Child Protection Vocabulary in the Children Act 1989: Power, Ambiguity and Heterogeneity
Abstract
Regardless the few decades that an established legislative framework in Child Protection has been in effect, the responsibility of the Law and the Child Protection System is to continuously explore social needs, as they change, transform or new ones are introduced to adapt to the circumstances in the attempts to safeguard and protect children. This paper is not focusing on those adaptations; it draws on this responsibility to argue that in an ever-changing world, wherein needs and demands are shifting, Child Protection Vocabulary needs to be more explicit and adaptive to those changes. Vocabulary like ‘best interest’, ‘resilience’, ‘power’, and ‘vulnerability’ are commonplace in child protection legislation, regulation, policy and practice. That said, the question of interpretation is always of concern; how are the varied agencies, stakeholders, authorities, groups, and individuals approaching safeguarding and child protection when the heterogeneity of the language used is ever-increasing? This paper provides a conceptual content analysis of Child Protection Vocabulary found in the Children Act 1989. The analysis will be drawing on the amendments in Children Act 2004, as well as the Children and Social Work Act 2017, but will preserve its focus on the Children Act 1989 as the foundation for the contemporary Child Protection System. Implications of the findings are provided at the end.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Aldgate, J. and Stratham, J. (2001) The Children Act now: messages from research. Norwich: Stationery Office.
Appleton, J.V. (1994) ‘The concept of vulnerability in relation to child protection: health visitors' perceptions’, Journal of Advanced Nursing, 20(6), pp.1132-1140.
Ball, C., 1998. Regulating child care: from the Children Act 1948 to the present day. Child & Family Social Work, 3(3), pp.163-171.
Bessarab, D. and Crawford, F. (2013) ‘Trauma, grief and loss: The vulnerability of Aboriginal families in the child protection system’ in Bennett, B. and Green, S. (eds.) Our voices: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander social work. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Bhatia, V.K. (1993) Analyzing genre: language use in professional settings. London, UK: Longman.
Bryman, A. (2016) Social research methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cooper, A. and Whittaker, A. (2014) ‘History as tragedy, never as farce: tracing the long cultural narrative of child protection in England’, Journal of Social Work Practice, 28(3), pp.251-266.
Coppins, V., Casey, S. and Campbell, A. (2011) ‘The child’s best interest: a review of Australian juvenile justice legislation’, The Open Criminology Journal, 4(1), pp.23-31.
Daniel, B. (2010) ‘Concepts of adversity, risk, vulnerability and resilience: a discussion in the context of the ‘child protection system’, Social Policy and Society, 9(2), pp.231-241.
Department for Education (2018) Working together to safeguard children: a guide to inter-agency working to safeguard and promote the welfare of children. London, UK: Department for Education.
Department for Education (2013) Working together to safeguard children: a guide to inter-agency working to safeguard and promote the welfare of children. London, UK: Department for Education.
Eastmond, M. and Ascher, H. (2011) ‘In the best interest of the child? The politics of vulnerability and negotiations for asylum in Sweden’, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 37(8), pp.1185-1200.
Eggins, S. (2004) Introduction to systemic functional linguistics. New York, NY: A&C Black.
Erlingsson, C. and Brysiewicz, P. (2017) A hands-on guide to doing content analysis. African Journal of Emergency Medicine, 7(3), pp.93-99.
Grey, D. (2009) More Ignorant and Stupid than Wilfully Cruel’: Homicide Trials and ‘Baby-Farming’, in England and Wales in the Wake of the Children Act 1908.
Featherstone, B., Morris, K. and White, S. (2014) Re-imagining child protection: Towards humane social work with families. Bristol: Policy Press.
Fawcett, B. (2009) ‘Vulnerability: Questioning the certainties in social work and health’, International Social Work, 52(4), 473-484.
Fraser, M.W., Galinsky, M.J. and Richman, J.M. (1999) ‘Risk, protection, and resilience: Toward a conceptual framework for social work practice’, Social Work Research, 23(3), pp.131-143.
Hall, C., Slembrouck, S. and Sarangi, S. (2020) Language practices in social work: Categorisation and accountability in child welfare. London, UK: Routledge.
IICSA (2018) Independent inquiry into child sexual abuse in England and Wales (IICSA). Available at: https://www.iicsa.org.uk/ (Accessed: 4 September 2021).
Jackson, K. and Bazeley, P. (2019) Qualitative data analysis with NVivo. London, UK: Sage.
Keddell, E. (2018) ‘The vulnerable child in neoliberal contexts: The construction of children in the Aotearoa New Zealand child protection reforms’, Childhood, 25(1), pp.93-108.
Klonowski, A. (2013) Report of the independent reviewing officer in relation to child sexual exploitation issues in Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council during the period 2006 to 2013. Rochdale: Rochdale Metropolitan Borough.
Laming, H.B. (2009) The protection of children in England: A progress report (Vol. 330). Norwich: The Stationery Office.
Laming, H.B. (2003) The Victoria Climbie inquiry: report of an inquiry by Lord Laming. Norwich: The Stationary Office.
Martin, R. (1978) ‘Expert and referent power: A framework for understanding and maximizing consultation effectiveness’, Journal of School Psychology, 16(1), pp.49-55.
Martín Martín, P.Á. (2003) ‘A genre–analytic study of English and Spanish research article abstracts in the experimental social sciences’, English for Specific Purposes, 22(1), pp.25-43.
McClain, L.C. and Cere, D. (eds.) (2013) What is parenthood?: contemporary debates about the family. New York, NY: NYU Press.
McFadden, P., Mallett, J., Campbell, A. and Taylor, B. (2019) ‘Explaining self-reported resilience in child-protection social work: The role of organisational factors, demographic information and job characteristics’, The British Journal of Social Work, 49(1), pp.198-216.
Morris, K. and Featherstone, B. (2010) ‘Investing in children, regulating parents, thinking family: a decade of tensions and contradictions’, Social Policy and Society, 9(4), pp.557-566.
Munro, E. (2019) Effective child protection. London, UK: Sage.
Munro, E. (2011) A child-centred system. London, UK: Department for Education.
Nadan, Y. and Korbin, J. (2018) ‘Cultural context, intersectionality, and child vulnerability’, Childhood Vulnerability Journal, 1(1), pp.5-14.
Prasad, B.D. (2008) ‘Content analysis’, Research Methods for Social Work, 5, pp.1-20.
Reath, A. (1989) Kant’s theory of moral sensibility. Respect for the moral law and the influence of inclination. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Rogowski, S. (2020) Social work: The rise and fall of a profession? Bristol: Policy Press.
Sankaran, V., Church, C. and Mitchell, M. (2018) ‘A cure worse than the disease: The impact of removal on children and their families’, Marquette Law Review, 102(4), pp.1161-1194.
Shapiro, J. (2011) Legality. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press.
Sherwood-Johnson, F. (2013) “Constructions of ‘vulnerability’ in comparative perspective: Scottish protection policies and the trouble with ‘adults at risk’”, Disability & Society, 28(7), pp.908-921.
Swale, J.M. (1990) Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Thompson, K. (2016) Strengthening child protection: Sharing information in multi-agency settings. Bristol: Policy Press.
Tolonen, H., Koulu, S. and Hakalehto, S. (2019) Best Interests of the Child in Finnish Legislation and Doctrine: What Has Changed and What Remains the Same? in Haugli, T., Nylund, A., Sigurdsen, R. and Bendiksen, L. (eds.) Children’s Constitutional Rights in the Nordic Countries. Stockholm: Brill Nijhoff, pp.159-184.
Warner, J. (2015) The emotional politics of social work and child protection. Bristol: Policy Press.
Yin, R.K. (1984) Case study research: Design and methods. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.21100/gswr.v2i2.1280
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.