Download The ethic of care in families

Thinking about and working with the ethic of care
What is the ethic of care?
 It has its origins in diverse disciplines such as
psychology and moral philosophy
 In recent decades it has been taken on board by
political theorists and feminists in particular when
thinking about social policy
 It is underdeveloped in social work but has been
applied to thinking about practices in families and
social work practices
What is the ethics of care?
 It celebrates our interdependence as human beings -




we all need care at different points of the life cycle and
in different ways
It argues for a different value system in society so that
care is recognised and supported properly
It seeks to render care visible and links it to citizenship
In families it is interested in everyday practices and
meanings and seeks to understand these rather than to
dismiss or judge them
Thus it is critical of contemporary social work
practices that seek to assign meanings
 It is concerned to render care visible and the ethic of
care that is visible in the most deprived families and
communities but is also being used to understand why
care might be difficult or compromised
Why might this happen for children and young people?
Research suggests the following:
Poverty and inequality
Domestic violence, drug and alcohol issues and mental
health
Poverty and inequality
 These are linked but not the same
 Poverty does not cause bad parenting but makes good
parenting harder
 Key issues are lack of social support and cumulative
trauma
 Inequality – huge research evidence on how more
unequal societies are societies with greater social
problems and where trust is less evident between
different groups – less social solidarity – affects
everyone including social workers and familiesSHAME
 Those who come into the child protection system are
from the most deprived parts of the society
 Eight times more likely to be in care if you come from
one area than from a richer area (Bywaters et al,
forthcoming)
 Thus as Aboriginal and first national people have
pointed out, there are very important issues of social
justice to be addressed
The ‘toxic trio’
 Domestic violence
 Mental health
 Drug and alcohol issues
 However, we need to understand these from the
bottom up rather see them as categories of risk simply
 That serves to obscure the people and their practices
and the meanings they attach to them
Social work practices with families
 Much of our practices are very authoritarian and short
–term – not holistic
 They are very gendered – focus is on mothers
 Example – Jenny’s story of domestic violence
 Risk is individualised
Alternatives
 Family Group Conferences
 These come from the MAORI tradition
 Their concern was that too many of their children were




being lost from their communities
Social work practices did not work with their
traditions and strengths
These are now used across the world –
Lots of evidence about process and effectiveness
One finding is that men do attend more than
traditional processes
Alternatives
 Domestic violence
 Family Group Conferences are used here with whole
family
 Projects with men: Caring Dads
 Strength to Change
 Lack of integration .....
Alternatives
 Family Drug and Alcohol Treatment Courts in London
and Milton Keynes
 Judge led, multi-disciplinary and within the timescales
for the child
 Evaluation very positive – especially good findings
about men
Alternatives
 Signs of Safety
 Motivational Interviewing
 Parents Support and Advocacy Services
What is happening?
 Some recognition that practice starts from a deficit
position and is too risk saturated
 Thus trust and engagement are too difficult
 We need a different paradigm rooted not just in
techniques but in respect and a recognition of the
difficulties of caring in an unequal society and that our
services can compound stigma and shame and become
part of the problem
 [email protected]
 www.open.ac.uk
References
 Bywaters, P (forthcoming) 'Inequalities in child welfare:
towards a new policy, research and action agenda', British
Journal of Social Work.
 Cosser, J., Brandon, M. and Jordon, P. (2011) Don’t Make
Assumptions: Children’s Experiences of the Child Protection
System and Messages for Change, London: Office of the
Children’s Commissioner.
 Featherstone, B. (2009) Contemporary Fathering: Theory,
Policy and Practice, Bristol: The Policy Press.
 Featherstone, B., Fraser C., Ashley, C. and Ledward P. (2011)
‘Advocacy for parents and carers involved with children’s
services: making a difference to working in partnership?
Child and Family Social Work, vol 16, no 3, pp 266-75
 Featherstone, B. and Fraser, C. (2012) ‘“I’m just a mother:
they’re all professionals”: Advocacy for Parents as an Aid to
Parental Engagement’, Child and Family Social Work, vol 17,
no 2, pp 244-53
 Frost, P. and Hoggett, P. (2008) ‘Human Agency and Social
Suffering’, Critical Social Policy, vol 28, no 4, pp 438-60.
 Gilbert, N., Parton, N. and Skiveness, M. (2011) ‘Changing
Patterns of Responses and Emerging Orientations’ in N.
Gilbert, N. Parton and M. Skiveness (eds) Child Protection
Systems: International Trends and Orientations, Oxford
University Press: Oxford.
 Hooper, C-A., Gorin, S., Cabral, C. and Dyson, C.
(2007) Living with Hardship 24/7: The diverse
experiences of families in poverty in England, London:
The Frank Buttle Trust.
 Lonne, B., Parton, N., Thomson, J. and Harries, M.
(2009) Reforming Child Protection, London: Routledge
 Wilkinson, R. and Pickett, K. (2009) The Spirit Level:
Why more equal societies always do better, London:
Penguin.