Using evidence to challenge prevailing ideology: Listening to Fathers, Men's experience of child protection
•Transferir como PPTX, PDF•
0 gostou•290 visualizações
Nick Smithers AMIS - Abused Men in Scotland
Recomendados
Recomendados
Mais conteúdo relacionado
Destaque
Destaque (20)
Semelhante a Using evidence to challenge prevailing ideology: Listening to Fathers, Men's experience of child protection
Semelhante a Using evidence to challenge prevailing ideology: Listening to Fathers, Men's experience of child protection (13)
Mais de BASPCAN
Mais de BASPCAN (20)
Último
Último (20)
Using evidence to challenge prevailing ideology: Listening to Fathers, Men's experience of child protection
- 1. Using evidence to challenge prevailing ideology Listening to Fathers Men’s experience of child protection Nick Smithers
- 2. The Context Turn of the 21st Century 80% of fathers live with all children 13% of fathers do not live with any children of which 70% remain in contact (Burghes, Clark and Cronin, 1997). Children in child protection system: 38% with both parent 31% with lone mother 28% reconstituted family 2% with lone father The figures for those still with both parents drops sharply as child protection proceedings continue (Daniel and Taylor 2001). Children in child protection system have significantly less access to their fathers than the wider population
- 3. Research and Practice Consensus about positive role fathers play in children’s lives But … discourses that stereotype, label and marginalise men dominate Fathers continue to be systematically excluded from the child protection system
- 4. Child Protection Context Munro Review – concluded that instead of “doing things right” (i.e. following procedures) the system needed to be focused on doing the right thing (i.e. checking whether children and young people are being helped) Identified- a commonly held belief that the complexity and associated uncertainty of child protection work can be eradicated
- 5. Patriarchy Male privilege Need to challenge male power – hence ‘perpetrator’ label, holding men to account Prepetrator Programmes Argued to be feminist but stuck in second wave feminism ‘It’s feminist because I say so’ (Orme, 2003) denies ‘the complexity and diversity of women’s experience and the richness of feminist theories that explore and explain that experience.’ and ‘the complex and multi-layered operation of power …., whatever their gender’ Evident in unreflective practice based around a one-dimensional view of men and around ideology rather than evidence
- 6. Fathers in Child Protection Cases • No use • Absent – Ghost Fathers • One dimensional – men as ‘bad’, mothers as ‘good’ • As ‘risky’ • Clapton’s work on fathers’ portrayal in social work literature – either invisible or abusive • Some even whisper of men as a resource
- 7. Curriculum for excellence Early Years Framework
- 10. Listening to Fathers Who’s looking after my son I dinnae know, I was panicking through all this all thoughts going through my head. I couldnae sleep, crying at night realising that I needed to do something about this because the social work are nae doing nothing about it.
- 11. Allegations : Believe the Victim He asked me what actually happened that day and I told him and I said ‘I’ve no been convicted of the assault charge’ and he said ‘no matter what, that’ll always be used against ye.’
- 12. Cognitive Dissonance She said ‘You don’t look good on paper’ I said ‘No Hen, but you wrote the paper’
- 13. Gendered Analysis of Domestic Abuse Is this an untouchable theory despite lack of empirical foundation? What’s it like to speak out? Lets consider the ethics of VAW activism … Is it endangering women and children as well as marginalising men? What does the evidence tell us?
- 15. Reoffending Psychometric data from a cohort of 31 individuals who completed the Inner Strength. Reoffending data from the 18 (58 %) participants who have been released from custody System checks using Police computers including PNC, OPUS and Icis. Additional checks for involvement in Domestic Abuse calls to the police. No evidence could be found to link any of the cohort with Domestic abuse reoffending since release = 0% proven reoffending.
Notas do Editor
- Good Morning everyone. My name etc. This paper is titled Using Evidence to Challenge Prevailing Ideology and I will describe to you a practitioner research project which I undertook in 2012 and the interesting journey which I unwittingly set out on at that time. I did not embark on the project with the intention of challenging any prevailing ideology as I was blissfully unaware that there was a prevailing ideology and in fact it is a challengeable and challenging position to take. My study is the result of a Knowledge Exchange Fellowship – a scheme which encourages collaboration between frontline practitioners and University researchers. In this case I applied to the scheme to investigate fathers’ experience of child protection systems. At the time I was employed as a father’s worker by Circle where I worked for 6 years in North-East Edinburgh. Practitioner Research has some key advantages methodologically in that it is rooted in the day to day experience of the practitioner and in collaboration with an academic mentor and access to library resources provides the foundation for solid, evidence-based findings. Of course it also has limitations notably sample size and dare I say less objectivity or critical distance than may be desirable. I already described my journey and I feel that this is the foundation of good research- a journey into the unknown or exploration of the world. Well at least that is how I have always considered research since my undergraduate days studying Anthropology – mind you in those days I envisaged myself ensconced with a nomadic Siberian tribe rather than a housing estate in North Edinburgh. Nevertheless I did bring an ethnographic sensibility to the project and was interested above all else to capture the voice and experience of fathers who were involved in the child protection system. I was motivated to do this by my experience as a father’s worker in the area for the previous three years- on completing my MSW at Edinburgh I began in post with the concerns of child protection ringing in my ears and anticipated in my work engaging with men who may present as dangerous or risky to their children and whom I would support to change and become ‘good men and fathers’. As the work developed I rarely met such straightforward individuals nor any who fitted such lazy stereotypes and in fact the role and task was increasingly to advocate on behalf of fathers who felt marginalised by professionals and oppressed by an unweilding child protection machine. I would also describe my role often as mediator between the father and social worker who struggled to communicate effectively with these men who may present as frustrated and angry thus fulfilling negative stereotypes which were held.
- Literature Review- The context- As we can see from these figures the key message is that where there are child protection measures in place there is sharp decline in children living with both parents and particularly in having regular contact with their father. It has been well demonstrated that paternal involvement in a child’s life is directly connected with a range of positive developmental outcomes. From that we can assume that the lach of paternal involvement in vulnerable childrens lives is in itself problematic- with obvious exceptions in cases where the risks are deemed too high. In a sense my research was a follow-up to an earlier study in the area called Dads the Word in 2001. The dads the Word study found that there were significant numbers of fathers in the area of Greater Pilton who were struggling with a variety of factors which were barriers to them either having contact with their children or feeling able to provide a level of care to their children that they would aspire to. Some of these men described the conflict between playing the stereotyped masculine role they felt was expected of them and their innate desire to nurture and care for their children. A picture emerges of an unsatisfactory impasse where services continue to focus more and more on women while proclaiming ‘men aren’t interested’ or ‘men won’t join groups’. These stereotypes dominate while on the other hand men fulfil the prophesy by stoically enduring increasingly debilitating health concerns and see no pathways to support. These men in the community were often isolated and in many cases estranged from their children. Much of the literature on the subject has identified the difficulty that social work as a profession has in dealing with fathers. Various academic investigators have explored the reasons for this and considered solutions. It remains apparent however that very little qualitative data exists which has enquired into men’s perspectives. Feminism remains the dominant academic discourse through which social work seeks to understand societal problems. Indeed it has been argued that social work practice is stuck in 2nd wave feminist thinking. Child protection continues to be viewed as women’s responsibility and problems are a manifestation of the Patriarchy. As Professor Joan Orme reflects that the undeveloped feminist approach to social work practice ‘denies the complexity of women’s experience’ and ‘the complex and multi-layered operation of power…whatever the gender’
- Constructions of men- In child protection literature men are constructed along almost uniquely negative stereotypes. As ‘No use’, ‘Absent/Disinterested’ , ‘A Risk’ ‘Outright Dangerous’ Gary Clapton has studied social work and associated literature in depth and concluded that men are usually either completely invisible or represented as abusive. As the following slides illustrate.
- So we know there is a problem with the engagement of men by social work and associated professionals involved in child protection work and the literature summarised gives us an idea of why and how that happens- also that it is not necessarily the case that ‘men’ are not interested but perhaps it is service providers who are not genuinely interested in engaging men. So to my findings- I identified some themes which emerge from the interviews the first of which here is titled Victims and Perpetrators. This theme reflects the typically unicausal approach to domestic abuse which characterises the field of child protection and which is dominated by a gendered analysis.
- Men who were labelled perpetrators found themselves banished from their children’s lives with no opportunity to have meaningful contact with their children, in some of these cases the children were left in the care of an abusive parent - this quote is from one father who was denied contact for six weeks while his infant son was in the care of an alcoholic mother. Eventually after incredibly arduous and drawn out assessment and negotiation the father was granted full custody of his two year old child- if equitable practice had been applied from the start the child would have been saved huge amount of disruption, danger and developmental damage. This case is far from unique. Allegations and Probability Some of the men I interviewed had been to court after being alleged to have sexually abused their children- despite having been found innocent and the victims of malicious false allegations – which were admitted in court- once back home they found that they continued to be treated with suspicion by social work professionals which caused undue trauma and pressure to the families and to the children. This grey legal area is extremely concerning with men and their families becoming distraught with the apparent hopelessness of trying to clear their name from clearly false allegations. Most importantly all these cases were characterised by the marginalisation of the men from meetings, reports and all professional practice around their child’s well-being and in some case with clear collusion between authorities and abusive women. Communication Breakdown All the men I interviewed described being marginalised by child protection professionals. Possibly marginalised due to preconceived ideas defining professional approaches to their children’s welfare which I have attributed to Cognitive Dissonance- by this I mean that when faced with the inherent messy complexity of child protection work professionals burdened by overly managerialist, risk-averse procedures and a lack of critically reflective supervision fall back on simplistic uni-causal templates heavily infuenced by a gendered approach.
- As one man described a conversation he had with his child’s social worker justifying restrictions to his contact She said ‘You don’t look good on paper’ I said ‘No hen, but you wrote the paper’ Fundamentally the problem can be distilled to the fact that there is a deficits-based approach taken towards men while there is a strengths-based approach taken towards women. Or in other words