Observing Front Line Decision Making in Child Protection

Saltiel, David

doi:10.1093/bjsw/bcv112

Cited by 58 publications

(85 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The lack of knowledge about what happens in supervision reflects a wider absence of research that looks directly at social work practice. Although there is a small but growing literature that analyses the complex interactions between social workers and service users (Ferguson, 2011;Hall et al 2014;Koprowska;2017;Saltiel, 2015;Winter et al 2016), few studies have attempted to measure the quality of direct social work practice: social work practice that is "live" with service users in their home, office or other location. Most notably, Whittaker et al (2016) describe the development of a system for rating social work communication skills.…”

Section: What Is the Quality Of Supervisory Practice?mentioning

confidence: 99%

How do we assess the quality of group supervision? Developing a coding framework

Bostock

Patrizo

Godfrey³

et al. 2019

Children and Youth Services Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How do we assess the quality of group supervision? Developing a coding framework, Children and Youth Services Review, https://doi.Abstract The importance of supervision for social work practice is one of the most widely accepted tenets of the profession. Yet, surprisingly little is known about what happens in supervision, making it difficult to unravel what it is about supervision that makes a difference to social work practice. This paper describes the development of a framework for assessing the quality of group supervision. It focuses on one subcategory of group supervision -systemic group supervision -and draws a wider evaluation of systemic social work practice in the UK. It is based on 29 observations of "live" of supervision to illustrate differences in quality of supervisory practice. The process of developing the coding framework was cyclical, and ultimately resulted in a three-point ordinal grouping for assessing systemic supervisory practice. Analysis of observational data assessed group systemic supervision as follows: 8 as non-systemic (28%); 12 (41%) as demonstrating some incorporation of systemic ideas into interactions, described as "green shoots" (or showing encouraging signs of development but not yet reached its full potential); and 9 (31%) supervision sessions demonstrating a full incorporation of systemic concepts and practice. What marked "systemic" sessions from "green shoots" supervision was the move from hypothesis generation about family relations and risk to children to purposeful, actionable conversations with families: the move from reflection to action. This paper supports a small but growing body of evidence about the fundamental characteristics of successful or effective supervision within children and families social work.

show abstract

Section: What Is the Quality Of Supervisory Practice?mentioning

confidence: 99%

How do we assess the quality of group supervision? Developing a coding framework

Bostock

Patrizo

Godfrey³

et al. 2019

Children and Youth Services Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There is a rich tradition of ethnographic studies that have used participant observation to study what goes on in social work organisations (Dingwall, et al, 1983;Pithouse, 1987;Scourfield, 2001;Broadhurst et al, 2010;Gibson, 2016;Helm, 2016;Saltiel, 2016). A powerful finding from this work is the pressure on social workers to complete computerised records and work to tight timescales.…”

Section: Research Into Practice: Snapshots Of Social Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

From Snapshots of Practice to a Movie: Researching Long-Term Social Work and Child Protection by Getting as Close as Possible to Practice and Organisational Life

Ferguson

Leigh

Cooner

et al. 2019

The British Journal of Social Work

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Child protection removals are stressful and traumatic events for children, but even more so if the child and her or his parents have not been prepared for the removal, as so often happens in emergency situations (Baugerud & Melinder, ; Storhaug & Kojan, ). These emergency removals can also be stressful for social workers and other decision makers (Saltiel, ; LeBlanc, Regehr, Shlonsky, & Bogo, ). When meeting a child in “immediate danger,” the social worker has to assess the child's situation under time pressures: In emergency situations, a judgement has to be made quickly regarding whether to proceed with an emergency removal or whether there are other ways to help the child and family.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Time constraints can impact upon the quality of assessments and decision making as there are fewer opportunities to get extensive information about the child, to weigh up different options, and to examine thoroughly whether the threshold for a removal intervention has been met (Berrick, Dickens, Pösö, & Skivenes, ; Helm, ; Östberg, ; Platt & Turney, ). The tension between the demand to make a quick decision and the time it takes to gather and revise the information is likely to constrain analytic reasoning (Helm, ; Saltiel, ; van de Luitgaarden, ). Despite the obviously stressful nature of emergency removals, very little research exists about front‐line practice in emergency situations (Masson, , ; Masson, McGovern, Pick, & Winn Oakly, ; Storhaug & Kojan, ; Storhaug, Kojan, & Fjellvikås, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Children in immediate danger: Emergency removals in Finnish and Irish child protection

Lamponen

Pösö

Burns

2018

Child & Family Social Work

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents a qualitative analysis of front-line practices regarding emergency removals in Finnish and Irish child protection. It examines how the responses to children's immediate danger are framed by legislation and how front-line practitioners assess the child's situation and make emergency placement decisions. The data consist of interviews with 16 Irish and 33 Finnish social workers. These child welfare protection systems respond differently to a task that appears to be similar. The Irish team-based practice rests on the social workers' shared assessment of the child's needs, and the formal decision is made by the courts (or police officers at nighttime); and the Finnish practice involves only one single social worker who makes both the assessment and the removal decision. The Irish system is tightly time regulated, whereas the Finnish system provides a more flexible time frame. Both approaches put a lot of stress on social workers' practice, which also includes creative workarounds (e.g., "planned emergency removals" in Finland). Future research will need to explore these features from the point of view of a child's right to protection.

show abstract

Observing Front Line Decision Making in Child Protection

Cited by 58 publications

References 37 publications

How do we assess the quality of group supervision? Developing a coding framework

How do we assess the quality of group supervision? Developing a coding framework

From Snapshots of Practice to a Movie: Researching Long-Term Social Work and Child Protection by Getting as Close as Possible to Practice and Organisational Life

Children in immediate danger: Emergency removals in Finnish and Irish child protection

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About