Journal of Children's Services

Shemmings, David; Little, Michael

2017 Journal of Children's Services

doi: 10.1108/JCS-09-2017-0040

Bullock, Roger; Parker, Roy

2017 Journal of Children's Services

doi: 10.1108/JCS-03-2017-0007

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to chart the history of personal social services for children and families in the UK and examine the factors that have influenced it. Special attention is given to changing perceptions of rights, the impact of scandals and the contribution of child development research.Design/methodology/approachAnalysis of historical documents and research reports using four methods: a timeline of milestones, demarcation of distinct developmental periods, trends in policy and practice and comparisons of children’s needs and experiences at different times.FindingsThe evolution of services has not been linear. In policy, there have been reform and retrenchment, amalgamation and differentiation. Practice has been shaped by the emergence of new problems and the disappearance of old ones as well as by legislation, extreme events, research and finance, all occurring in specific political, moral and economic contexts.Originality/valueAn analysis of developments in children’s services in their political, economic, moral and research contexts.

Parton, Nigel; Williams, Sasha

2017 Journal of Children's Services

doi: 10.1108/JCS-03-2017-0008

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to provide an analysis of the changes in child protection policy and practice in England over the last 30 years, in particular to critically analyse the nature and impact of the “refocusing” initiative of the mid-1990s.Design/methodology/approachPolicy analysis.FindingsWhile the period from the mid-1990s until 2008 can be seen to show how policy and practice attempted to build on a number of the central principles of the “refocusing” initiative, the period since 2008 has been very different. Following the huge social reaction to the death of Peter Connelly, policy and practice moved in directions quite contra to the “refocusing” initiative’s aims and aspirations such that we can identify a refocusing of “refocusing”. Such developments were given a major impetus with the election of the Coalition government in 2010 and have been reinforced further following the election of the Conservative government in May 2015.Originality/valueThe paper places the changes in child protection policy and practice in England in their political and economic contexts and makes explicit how the changes impact on the role and responsibilities of professionals, particularly social workers.

Thoburn, June

2017 Journal of Children's Services

doi: 10.1108/JCS-03-2017-0006

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to identify the particular characteristics and strengths of mainstream undergraduate and postgraduate university education for social workers.Design/methodology/approachA brief summary of the establishment of the honours degree or M-level qualification as the requirement for registration as a social worker in England is followed by a summary of the main aspects of “mainstream” social work courses. The values underpinning a “student” rather than a “trainee” route into social work are explored and some limited comparisons made with recently introduced fast-track specialist programmes. Where relevant, the student experience is contrasted with that of fast-track specialist trainees.FindingsThe paper concludes with a discussion of the potential impact on the social work profession and on agencies providing social work services of the cuts over the past few years in the numbers of students on “generalist” mainstream social work programmes.Research limitations/implicationsThis is a conceptual paper. It recognises that more information is available on long-established university programmes than on the more recently available fast-track routes into social work and cites relevant research.Practical implicationsThe paper points to the changing balance between numbers entering social work in England via mainstream and fast-track specialist programmes and argues for a fuller debate amongst all stakeholders as to whether this change is in the interest of the profession and those who need social work services.Social implicationsThe author argues that the unequal level of funding between the different entry routes into social work is distorting choice (for students and future employers) between fast-track specialist and mainstream social work education. It is hypothesised that differences between the curricula and learning experiences of the two routes may have an impact on the social work service available to vulnerable people across age and needs groups. It also points to a potentially negative impact on social work education and the knowledge base of the reduction in numbers of academics with both social work practice experiences and research qualifications.Originality/valueThis is an original paper that draws on the author’s experience and the published research and grey literature cited.

Bywaters, Paul; Sparks, Tim

2017 Journal of Children's Services

doi: 10.1108/JCS-04-2017-0014

PurposeIn the past 40 years, both health policy and educational policy in England have adopted commitments to reducing socially created inequalities. However, an inequalities perspective has only begun to emerge in relation to child protection, and child welfare services more widely. The purpose of this paper is to chart evidence of these green shoots of a new policy direction which focusses on two aspects: equalising service provision and outcomes for looked after children.Design/methodology/approachThe paper provides an analysis of trends in policies as expressed in official documents, research studies and policy statements.FindingsThe paper outlines the argument for a more comprehensive approach to addressing inequalities in child protection and child welfare services, and concludes by suggesting some implications for policy and practice.Originality/valueThe paper develops the concept of an inequalities perspective in child protection and outlines key implications.

Little, Michael

2017 Journal of Children's Services

doi: 10.1108/JCS-09-2017-0037

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to explore the aspects of social work for children, primarily in England.Design/methodology/approachIt is based on reflections on research undertaken by the author prior to 1995 and after 2015.FindingsThe paper explores the interaction between people – effective leaders and practitioners – and systems.Research limitations/implicationsIt is an opinion piece, and does not present findings from a single study.Practical implicationsIt urges systems that do not restrict the capability of practitioners.Social implicationsThe value of social work services at times of significant social disadvantage demands strong public policy attention.Originality/valueThe study draws on several research and case studies in over 20 English local authorities

Chamberlain, Clare; Little, Michael

2017 Journal of Children's Services

doi: 10.1108/JCS-09-2017-0038

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to reflect on development in children’s social work over 35 years from the perspective of someone who has worked in the field as a practitioner and director.Design/methodology/approachInterview.FindingsThe paper provides insights into implementing the Reclaiming Social Work model and how systems can better support social work practice with children and families.Originality/valueThe paper offers a unique perspective on developments in the field and implications for the future of children’s social work.

Birkholm Antczak, Helle; Mackrill, Thomas; Steensbæk, Signe; Ebsen, Frank

2017 Journal of Children's Services

doi: 10.1108/JCS-06-2017-0029

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to present a novel online video-based approach to supervision for statutory caseworkers. Caseworkers recorded a video of their meetings with their clients and sent the video to their supervisor. The supervisor selected clips in the video. They held an online meeting where they reviewed the clips, and the supervisor gave feedback and they reflected together. The caseworker then used what they had learnt in their future practice. The caseworker then recorded a new meeting, and the supervision cycle restarted.Design/methodology/approachIn total, 11 statutory caseworkers from three municipalities in the Copenhagen area participated in semi-structured qualitative interviews. The interviews focused on the professional learning and challenges caseworkers faced in relation to participating in the supervision process.FindingsThe caseworkers reported that they used the method to assess their own practice in a more realistic way as the use of video gave a more accurate image than merely recalling what had occurred. They reflected about and developed their relationship with clients, their conversational style and use of communication techniques, skills in relation to running meetings, and skills in relation to eliciting the young person’s perspective. The caseworkers were anxious when they received their first feedback from supervisors, but this diminished. The focus on supporting clients in their personal development challenged caseworkers who identified as having an administrative rather than interventional role. Some found the online meeting technology difficult to master.Originality/valueThis study presents and explores the use of a novel approach to statutory casework supervision.

Rice, Stephen

2017 Journal of Children's Services

doi: 10.1108/JCS-09-2017-0041

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to offer a view about the future of children’s social work from the perspective of a frontline practitioner.Design/methodology/approachReflections of a frontline practitioner are based on his experience of practising social work with children and families.FindingsThe professional task of assessment and intervention in order to protect the nation’s children from significant harm is probably one of the most complex in modern society. However, a focus on gathering too much information and the need for certainty can be detrimental to analysis and judgement. Further, the most complex and challenging part of the social work task, namely, direct work in the family home, is rarely subject to formally structured analysis or feedback. There is insufficient analysis of good practice, and the organisational conditions that will promote and sustain it, but there are alternative models, including outside local government and including from other countries, that appear promising.Originality/valueThe study offers the perspective of a frontline children and families social worker on issues facing the profession.

Forrester, Donald

2017 Journal of Children's Services

doi: 10.1108/JCS-08-2017-0036

PurposeThere are often calls for more focus on outcomes in Children’s Social Care yet there is little consensus on what these outcomes should be. Key challenges include who should decide what outcomes should be measured and the sheer range of issues that social workers deal with. The purpose of this paper is to provide a reflective account of approaches to measuring outcomes that the author has used in recent studies in order to illustrate the complexity involved in understanding what the purpose of Children’s Social Care is and therefore how outcomes might be measured.Design/methodology/approachA review of and reflection on lessons from recent research studies carried out by the author and colleagues.FindingsThe results are used to illustrate and support an argument that Children’s Social Care performs multiple functions and that this has implications for thinking about outcomes. Helping children and parents is one element of the work, but assessing risk across large numbers of referrals and identifying those that require involvement is equally important. Furthermore, the social work role requires complex considerations around liberty and the rights of parents and children. One consequence of this is that the quality of the service provided is important in its own right.Research limitations/implicationsIt is suggested that the evaluation of Children’s Social Care involves four types of outcomes: measures of the quality of the service provided; assessment of whether the “right” families are being worked with; client-defined measures of change; and the development of appropriate standardised instruments. Examples of approaches in each area are discussed.Practical implicationsThe theoretical considerations suggest that we need to have a multi-dimensional approach to evaluating, inspecting and leading Children’s Social Care services. In particular, the importance of the quality of delivery and appropriate targeting of the service are emphasised, as well as considering various approaches to measuring outcomes.Originality/valueThe paper proposes a combination of qualitative and quantitative measures of process, assessment and outcomes for evaluating outcomes in Children’s Social Care.

MacAlister, Josh

2017 Journal of Children's Services

doi: 10.1108/JCS-07-2017-0032

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to expose and dispel some outdated dilemmas and straw men that have drawn attention away from debates of substance in social work. The paper presents what Frontline believes to be the substantive dilemmas facing the social work profession, as it looks into the future.Design/methodology/approachThe paper draws on the insights and experiences of the past four years during which Frontline has been innovating in the field of social work education and leadership development.FindingsBuilding a better social work system requires addressing several important questions, namely, whether social work; first, is a practical or intellectual task; second, is a generic or specialist profession; third, focuses on social or therapeutic change; fourth, requires bureaucrats or change agents; and fifth, involves measuring inspections or measuring outcomes.Originality/valueThe paper sets out the key dilemmas facing the social work profession, which must be debated and addressed in order to build a better social work system.

Wilkins, David

2017 Journal of Children's Services

doi: 10.1108/JCS-06-2017-0024

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to discuss the underlying assumption that social workers need reflective supervision specifically, as opposed to managerial or any other form of supervision or support, and to consider whether our focus on the provision of reflective supervision may be preventing us from thinking more broadly and creatively about what support local authority child and family social workers need and how best to provide it.Design/methodology/approachThe paper provides an argument based on the author’s own research and a selective review of the literature.FindingsReflective supervision has no future in local authority child and family social work because: first, there is no clear understanding of what reflective supervision is; second, there is no clear evidence for its effectiveness; and third, sizeable proportion of local authority child and family social workers in England do not receive reflective supervision and many never have.Originality/valueThe paper challenges the received wisdom about the value of reflective supervision and advocates exploring alternative models for supporting best practice in child and family social work.

Frost, Nick

2017 Journal of Children's Services

doi: 10.1108/JCS-05-2017-0019

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to argue that the future of social work can be situated as part of a fundamental shift towards co-located, multi-disciplinary practice and networking. It is argued that social work has a key role to play in co-located, multi-disciplinary child welfare practice, and indeed can be a leading profession in this context. Situating social work in this way involves re-conceptualising social work as a network profession, rather than a silo profession. The paper builds on an earlier study of five multi-professional, co-located teams updated with interviews with social workers currently situated in such co-located teams. An exploration of the role of social work in relation to child sexual exploitation is provided.Design/methodology/approachThe first study was an ESRC-funded study and used a multi-method approach to understanding the work of five multi-disciplinary, co-located teams working with children, young people and families (Frost and Robinson, 2016). Four co-located teams with eight social workers participated in the research. This was followed up by a small scale study involving semi-structured interviews with six social workers situated in co-located, multi-disciplinary teams. The focus of the study was on professional identity and working practices with other related professionals.FindingsThe ESRC study explored the complexity of co-located, multi-disciplinary professional teams – exploring how they worked together and analysing the challenges they face. Professionals felt that such working enhanced their learning, their skill base and the process of information sharing. Challenges included structural and organisational issues and differences in ideological and explanatory frameworks. The follow up study of six social workers found that they gained satisfaction from being situated in such co-located, multi-disciplinary teams, but also faced some identified challenges. Child sexual exploitation is explored as an example of the work of co-located, multi-disciplinary teams.Research limitations/implicationsSemi-structured interviews with social workers based in co-located, multi-disciplinary teams have provided valuable insights into the operation of social workers in such settings. It is acknowledged that all the interviews are with social workers in co-located settings and that further work is required on the views of other social workers in reference to their experiences and views in relation to multi-disciplinary working.Originality/valueThe paper brings together theoretical positions and policy contextual material with qualitative research data which situate the social worker in wider multi-disciplinary, co-located settings. Drawing on qualitative, semi-structured interviews with 14 social workers in such teams, the paper aims to contribute to an understanding and development of the future of the social work role in these contexts, arguing that this is fundamental to the future of social work.

Wright, Chris

2017 Journal of Children's Services

doi: 10.1108/JCS-03-2017-0010

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to argue for a strengthening of the relational aspect of social work and for initiatives that involve local people and local communities.Design/methodology/approachA think piece based on observations of the current situation and supporting evidence.FindingsSocial work has become distanced from those whom it seeks to help. Case management and risk assessment need to be complemented by a more human approach based on positive relationships between professionals and service users.Originality/valueAn informed discussion on the future of social work.

Featherstone, Brid; Gupta, Anna; Morris, Kate

2017 Journal of Children's Services

doi: 10.1108/JCS-04-2017-0011

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to argue for the need to move away from a sole focus on assessing and dealing with individualised risk factors in order to more fully engage with and understand the social determinants of many of the harms that are manifest in families.Design/methodology/approachIt draws from a number of research studies being conducted by the authors and a literature on psycho-social approaches to social suffering.FindingsIt highlights the evidence on the contribution of poverty and inequality to many of the problems encountered within families. It explores how hurt, shame and loss are experienced by those who are marginalised and struggling to live well and care safely for themselves and others.Practical implicationsIt highlights the practice implications of adopting an approach that engages with both the social and the psychological and understands their inter-relationship. It offers some thoughts on how the social in psycho-social might receive the attention it deserves, a situation which does not pertain currently.Originality/valueIt offers an original contribution to thinking in the area of child protection where the focus is primarily on individualised risk factors. It highlights the importance of understanding the social determinants of many of the harms experienced in families and offers some pointers towards thinking and practising differently.

Trowler, Isabelle

2017 Journal of Children's Services

doi: 10.1108/JCS-09-2017-0039

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to reflect on progress and lessons in improving the social work system in England in the interests of children and families.Design/methodology/approachBased on an interview with the author by Michael Little (one of the Guest Editors of this edition).FindingsSocial work is best placed to lead the child protection system given its ability to manage risks in a challenging social and political environment. However, there is a need to address common concerns about the system, for instance to give social workers more autonomy, and to improve the quality in the workforce, especially at the senior level. The best authorities are practice focused, led by practitioners who are part of a stable team, and do well at a systems level.Originality/valueOffers the perspective of the Chief Social Worker for Children in England on the process of reforming the social work system for children and families.

Shemmings, David

2017 Journal of Children's Services

doi: 10.1108/JCS-06-2017-0025

PurposeHow might the profession of child protection social work be “future proofed”, i.e. remain intact and of value beyond its present existence? The paper aims to discuss this issue.Design/methodology/approachThis is a discussion/“think piece” paper, in which the author argues that foregrounding the art and science of helping relationships is a way forward. Recognising and promoting the centrality of helping relationships is the direction in which the author believes (or is it hopes?) social work should head, because “more of the same” is not, in the author’s view, possible to sustain for much longer. Treading the well-worn but pot-holed path of box-ticking, endless risk assessment and perfunctory statutory visiting is likely to lead to continuing problems retaining social workers and, for those who do stay, increased burnout, compassion fatigue and secondary trauma, each of which interrupts or delays the development of working alliances with family members.FindingsGrowing reliance on thresholds and checklists to assess risk has served to increase referrals. As a result, social workers spend much of their time on triaging and filtering rather than working with the children and families that most need help and protection. Further, it is not what is in the practitioner’s toolkit that matters: rather, it is a defined set of personal skills and qualities that tips the balance to achieve lasting change. Thus, in order to “future proof” social work, we would do well to deepen our understanding of how helping relationships can lead to lasting change. Supporting social workers in this work is not just the responsibility of individual practitioners and their professional bodies, action also needs to be taken at governmental and managerial levels.Originality/valueThis is a discussion/“think piece”.

Barth, Richard P.; Lee, Bethany R.; Hodorowicz, Mary Theresa

2017 Journal of Children's Services

doi: 10.1108/JCS-05-2017-0017

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to discuss ways of equipping the child welfare (CW) workforce to improve the well-being of children through graduate education and post-MSW training.Design/methodology/approachThis paper analyses the barriers to providing mental health (MH) services to vulnerable children and families and discusses three evidence-based ways of overcoming them.FindingsChild and family social workers need to do more than case management if they are to influence the well-being of the children and families they seek to help. A variety of methods is necessary to implement this changed role and three initiatives – Partnering for Success, Motivational Interviewing for Child Welfare Trainees and Training Adoption-Competent Welfare Professionals – show promising results. CW workers can learn to implement evidence-informed MH practices with high fidelity.Research limitations/implicationsNone of the studies are controlled studies.Practical implicationsThe paper offers innovative ideas about workforce implications and implementation strategies.Social implicationsAbused and neglected children’s well-being is deserving of more effective methods.Originality/valueThe paper provides details of three innovative evidence-based projects – national models in the USA – concerned with promoting children’s well-being.