1 Review meetings for children in care: insights informed by Bourdieu Karen Winter ESWR conference 2013
Dec 31, 2015
1
Review meetings for children in care: insights informed by
Bourdieu
Karen WinterESWR conference 2013
Current context
Parental and child involvement in review processes for children in care a legal requirement
An essential mechanism through which needs of children identified and plans for their care drawn up
2
Research evidence
Significant improvements in law, policy and practice to secure greater involvement
Some positive parental and child experiences Significant barriers remain Lack of practice near research and lack of
theoretical conceptualization
3
Refocus research questions
The gap between these broader developments and the actual experiences of many children
and their parents suggests that it is necessary to consider afresh the micro dynamics within review meetings through which decisions are
arrived at
4
5
Methodological challenges
Where in the review meeting does power lie and how is it exercised?
To examine this need to: Reclaim the individual case as a foci of analysis Apply sociological theories that elucidate social,
relational aspects of children’s encounters Develop theoretically informed accounts that
connect the ‘one’ and the ‘many’
6
My research
In depth case studies In depth individual interviews with children
(aged 4-7), social workers and birth parents Uses work of:
Foucault (macro-discourses and discursive practices)
Bourdieu (micro-social and relational aspects which impinge on participation rights) –field, habitus and capital – The Weight of the World
Field – the review meeting
A legally mandated structured space where professionals, parents and the child are required to come together
Space organized around the same common interest namely the statutory requirement to review and agree a plan for a child
7
Field – the review meeting
Field defined as ‘structured spaces of positions’ where ‘all the agents [people] that are involved in a field share a certain number of fundamental interests, namely everything that is linked to the very existence of the field’ and [where] they are ‘engaged in [a] struggle’ to accrue, acquire or keep a certain form of capital’ (Bourdieu 1993, p. 72-73).
8
Capital
Four types: Economic (property and material possessions); Cultural (what is understood to be the legitimate skills,
knowledge, behaviour and competencies needed to gain and maintain power within a particular field);
Social (the quantity and quality of relationships and networks with others);
Symbolic capital (positive recognition, prestige and/or honour associated with the acquisition of one or more of the other types of capital). Can also refer to species of capital
9
The capital in review meetings
10
Capital
Knowledge of the child
Players in the field have differential knowledge of the child which they trade in
Some knowledge is more highly valued than other knowledge
Two main types of knowledge11
Capital
‘Assessed/objective knowledge of the child’ produced by social workers often imbued with jargon and objective terminology and the most highly valued
‘Subjective/relational’ knowledge of the child owned by parents and the least valued
‘Competition’ takes place with players trading on their knowledge of the child
12
Objective/assessed knowledge
Congruent with organisational norms and forms –’damaged’, ‘needy’, ‘behavioural issues’
SW: [Andrew] … he’s been subjected to a horrible parenting and misdemeanours throughout his
wee life. Em, he is quite damaged. Very confused and very, very hurt and he’s very keen
to be loved. I think he’s afraid of rejection
13
Subjective/relational knowledge
Draws on personal relationship with child
It is historical, personal, anecdotal, from memory, by word (rather than written script), woven through and within the child’s lived experience of family life, pre-dating social work involvement and therefore inaccessible to the social worker
14
Subjective/relational knowledge
Mrs. Armstrong defines knowledge of her son Andrew through: the maternal relationship, similar shared childhood experiences with him and ‘blood ties’.
Yea […] he’s not a good mixer […] well he mixes with younger kids than himself […] you see he has [… ]
difficulties […] I should know I’m his mother and I went through the same thing [referring to her own care history
and childhood difficulties] … Me and Andrew is close and I know he is finding it hard what with us away an all.
15
Subjective/relational knowledge
The importance of Mrs Armstrong’s knowledge claim lies in the fact that, the maternal relationship and similar shared childhood experiences cannot be reproduced or owned by the professionals
No-one else can be Andrew’s birth mother
No-one else therefore can lay claim to the unique experience and knowledge that accompanies the birth mother-son relationship.
16
The importance of Mrs Armstrong’s knowledge claim lies in the fact that, the maternal relationship and similar shared childhood experiences cannot be reproduced or owned by the professionals
No-one else can be Andrew’s birth mother
No-one else therefore can lay claim to the unique experience and knowledge that accompanies the birth mother-son relationship.
17
Habitus
The highly valued objective ‘knowledge of the child’ maintained by the operation of the professional habitus of the social worker and the strategies and techniques they employ
This occurs in a context where the parental habitus is defined through the discourse of inadequate, dangerous and/or inappropriate parenting
18
Habitus
Bourdieu (1993) argues that subjects’ strategies of action are determined by their positioning in the field
Those in dominant positions enact conservation strategies the aim of which is to preserve the distribution and valuation of the different capitals and to safeguard, preserve and even enhance their position within this hierarchy
Dominated actors, on the other hand, operate subversion strategies in which their aim is to transform the fields’ system of authority including its relative valuation of different capitals
19
Parental habitus
Mr. Armstrong: Yea [...] all the while you have to be careful what you say in case them uns [social workers] take it the wrong way. Like you have said something bad and they could cut your contact
Mrs. Armstrong: Yea. Like they have this over you that we’ve got your children and you might not get to see them.
20
Professional habitus
Habitus – those taken for granted dispositions, norms, practices and language
Structuring effect of the LAC meeting and its requirements
Paperwork – note taking (suspicious) From filling for contributions Verbal contributions –questions (suspicious),
lack of time to talk
21
Examples
Mr. Armstrong: Their school’s brought up. How are they doing in school, their health eh the health visitor’s always there. She’s been to every one of them eh their medical needs is all attended to blah, blah, blah [...] Just the usual load of bull
Interviewer: [Later in interview] Do you not find those useful questions or?
Mr. Armstrong: How would we know about their care?
Mrs. Armstrong: We’ve asked the questions and they don’t fire the answers
22
Examples
Mrs. Armstrong Whenever you go to them (the meetings) you’re given pieces of paper that size and there’s a lot of writing on it and you’re maybe given sometimes ten to twelve sheets for each child and you’re given maybe ten fifteen minutes to go through them [...]
Mr. Armstrong: you’re not actually getting proper time to go through them
Mrs. Armstrong: Before they (the professionals) went in they had read all this paperwork for each child [but] we were given five minutes to go through nearly half a telephone book.
23
Social positioning of the child
Crowded out by conditional support from the parent Where the child expresses a view congruent with
parental view (example returning home) this view is sanctioned as legitimate
Where child expresses a view to the contrary claims of coaching emerge
Same process mirrored in social worker accounts Competition as to who has the rightful, truthful
knowledge claims over the child
24
Example Interviewer: How did [Andrew] get his views across? Mr. Armstrong: He wrote them but it’s not his handwriting and
they’re not his questions Interviewer: They’re not the child’s questions? Mr. Armstrong: You would know yourself love if you were at it Mrs. Armstrong: You know your own child like Mr. Armstrong Like there was one particular one ‘When am I going
to get a foster family’, now that’s my child’s question? Mrs. Armstrong: No that’s them talking to him about fostering Mr. Armstrong: That’s them putting words into his mouth Mrs. Armstrong: Drumming it into him like
25
26
Drawing together
Use of Bourdieu to: Provide theoretical framework Provide methodological principles Provide backdrop to foreground accounts,
perspectives, the content, the depth, the process Important in terms of complimenting existing
research regarding children in care and their involvement in decision making