‘Thinking in and out of the frame’; applying systemic ideas to social work with children

Daniel, Gwyn

doi:10.4324/9780203341155_chapter_5

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The importance (and the difficulty) of keeping an open mind has been emphasized by a number of writers who highlight the ways in which different forms of cognitive bias arise and influence judgement and decision‐making (Galanter & Patel 2005; Gambrill 2005; Munro 2008; Holland 2010). Writing about the application of systemic ideas to social work with children, Daniel observes that ‘[o]ne of the most helpful systemic ideas is that of conceptualising uncertainty as a rigorous, intellectually robust and ethical position, rather than a sign of weakness or equivocation’ (Daniel 2005, p. 60). Applying this observation to social work more generally gives the practitioner permission to stay with uncertainty and anchors the process of hypothesising at the heart of thoughtful and reflective practice.…”

Section: Relationship‐based Practice With Involuntary Clientsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A relationship‐based approach to engaging involuntary clients: the contribution of recognition theory

Turney¹

2012

Child & Family Social Work

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper focuses on the process of engaging with families where a child is at risk of harm, and considers a relationship‐based approach to work with ‘involuntary clients’ of child protection services. Contextualizing the discussion within a broader understanding of the role and importance of relationship‐based practice, a conceptual and ethical framework is outlined that can, it is suggested, support effective relationship‐based work and moral decision‐making with involuntary clients. Making use of psychoanalytic and more broadly psychodynamic insights, along with perspectives drawn from recognition theory, it is argued that relationship‐based practice offers the potential for recognition, respect and reciprocity, and that these three aspects of relationship provide a foundation for ethical engagement with involuntary clients. However, such an approach is not without tensions, so the latter part of the paper considers some of the challenges and dilemmas that accompany the process of trying to engage parents who do not want to be ‘worked with’.

show abstract

Section: Relationship‐based Practice With Involuntary Clientsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A relationship‐based approach to engaging involuntary clients: the contribution of recognition theory

Turney¹

2012

Child & Family Social Work

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(2000, p. 72) In the last 15 years or so, Mason's framework has been taken up within the generic social work literature (e.g. Cameron andMc Gowan, 2013, Caw andSebba, 2013;Daniel, 2005;Featherstone et al, 2014;Neden et al, 2020;Stanley and Mills, 2014;Tasker and Wood, 2016;Wilkins, 2015), systemic children and families social work (e.g. Clayton, 2012;Gaughan and Kalyniak, 2012;Greenwood, 2016;Robinson and Whitney, 1999), and more problematically, within relationship-based (psychodynamic) social work theory (e.g.…”

Section: Interpreting (Un)safe (Un)certaintymentioning

confidence: 99%

Deconstructing Mason’s (un)safe (un)certainty

Kenny

2021

Human Systems: Therapy, Culture and Attachments

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Barry Manson’s safe uncertainty framework has had a significant influence on the fields of systemic psychotherapy and systemic social work. His original 1993 paper has been cited more than 300 times, and a range of interpretations offered and applications proffered. I offer a deconstructive reading of Mason’s 1993 paper, in order to better understand this phenomenon. I focus on issues of style, rhetoric, expositional emphasis, and word choice – why does Mason choose ‘safe’ rather than ‘secure’? Using analysis by Boholm and colleagues, I set out the semantic pros and cons of using ‘safe’ and ‘secure,’ arguing that, on balance, ‘secure’ is the more appropriate word for Mason’s purposes. I then explore Mason’s reporting of practice, in particular the shift over time from indirect to direct reporting of speech. I argue this shift underpins efforts by Mason to clarify his use of safe uncertainty. Mason’s changing use of voice strongly supports the claim that his framework should not be applied to the analysis of, or responses to safeguarding, risk and protection dilemmas, for which more appropriate frameworks are available.

show abstract

“…Daniels (2005, p. 60), in a chapter on systemic thinking and practice, identifies four characteristics that she has repeatedly encountered in social workers. They include social workers…”

Section: Internal Obstacles To Thinking – Psychodynamic Perspectives mentioning

confidence: 99%

‘Thoughtful’ practice: child care social work and the role of case discussion

Ruch

2006

Child & Family Social Work

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since the publication of Lord Laming’s inquiry into the death of Victoria Climbé there have been a number of insightful and thoughtful papers into the professional context and circumstances that surrounded this tragedy. Those papers highlight the insufficient thought given to the psychosocial dimensions of Victoria’s situation, their impact on professional practice and the support needs of practitioners. This paper explores the tensions between ‘doing’ and ‘thinking’ in contemporary practice and draws on psychodynamic concepts to inform our understanding of why individuals and organizations behave in repetitiously compulsive ways. A case discussion model is outlined and its potential for addressing the psychodynamic demands facing practitioners and front‐line managers is considered.

show abstract

‘Thinking in and out of the frame’; applying systemic ideas to social work with children

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

A relationship‐based approach to engaging involuntary clients: the contribution of recognition theory

A relationship‐based approach to engaging involuntary clients: the contribution of recognition theory

Deconstructing Mason’s (un)safe (un)certainty

‘Thoughtful’ practice: child care social work and the role of case discussion

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About