexibility of this approach allowing for detailed probing when necessary (Becker and Bryman 2004). It is a simple method of data collection but allows for detailed excavation of people’s experiences. Open ended questions were consciously used to avoid bias and encourage a free flowing narrative that was in line with the interviewees’ views and opinions whilst also following the overarching themes that were being explored (Rubin and Babbie 2007). Whilst the interview schedule did not have to be strictly adhered to, it was designed in a way that started with descriptive, open questions such as “Can you give me a description of your current role?” and slowly moved to more direct questions that aimed to elicit thoughts and opinion, “How do you feel about the statement ‘If you can manage a factory, you can manage a team of social workers?’” Having the interview designed in this meant that the range of questions were general enough to stimulate free flowing dialogue, but also specific enough to gather relevant data.

All of the interviews were recorded, and subsequently transcribed as soon as possible for reasons of confidentiality; informants could be indirectly attributed through a collection of characteristics (McLaughlin 2007). This was particularly important as the sample represents the majority of two local authority management teams, in secondary settings, and therefore could be easily identified. For this reason, transcripts of interviews were not provided in an appendix and no contextual detail has been provided about any of the interviewees. Despite the onerous process of transcribing data (O’Leary 2004: 169), it was important because it meant that more attention could be spent actively listening and tuning in, as opposed to writing notes. The interview itself, as a communication interchange establishing a framework for future evaluation and enquiry, lies at the heart of social work practice (McLaughlin 2007), and drew on some of the skills that had been developed on placement, particularly active listening, signposting and probing. Qualitative methodologies mirror the focus placed upon person-centredness in social work practice (Connelly and Harms 2012). This highlights the transferability of skills from practice into research and vice versa. With this in mind, it was important to use these skills to ensure interviews was being guided and not led. This meant avoiding leading questions and generally putting words in the mouth of the informant. For example, asking “What do you feel the main reasons for this are?”, as opposed to “Is this a direct consequence of the increased use of key performance indicators?”

Key findings and discussion

Thematic analysis is a commonly used method for analysing such data (Bryman 2008, Davies 2007), and was used to explore the transcripts and highlight recurrent themes as it has been defined as a method for identifying, analysing and recording themes within data (Braun and Clarke 2006). Braun and Clarke’s (2006) six stage thematic analysis model was used as a guide, and involved getting immersed in the data in the first instance followed by creating, searching, reviewing and defining/naming themes.

Initial coding was done by highlighting particular extracts that were interesting (Boyatzis 1998), separated by different colours to represent the various different topics that emerged. This was a useful way of organising what was initially a large amount of data by marking recurrent topics and words (Ryan and Bernard 2003). This stage represented an organisation of data into individual building blocks of particular topics; the next stage aimed to bring together blocks into groups of similar colours. At this stage, it was possible to identify themes.

Limitations of study

It would be nave to think that such a study could be generalised to a wider population (Gomm 2008, Smith 2009). However, it has been argued that although such studies are not generalisable in the traditional sense, they have redeeming qualities which set them above that requirement (Myers 2000). Small scale research highlights the importance of viewing such studies as focusing on discovery, and not proof (Denscombe 1998). The development of managerialism is not unique to the UK (Politt and Bouckaert 1997, Hood et al. 1999, Brunsson and Sahlin- Andersson 2000), and highlights the relevance and necessity of shedding light on management experiences within a paradigm that triumphs managerial prerogative (Thomas and Davies 2005).

The sample represent one of convenience, as all but one of the informants were known to the researcher in a professional capacity. Whilst this has been deemed the least credible of sampling techniques (Bryman 2008), it must also be stressed that it was also purposive as highlighted previously. With this in mind it is important to recognise how the researcher’s own views and values can create a bias, particularly as the constructivist framework of qualitative research states that individuals construct their own understanding through experience (Denscombe 2003, Kuper 2008). Rigorous testing of the interview schedule was done to avoid any bias by recognising and removing leading questions.

Ethics

It was necessary to follow well established protocol within the university school, as well as the local council to ensure that the study was carried out in a way that was ethically sound. This firstly involved completing an ethical level one self audit, as well as qualitative appraisal tool identified in literature (McLaughlin 2007). It was important to gain informed consent from the interviewees, and discuss the extent and manner in which absolute confidentiality was to be achieved. Contingent confidentiality (Dominelli 2005) is more commonly discussed in social work, as it is necessary to spell out the precise conditions this would need to be broken, such as a criminal offense being disclosed, however this was not the case in this study.

The local council’s policy on research meant that the research design was scrutinised to glean what use this had. Indeed the request form specifically states answer “What benefit will the dissertation offer to the council, if any?”. The question better asked would be “What benefit will the dissertation offer social work?”, as the organisation would arguably benefit if their goals were parallel with social work. Social work as a profession risks having its own priorities sidelined for those of employing organisations, and although workers are accountable to their organisation, social work’s struggle with developing an evidence base (Marsh and Fisher 2005) highlights the need to build a solid research infrastructure that informs best practice (Davies et al. 2000, Trinder 2000).

The council procedure involved providing information on was to be interviewed and the interview schedule itself. As was briefly discussed earlier, having to tell the council who was being interviewed and the impact this has on anonymity is questionable; indeed the impact of tighter ethical and regulatory frameworks for social work students and having a research capable workforce are well noted (Dominelli and Holloway 2008). Arguably, social work research should place ethics at the centre of what it aims to achieve, and this is well noted (Hugman and Smith 1995). This is particularly important as ethics are or at least should be at the centre of practice. What this raises are issues of accountability for the researcher that mirror those of workers and managers as is discussed in the following chapters. As a social work researcher, to whom am I accountable? The current research governance framework (Department of Health 2005) has been seen to focus more towards accountability to funders and regulators as opposed to anybody else (Dominelli and Holloway 2008). How this affects larger research projects is unclear, but as an ethical researcher, since I was unable to guarantee the anonymity of further informants it was decided that a sample of six was enough. How this subsequently affects participation is interesting but unfortunately not within the scope of this particular piece of research.

References

Anastas 2004

Arksey, H., & Knight, P. T. (1999) Interviewing for social scientists: An introductory resource with examples. Sage.

Askeland, G. A. and Payne, M. (2001) “What is Valid Knowledge for Social

Workers?” Social Work in Europe, 8 (3): pp. 13-23

Becker, S. & Bryman, A. (2004) Understanding Research for Social Policy and Practice: Themes, Methods and Approaches Bristol, The Policy Press

Bledsoe, S., Bellamy, J., Mullen, E. & Shlonsky, A. (2005) “From concept to implementation: Challenges facing evidence based social work” Evidence and Policy 1, pp. 143-151

Boyatsiz, RE. (1998) Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and code development Thousand Oaks, Sage

Butler, I. (2002) “A code of ethics for social work and social care research” British Journal of Social Work 32 (2): pp. 239 -248

Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006) “Using thematic analysis in psychology” Qualitative Research in Psychology 3, pp. 77 – 101

Bryman, A. (2008) Social research methods 3^rd edition Oxford, Oxford University Press

Bryman, A. (2012) Social Work Methods (4^th Ed.) Oxford University Press

Cheetham, J. (2000) “The importance of research in the education of care professionals” in Pierce, R. and Weinstein, J. (eds) Innovative Education and Training for Care Professionals. A Providers Guide London, Jessica Kingsley

Connelly, M. and Harms, L. (2012) Social Work: From theory to practice Melbourne, Cambridge University Press

Davies, MB. (2007) Doing a successful research project: Using qualitative or quantitative methods Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan

Davies, H.T.O., Nutley, S.M. and Smith, P.C. (eds) (2000) What works? Evidencebased policy and practice in public services Bristol, The Policy Press

Denscombe, M. (1998) The Good Research Guide for Small Scale Social Research Projects Buckingham, Open University Press

Department of Health (2005) The Research Governance Framework for Health and

Social Care London, Department of Health

Dominelli, L. (2005) “Social work research: Contested knowledge for practice” in Adams, R., Dominelli, L. and Payne, M. (eds) Social Work Futures, London,

Palgrave/Macmillan

Dominelli, L., & Holloway, M. (2008). Ethics and governance in social work research in the UK. British Journal of Social Work, 38(5), 1009-1024.

Gomm, R. (2008) Social Research Methodology: a critical introduction, 2^nd Edition Hampshire, Palgrave Macmillan

Herr, K. and Anderson, G. (2005) The action research dissertation: A guide for students and faculty London, SAGE Publications

Hugman, R. & Smith, D. (1995) Ethical issues in social work: an overview London, Routledge

Knight, P. (2002) Small Scale Research London, SAGE Publications

Kuper, A. (2008) “Critically Appraising Qualitative Research” The British Medical Journal 337, pp.1035 – 1043

Lewis, J. (2003) “Design issues” in Ritchie, J., & Lewis, J. (Eds.) Qualitative research practice: A guide for social science students and researchers. Sage.

Marsh, P. and Fisher, M. (2005) Developing the Evidence Base for Social Work and Social Care Practice London, Social Care Institute for Excellence.

McLaughlin, H. (2007). Understanding social work research. Sage.

Myers, M. (2000) “Qualitative research and the generalizability question: Standing firm with Proteus.” The qualitative report, 4(3/4): pp. 1-9.

Neuman, W. (1997) Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches 3^rd Ed. Boston, Allyn and Bacon

O’Leary, Z. (2004) The Essential Guide to Doing Research London, Sage

Payne, G. & Payne, J. (2004) Key Concepts in Social Research London, Sage

Rubin, A. & Babbie, E. (2007) Essential Methods for Social Work California, Thomson Higher Education

Ryan, G. & Bernard, H. (2003) “Techniques to Identify Themes” Field Methods 15, pp. 85-109

Shaw, I. (2003) “Cutting edge issues in social work research” British Journal of Social Work 33, pp. 1268-1282

Sheldon, B. & Chivers, R. (2000) Evidence-based Social Care: A Study of Prospects and Problems Lyme Regis, Russell House Publishing

Smith, R. (2009) Doing Social Work Research Berkshire, Open University Press

Thurlow – Brown, N. (1988) The Curate’s Egg. Unpublished conference paper. North East Essay Mental Health Trust

Trinder, L. (2000) ‘Evidence-based practice in social work and probation’, in

L. Trinder and S. Reynolds (eds) Evidence-based Practice: A critical appraisal,

Oxford: Blackwell Science, pp 138-162.

Simulated interviews reflection and approach work

Part 1

The purpose of the interview was to explore the service user’s situation and investigate his needs and problems.

When reflecting on the interview techniques I asked both open and closed questions, for example “Do you want to tell me what’s happened recently?” I probed into his responses several times for example “would you like to talk in more depth about that?” These questions can promote client involvement, inviting the service user to talk in more depth. Using this technique shows that I listened by asking questions about points he had discussed. The service user mentioned that he felt I listened well to what he was saying because I asked him to talk about what he’d discussed in more detail.

I tried to use the non verbal attending SOLER techniques (Egan, 2007) these included facing the client squarely, having an open posture, leaning towards the service user and keeping good eye contact during the interview which when looking back at the interview I believe I did constantly.

I did try one technique called scaling, upon reflection I concluded that it was not the correct time to use it. I think I was too eager to try too many techniques at once. Understanding this will help establish the correct skills to use in different situations.

During the interview the service user was fidgeting, this may be a response to how he dealt with their anxieties and depression. However upon reflection I understand that anyone having an interview with a social worker could be nervous and fidget. It’s unfair to conclude that it was his anxieties that caused him to fidget. Upon reflection I found that his answers were closed at first until I tried to make him comfortable, probing his responses until he felt more relaxed and happy that I was listening. He then became more confident at answering the questions and gave more in depth responses. However this may not have been because of the techniques I used. The service user has had dealing with mental health teams in the past. Having had experience of interviews he would find it easier to talk to a social worker and give answers out of habit. Mental health services have a habit to affect service users. Helping them in certain situations in the past, the service user will be used to working with them in this setting and want them to help again so willingly involve themselves interviews.

I tried to empathise with the service user when it was possible for example “I can see things have been really difficult for you”. I showed support when it was needed for example he knew what he did not want but not what he wanted in regards to having help. I explained that it was a good situation to be in and we can move on further from this. I believe I showed understanding and empathy towards his situation by using non verbal skills like smiling and nodding when he explained something

Within the interview I was nervous and did not appreciate that this service user had previous experience of mental health services and already had strategies that enabled him to live with his mental distress. I focused solely on his mental health and this impeded my techniques and how I acted as the interviewer. I should have focused on the situation and asked him what his current situation was and why he was currently using mental health services. I did find out the main part of his situation, that he is about to be made homeless but I didn’t explore it in depth after he’d mentioned it. I just carried on with using techniques I had learnt and ignored the severity of his situation. I think my understanding of the purpose of the interview and the actual purpose had affected the way I acted and asked questions. Ignoring the whole reason why the service user was in crisis may have been due to my own personal experience of mental health. Understanding that my previous experience may impede my practice is something that reflection has uncovered.

My age and gender may have affected the interview process. Being a young woman who’s a social worker when my client is an older male with mental health problems understandably there are boundaries these may have affected how I asked questions and what I wanted to cover and how he answered questions. This man was not much younger than my father I may have ignored his most pressing problem because I associated him to a close figure that never has problems and always deals with things independently. Unconsciously I may have associated this and that may be why I ignored the severity of his imminent homelessness.

I used a notebook throughout the interview. Upon reflection I believe I unconsciously used this as a barrier because of my own nerves and understanding of individuals using mental health services. I am rather disappointed in myself even if it was an unconscious action an individual using the mental health team needs a social worker who will not put up barriers that may suggest they want to distance themselves from the service user. Being aware of this will help me in the future when working within the mental health services.

Biestek (1961) produced a set of values that social work is based on including individualisation and acceptance (Adams, Dominelli and Payne, 2009). I showed anti discriminatory practice by understanding that individuals should be treated as unique. You may already have previous experience of similar cases and already know what might work. However it’s important not to direct the service user but let them make their own decisions. Within the interview I believe I used this approach asking the service user “What would you like us to do to help you?” ensuring the service user makes the decisions. The social worker can safeguard the service user against making decisions for him by using reflection as a technique. Reflecting individually and being able to use your team to reflect upon what you as the social workers have done and why you have done. Colleagues may identify an important aspect which the social worker had not previously considered.

During the interview I tried to keep my emotions controlled to make sure the service user was not affected. However whilst reflecting I feel emotional about the situation. I think it’s important to be able to feel emotions regarding the situation otherwise I may be more affected by the situation later on.

Part 2

The service user’s situation is such that he will be imminently evicted and become homeless. As such the approach to take requires an intervention that will help and be effective in the short term. A crisis intervention and task centred approach helps people faced with sudden problems (Adams et al, 2009). When in crisis individuals find that they have no solutions, because of this may be more susceptive to outside help, in this case from mental health social workers (Roberts, 2000). These approaches would be the most effective in this situation as the service user is facing sudden problems.

Crisis intervention uses elements of the psychodynamic approach and cognitive approach focusing on emotional responses to events and how to control them realistically. The task centred approach focuses on major continuing problems in life. Both improve the individual’s ability to deal with their problems (Payne, 2005).

There are different phases of crisis intervention, the beginning phase focuses on the situation but should look into his emotional state and well being. Using Roberts, 2000 seven stage crisis intervention model helps understand what this approach involves. The first stage is conducting the assessment. This leads to establishing rapport with the service user. Major problems are then identified and the causes of crisis are investigated to ensure these do not continue to affect the service user. The social worker helps the service user deal with emotions regarding the situation. The next stage involves the social worker and service user identifying different routes to take to ensure the service user is involved with decision making with regard to his plan (Roberts, 2000). I believe that this model is the most useful when understanding crisis intervention as during the fifth stage when they are looking at different routes to take they can look at the service users previous responses at coping with difficult situations and how they had dealt with them then therefore focusing on strengths. During this stage the social worker could help the service user reduce the crisis into smaller manageable amounts this may decrease the service user’s level of anxiety. Helping involve him in coping mechanisms and decision making to develop and implement a plan.

Firstly the social worker and service user must identify the crisis, assess the situation, explore strengths and the resources the service user may have and then implement a plan (Payne, 2005). Crisis intervention identifies practical tasks that the individual’s need to readjust when crisis has occurred (Payne, 2005). This service user’s crisis has already been identified as his imminent homelessness. During the interview the situation was explored to find out other problems he is facing, he currently has depression and levels of anxiety and has had previous gambling problems. The strengths that the service user has are his commitment to want to work in the future and knowing he needs help but does not know what kind of help he needs. A major strength the service user has is his ability to form strategies to cope with his mental illness to enable him to live within society without difficulty until crisis had happened.

From this initial interview further work would need to be done with the service user this would involve looking holistically, investigating his environment, familial relationships and other situations and find out any other needs which the service user may wish us to meet.

Task centred intervention would be incorporated within this time whilst crisis intervention was ongoing. This is a practical approach and would be effective as it looks at his problems and why he might be facing crisis to try and prevent him facing crisis again. This is a short term problem solving approach using partnership and empowerment, building on people’s strengths. This approach focuses on the service user’s problems. Payne, 2005 explains that task centred looks at problems that the service user acknowledges and what they want to change. Task centred is effective when solving problems involving social relationships and decision making problems, both of which the service user has. The client identifies problems the tasks are then planned, these may involve small actions or involve different actions, for example in this case help with familial relationships and take part in gambling help. The tasks can be physical actions for example the service user is this case could call a gambling anonymous helpline and ask for further help. These tasks are then evaluated to see if they have been achieved (Doel and Marsh, 2005). The purpose of task centred is to help resolve problems and give them capacity to deal with them in the future.

Criticisms of both crisis intervention and task centred are that neither is effective when the service user is constantly facing crisis and some individuals may find it difficult to face their problems head on like in task centred.

If timing was not a problem another approach which may have been useful would be Cognitive Behavioural Approach. This approach involves the application of the social learning theory and would help me as a social worker and the service user to understand how emotional and behavioural problems can arise and how they can then be maintained or changed. This theory was chosen as its one of the most effective treatments for conditions where depression is the main problem. It looks at triggers which might affect how the service user functions within society for example his gambling problems may have caused a difficult financial situation leading to his imminent homelessness (Westbrook, Kennerley and Kirk, 2007).

Cognitive behavioural therapy focuses on client self determination, empowering the service user to make their own decisions and also boosts the service users confidence when making these decisions and avoids having a dependent service user. It encourages service users to reinforce desirable behaviours rather than punish those that are undesirable (Adams et al, 2009) (Westbrook, Kennerley and Kirk, 2007).

Cognitive behavioural therapy is not a short process which is why it wouldn’t be useful in this case. If further on when the crisis has resolved and the service user and social worker have built rapport it may be a useful approach to use when dealing with his other problems. The service user already had an idea of what cognitive behavioural therapy was as his psychiatrist has already referred him for short term cognitive behavioural work. Working with the therapist allocated to this service user may enhance his progress, if all professionals are working towards the same goal using the same approach it may be beneficial to the service user in the long run.

This essay provides a critical analysis of a 10-minute AV recording transcript (appendix 1) of an interview with a service user in a simulated role play. This is not a real interview, but part of a student assignment. All names used in this recording transcript are fictitious and thus there are no issues concerning confidentiality.

The essay comprises two parts. In Part 1, Kolb’s Learning Cycle (Kolb, 1984) will be utilised to reflect upon the interview. In Part 2, the ASPIRE Model (Parker and Bradley, 2003) will be utilised to outline how further work with this service user would be approached. Kolb’s Learning Cycle and the ASPIRE Model will both be briefly outlined within the appropriate section.

Part 1: Reflection and Critical Analysis

Kolb’s Learning Cycle, which will be used to reflect upon and critically analyse the interview, comprises four stages of learning from experience: Concrete Experience (i.e. active involvement in an experience); Reflective Observation (i.e. reviewing and reflecting on the experience); Abstract Conceptualisation (i.e. concluding and learning from the experience); and, Active Experimentation (i.e. planning and trying what has been learned). Each of these stages will be used in this reflection and critique.

Concrete Experience

A simulated role play interview was conducted with ‘Paul Jones,’ a 60-year old who contacted the adult social work team to discuss the possibility of some assistance. Paul is the sole carer of his 92-year old father, James. Paul has been finding it increasingly difficult to care for James, who spends all day on the sofa and does not even go upstairs to his bed at night. James became this way soon after the death of his daughter 1-month previously. She died of cancer not long after Paul and James lost Paul’s mother and James’ wife to a heart attack, 6-months previously. Their only relative is Paul’s son, who lives up North and is unable to visit regularly. The full case study can be found in appendix 2.

Reflective Observation

The purpose of the interview was to work collaboratively with Paul in establishing his current needs. With the exception of the beginning of the interview when I was nervous and finding background noise distracting, I communicated in a clear and courteous manner. These skills are important when establishing rapport with a service user, laying the foundations to develop mutual respect and trust (Koprowska, 2005). After some introductions and the setting of boundaries regarding confidentiality, I placed the interview agenda into Paul’s control with the appropriate use of the open-ended question, “What has bought you here today?” By recognising the power imbalance present between social workers and service users, I was mindful to reduce the oppressive impact of hierarchy (Dalrymple and Burke, 2000). The question did, however, seem to unnerve Paul and he passed the question back by asking “Well, I’m not sure how much you know?” I informed him that “I do know a little bit. . .” and then gently encouraged him to provide me with some more information. On reflection, I should have clarified with Paul why needed the information again (i.e. to confirm accuracy of details). He was clearly uncomfortable with repeating the information, possibly due to a previous resistance to seeking outside help. I was focused on eliciting information from Paul first-hand to prevent any assumptions being made, but should have adapted my approach based on Paul’s needs.

A key strength within the interview was the effective use of empathic understanding, which appeared to put Paul at ease. Statements such as, “This must have been a very difficult time for you” and appropriate use of eye contact and body language conveyed empathy, congruence (genuineness), and unconditional positive regard. These are three core conditions required in person-centred counselling (Rogers, 1980). I feel that by utilising these skills within the interview, Paul was able to speak openly about his concerns. Indeed, evidence suggests that congruence supports anti-oppressive practice by facilitating the development of a partnership (Miller, 2006).

Paul sought help under the premise that it was for James, but with the appropriate use of open-ended and closed questions it was established that he needed help too. The needs of the carer are far too often overlooked within social care (Herring, 2006), but I ensured I gained a balanced accumulation of information on both Paul and James in order to establish both of their needs. Systems Theory (Bronfenbrenner, 1977) purports that in order to understand an individual, they need to be assessed in terms of their interactions with their environment and within their relationships.

By the end of the interview, a shared understanding had been reached, as well as a plan of action in terms of arranging a home visit and contacting Citizen’s Advice to discuss financial concerns. Thus, the initial aim of the interview was met.

Abstract Conceptualisation

When discussing his problems, Paul was very open and forthcoming, as was facilitated by the use of non-verbal encouragers such as nodding and leaning slightly forward to show interest (Seden, 1999). He was, however, resistant to further outside help such as from his GP or a counsellor. I was careful not to judge Paul on this and to remind myself that there are a number of reasons why he might be resistant (e.g. previous negative experiences with health professionals; family belief systems, etc.). Interestingly Paul did share that James would also be resistant to outside help, indicating the possibility that seeking help is not part of the family belief system. It was important that I did not oppress Paul or James by “undermining their responsibilities for the choices they make” (Dominelli, 2002, p.47).

On reflection, I should have been more understanding of Paul’s difficulties accepting help and adjusted my approach accordingly. In particular, if I was to conduct this interview again, I would change the way I responded to Paul’s concerns that, “I am just worried that I am going to lose it with my dad” and “I often find things closing in on me. . .” I should have probed these concerns further, as has been highlighted in my feedback, in order to establish whether Paul was a danger to himself or James. One of the key roles within the National Occupational Standards for Social Work is to “Manage risk to individuals, families, carers, groups, communities, self and colleagues” (GSCC, 2002, p.12). Paul’s feelings of despair were mentioned on more than one occasion and, on reflection, I should have detected this as a potential risk factor.

I feel I was effective in my use of paraphrasing, as used to clarify issues and demonstrate active listening. However, greater use of summarising might have facilitated communication and ensured that information provided by Paul was being interpreted according to his own subjective experiences (Seden, 1999). I will endeavour to develop these skills throughout my training.

References

Bronfenbrenner, U., 1977. Toward an experimental ecology of human development. American Psychologist, 32, pp.513-530.

Dalrymple, J. and Burke, B., 1995. Anti-oppressive Practice: Social Care and the Law. Buckingham: Open University Press.

Dominelli, L., 2002. Anti-Oppressive Social Work Theory and Practice. Palgrave Macmillan.

General Social Care Council, 2002. The National Occupational Standards for Social Work. Topss England, April 2004.

Herring, J., 2006. Where are the carers in healthcare law and ethics? Legal Studies, 27(1), pp. 51-73.

Kolb, D.A., 1984. ‘Experiential Learning experience as a source of learning and development’. New Jersey: Prentice Hall

Koprowska, J., 2005. Communication and interpersonal skills in social work. Exeter: Learning Matters

Miller, L., 2006. Counselling Skills for Social Work. London: Sage Publications.

Parker, J. and Bradley, G., 2003. Social Work Practice: Assessment, Planning, Intervention, and Review. Exeter: Learning Matters.

Rogers, C.R., 1980. A way of being. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Seden, J., 1999. Counseling skills in social work practice. Buckingham: Open University Press.

Part 2 – Further Work with the Jones Family

The acronym ASPIRE represents the social work process of Assess, Plan, Intervene, Review, and Evaluate, which enables the exploration of successfully operationalising a plan made with a service user (Parker and Bradley, 2003). Adopting this framework also encapsulates the fourth stage of Kolb’s Learning Cycle: Active Experimentation. Importantly, supervision would be required in any interviews since I am a newly qualified Social Worker. Furthermore, the contribution of regular and high quality supervision in the social work profession has been emphasised (Laming, 2009).

If the case of the Jones family was allocated to me after this initial assessment, I would take an eclectic approach, using the ASPIRE framework to guide intervention delivery. An eclectic approach would be adopted in order to ensure that Paul and James’ individual needs were taken into consideration. I would be unable to identify the most appropriate approach to use without first meeting with James, thus an eclectic approach would facilitate flexibility between service user needs.

Assessment would take place within the home, thus adopting a person-in-environment perspective (Kemp et al., 1997). Importantly, supervision would be required in any interviews since I am a newly qualified Social Worker. Systems Theory posits that in order to understand a service user, their ecological system needs to be taken into consideration (Bronfenbrenner, 1977). This includes their microsystem (i.e. immediate relationships), mesosystem (i.e. different parts of the microsystem working together), exosystem (i.e. systems that the individual is not directly part of but that affects them), macrosystem (i.e. the larger social world, such as government and culture), and their chronosystem (i.e. a system of change). The rationale for utilising this theory is that the current problems experienced by Paul and James appear to be related to recent changes within his microsystem. This includes the loss of two family members, changing health status (i.e. James has gained weight, has emphysema, and is becoming less mobile), changing roles (i.e. Paul is now sole carer to James), and a change in their relationship. Bell (2003) asserts that it is easier to understand an individual’s behaviour in the setting in which it occurs, which is the approach I feel most appropriate within this scenario. Family relationships are complex and aptly described by Dallos (1991) as, “The essence of family life is that it is complex and changing and that unique situations and combinations of needs continually arise” (p.7). Therefore, effective support for individual members requires the utilisation of theory and knowledge that assesses their needs within the family context.

An understanding of demands and resources is important when working from the systems perspective, an understanding which the theory itself lacks to emphasise (Coady and Lehman, 2008). For the Jones family, demands within their life include bereavement, deteriorating health, and financial concerns. In terms of resources, they are fairly isolated and, despite initiating this interview, they are both resistant to outside help, which also limits their resources. This provides the rationale for utilising a Task-Centered, problem solving approach in the intervening stage of the ASPIRE framework. The evidence suggests that such an approach is appropriate for dealing with family problems, new roles, and illness or bereavement (Reid, 1978). Paul mentioned a number of problems, both personally and in relation to James, and thus facilitating him to identify the cause of these problems would be a useful endeavour in helping him tackle them. By using a problem solving approach within a collaborative partnership with the family, I would anticipate that it would enhance their capacity to deal with future problems if they were to arise (Germain and Gitterman, 1996, p.139). In turn, educating Paul on the use of problem solving strategies would act to prevent further oppression by providing him with tools he can utilise in other areas of his life (Coulshed and Orne, 1998).

A problem I identified during the role play, but which would need to be confirmed via a shared interpretation with Paul and James, is that Paul could unintentionally be colluding with James’ disengagement. For example, by leaving his lunch next to the sofa so that he does not have to move, Paul is creating dependency. Thompson (2001) suggests that when working with carers, it is important not to encourage them in a role that could result in dependency and thus further oppress the person being cared for. This would need to be attended to sensitively and without causing offence to Paul. One such way of achieving this is via the problem solving approach to help Paul recognise this for himself. Indeed, “change is easier if the directions that professionals and users wish to follow coincide” (Dominelli, 2002, p.25).

In working with Paul and James, great consideration would be needed in terms of bereavement. It sounds like James might be experiencing depression associated with one of the purported stages of bereavement (Kubler-Ross, 1989). In addition, Paul might be in the anger stage or possibly unable to process his feelings due to the stress of taking care of his father and worrying about finances. Their current problems are likely to hinder them both reaching a period of ‘restoration orientation,’ where they can focus on building their future after their loss (Worden, 2003). In order to facilitate a move towards restoration orientation, I would work with the strengths possessed by Paul and James to ensure anti-oppressive focus is maintained (Parker and Bradley, 2003).

There has been some critique to Systems Theory, including that it lacks theoretical and empirical support in practice situations (Healy, 2005). Overall, however, the purpose of the theory is to work with service users in a way that enhances and strengthens their abilities to adapt and solve problems, which ultimately provides long-term outcomes rather than short-term solutions. The key role of social work, as agreed internationally, is the promotion of “social change, problem solving in human relationships and the empowerment and liberation of people to enhance well-being” (GSCC, 2002, p.12), and I anticipate that the theories and approaches outlined above would facilitate the empowerment and liberation of the Jones family.

In order to effectively meet the needs of the Jones family, it will be essential to conduct the review and evaluation stage of the ASPIRE model in order to provide closure, implement any additional interventions, and develop my own skills and abilities through reflection and critical analysis.

CHAPTER FOUR

Evidence suggests that contemporary social work practice is faced with the dilemma of how to direct its efforts primarily to the poor and needy in the UK and at the same time to engage in social welfare policy to help promote social change. According to Okitikpi and Aymer’s (2003) social work professionals working with African refugees are often frustrated and poorly resourced to manage families who suffer from difficult lifestyle experiences due to poverty and social exclusions. Also Okitikpi and Aymer (2003) are of the view that problems of poverty and working in partnership with African families alleged of child abuse or maltreatment would be better and easier managed should social workers engage in open direct interventions. Bernard & Gupta (2008) highlights the difficulties social workers face when assessing and making interventions regarding African children and their families whose cultures differ from the majority white population in the UK. Therefore the argument that the mission of social work is to promote social change and alleviate poverty in society by engaging with social welfare policy rather than interventions at family levels is currently the pivot of strong debate. The term social work intervention as defined by IFSW:

‘Usually describes work undertaken with individuals, families, groups and communities. In this context the term is to cover the use of social work knowledge and skills when using it within a social care organisation to facilitate the provision of services and practice consistent with the Codes of Practice and with standards of service and practice, and to promote social inclusion and life opportunities of people using the services’ IFSW (2000).

Types of Social Work Intervention

According to Elde-Woodward (2002), there are three fundamental methods or stages of intervention. The first method of intervention, Elde-Woodward describes as ‘macro’ social work intervention which involves directing social work practice to society or communities as a whole. This type of social work practice includes policy forming and advocacy on a national or international scale. The second method of intervention is ‘mezzo’ social work practice, which involves working with agencies, small organizations, and other small groups directly or indirectly related to social work practice to make policies or developing programs for a particular community. The third method of intervention is the ‘Micro’ social work practice which involves offering direct service to individuals and families. Hartnett et al (2005) research on the role perceptions of social workers and social work students shows that only very few actually engage in policy-practice that focus on social policy formulation and advocacy.

There are a wide variety of activities that falls under the category of social work practice and social work professionals works in many different settings of employment. Basically social workers engage in clinical practice, find themselves working with individuals or families. However, social workers who serve in community practice are engage with the mezzo or macro stages of social work. Spratt et al (2004) findings shows that social work intervention with individuals or families is the most popular and effective method of intervention that bring about social change in individual lives. Social work intervention aims to help children or families to identify, and to establish appropriate relationships with social workers that will enhance their livelihood. The purpose of the intervention is diverse and ranges from increasing life skills or changing behaviour to increase life options and to cope with changing life situations and transitions (Smale, Tuson and Statham, 2000).

Identifying and acknowledging child abuse

Many schools of thought argue that social workers could assist families living in poverty to identify issues of child abuse by showing empathy, establishing working relationships and engaging in appropriate interventions. In any of the situations there are a number of factors making African families living in poverty to be alleged of maltreating or abusing their children. Some of these factors are poor parenting practices, lack of knowledge about the laws pertaining in the country of residence and ethno-centric discrimination and racism (Elder-Woodward, 2002). Child abuse cases referred by other agencies for the attention of local authority social services may result in interventions that usually draw children into child protection system. Such interventions do not always consider the financial and social situations such parents find themselves, but used by social work professionals in manner to comply with government legislation and the responsibility of protecting or safeguarding children. For instance, parents living on meagre income hardly could sustain the family financial commitments, or such parents may not consider the legal implications of living children alone in the house for work, as often such children are seen wandering the streets or become school dropouts due to poor parental care and support. Social worker’s distinctive contribution for families living in extreme poverty and experiencing social exclusion is o employ empathy, communication and relationship skills to help identify and to acknowledge issues of child abuse (Spratt et al 2004).

Intervention within the social work process is not a static, snapshot or a holistic process whereby social workers arrives at definitive answer to protect vulnerable children from further harm. However, the fundamental interpersonal skills require of social workers is the key to identifying the possible causes of child abuse or maltreatment in a family setting, through the building of appropriate relationship with the families and collaborating with other interested agencies (Lloyd and Taylor, 1990). Most often than not social workers take ethnocentric and prejudice approach at the initial contact with African families accused of child abuse and consequently arrive at a judgemental decision. With the right relationship with African families involve in child abuse cases social work professionals are positive to understand the needs of such families and what type of intervention is appropriate to help address their problems. Intervention skills used by social workers fits most easily into the traditional frameworks in which social work is usually taught to qualifying students, but less easily recognized as intervention by most social workers once in practice. Arguably, the core skills of intervention have not been grasped in its entity practising social workers and hence are not consciously transferred across situations where is most needed.

Intervening child abuse

Social work involves intervening children and family’s situation and problems through appraisal of what information is available and what information is gathered from the family after initially assessing the family’s financial and social status, with collaboration with other organisations and professionals working with the family. Many authors argue that social worker should lead families alleged of child abuse through the intervention process, highlighting and explaining the importance of working together to agree on the most appropriate intervention needed to bring social change. Furthermore, social workers use a range of knowledge, models and frameworks to decide what method of intervention is needed to achieve the desired result. To ensure that collated information from all quarters leads to informed intervention, social workers need to establish working relationships of trust with African families and other professionals. They must be able to understand the socio-economic status and parenting practices of African families, through their own knowledge and skill, or by drawing on that of others. Social workers recognition and understanding of parents behavioural patterns, complicated with poverty, understanding of diverse cultures and building of good working relationships are vital to successful interventions.

There is evidence in the literature to suggest that social workers and other related professionals have difficulty fostering good working relationship with black African families alleged of child abuse cases as such families have no trust in the child protection system. Therefore social workers need to develop the requisite skills and behaviours to understand the problems of African families living under the poverty line, and who may have little or no knowledge of the child protection system in the UK. In recognition of the difficulties inherent in deploying effective interventions the Department of Health introduced the Framework for the Assessment of Children in Need and their Families ( DH 2000). Macdonald (2002) notes the pitfalls that arise when conducting assessments leading to social work intervention. It is not just simple to follow a framework setting out the areas to be investigated, as social workers need to exercise professional judgement and be alert to unconscious bias which may creep into the work, distorting assessments and the degree of interventions.

Social Work Intervention and environmental influences

Bernard & Gupta (2008) literature review on black African children and child protection system emphasize the adverse effects of poverty and social exclusion on parenting capacity and children’s development, which have been identified as a major factor in most families involved in care proceedings (Brophy et al, 2003). African families are proportionally more likely to live in poverty than majority whites in Britain as many undertake low-income paid jobs (Kyambi, 2005), have their rights to support services withdrawn under section 17 of the 1989 Children Act, (Kholi, 2006) and income, employment opportunities and access to support services are determined by their immigration and asylum status (Bernard & Gupta, 2008).

The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, recognises the need to protect children who experience a deprived childhood due to families living in poverty, and requires governments to ensure all children have an adequate standard of living as a basic right. The UN recognizes that deprivation during childhood undermines the fundamental rights which children, as well as adults, should enjoy, including access to key services such as health, education and social services (Monteith & McLaughlin, 2005). Available evidence shows that poverty and social deprivation during childhood has adverse effects on children developments and limits their capacity to reach full potential and will perpetuate social inequalities across generations within populations.

The Labour government pledge to reducing poverty in the country was a step forward to achieve social change among families, but did not explicitly define the target groups that are mainly living in extreme poverty. The Labour government’s anti poverty strategy involves policies to increase the incomes of poor families by improving child-related benefits and tax credits and the introduction of a national minimum wage. The government’s Sure Start initiative and the National Childcare Strategy in the UK provide affordable childcare provision for working parents. Moreover, the publication of the document ‘Every Child Matters’ set outs the government approach to the wellbeing of children and young people (McLaughlin & Monteith 2005). The sure start initiative provides a lot of support to parents struggling to care for their children, but the limited number of branches across the country only seems to assist the majority white families. Bradshaw (2001) and Stewart & Hill (2005) argue that the government’s child poverty reduction strategies may be easier to achieve in short-term basis but not achieving much in long term. The main official working document for many British child protection social workers is the Department of Health (DoH), 1988 document, ‘Protecting Children: A Guide for Social Workers undertaking a Comprehensive Assessment, but has its limitations when working with black African families (Chands, 1999).

It is arguable to say that taking children into public care because their parents are not capable of providing adequate care may be due to the withdrawal of all support services in accordance with section 9 of the 2004 Asylum an Immigration Act (Kelly & Meldgaard, 2005). Evidence shows that basic physical care that families are expected to provide for children becomes limited by inadequate housing, unemployment, poverty, and social exclusion particularly with black African families living in poverty. It is argued that any assessment process that reflects the inadequate provision of care as the failure of black people and as indicator of child abuse rather than the effects of racial inequality is in itself racist. Furthermore, as black African families are disadvantaged in many circumstances, it is arguable that they will face higher levels of risk from the harmful effects of inappropriate social work intervention and misjudgement (Chands, 1999).

Social Work Intervention and parental behaviours

The history of over-representation of black children in the child protection system, according to Chand (1999) dates back to the 1960s. Research shows that black children are quick to enter into the child protection system than their white counterparts, for reasons such as parenting behaviours, culture and social and economic problems. Many research work relating to the differences in child-rearing and poverty in the UK show that black African families are often at risk of being stereotyped as not capable of parenting children in the most appropriate way. Therefore, social workers have a responsibility to understand issues framing the experiences of African children at risk of significant harm, ad not to create the general impression that all African families are not capable. According to Chand (1999)

‘despite the very obviousness of the diversity of childhoods, we live and work in a society which tends to assume that there is just one kind of childhood that is normal and ordinary (Rogers, 1989, p. 97).

The issues of punishment, parental behaviour and discipline, complicated with poverty are controversial concepts among black African families living in the UK, which often draw them into the arena of child protection system. According to Bernard & Gupta (2008), the literature that exists focuses on the African families where their parenting is deemed to be below the threshold of what is considered proper. This dysfunction within African families can risk reproducing stereotypes of this group as ‘deficient’, thus fostering a pathological viewpoint of African family relationship. It is widely accepted that black African family relationships with white social workers working with them, is always strained with mistrust and non-acceptance. Available research shows that (Chands, 1999), different child-rearing practices, as a result of socio-economic status permeates different cultures and social workers working with families of different cultural values and beliefs may experience difficulty in understanding what parental behaviours are acceptable and not acceptable. Thus, to distinguish whether a particular child-rearing practice is deviant to societal norm, social workers will always have to dwell on the knowledge acquired from both formal and informal training, experiences and their moral judgements, to employ the most appropriate intervention process applicable to the family. Bernard & Gupta (2008) claims that African family relationships, like those of many minority ethnic groups, are often constructed differently from the conventional nuclear family model that exist in the majority culture in contemporary Britain. Cultural values and more importantly poverty influence the lives of many black African children and their families involved in the child protection system (Thorburn et al, 2005). In order for social workers to establish a good working relationship when working with black African families and children living in poverty, Chands (1999) argues that it is paramount for social workers to have a sound knowledge and understanding of what is acceptable and unacceptable parental behaviours within the cultural background of the families. If not, social workers may intervene in alleged child abuse cases inappropriately.

There are a few data on the impact of poverty and cultural values in influencing expectations, motivations, roles and approaches to parenting and perceiving what constitutes harmful behaviours (Barn et al., 2006). It is debatable to define in specific terms how children should be discipline from the view points of parents and professionals and what type and degree of punishments are deem appropriate for a misbehaving child. Barn et al (2006) findings show that African families do not punish their children any different from the majority white families and that there is no evidence of using more severe physical punishment (Thorburn et al., 2005). However, research shows that working-class white families presumably employ more smacking, which is a form of physical punishment, in an attempt to manage children behaviours and corporal punishment is still practise in schools outside the state sector, which are mainly occupied by middle-class children. Yet in general, as the vast majority of African parents use physical punishment as a form of discipline to manage their children behaviours, they are inevitably alleged of abusing their children (Chands, 1999). These are related to their cultural background, their socio-economic status, and their own personalities’ (Phillips & Dutt 2000). For example, Ellis (2006) maintained that in African culture there is little fondling and kissing of infants and any kind of caressing stops when the child is toddling. Black Africans express their affection and love in a different way, through good physical attention, such as bathing, skin-care and hair-care (Chands, 1999). This illustrates the necessity to understand different cultures in order to guard against misinterpretations of parenting behaviour, and to ask why a black African parent may not be showing any obvious signs of affection towards their child. Moreover, the unrealistic expectation by white social workers should be understandably measured in the light of the parents’ anxiety about their children’s future considering the poverty levels of many black African children living the United Kingdom (Beranard & Gupta 2006).

With regard to responsibility and independence, many research shows that most white social workers seem to adopt euro-centric approach when working with black African children and their families (Chands, 1999). In effect black African children are either not protected because they are seen to be able to cope with situations not deemed appropriate for white children, or where black African children are not taking on similar responsibilities to their white counterparts they are deemed to be at risk of abuse or deprivation (Chands, 1999). For instance, the issue of older siblings caring for younger ones in the case with many black African families may be decisive in the workers’ assessment of risk of significant harm to the child. According to Chands (1999) there is the need to question why this should be when a high level of both responsibility and independence by the older sibling can be clearly demonstrated. It must be emphasized therefore that although child abuse occurs in all races and cultures, workers must guard against viewing suspected abuse through the norms and values of their own background.

A further point is that black African families’ unwillingness or resistance to the assessment and intervention process employ by social workers working on alleged child abuse cases should not be seen as evidence of guilt, as the system may be new to them or a good working relationship is not there. Finally, Chands (1999) explains that in order to make the intervention process fairer for all black African families, it is necessary for majority white workers and institutions to understand that most black African parents may be less aware of child protection procedures, may be living in poverty, and their experience in the UK make them more susceptible to the child protection system. Some researchers have identified the importance of understanding how poverty complicate different cultural values, which in many cases explains the motivation behind parental actions when managing unacceptable behaviours of their children (Barn et al, 2006) and in their research on normative parenting there is no significant differences between ethnic groups with regard to physical punishment of children (Bernard & Gupta, 2008).

CHAPTER FIVE
IMPLICATIONS FOR SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE

There is some evidence in the literature to suggest that social workers and other professionals struggle to manage the complex needs and social circumstances of many African families (Bernard & Gupta, 2008). According to Hayes & Spratt (2008), social workers are more engage with child protection work, but not in way that is readily understood by those who legislate, set policy and measure performance. Social workers may lack the necessary tools to adequately differentiate borderline cases from high-risk cases, couple with poor collaboration with other professionals, classifying certain parenting practices as politically and ethically unacceptable and their own personal cultural values, they turn to route all borderline child abuse cases through the child protection processes. It might seem paradoxical that in recent years social workers, who are seen as the force for conformity, are frequently criticized for acting more in the interests of society than in the interests of service users. However, when social workers relate more with families than just aiming to achieve government’s target, they build good working relationships with those they serve and help liberate them from oppression, poverty and social deprivation. Thus, social workers engaging more with methods of intervention which liberate children and their families from poverty, deprivation and social exclusion are really working to the principles and ethics of social work practice as defined by IFSW in contemporary Britain.

Social work professionals almost always draw exclusively on sociology and political science knowledge base, believing that individuals can be wholly human only within the context of a benign environment and a just social order. Evidence shows that changing the social system of African families who suffer oppression through poverty and social exclusion by empowering them, not only means liberating them from social injustice, but also promoting family dignity and happiness. According to Bernard & Gupta (2008) the poverty and social circumstances experience by many African families pose challenges for parents and children, as well as social work professionals working to safeguard and promote children welfare. Therefore, it is the requirement of the social workers to consider African families’ poverty and social circumstances before deciding on what intervention process will most help change their life. Recent government’s efforts to change the objective social work from perhaps overemphasizes on child protection agenda to a more preventative approach in alleged child abuse cases, have not entirely favoured African families living in poverty who are accuse of being ‘deficient’ in their child-rearing behaviours. Social workers invariably experience the dilemma of choosing between directing efforts to child welfare process or child protection process and not see children suffer further abuse under the context of poverty.

The broader development of the new theoretical perspectives based on systems theory will assist social work professionals working with children and African families to consider a more specific view of their roles and to help develop effective relationships with African families with the view of understanding their individual, emotional as well as social needs. A lack of good relationship with African families will adversely impact on social workers ability to understand their parenting behaviours so as to employ the appropriate method of intervention (Bernard & Gupta, 2008). There are four main reasons for the need for a new perspective.

Policy changes resulting in a change in method of intervention

The policy environment to which social work practice relates continues to change to bring about the necessary social change. According to Platt (2006) persistent demands on social workers from the government and including inadequate staff, the bureaucracy and central government targets, and policies on refugees and asylum seekers, creates difficulty for social work to offer a wide range of family support services. Research shows that many African families may benefit more when they are routed away from child protection system towards child welfare services (Hayes & Spratt, 2008). However, the government’s response to Lord Laming’s Report in Every Child Matters following the death of Victoria Climbie, has strengthen child protection and increase the number of cases routed through child welfare processes. Therefore it is important for social workers to subject parenting practices influenced by poverty to thorough scrutiny during assessment process to help achieve better outcomes for African children. Poverty can create forms of disempowerment for children when it is used to justify parental behaviours and practices that violate their right (Bernard & Gupta, 2008). Further to this point, social workers sometimes face resistance when assessing parenting problems, and more importantly their judgements about what should be consider as significant harm, when parents use poverty as a yardstick for their behaviours. Chand (1999) argue that due to the large number of cases of child abuse and child protection issues among black African children and families, social workers should take the initiative and be proactive by liaising with the families they serve, informing them about where they draw their boundaries.

Changes in the knowledge and skill base

As with any profession there are both new approaches and new understandings about the effectiveness of specific interventions. Investment in research and the dissemination of knowledge and skills in health remains vast greater than in social care. But the strengthening of these resources in social work and social care should result in more knowledge based practice and management in the medium and long term. The case for recognising different sources of knowledge has been made and the multiplicity of information collected in various departments need to include that produced through the experience and expertise of people using the services and front line workers as well as from research. According to Chand (1999) training either formally or informally, is important for social workers working with black African families with child-rearing issues since it can raise the issue of how black African families meet their children needs differently. The training should be integrated into the social work training syllabus in higher education and this would broaden the understanding of students which may dispel some of the myths around black African families and their child-rearing practices and alleviate the potential of pathologizing them in child care practices (Chand, 1999).

Technological and structural changes

Recent technological changes, identification of gaps in knowledge and skills new areas of working are emerging which is resulting in the provision of services falling behind service demands. For instance global movements have necessitated the need for social workers to work with African children and families migrating to the UK with existing poor backgrounds, to work with asylum seekers or refugees escaping from own countries in political turmoil or at war (Newburn, 1993). New technologies and the growing familiarity of the public in using social welfare services opens up new forms of interventions particularly to assist African families living poverty in the UK. In areas where there is rapid development or new issues with social work practice there is the necessity in advance of theory. Strategies in these circumstances may include transferring existing knowledge and skills to the new area, drawing on any international experience and expertise, networking to share and learn from experience and research on needs and effective responses. Initially these may need to be done separately to structure a different perspective before it is possible to bring experience and learning together in new ways.

Multi organisational or Partnership Intervention

For intervention to meet the required target, it all depends on proper initial assessment, but many of the assessment tools that are employ such as DoH (2000) Framework for the Assessment of children in need and their families may disadvantage black African families due to the eurocentric approach of social workers. Research shows that partnership is needed to embrace both good working relationships and appropriate intervention process (Chand, 1999). Against this background, children in need may be given preventative supports and will prevent vulnerable children from abuse or maltreatment. Therefore greater attention should be given to support professional social work practice, and safeguarding the value base, the relationship and the process of good practice, expertise of social workers and related professions.

Implications and issues for considerations

Recent studies on African families and the child protection system show that these families are disproportionately represented at different levels in the child care system. The existing intervention tools for social work practice are grounded within ethnocentric epistemologies and, as the foundation for social work theory and practice, are not well equipped for the task of nurturing and developing African families and their children. This is evident, for example, in the sustained over-representation of black children in the care system and in the lack of supportive social work services designed to meet their needs. It is therefore important for the development of new theoretical perspectives based on systems theory to help social workers who work with African children and families. This will enable social workers to take a broader view of their role and to develop a vivid perception of parenting behaviours and practices of these families which are complicated with poverty so that a more appropriate method of intervention are employed in their judgement.

The extreme poverty experience by many African families pose challenges for social workers working to safeguard and promote children’s welfare (Bernard and Gupta, 2008). The Framework for the Assessment of Children in Need and their Families (Department of Health, 2000) based on the ecological approach places a requirement on social workers to also consider the low income status of parents when intervening cases of child abuse. These approaches provide an essential framework for work with African children and families, both in terms of the context of their lives and the process of the work being undertaken. In order to safeguard and promote the welfare of West African children, a starting point must be an acknowledgement of sources of maltreatment of children in the context of poverty (Bernard and Gupta, 2006).

The dissertation highlights the importance of social workers considering the poverty situations of many African families who have immigrated to the United Kingdom, particularly those who have recently arrived into the country. Most of the African families may be asylum seekers or refugees with insecure social status and may have very limited understanding of the child protection or welfare state system in the UK (Bernard & Gupta, 2008). Therefore only throug

This module will address the role of social work in the criminal justice context. This context includes a range of agencies working with adults and young persons who are involved in offending and agencies who work with the victims of crime.

Social Work within the criminal justice context can therefore involve direct work with people who have offended, for example working as a Probation Officer or working in a voluntary sector organisation that provide services to people involved in the criminal justice system. It also involves working with children and families who may be involved in the criminal justice system or affected by crime.

The module will cover the context and settings of social work in the criminal justice system, the principles, methods and interventions of working with offending behaviour; assessment in criminal justice contexts; the impact of crime and working with children and young people in the criminal justice system. A commitment to anti-oppressive practice underpins the module and students will be encouraged to critically think and evaluate their own practice and perspectives.

The module runs in Semester One and consists of lectures which take place on Tuesdays from 22/09/09 to 27/10/09. Lectures will be held from 10am to 1pm every Tuesday and on alternate weeks there will also be lectures from 2pm to 4pm in the afternoon. Tutorials will take place on alternate Fridays, beginning on 25/09/09. Students will be divided into tutorial groups and tutorials will run from 12-1pm and 1pm to 2pm on alternate Fridays. Students will be notified of their assigned tutor group in due course.

Students will be assessed for via a written assignment which is due for submission on:

Monday 2nd November at 4pm.

Module Aims

Students will understand the social work role within a criminal Justice context, and develop their understanding of the knowledge, skill and value base pertinent to the area of practice.

Learning Outcomes

Students will understand policy and legislation that informs the social work role in this context.

Students will learn the theoretical perspectives informing social work intervention in a criminal justice context.

Students will explore the research and methods that inform social work intervention in the criminal justice context.

Students will develop skills in the critical examination of theory and its application to practice.

Students will understand their own value base in relation to this area and have considered ethical issues in relation to practice.

Week 1 – Introduction to Social Work and Criminal Justice – history, context and settings

Date: 22/09/09

Lecture: 10 – 1pm – Nicola Carr

Tutorial – 25/09/09 (Group 1 (12-1) / Group 2 (1-2) – Nicola Carr and Alan Harpur

Week 2 – Working with offending behaviour- Principles, Methods and Interventions

Date: 29/09/09

Lecture: 10am -1pm – Nicola Carr

Lecture: 2pm -4pm – Nicola Carr

Week 3 – Assessment in criminal justice contexts

Date: 06/10/09

Lecture: 10am – 1pm – Nicola Carr

Tutorial: 09/09/09 (Group 1 (12-1) / Group 2 (1-2) – Nicola Carr and Alan Harpur

Week 4 – The impact of offending – working with victims of crime and Restorative Justice approaches

Date: 13/10/09

Lecture: 10am to 1pm – Nicola Carr

Lecture: 2pm to 4pm (Victim Panel – Susan Reid, Victim Support, Northern Ireland and Christine Hunter, PBNI Victims Unit)

Week 5 – Public Protection, Prisons and Resettlement

Date: 20/10/09

Lecture: 10am to 1pm (PPNAI, Willie McAuley; John Warren, Extern)

Tutorial: 23/09/09 (Group 1 (12-1) / Group 2 (1-2)

Week 6: Working with young people in the criminal justice system – balancing welfare and justice?

Date: 27/10/09

Lecture: 10am to 1pm – Nicola Carr

Lecture: 2pm to 4pm (Kelvin Doherty, Youth Justice Agency)

Course Reading
Recommended Texts

A further extensive list of recommended reading is provided for each week of the course based on subject area.

Assessment

Assessment of this module is through a written assignment which is due for submission:

Monday 2nd November by 4pm.

You are required to submit one printed copy to Reception in 6 College Park and one electronic copy via ‘My Modules’ on Queen’s Online before 4.00pm on Tues 5th Jan. Please refer to the following link on the School’s web site for submission procedures http://www.qub.ac.uk/schools/SchoolofSociologySocialPolicySocialWork/ImportantNotice/#d.en.93464

Students must answer one of the essay questions below and the word count for this assignment is: 2500 Words +/- 10%

Essay Questions

Restorative Justice aims to address the consequences of offending for victims and offenders and communities in a meaningful way. Critically evaluate this statement with reference to practice in the Northern Ireland criminal justice system.

Young people who are involved in offending should be treated as ‘children first’. Discuss this statement with reference to policy and practice in working with young people in the criminal justice system.

The history of probation is one of an increased emphasis on public protection. Discuss this statement with reference to probation practice in Northern Ireland.

Assessment of the risk of re-offending and risk of harm should guide the nature of intervention with offenders. Critically evaluate this statement with reference to theory, policy and practice.

GUIDELINES

This assignment should be based on learning from your lectures, workshops and guided study / reading .You are encouraged to start researching and preparing at an early stage as the submission date is A discussion forum will also be established on queens on-line in order to assist you to share ideas with tutors and other students and to seek to share resources for the assignment.

REFERENCING

Your assignment must be supported with references from relevant readings and you must follow the referencing guidelines relating to books, journals and web based material provided in your course handbook. You are encouraged to read widely in preparing for your assignment, drawing on material from your reading list as well as other relevant material. You should also look at the general assessment guidelines in your assessment handbook for more general assignment writing skills.

Essay guidance

The best way to structure the answer to a question is to begin with a very brief analysis of what you interpret the question as being about, and then a road-map of how you propose to answer it. This focuses your mind on organising a clear, coherent structure for your answer. Be very careful to indicate as much as possible of what empirical or other evidence there is to support your points.

It is not necessary to come to a definite conclusion on the question: uncertainty having weighed the arguments and evidence is almost always an acceptable position. What is essential, however, is that you have given sufficient weight to arguments contrary to your own, with reasons to back up your rejection. Frequently questions require you to present and assess a number of viewpoints, indicated by such instructions as ‘discuss’, ‘assess’, ‘how far is the case that…’ etc. But it is always essential to consider what alternative interpretations to your own argument there might be.

Source: Oxford University Press (Online Resource Centre)

Requirements for the Award of 10 Credit Points

In order to be awarded 10 credit points towards the completion of the Bachelor’s Degree in Social Work students must:

Complete and submit a written assignment and gain a mark of at least 40%.

Attend at least 80% of all lectures; and

Attend at least 80% of all workshops.

Students who fail to attend for the required number of lectures and tutorials, or who miss particularly crucial elements of the module, may be required to undertake additional work in order to be awarded credit points.

LATE SUBMISSION OF COURSEWORK

The University’s rule is that for work submitted after the deadline, 5 percentage points per working day are deducted from the received mark up to a maximum of five days. Thereafter, the work receives zero.

Extensions to essay deadlines are covered by a formal University procedure and may be granted on grounds of ill health or personal circumstances. You need to submit a completed Exemption from Late Coursework Marks Penalty Form (available from the Office, 6 College Park and on the School’s Website www.qub.ac.uk/soc ) within three days of the essay deadline. The form should be accompanied by a medical certificate (NOT self-certification) and/or other written supporting evidence and should be taken to the module convenor, preferably during his/her office hours, who decides whether or not to agree to an extension.

Lecture Outlines

Week 1 – Introduction to Social Work and Criminal Justice – history, context and settings

Date: 22/09/09

Lecture: 10 – 1pm

This lecture will provide an introduction to the module by outlining the role of social work in the criminal justice context. The first lecture will cover the history of social work within the criminal justice context and will explore theoretical perspectives on the intersection of social work and the criminal justice system. Particular consideration will be given to the role of the social worker within the parameters of the ‘care’ or ‘control’ debate. Some of the key phases of social work intervention in the criminal justice system will be explored ranging from original social work role as a ‘court missionary’ through to the current drive towards interventions based on the assessment of risk and ‘evidence based practice’.

Tutorial – 25/09/09 (Group 1 (12-1) / Group 2 (1-2)

Following from the introductory lecture, this tutorial will focus on some of the key paradigm shifts that have influenced the role of social work within the criminal justice context. Students will be encouraged to critically explore the role of social work within this setting.

Key Reading – Social Work in the Criminal Justice System – History, Context and Settings

Audit Commission (1989) Promoting Value for Money in the Probation Service, London: HMSO

Brownlee, I. (1998) Community Punishment. A Critical Introduction. Essex: Longman Criminology Series

Burnett, R. & Roberts, C. (Ed.) (2004) What Works in Probation and Youth Justice Cullompton: Willan

Chapman, T. and Hough, M. (1998) Evidence Based Practice, London: HMIP

Farrant, F. (2006) ‘Knowledge production and the punishment ethic: The demise of the probation service.’ Probation Journal, 53,4: 317-333

Fulton, B. & Parkhill, T. (2009) Making the Difference: an oral history of probation in Northern Ireland. Belfast: PBNI. Available at: http://www.pbni.org.uk/archive/Publications/Other%20Publications/pbni%2025th%20book.pdf

Gorman, K. (2001) ‘Cognitive behaviourism and the search for the Holy Grail: The quest for a universal means of managing offender risk.’ Probation Journal, 48, 3: 3-9

Kemshall, H. (2002) ‘Effective practice in probation: An example of ‘Advanced Liberal’ responsibilisation?’ Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, 41,1: 41-58

Lindsay, T. & Quinn, K. (2001) ‘Fair Play’ in Northern Ireland: Towards Anti-Sectarian Practice. Probation Journal, 42, 2: 102-109

McKnight, J. (2009) ‘Speaking up for Probation’ Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, 48,4: 327-343

Mair, G. (Ed.) (2004) What Matters in Probation Cullompton: Willan

Merrington, S. and Stanley, S. (2000) ‘Reflections: doubts about the what works initiative’, Probation Journal, 47, 4: 272-275

Robinson, G. & Raynor, P. (2006) ‘The future of rehabilitation: What role for the probation service?’ Probation Journal, 53,4: 334-346

Vanstone, M. (2004) ‘Mission control: The origins of a humanitarian service.’ Probation Journal, 51, 1: 34-47

Week 2 – Working with offending behaviour- Principles, Methods and Interventions

Date: 29/09/09

Lecture: 10am -1pm – Nicola Carr

Lecture: 2pm -4pm – Nicola Carr

These lectures will focus on the development and use of community penalties. Students will learn about the development of the ‘what works’ initiative and the drive towards effective, evidence-based practice. Key issues such as risk management and public protection will be explored and students will be encouraged to critically evaluate these developments.

Key developments in working with offenders will be outlined including some of the most recent methods of intervention based on research evidence.

Key Reading – Working with offending behaviour- Principles, Methods and Interventions

Andrews, D., Bonta, J. and Hoge, R. (1990a) ‘Classification for effective rehabilitation’, Criminal Justice and Behaviour, 17 ,1: 19-52.

Andrews, D. et al. (1990b) ‘Does correctional treatment work?’ Criminology, 28, 369-404

Ansbro, M. (2008) ‘Using attachment theory with offenders.’ Probation Journal, 55,3: 231-244

Bailie, R. (2006) ‘Women Offenders: The Development of a Policy and Strategy for Implementation by the Probation Board for Northern Ireland’ Irish Probation Journal, 3, 1:97-110

Batchelor, S. (2004) ‘Prove me the bam!’ Victimization and agency in the lives of young women who commit violent offences.’ Probation Journal, 52, 4: 358-375

Bhui, H.S. & Buchanan, J. (2004) ‘What Works?’ and complex individuality.’ Probation Journal, 51,3: 195-196

Bottoms, A. and Williams, W. (1979) ‘A non-treatment paradigm for probation practice’ British Journal of Social Work, 9,2: 160-201

Burnett R & Roberts C (2004) What Works in Probation and Youth Justice, Developing Evidence Based Practice. Cullompton: Willan

Burnett, R. & McNeill, F. (2005) ‘The place of the officer-offender relationship in assisting offenders to desist from crime.’ Probation Journal, 52,3: 221-242

Bushway, S.D.; Thornberry, T.P. & Krohn, M.D. (2003) ‘Desistance as a developmental process: A comparison of static and dynamic approaches.’ Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 19, 2: 129-153

Cherry, S. (2005) Transforming Behaviour: Pro-social Modelling in Practice. Cullompton: Willan

Dixon, L. & Ray, L. (2007) ‘Current issues and developments in race hate crime’ Probation Journal, 54,2: 109-124

Farrall, S. & Bowling, B. (1999) ‘Structuration, human development and desistance from crime.’ British Journal of Criminology 17, 2: 255-267

Farrall, S. (2002) Rethinking What Works with Offenders: Probation, Social Context and Desistance from Crime. Cullompton: Willan

Healy, D. & O’Donnell, I. (2008) ‘Calling time on crime: Motivation, generativity and agency in Irish Probationers.’ Probation Journal, 55,1: 25-38

Jordan, R. & O’Hare, G. (2007) ‘ The Probation Board for Northern Ireland’s Cognitive Self-Change Programme: An overview of the pilot programme in the community.’ Irish Probation Journal, 4,1: 125-136

Loughran, H. (2006) ‘A place for Motivational Interviewing in Probation?’ Irish Probation Journal, 3,1: 17-29

Martinson, R. (1974) ‘What works? Questions and answers about prison reform’, ThePublic Interest, 10, 22-54

McCulloch, P. (2005) ‘Probation, social context and desistance: retracing the relationship.’ Probation Journal, 52,1: 8-22

McGuire, J. & Priestly, P. (1995) ‘Reviewing “what works”: Past, present and future.’ In J. McGuire (Ed.) What Works in Reducing Re-offending. Sussex: Wiley

McNeill, F. (2001) ‘Developing effectiveness: Frontline Perspectives’, Social Work Education, 20,6: 671-678

McNeill, F. (2006) ‘A desistance paradigm for offender management’ Criminology and Criminal Justice, 6, 1: 39-62

McWilliams, W. (1987) ‘Probation, pragmatism and policy’, Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, 26,2:97-121

Maruna, S. (2001) Making Good: How Ex-Convicts Reform and Rebuild their Lives. Washington D.C. : American Psychological Association

Maruna, S.; Immarigeon, R. & LeBel, T.P. (2004) ‘Ex-offender Reintegration: Theory and Practice’ In: S. Maruna and R. Immarigeon (eds.) After Crime and Punishment: Pathways to Offender Integration, Cullompton: Willan

Miller, W. & Rollnick, S. (2006) Motivational Interviewing, Gilford Press, New York

Raynor, P. & Vanstone, M. (1994) ‘Probation practice, effectiveness and the non-treatment paradigm’, British Journal of Social Work, 24,4: 387-404

Rex, S. (1999) ‘Desistance from offending: Experiences of probation’, Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, 38, 4: 366-383

Rex, S. & Bottoms, A. (2003) ‘Evaluating the evaluators: Researching the accreditation of offender programmes.’ Probation Journal, 50,4: 359-368

Smith, D. (2004) ‘The uses and abuses of positivism’, in G. Mair (Ed.) What Matters in Probation, Cullompton: Willan

Vanstone, M. (2000) ‘Cognitive-behavioural work with offenders in the UK: a history of an influential endeavour’, Howard Journal, 39,2: 171-183

Week 3 – Assessment in criminal justice contexts

Date: 06/10/09

Lecture: 10am – 1pm – Nicola Carr

Assessing the risk of re-offending and the risk of harm is one of the core tasks of the social worker within the criminal justice system .This lecture will cover the background of assessment and some of the factors that impact on assessment. Particular attention will be paid to research evidence concerning, dynamic and static risk factors in relation to offending. In addition, attention will be paid to protective factors and research relating to desistance from crime. An overview will be provided of a range of risk assessment tools currently in use within the criminal justice system.

Tutorial: 09/09/09(Group 1 (12-1) / Group 2 (1-2) – Nicola Carr and Alan Harpur

This tutorial will be in a workshop format and will focus on the use of risk assessment tools in relation to the assessment of the risk re-offending and risk of harm with the aim of planning interventions to address these areas.

Assessment in criminal justice contexts

Aye-Maung, N. & Hammond, N. (2000) ‘Risk of re-offending and Needs Assessments: The User’s Perspective. (Home Office Research Study 216). London: Home Office

Best, P. (2007) ‘ The Assessment, Case Management and Evaluation System (ACE) in Northern Ireland.’ Irish Probation Journal, 4,1: 101-107

Kemshall, H. (1998) Risk in Probation Practice. Aldershot: Ashgate

Kemshall, H. (2003) Understanding Risk in Criminal Justice. Berkshire: Open University Press

Kemshall, H. (2008) Understanding the Management of High Risk Offenders. Berkshire: Open University Press

Merrington, S. & Skinns, J. (2002) ‘Using ACE to Profile Criminogenic Needs’, Probation Studies Unit ACE Practitioner Bulletin No. 1, University of Oxford. Available at: http://www.crim.ox.ac.uk/publications/psubull1.pdf

O’Dwyer, G. (2008) ‘A Risk Assessment and Risk Management Approach to Sexual Offending for the Probation Service.’ Irish Probation Journal, Vol. 5: 84-91

Robinson, G. (2002) ‘Exploring risk management in probation practice: contemporary developments in England and Wales.’ Punishment and Society, 4, 1: 5-25

Robinson, G. (2003) ‘Implementing OASys: lessons from research into LSI-R and ACE’ Probation Journal, 50, 1:30-40

Week 4 – The impact of offending – working with victims of crime and Restorative Justice approaches

Date: 13/10/09

Lecture: 10am to 1pm – Nicola Carr

This lecture will address issues concerning the impact of crime, and will explore issues relating to victims of crime. The concept of the ‘victim’ of crime will be critically assessed with reference to a range of literature, and the victim’s role within the criminal justice system will be explored. The role of the Social Worker in working with victims of crime will also be analysed.

The principles and practices of restorative justice approaches will be examined and explored specifically in relation to the Northern Ireland context.

Lecture: 2pm to 4pm (Victim Panel – Susan Reid, Victim Support, Northern Ireland and Christine Hunter, PBNI Victims Unit)

The afternoon lecture will involve a panel presentation from representatives from two agencies working with victims of crime. The presenters will focus on particular issues and themes relating to their work and students will have an opportunity to discuss the issues raised.

Victims and the Impact of Crime

Hoyle, C. & Zedner, L. (2007) ‘Victims, victimization and the criminal justice system.’ In M. Maguire; R. Morgan & R. Reiner (Eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Criminology (Fourth Edition) Oxford: Oxford University Press

Hunter, C. (2005) ‘The View of Victims of Crime on How the Probation Board for Northern Ireland Victim Information Scheme Might Operate’ Irish Probation Journal, 2,1: 43-47

Norton, S. (2007) ‘The place of victims in the Criminal Justice System.’ Irish Probation Journal, 4,1: 63-76

Williams, B. (2009) ‘Victims’ In: C. Hale; K, Hayward; A. Wahidin & E. Wincup (Eds.) Criminology (Second Edition) Oxford: Oxford University Press

Restorative Justice

Braithwaite, J. (1989) Crime, Shame and Reintegration. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Campbell C, Devlin R, O’Mahony D, Doak J (2005) Evaluation of the Northern Ireland Youth conferencing Service NIO Research and Statistical Series: Report No 12

Daly, K. (2002) ‘Restorative Justice: The real story’ Punishment and Society, 4,1: 55-79

Daly, K. & Stubbs, J. (2006) ‘Feminist engagement with restorative justice.’ Theoretical Criminology, 10, 1: 9-28

Gelsthorpe, L. & Morris, A. (2002) ‘Restorative youth justice. The last vestiges of welfare?’ In: J. Muncie; G. Hughes & E. McLaughlin (Eds.) Youth Justice Critical Readings. London: Sage

Gray, P. (2005) ‘The politics of risk and young offenders’ experiences of social exclusion and restorative justice.’ British Journal of Criminology, 45,6: 938-957

Hamill, H. (2002) ‘Victims of paramilitary Punishment Attacks in Belfast.’ In C. Hoyle & R. Young (Eds.) New Visions of Crime Victims, 49-70., Oxford: Hart

Hoyle, C. (2002) ‘Securing restorative justice for the “Non-Participating” Victim’. In: In C. Hoyle & R. Young (Eds.) New Visions of Crime Victims, 97-132., Oxford: Hart

McEvoy, K. & Mika, H. (2002) ‘ Restorative Justice and the critique of informalism in Northern Ireland.’ British Journal of Criminology, 42, 3: 534-562

McLaughlin, E.; Fergusson, R.; Hughes, G. & Westmarland, L. Restorative Justice: Critical Issues London, Sage

Marshall, T. (1999) Restorative Justice: An Overview. London: Home Office. Available at: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs/occ-resjus.pdf

Morris, A. (2002) ‘Critiquing the critics: A brief response to critics of restorative justice.’ British Journal of Criminology, 42,3: 596-615

O’Mahony, D. & Doak, J. ‘Restorative Justice- Is More Better? The Experience of Police-led Restorative Justice in Northern Ireland’ The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, vol. 43, no. 5

Shapland, J.; Atkinson, A.; Atkinson, H.; Dignan, J.; Edwards, L; Hibbert, J. Howes, M.; Johnstone, J.; Robinson, G. & Sorsby, A. (2008) Does restorative justice affect reconviction? The fourth report from the evaluation of three schemes. London: Ministry of Justice. Available at: http://www.justice.gov.uk/restorative-justice-report_06-08.pdf

Zehr H & Towes B (EDS) – Critical Issues in Restorative Justice, Willan Publishing

Week 5 – Public Protection, Prisons and Resettlement

Date: 20/10/09

Lecture: 10am to 1pm (Nicola Carr and Willie McAuley, PPNAI)

Public protection has formed an important part of the work of criminal justice agencies in recent years. This lecture explores the ‘public protection’ discourse, and its practical implications in relation to new ‘public protection’ arrangements.

The second part of this lecture will focus on the role of social work in relation to prisoners and their families and the role of resettlement.

Tutorial: 23/09/09(Group 1 (12-1) / Group 2 (1-2)

This tutorial will follow from this week’s lecture and address issues in relation to prisoners, the effects of imprisonment and resettlement.

Public Protection, Prisons and Resettlement

Burnett, R. & Maruna, S. (2006) ‘The kindness of prisoners: Strengths-based resettlement in theory and action.’ Criminology and Criminal Justice, 6, 1: 83-106

Corcoran, M. (2007) ‘Normalisation and its discontents: Constructing the ‘irreconcilable’ female political prisoner in Northern Ireland.’ British Journal of Criminology, 47,3: 405-422

Her Majesty’s Inspectorates of Prison and Probation (2001) Through the Prison Gate: A Joint Thematic Review. London: Home Office. Available at: http://www.justice.gov.uk/inspectorates/hmi-prisons/docs/prison-gate-rps.pdf

Kemshall, H. (1996) Reviewing Risk: A review of the research on the assessment and management of risk and dangerousness: Implications for policy and practice in the Probation Service. London: Home Office

Kemshall, H. & Maguire, M. (2001) ‘Public Protection, partnership and risk penality: The Multi-Agency risk management of sexual and violent offenders.’ Punishment and Society, 3,2: 237-264

Lewis, S.; Vennard, J.; Maguire, M.; Raynor, P.; Vanstone, M.; Raybould, S. & Rix, A. (2003) The Resettlement of short-term prisoners: an evaluation of seven pathfinders. London: Home Office. Available at: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs2/occ83pathfinders.pdf

McEvoy, K.; Shirlow, P. & McElrath, K. (2004) ‘Resistance, transition and exclusion: Politically motivated ex-prisoners and conflict transformation in Northern Ireland. Terrorism and Political Violence, 16, 3: 646-670

Maguire, M. & Raynor, P. (2006) ‘How the resettlement of prisoners promotes desistance from crime: Or does it?’ Criminology and Criminal Justice, 6, 1:19-38

Maruna, S. & Liebling, A. (2004) The Effects of Imprisonment. Cullompton: Willan

Matthews, R. (2009) ‘Prisons’ in C. Hale; K, Hayward; A. Wahidin & E. Wincup (Eds.) Criminology (Second Edition) Oxford: Oxford University Press

Public Protection Arrangements Northern Ireland (PPANI) Guidance to Agencies. Belfast: Northern Ireland Office. Available at: http://www.publicprotectionni.com/

Scraton, P. & Moore, L. (2004) The Hurt Inside. The Imprisonment of women and girls in Northern Ireland. Belfast: Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission. Available at: http://www.statewatch.org/news/2004/oct/the-hurt-inside-nihrc.pdf

Scraton, P. & Moore, L. (2005) ‘Degradation, harm and survival in a women’s prison.’ Social Policy and Society, 5, 1: 67-7

Wahidin, A. (2009) ‘Ageing’ in prison: crime and the criminal justice system.’ In: C. Hale; K, Hayward; A. Wahidin & E. Wincup (Eds.) Criminology (Second Edition) Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Week 6: Working with young people in the criminal justice system – balancing welfare and justice?

Date: 27/10/09

Lecture: 10am to 1pm – Nicola Carr

Working with young people who are involved in the criminal justice system involves addressing the context of offending and the welfare needs of the young person. This lecture will cover the theories and practices that inform this work, with reference to research literature and the current system and policy context in Northern Ireland.

Lecture: 2pm to 4pm (Kelvin Doherty, Youth Justice Agency)

The afternoon lecture will be delivered by Kelvin Doherty, from the Youth Justice Agency, who will provide an overview of the youth conferencing service in Northern Ireland. The lecture will focus on the aims, rationale and operation of youth conferences through an interactive session.

Working with Young People in the Criminal Justice System

Campbell, C.; Devlin, R.; O’Mahony, D.; Doak, J.; Jackson, J.; Corrigan, T. & McEvoy, K. (2006) Evaluation of the Northern Ireland Youth Conference Service. Belfast: Northern Ireland Office. Available: http://www.nio.gov.uk/evaluation_of_the_northern_ireland_youth_conference_service.pdf

Ellison, G. (2001) Young People, Crime, Policing and Victimisation in Northern Ireland. Belfast: Institute of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Queen’s University. Available at: http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/issues/police/ellison00.htm

Graham, J. & Bowling, B. (1995) Young People and Crime (Home Office Research Study No. 145), London: Home Office

Hamilton, J.; Radford, K. & Jarman, N. (2003) Policing, Accountability and Young People. Belfast: Institute for Conflict Research. Available at: http://www.conflictresearch.org.uk/documents/policeyp.pdf

Include Youth (2008) A Manifesto for Youth Justice in Northern Ireland. Belfast: Include Youth. Available at: http://www.includeyouth.org/fs/doc/Include-Youth-Manifesto-2008.pdf

Leonard, M. (2004) Children in Interface Areas: Reflections from North Belfast. Belfast: Save the Children

Muncie, J. (2004) Youth and Crime (Second Edition) London: Sage

NICCY (2008) Children in Conflict with the Law and the Administration of Juvenile Justice. Belfast: NICCY. Available at: http://www.niccy.org/uploaded_docs/1_71784_NIC71784%20Childrens%20Rights%20Text%208.pdf

Social work is a profession established to promote and secure the wellbeing of families, children, adults and the surrounding communities. Social work in Wales is regulated under the guidance and legislation of the Care council for Wales. This guidance is governed by a code of practice which all Social workers are to adhere too. Anyone choosing to use the title ‘social worker’ is required to be registered with the care council for Wales, or any other council for other countries within the UK. The Care council for Wales states that the purpose of the code is to ‘set out the conduct that is expected of social care workers and to inform service users and the public about the standards of conduct they can expect’. (WAG, 2012:5) These guidelines allow all social workers to have a clear understanding of their role and what is expected of them. The aim of this assignment is to discuss the role and task of the Social worker, effectively showing an understanding of ethical issues, and anti-oppressive practice within Welsh context.

The role of the Social worker is often formed by the needs of the individual service user or family. Social workers play a leading role in providing safety and protection to adults and children. However the role will at times have to be adapted in order to fully meet the individual service users’ needs. Some roles carried out by the Social worker could possibly include being a counsellor, advocate, caseworker, manager of care, a person of social control and being able to work effectively as part of a mulit-disciplinary team. Each of these roles will require a number of different skills, Such as being an effective communicator, having the ability to recognise and regard diversity, and make effective risk assessments. The social worker needs to be able to respect the service user irrespective of their reasons for necessitating a social worker. Parallel with these the Social worker will need to have values and admiration for ethnicity, gender, class, culture, religion, age, sexuality or ability. In doing all of these social workers have a number of Acts and Laws in which they must obey, such as All Wales Framework for the Assessment of Children in need etc. . The Laws are regulations which enable the social worker to carry out their role and tasks in a positive way allowing for empowerment, change, and anti-oppressive practice and to tackle matters of oppression. The policies and legislation provide mandate for practice. Alongside the role of the social worker is the task of the social worker. The role of the social worker may require a wide variety, in terms of the range of tasks needing to be carried out. Some of these tasks could include supporting the parents/s to develop and enhance parenting skills, supporting the service user to become financially dependent- in order for them to reduce the possible risks of falling into poverty, and encouraging and supporting the service user back to work and employment. This is just to name a few of many tasks carried out within the role of a social worker.

Social workers are to practice anti-oppressive practice whilst working with service users, this is intended to enable them to resolve any problems and overcome barriers being faced by the service user. Dominelli. (2002) states that ‘Anti-oppressive practice seeks to eliminate oppression within professional practice as well as contribute to its eradication within the broader society’ (:83) Dominelli (2002) then goes on to suggest that ‘ being clear about their principles, value base and ethical orientation will help individual practitioners in the decision-making process where and how they will direct their work’ (:84) In keeping with clear principles and ethical issues and taking into account the code of ethics as set by BASW which states that, (2012) ‘Respect for human dignity, and for individual and cultural diversity Value for every human being, their beliefs, goals, preferences and needs’. One of the principles that is important in respecting a service users’ needs and rights is that social workers within Wales implement the use of the ‘Welsh Language Act 1993’ this is one example of where laws between England and Wales are noticeably different in social work. In coinciding with this Act, the Welsh Language is proposed to have equal status. Whilst differentiating ethical issues, it became apparent that a service user has a right to decide what language their social worker uses, therefore, as stated by Davies (1994) ‘Principles for anti-oppressive practice in Wales:

1. A service user has the right to choose which language to use with a worker;

2. Language is more than a means of communication: it is an essential part of a

person’s identity;

3. People are able to express themselves more effectively and comfortably in their

language of choice;

4. Good practice means offering users real language choice;

5. A comprehensive and quality service in Wales means a bilingual service’. (:60)

Refusing this service can be recognised as a way of oppressing an individual.

This assignment has discussed and researched some of the areas of social work, such as the role and task of the social worker. It became apparent that the role of the social worker and the area in which they practice will provide the outline of the tasks they will be required to carry out. There is a great importance of values, and the need to adhere the policies and regulations is clearly paramount in all areas and practice of social work. The assignment has then gone on to identify the difference in regulations and policies within Wales and England, and the importance of anti-oppressive practice, Likewise recognising the rights of the service user, and the need to respect these rights. Finally the assignment went onto show an understanding of the need to be aware of ethical practice.

Firstly I would like to focus on the policies and legislation which has shaped partnership working. The ideas of collaboration and partnership working now form a large body of policies and legislation, which include some duties for statutory inter agency working. I have examined only some of the key polices and legislation as there are too many to examine for the purpose of this essay. I have made reference to partnership working for each one. Firstly I look at the UK wide policies/legislations and then I focus on Welsh policy.

Firstly the Seebohm Report (HMSO, 1968) argued for a co-operation across the spectrum of welfare state services and more effective co-operation by different professionals. It proposed a major restructuring of personal social services into a unified social service department. National Health Service and Community Care Act (HMSO, 1990) gave a duty to local authorities to assess and where applicable meet a person’s needs for community care services by collaboration with other agencies. Building Bridges (DOH, 1995) this encourages interdisciplinary and multiagency care planning.

The Health and Social Care Act 2001 (Home Office, 2001) created new powers to establish care trusts by building on existing health and local authority powers to forge partnerships and provide integrated care. The National Service Framework for Older People (DOH, 2001) set out standards for care of older people across health and social services. It aimed to remove age discrimination, provide person center care, promoting independence and fitting services around people needs. Means for achieving these aims included the single assessment process and integration in commissioning arrangement and service provision. Valuing people a new strategy for learning disability for the 21st century (DH, 2001) highlighted partnership working through local partnership boards and inter-professional/inter agency co-operation are seen as central to achieving the four key principles of rights, independence, choice and inclusion for people with learning disabilities. National Service Framework (NSF) for Older People (Department of Health, 2001) highlighted that agencies should not duplicate each other’s assessments, and professionals should contribute to assessments in the most effective way.

Community Care (Delayed Discharge) Act (DoH, 2003) introduced a new dynamic in interagency and inter professional relationships. It made social services authorities liable to reimburse the NHS for delays where patients in hospital are medically fit but unable to be discharged due solely to social service inability to provide assessment and community care services within a required timescale. Every Child Matters (HMSO, 2003) in response to the Victoria Climbi inquiry, it proposed: improved interagency information sharing and co-operation; work in multi-disciplinary teams; a ‘lead’ professional role; creation of local safeguarding boas; in the long term integration of key services for children and young people in children’s trusts under a director of children’s services. Children Act ( 2004) allowed the creation of database to support professionals in sharing information. The Carers (Equal Opportunities) Act (DOH, 2004) placed a duty on social service to inform carers of their right to an assessment. It also enabled social services to ask other public bodies including the health organizations to provide service to careers. Single Assessment Process Implementation Guidance (DOH, 2004) sets out how the single assessment process described in the Mental Capacity Act (2005) where social workers and care professionals acting on behalf of someone who lacks capacity must act in a person’s best interest.

Working Together to Safeguard Children (DfES, 2006) aaddressed to practitioners and managers, sets out how organisations and individuals should work together to safeguard and promote the welfare of children, stressing shared responsibility and the need to understand the roles of others. It described the role of local safeguarding children’s boards (LSCBs), training for inter-agency work and the detailed processes for managing individual cases. These elements are ‘statutory” guidance, which required compliance. Mental Health Act (2007) amended the 1983 Act broadening the group of professional practitioners who undertake approved social worker (ASW) functions, to be known as Approved Mental Health Professionals. Concurrently, the code of practice of the 1983 Act was updated, stressing inter-professional collaboration in assessment and after care planning and involvement of patients and carers. Building brighter futures: next steps for the children’s workforce (DfE, 2008) set out the components of integrated working as they are emerging through Children’s Trusts. It considered the contribution of the Common Core of Skills and Knowledge and the pros and cons of professional identities and boundaries. It looked forward to achieving a broad vision of integrated working that has support across the whole children’s workforce.

Now I would like to focus upon the policies that are specifically within Wales. Firstly, The Review of Health and Social Care in Wales, (WAG, 2003) emphasized the importance of multi-agency working and looked at decision-making processes, the capacity and effectiveness of existing services, the capacity of management, the processes governing standard setting, information management, resource flows, and incentives and sanctions. The Report of the Wanless Committee (WAG, 2004) focuses on shared decision-making between professionals and users and patients. It also highlights that there needs to be integrated thinking across health and social care boundaries and highlights the need for a new approach for funding health and social care. Making the Connections: Delivering Better Services for Wales: The Welsh Assembly Government Vision for Public Services (WAG, 2004). This policy aims to increase efficiency through more effective co-operation across the public services and to place people and communities at the centre, enabling active participation in service planning design and delivery. Children and Young People: Rights to Action – Stronger Partnerships for Better Outcomes (WAG, 2005). This paper outlines the expectation from the assembly government for local agencies to take a joint approach in planning services to make them as effective as possible. Fulfilled Lives, Supportive Communities: Improving Social Services in Wales from 2008-2018 (WAG, 2006). This focuses on partnership arrangements which put the citizen at the centre and work effectively across sectors and organisations using care pathways to support people. Lastly, Sustainable Social Services for Wales – A Framework for Action (WAG, 2011) highlights the importance of developing more integration of health and social services for children, young people, and frail older people, and in respect of re-ablement services. Joining up in this way will help break down barriers that can often get in the way of providing services and drive out duplication. This sets out the current vision for partnership working within Wales until 2016.

As highlighted above there are many key pieces of legislation and policies which highlight the importance of multi-agency working. Since the 1960’s there has been a focus on partnership working for social services. There are some key principles and ethical issues to partnership working and there can be some dilemmas to this. The next part of this essay will focus upon key principles and ethical issues.

There are many areas to partnership working that may lead to some dilemmas. Glasby (2004) defines inter-professional working as to or more people from different professions communicate and co-operate to achieve a common goal. Adams et al (2006) highlights the importance of having a professional identity is to partnership working. Adams et al (2006) suggests that a professional identity gives a person a set of values, expertise, role and responsibilities.

Currently my practice learning level three is based within the Adult Community Care Team (ACCT) which implements care plans for clients with presenting eligible needs. To ensure that clients’ needs are met there is a process which involves various professionals that are involved within the information gathering and care planning for example social worker, health, brokerage, finance team and carer assessors. During my placement I have been able to see the importance of working with other professionals to deliver effective services for the clients. During one unified assessment (UA) I completed I worked collaboratively with a nurse to complete the UA. The reason for this is to identify if this particular client was in need of a nursing home rather than a residential home. Therefore the expertise of the nurse as vital to complete the assessment. However there were some key issues that

Key principles

Retaining professional identification

Partnership working can be complex and often brings people together who have different views on what is ‘right’ for a service user with different approaches ( Gasper, 2010). Whittington (2003) suggests that if professionals can understand what they have in common, what they can contribute distinctively, what can be complementary and identify the possible tensions between them it can improve the effectiveness of partnership working. By identifying these areas professionals can complement each to benefit the client overall. Keeping (2006) highlights a general uncertainty from other professionals around what social workers actually do. Lack of knowledge of what each professional involved does can lead to stereotyping each worker (Lymbery, 2006). This means that it is important for social workers to remember what responsibilities lay with them when working with other professionals.

Building relationships and trust

Seden et al (2011) suggests that social workers are often caught between care and control finding their way through complex relationships with service users, other professionals, peers and the public. Trust is an important factor in facilitating open discussion and successful role negation, both of which are important features of inter-professional working (Barrett and Keeping, 2005). Where professionals trust each other’s motives, competence and dependability they are more able to manage risky situations (Lawson, 2004). Trust is an important element of collaborative working relationship.

Gasper (2010) highlights that partnership working can mean better access to service and an avoidance of duplication which means service can be delivered in more of a cost-effective way.

Differences in languages

Within partnership working there can be many professionals involved. Issues may arise when there is a use of specialist language that not everyone understands (Maguire and Truscott, 2006)

Communication

Communication across professions can be difficult especially when they are not in the same location, this can result in a breakdown of communication and delays in services (McCormack et al, 2008)

Inequalities in status and pay

There may be differences in status between professionals and this must be acknowledged to see if they impact upon communication (Barrett and Keeping, 2005). Some practitioners perceive threats to their professional status, autonomy and control when asked to participate in more democratic decision making forums (Lloyd and Wait, 2006).

Conflicting organisation and professional boundaries

There is often un-clarity around the roles of voluntary and service users in partnership working (Marks, 2007)

Resources can be split into three areas; money, information and time. Issues around money can be identified in several areas. One is that there are different funding cycles, separate budgets and financial pressures (Frye and Webb, 2002). Some professionals may be reluctant in funding services if there is a pressure on budgets (Roy and Watts, 2001). Information sharing can pose constrains for partnership working.

Partnership working needs a sufficient amount of time dedicated for it to be effective (Atkinson, 2007). Frost and Lloyd (2006) suggested that time is needed for relationships to develop and trust to be built. These are key components for agreements to be made around protocols and reflection upon new professional identifies (Frost and Lloyd, 2006).