No abstract

This article argues that key values of child protection work are not the appropriate point of departure for contemplating the welfare of children in professional care. Central values, such as ‘comfort’, ‘recognition’ or ‘appreciation’ say very little about the social practices of residential care. Using data from an ethnographic study in Denmark, the article demonstrates that ideas about the needs of troubled children are realised in dissimilar ways, creating highly different living environments for institutionalised children. The principles behind these construction processes are explored, and the profound ambiguity of values in childcare is discussed as an effect of residential care’s being an ‘institutional’ or ‘human service’ type of organisation.

No abstract

Based on comparative focus group data from Norway, Denmark and England, this article asks why people take on substantial mortgages to become homeowners. It argues that financialization of the housing market has resulted in a widespread investment philosophy at the household level and changed the way people think and talk about "the home". High levels of mortgage borrowing have become commonplace and are justified by social valuations of owner-occupation based on beliefs around freedom through homeownership. Like previous research, the study shows that homeownership offers social identity, stability and belonging. But, this is wrapped up in an investor's language, such that the distinction between homes as socially valued living environments and homes as investment objects has become blurred. This makes it difficult -perhaps impossible -for households to assess the risks involved in home purchases.

This article explores a paradox that was identified during an ethnographic study of two Danish therapeutic residential institutions for children with emotional and behavioural problems. The key objective of these institutions is to provide specialized treatment for the individual child. However, the task of organizing everyday life for a group of troubled children is so demanding that little room is left for individualization. In practice, treatment takes the shape of a rather standardized package. Analysing individual treatment as a powerful kind of `institutional thinking', the authors delve into the meaning of an apparent contradiction in terms: standardized individual therapy.