Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-pwrkn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-21T10:03:46.809Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Walking the Walk: Changing Familial Forms, Government Policy and Everyday Social Work Practice in England

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 June 2018

Julie Walsh  and
Will Mason
Julie Walsh
Affiliation:
Department of Sociological Studies, University of Sheffield, England E-mail: j.c.walsh@sheffield.ac.uk
Will Mason
Affiliation:
Sheffield Methods Institute, University of Sheffield, England E-mail: w.j.mason@sheffield.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Although contemporary sociological thought reports a diversification of family forms in society, ‘the family’ continues to influence national and international political agendas. Social workers, as ‘street level bureaucrats’, are social agents that both work with citizens and implement policies made by senior officials. Despite this, the extent to which conceptual and policy developments in family diversity manifest in family-based social work practice remains under explored. This article brings together the findings of two comparative studies, and explores the transfer of conceptual understandings of family, and policy, in England, through two examples: gendered caring expectations and culturally located familial norms. Significantly, we show that, when prompted, social workers recognise family complexity and diversity, but myriad constraints complicate the application of these understandings, and related policies. Bringing together literature from sociology, social policy and social work, this article, thereby, offers a unique lens and highlights a lag between conceptual developments, policy and implementation.

Keywords

Family practicessocial workmigrant familiesgender roles
Type
Themed Section on Families, Social Work and the Welfare State: Where Contemporary ‘Family’ Meets Policy and Practice
Information
Social Policy and Society , Volume 17 , Issue 4 , October 2018 , pp. 603 - 618
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aronson, J. (1995) ‘A pragmatic view of thematic analysis’, The Qualitative Report, 2, 1, 1–3.Google Scholar
Beck, U. and Beck-Germshein, E. (1993) Individualisation, London: Sage.Google Scholar
Ben-Ari, A. and Strier, R. E. (2010) ‘Rethinking cultural competence: what can we learn from Levinas?’ British Journal of Social Work, 7, 1, 2155–67.Google Scholar
Bhambra, G. (2017) ‘Brexit, commonwealth and exclusionary citizenship’, Open Democracy, https://www.opendemocracy.net/gurminder-k-bhambra/brexit-commonwealth-and-exclusionary-citizenship [accessed 11.12.2017].Google Scholar
Boccagni, P. (2015) ‘(Super)diversity and the migration–social work nexus: a new lens on the field of access and inclusion?’, Ethnic and Racial Studies, 38, 4, 608–20.Google Scholar
Brotherton, G. (2016) ‘How migration and radicalisation are making British social work global’, Community Care, http://www.communitycare.co.uk/2016/02/24/migration-radicalisation-making-british-social-work-global/ [accessed 09.12.2017].Google Scholar
Bywaters, P., Brady, G., Bunting, L., Daniel, B., Featherstone, B., Jones, C., Morris, K., Scourfield, J., Sparks, T. and Webb, C. (2017) ‘Inequalities in English child protection practice under austerity: a universal challenge?’, Child and Family Social Work, 23, 1, 53–61.Google Scholar
Cheal, D. (2008) Families in Today's World, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
Act, Children (1989) https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1989/41/contents/enacted [accessed 15.05.2018].Google Scholar
Department for Education (DfE) (2015) ‘Working Together to Safeguard Children ’, London: DfE.Google Scholar
Department of Health (DoH) (2007) Maternity Matters, London: DoH, http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Healthcare/Children/Maternity/MaternityMatters/index.htm [accessed 30.05.2018].Google Scholar
Dominelli, L. (2018) Anti-Racist Social Work, 4th edn, London: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Doucet, A. (2006) ‘Estrogen filled worlds’: fathers as primary caregivers and embodiment’, The Sociological Review, 54,4, 696–716.Google Scholar
Doucet, A. (2009) ‘Dad and baby in the first year: gendered responsibilities and embodiment’, Political and Social Science, 624, 1, 78–98.Google Scholar
Erikksen, M. and Hester, M. (2001) ‘Violent men as good enough fathers? A look at England and Sweden’, Violence against Women, 7, 7, 779–98.Google Scholar
Favell, A. (2008) ‘The new face of East-West migration in Europe’, Journal of Ethnic and Migration and Studies, 34, 5, 701–16.Google Scholar
Featherstone, B. (2014) ‘Working with fathers: risk or resource?’, in Ribbens Mccarthy, J., Hooper, C. and Gillies, V. (eds.), Family Troubles?: Exploring Changes and Challenges in the Family Lives of Children and Young People, Bristol: Policy Press, 315–26.Google Scholar
Featherstone, B. and Packover, S. (2007) ‘Letting them get away with it: fathers, domestic violence and child welfare’, Critical Social Policy, 27, 2, 181–202.Google Scholar
Featherstone, B., White, S. and Morris, K. (2014) Reimagining Child Protection, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Finch, J. (2007) ‘Displaying families’, Sociology, 41, 1, 65–81.Google Scholar
Finch, J. and Mason, J. (2000) Passing on: Kinship and Inheritance in England, Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Furlong, M. and Wight, J. (2011) ‘Promoting “critical awareness” and critiquing “cultural competence”: towards disrupting received professional knowledge’, Australian Social Work, 64, 1, 38–54.Google Scholar
Gabb, J. (2010) Researching Intimacy in Families, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Gambrill, E. (2008) Decision making in child welfare: constraints and potentials’, in Lindsey, D. and Shlonsky, A. (eds.), Child Welfare Research: Advances for Practice and Policy, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Giddens, A. (1992) The Transformation of Intimacy, UK: Wiley.Google Scholar
Gillies, V. (2011) ‘From function to competence: engaging with the new politics of family’, Sociological Research Online, 16, 4.Google Scholar
Gov.uk (2017) ‘ Housing benefit’, https://www.gov.uk/housing-benefit/overview [accessed 11.12.2017].Google Scholar
Hantrais (2004) Family Policy Matters: Responding to Family Change in Europe, Bristol: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Harrison, G. and Turner, R. (2011) ’Being a “culturally competent” social worker’, British Journal of Social Work, 41, 333–50.Google Scholar
Heath, S., McGhee, D. and Trevena, T, (2011) ‘Lost in transnationalism’, Sociological Research Online, 16, 4.Google Scholar
Jamieson, L. (1997) Intimacy: Personal Relationships in Modern Societies, Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Jarrett, T. (2017) Children: parental responsibility – what is it and how is it gained and lost (England and Wales), Briefing Paper No. 2827, House of Commons Library, http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN02827 [accessed 05.03.2018].Google Scholar
Kilkey, M., Plomien, A. and Perrons, D. (2014) ‘Migrant men's fathering narrative, practices and projects in national and transnational spaces: recent polish male migrants in London’, International Migration, 52, 1, 178–91.Google Scholar
Kohli, H. K., Huber, R. and Faul, A. C. (2010) ‘Historical and theoretical development of culturally competent social work practice’, Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 30, 3, 252–71.Google Scholar
Laird, S., Morris, K., Archard, P. and Clawson, R. (2016) ‘Working with the whole family: what case files tell us about social work practices’, Child and Family Social Work, 22, 1, 1322–9.Google Scholar
Lamy, D. (2003) The Victoria Climbe Enquiry, London: HMSO.Google Scholar
Lewis, C. and Lamb, M. E. (2007) ‘Understanding fatherhood: a review of recent research’, Lancaster: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.Google Scholar
Lewis, J. (2001) ‘The decline of the male breadwinner model’, Social Politics, 8, 2, 152–69.Google Scholar
Lipsky, M. (1980) Street-Level Bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Service, New York: The Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Mason, W., Mirza, N. and Webb, C. (2018) ‘Using the framework to analyse mixed methods case studies’, Sage Research Methods Cases, Part 2.Google Scholar
Mason, W., Morris, K., Webb, C., Daniels, B., Featherstone, B., Bywaters, P., Mirza, N., Hooper, J., Brady, G., Bunting, L. and Scourfield, J. (forthcoming) ‘Investigating child welfare inequalities: the use of mixed methods case studies’, Journal of Mixed Methods Research.Google Scholar
Morgan, D. (1996) Family Connections: An Introduction to Family Studies, Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Morris, K., White, S., Doherty, P. and Warwick, L. (2015) ‘Out of time: theorizing family in social work practice’, Child and Family Social Work, 22, 3, 51–60.Google Scholar
Nordquist, P. and Smart, C. (2014) Relative Strangers, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Nygren, L., White, S. and Ellingsen, I. (2018) ‘Investigating welfare regime typologies: paradoxes, pitfalls and potentialities in comparative social work research’, Social Policy and Society, https://doi.org/10.1017/S1474746418000167.Google Scholar
O'Cathain, A., Murphy, E. and Nicholl, J. (2010) ‘Three techniques for integrating data in mixed methods studies’, BMJ, 341, 4587.Google Scholar
ONS (2016) ‘Lone Parent Families in the UK, by Country, 1996 – 2015’, https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/families/adhocs/006183loneparentfamiliesintheukbycountry1996to2015 [accessed 11.12.2017].Google Scholar
ONS (2017) Migration Statistics Quarterly Report: November 2017, https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/internationalmigration/bulletins/migrationstatisticsquarterlyreport/november2017 [accessed 01.01.2018].Google Scholar
Osborn, M. (2014) ‘Working with fathers to safeguard children’, Child Abuse and Neglect, 38, 993–1001.Google Scholar
Palkovitz, R. and Hull, J. (2018) ‘Towards a resource theory of fathering’, Journal of Family Theory and Review, 10, 181–98.Google Scholar
Parsons, T. and Bales, R. (1956) Family, Socialization and Interaction Process, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Poole, E., Speight, S., O'Brien, M., Connolly, S. and Aldrich, M. (2013) ‘What do we know about non-resident fathers?’, Understanding Society, https://www.understandingsociety.ac.uk/research/publications/522028 [accessed 09.08.2017].Google Scholar
Saltiel, D. (2013) ‘Understanding complexity in families’ lives: the usefulness of family practices as an aid to decision making’, Child and Family Social Work, 18, 1, 15–24.Google Scholar
Scourfield, J., Tolman, R., Maxwell, N., Holland, S., Bullock, A. and Sloan, L. (2012) ‘Results of training course for social workers on engaging fathers in child protection’, Children and Youth Service Review, 34, 1425–32.Google Scholar
Shier, M. L., Engstrom, S. and Graham, J. R. (2011) ‘International migration and social work: a review of the literature’, Journal of Immigrant and Refugee Studies, 9, 1, 38–56.Google Scholar
Smart, C. (2007) Personal Life, Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
Studsrød, I., Ellingsen, I., Muñoz Guzmán, C. and Mancinas Espinoza, S. E. (2018) ‘Conceptualizations of family and social work family practice in Chile, Mexico and Norway’, Social Policy and Society, doi: 10.1017/S1474746418000234.Google Scholar
United Nations (2016) International Migration Report, 2015, Department of Economic Social Affairs, New York: United Nations.Google Scholar
Valtonen, K. (2008) Social Work and Migration: Immigrant and Refugee Settlement and Integration, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Vertovec, S. (2007) ‘Superdiversity and its implications’, Ethnic and Racial Studies, 30, 6, 1024–54.Google Scholar
Walsh, J. (2018) ‘Migrant family display: a strategy for achieving recognition and validation in the host country’, Sociological Research Online, 23, 1, 67–83.Google Scholar
Walsh, J., White, S., Morris, K. and Doherty, P. (2018) ‘How do you solve a problem like Maria: family complexity and institutional complications in UK Social Work’, European Journal of Social Work, https://doi.org/10.1080/13691457.2018.1461068.Google Scholar
Wastell, D., White, S., Broadhurst, K., Hall, C., Peckover, S. and Pithouse, A. (2010) ‘Children's services in the iron cage of performance management: street level bureaucracy and the spectre of Švejkism’, International Journal of Social Welfare, 19, 310–20.Google Scholar
Weeks, J., Heaphy, B. and Donovan, C. (2001) Same Sex Intimacies: Families of Choice and Other Life Experiments, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Welbourne, P. and Dixon, J. (2015) ‘Child protection and welfare: cultures, policies and practices’, European Journal of Social Work, 19, 6, 827–40.Google Scholar
Williams, F. (2004) Rethinking Family, UK: Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation.Google Scholar
Yin, R. K. (2014) Case Study Research: Design and Methods, London: Sage.Google Scholar
Zanoni, L., Warburton, W., Bussey, K. and McMaugh, A. (2013) ‘Fathers as ‘core business’ in child welfare practice and research: an interdisciplinary review’, Children and Youth Service Review, 35, 1055–70.Google Scholar