No abstract

In the last decade, Family Group Conferences (FGCs) have increasingly been used to help people and their networks deal with their problems. The FGC fits well with the call for equal rights and self-management coming from clients and client movements, as well as the economy-driven pressure towards more informal and less professional care coming from governments. However, there is a lack of knowledge about the underlying theory to explain how the FGC works. In this article, we aim to provide such a theoretical basis by examining how the concept of empowerment can be linked with the basic assumptions underlying the FGC. Can making a plan of their own indeed help to empower people and if so, how does the process of empowerment proceed? Empowerment is often mentioned as a goal of the FGC, but authors are not unanimous when it comes to the operationalisation of empowerment, especially on the relational level of the person in his or her social context. In the article, we use the concepts of relational autonomy and resilience to conceptualize empowerment on the relational and individual level.

No abstract

Purpose: Self-managed institutional homeless programmes started as an alternative to regular shelters. Using institutional theory as a lens, we aim to explore the experiences of stakeholders with the institutional aspects of a self-managed programs. Method: The data we analysed (56 interviews, both open and semi-structured) were generated in a longitudinal participatory case-study into JES, a self-managed homeless shelter. In our analysis we went back and forth between our empirical data and theory, using a combination of systematic coding and interpretation. Participants were involved in all stages of the research. Results: Our analysis revealed similarities between JES and regular shelters, stemming from institutional similarities. Participants shared space and facilities with sixteen people, which caused an ongoing discussion on (enforcement of) rules. Participants loathed lack of private space. However, participants experienced freedom of choice over both their own life and management of JES and structures were experienced more fluid than in regular care. Some structures also appeared stimulated self-management. Conclusion: Our analysis showed how an institutional context influences self-management and suggested opportunities for introducing freedom and fluidity in institutional care.

Summary Family Group Conferencing as deployed in child care might be useful in elderly care to strengthen older adults’ social networks and self-mastery. When Family Group Conferencing was implemented for older adults in the Netherlands, social workers were reluctant to refer. To discover reasons for this reluctance, we examined social workers’ views and attitudes concerning Family Group Conferencing for their clients. Findings In an initial exploratory study, we distributed a survey among social workers who worked with older adults and were informed about Family Group Conferencing, followed by three focus groups of social workers with and without Family Group Conferencing experience. We also held semi-structured individual interviews with social workers and an employee of the Dutch Family Group Conferencing foundation. The respondents were positive about Family Group Conferencing, but hesitant about referring their older clients. Reasons were: they were already working with their clients’ social networks; they feared losing control over the care process; and they wondered how they could motivate their clients. They also reported that their clients themselves were reluctant, because they seemed to fear that Family Group Conferencing would lose them self-mastery, and they did not want to burden their social networks. Applications Our findings indicate that implementing Family Group Conferencing in elderly care is a complicated and slow process, partly because social workers have little experience with Family Group Conferencing. To facilitate social workers it might be necessary to offer them more guidance, in a joint process with the Family Group Conferencing foundation. One might also experiment with alterations to the Family Group Conferencing model, for example, by focusing less on family networks and more on reciprocity.