The British Journal of Social Work

WAQAR I. U. AHMAD, KARL ATKIN

doi: bjsw;26/6/755pmid: N/A

Services for haemoglobinopathies have been a major site of struggles for the black communities, yet the social research literature on haemoglobinopathies remains patchy and fragmented. We provide an overview of the literature on sickle cell disorders and thalassaemia major in the broader context of debates on childhood disability and chronic illness, and on ethnicity, racism and health care. © 1996 The British Association of Social Workers « Previous | Next Article » Table of Contents This Article Br J Soc Work (1996) 26 (6): 755-775. » Abstract Free Full Text (PDF) Free Classifications Article Services Article metrics Alert me when cited Alert me if corrected Find similar articles Similar articles in Web of Science Add to my archive Download citation Request Permissions Citing Articles Load citing article information Citing articles via CrossRef Citing articles via Scopus Citing articles via Web of Science Citing articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by AHMAD, W. I. U. Articles by ATKIN, K. Search for related content Related Content Load related web page information Share Email this article CiteULike Delicious Facebook Google+ Mendeley Twitter What's this? Search this journal: Advanced » Current Issue October 2015 45 (7) Alert me to new issues Published on behalf of BASW – The British Association of Social Workers The Journal About this journal Publishers' Books for Review Rights & Permissions Dispatch date of the next issue We are mobile – find out more This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Journals Career Network Impact factor: 1.335 5-Yr impact factor: 1.802 Editors Professor Margaret Holloway Professor Malcolm Golightley View full editorial board For Authors Instructions to authors Guidelines for authors and reviewers Code of Practice Online submission instructions Submit a manuscript Self-Archiving Policy Alerting Services Email table of contents Email Advance Access CiteTrack XML RSS feed Corporate Services Advertising sales Reprints Supplements Widget Get a Widget

AHMAD, WAQAR I. U.; ATKIN, KARL

doi: N/Apmid: N/A

Services for haemoglobinopathies have been a major site of struggles for the black communities, yet the social research literature on haemoglobinopathies remains patchy and fragmented. We provide an overview of the literature on sickle cell disorders and thalassaemia major in the broader context of debates on childhood disability and chronic illness, and on ethnicity, racism and health care.

AHMAD, WAQAR I., U.;ATKIN,, KARL

doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.bjsw.a011158pmid: N/A

Abstract Services for haemoglobinopathies have been a major site of struggles for the black communities, yet the social research literature on haemoglobinopathies remains patchy and fragmented. We provide an overview of the literature on sickle cell disorders and thalassaemia major in the broader context of debates on childhood disability and chronic illness, and on ethnicity, racism and health care. This content is only available as a PDF. © 1996 The British Association of Social Workers

BYWATERS, PAUL

doi: N/Apmid: N/A

Despite the dearth of research into the health of children and young people in contact with or ‘looked after’ by local authorities, a series of official and quasi-official reports have begun to raise awareness of this issue. There are good reasons to believe that this group of children will be disadvantaged in terms of health as they are in other aspects of their lives. The evidence suggests that local authorities do not live up to the standards of ‘good parents’. Current notions of good practice are critically appraised and the article concludes that social work is unable to do more than mitigate the effects of Government policies which affect health and social services and which have lead to widening social inequalities.

BYWATERS,, PAUL

doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.bjsw.a011159pmid: N/A

Abstract Despite the dearth of research into the health of children and young people in contact with or ‘looked after’ by local authorities, a series of official and quasi-official reports have begun to raise awareness of this issue. There are good reasons to believe that this group of children will be disadvantaged in terms of health as they are in other aspects of their lives. The evidence suggests that local authorities do not live up to the standards of ‘good parents’. Current notions of good practice are critically appraised and the article concludes that social work is unable to do more than mitigate the effects of Government policies which affect health and social services and which have lead to widening social inequalities. This content is only available as a PDF. © 1996 The British Association of Social Workers

PAUL BYWATERS

doi: bjsw;26/6/777pmid: N/A

Despite the dearth of research into the health of children and young people in contact with or ‘looked after’ by local authorities, a series of official and quasi-official reports have begun to raise awareness of this issue. There are good reasons to believe that this group of children will be disadvantaged in terms of health as they are in other aspects of their lives. The evidence suggests that local authorities do not live up to the standards of ‘good parents’. Current notions of good practice are critically appraised and the article concludes that social work is unable to do more than mitigate the effects of Government policies which affect health and social services and which have lead to widening social inequalities. © 1996 The British Association of Social Workers « Previous | Next Article » Table of Contents This Article Br J Soc Work (1996) 26 (6): 777-792. » Abstract Free Full Text (PDF) Free Classifications Article Services Article metrics Alert me when cited Alert me if corrected Find similar articles Similar articles in Web of Science Add to my archive Download citation Request Permissions Citing Articles Load citing article information Citing articles via CrossRef Citing articles via Scopus Citing articles via Web of Science Citing articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by BYWATERS, P. Search for related content Related Content Load related web page information Share Email this article CiteULike Delicious Facebook Google+ Mendeley Twitter What's this? Search this journal: Advanced » Current Issue October 2015 45 (7) Alert me to new issues Published on behalf of BASW – The British Association of Social Workers The Journal About this journal Publishers' Books for Review Rights & Permissions Dispatch date of the next issue We are mobile – find out more This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Journals Career Network Impact factor: 1.335 5-Yr impact factor: 1.802 Editors Professor Margaret Holloway Professor Malcolm Golightley View full editorial board For Authors Instructions to authors Guidelines for authors and reviewers Code of Practice Online submission instructions Submit a manuscript Self-Archiving Policy Alerting Services Email table of contents Email Advance Access CiteTrack XML RSS feed Corporate Services Advertising sales Reprints Supplements Widget Get a Widget

EILEEN MUNRO

doi: bjsw;26/6/793pmid: N/A

This article argues that social workers and the general public need a clear understanding of the distinction between avoidable and unavoidable mistakes in child protection work. The public is understandably distressed when a child dies and is right to demand an inquiry to check the quality of help provided. But a child's death is not proof that any professional was incompetent. Our limited knowledge and the complexity of assessing risk mean that professionals can only make the best judgement on the available evidence. Analysis of forty-five inquiry reports shows that inquiries appreciate this; in 42 per cent of them social workers were not criticized. The analysis however also reveals one persistent error: social workers are slow to revise their judgements. Psychology research indicates that this error is widespread and by no means peculiar to social workers but it means that misjudgements about clients that may have been unavoidable on the limited knowledge available when they were made continue to be accepted despite a growing body of evidence against them. Social workers need a greater acceptance of their fallibility and a willingness to consider that their judgements and decisions are wrong. To change your mind in the light of new information is a sign of good practice, a sign of strength not weakness. © 1996 The British Association of Social Workers « Previous | Next Article » Table of Contents This Article Br J Soc Work (1996) 26 (6): 793-808. » Abstract Free Full Text (PDF) Classifications Article Services Article metrics Alert me when cited Alert me if corrected Find similar articles Similar articles in Web of Science Add to my archive Download citation Request Permissions Citing Articles Load citing article information Citing articles via CrossRef Citing articles via Scopus Citing articles via Web of Science Citing articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by MUNRO, E. Search for related content Related Content Load related web page information Share Email this article CiteULike Delicious Facebook Google+ Mendeley Twitter What's this? Search this journal: Advanced » Current Issue October 2015 45 (7) Alert me to new issues Published on behalf of BASW – The British Association of Social Workers The Journal About this journal Publishers' Books for Review Rights & Permissions Dispatch date of the next issue We are mobile – find out more This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Journals Career Network Impact factor: 1.335 5-Yr impact factor: 1.802 Editors Professor Margaret Holloway Professor Malcolm Golightley View full editorial board For Authors Instructions to authors Guidelines for authors and reviewers Code of Practice Online submission instructions Submit a manuscript Self-Archiving Policy Alerting Services Email table of contents Email Advance Access CiteTrack XML RSS feed Corporate Services Advertising sales Reprints Supplements Widget Get a Widget

MUNRO,, EILEEN

doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.bjsw.a011160pmid: N/A

Abstract This article argues that social workers and the general public need a clear understanding of the distinction between avoidable and unavoidable mistakes in child protection work. The public is understandably distressed when a child dies and is right to demand an inquiry to check the quality of help provided. But a child's death is not proof that any professional was incompetent. Our limited knowledge and the complexity of assessing risk mean that professionals can only make the best judgement on the available evidence. Analysis of forty-five inquiry reports shows that inquiries appreciate this; in 42 per cent of them social workers were not criticized. The analysis however also reveals one persistent error: social workers are slow to revise their judgements. Psychology research indicates that this error is widespread and by no means peculiar to social workers but it means that misjudgements about clients that may have been unavoidable on the limited knowledge available when they were made continue to be accepted despite a growing body of evidence against them. Social workers need a greater acceptance of their fallibility and a willingness to consider that their judgements and decisions are wrong. To change your mind in the light of new information is a sign of good practice, a sign of strength not weakness. This content is only available as a PDF. © 1996 The British Association of Social Workers

MUNRO, EILEEN

doi: N/Apmid: N/A

This article argues that social workers and the general public need a clear understanding of the distinction between avoidable and unavoidable mistakes in child protection work. The public is understandably distressed when a child dies and is right to demand an inquiry to check the quality of help provided. But a child's death is not proof that any professional was incompetent. Our limited knowledge and the complexity of assessing risk mean that professionals can only make the best judgement on the available evidence. Analysis of forty-five inquiry reports shows that inquiries appreciate this; in 42 per cent of them social workers were not criticized. The analysis however also reveals one persistent error: social workers are slow to revise their judgements. Psychology research indicates that this error is widespread and by no means peculiar to social workers but it means that misjudgements about clients that may have been unavoidable on the limited knowledge available when they were made continue to be accepted despite a growing body of evidence against them. Social workers need a greater acceptance of their fallibility and a willingness to consider that their judgements and decisions are wrong. To change your mind in the light of new information is a sign of good practice, a sign of strength not weakness.

MARJUT KOSONEN

doi: bjsw;26/6/809pmid: N/A

This article describes some of the findings of a study undertaken to evaluate all foster and adoptive placements in one local authority social work department in Scotland. The numbers, characteristics and care experiences of children in foster and adoptive care were considered. The study found that for the majority of children placement in foster care led to separation from siblings. The children were most vulnerable to separation at points of entry and leaving care. Separation from brothers and sisters can have lifelong consequences for the child and his or her siblings, as few of the children were found to have plans which included reunification with their siblings. A fragmented picture emerged concerning siblings' living situations. Children were found to have siblings living in a variety of situations, both in and outwith the care system. Social workers lacked full information about the family composition where contact with parents was lost or siblings had moved from the area. Children were most likely to be placed with siblings in temporary and relative foster placements. © 1996 The British Association of Social Workers « Previous | Next Article » Table of Contents This Article Br J Soc Work (1996) 26 (6): 809-822. » Abstract Free Full Text (PDF) Free Classifications Article Services Article metrics Alert me when cited Alert me if corrected Find similar articles Similar articles in Web of Science Add to my archive Download citation Request Permissions Citing Articles Load citing article information Citing articles via CrossRef Citing articles via Scopus Citing articles via Web of Science Citing articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by KOSONEN, M. Search for related content Related Content Load related web page information Share Email this article CiteULike Delicious Facebook Google+ Mendeley Twitter What's this? Search this journal: Advanced » Current Issue October 2015 45 (7) Alert me to new issues Published on behalf of BASW – The British Association of Social Workers The Journal About this journal Publishers' Books for Review Rights & Permissions Dispatch date of the next issue We are mobile – find out more This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Journals Career Network Impact factor: 1.335 5-Yr impact factor: 1.802 Editors Professor Margaret Holloway Professor Malcolm Golightley View full editorial board For Authors Instructions to authors Guidelines for authors and reviewers Code of Practice Online submission instructions Submit a manuscript Self-Archiving Policy Alerting Services Email table of contents Email Advance Access CiteTrack XML RSS feed Corporate Services Advertising sales Reprints Supplements Widget Get a Widget