Rationalising family intervention projects

Disciplinary Social Policy and the Failing Promise of the New Middle Classes: The Troubled Families Programme

“…The findings from these interviews partly contrast with those of other research on Family Intervention Policy, which tends to highlight the complex ways in which national policies are implemented, negotiated and partly circumvented and undermined at the local and frontline levels (see Parr and Nixon, 2008;Hayden and Jenkins, 2014). Yet, while we acknowledge a multitude of approaches and intentions as well as outcomes in the implementation of the TFP, we highlight common trends present throughout our interviews.…”

“…Research on the TFP, and Family Intervention Policy more generally, has generally emphasised the complex ways in which national policies are implemented, negotiated and partly circumvented and undermined at the local and frontline levels (see Parr andNixon, 2008, Hayden andJenkins, 2014). In contrast, and in line with the crucial aim of instilling a sense of aspiration in the families targetted, we find five common themes in our research on the TFP: (1) the aims and logic are focused on promoting behaviours and cultures consistent with the social and political construct of the NMC; (2) the programme is targeted at poor families and often women, especially lone parents, as bearing the responsibility for reproducing NMC values; (3) in-depth intervention, monitoring, performance management and conditionality are involved that focus on household and family behaviour; (4) the programme could result in disciplinary interventions for not upholding and reproducing NMC values and cultures; and (5) local implementation often acknowledges the links between individual family and household dynamics and the wider local community, and therefore attempts to change both.…”

“…Yet, these data have to be looked at with significant caution as the report authors themselves recognise that they are 'unsure whether the data submitted is representative of all troubled families going through the programme' (DCLG, 2014: 3). Parr and Nixon (2008) suggest that the bulk of family intervention projects in the UK are aimed at female-only households, with a tendency 'to blame female tenants for the 'inappropriate' behavior of their male partners or teenage sons'. Parenting Orders have also been predominantly given to lone mothers (Martin and Wilcox, 2013: 157).…”

Have Families Been Rethought? Ethic of Care, Family and ‘Whole Family’ Approaches

“…Family Nurse Partnerships (FNPs) (White et al, 2008) involve dedicated health practitioners working with parents through pregnancy and a child's first two years. Family Intervention Projects (FIPs) Parr, 2008a, 2008b;Parr and Nixon, 2008) originated in the Cabinet Office's Social Exclusion Action Plan (SETF, 2006). FIPs involve intensive intervention strategies in working with 'whole' 'anti-social families'.…”

Troubling Times for Young People and Families With Troubles – Responding to Truancy, Rioting and Families Struggling With Adversity

“…This population has also been characterised as the 'precariat' (Wacquant, 2008), the urban underclass (Murray, 1990) or the population not in education, empolyment or training (NEET). This rationale allows for particular types of families, namely working class and socially excluded (Gillies, 2005a(Gillies, , 2006(Gillies, , 2008, to be labelled as 'problem families' or 'troubled families' who 'terrorise' their communities (Parr and Nixon, 2008). Wacquant has referred to this focus on a 'dangerous, immoral, dysfunctional underclass' in need of urgent discipline and control as the 'penalisation of poverty' (Wacquant, 2001(Wacquant, , 2009).…”