Learning from difference? European perspectives on social work in child and family services

Janet Boddy Centre for Innovation and Research in Childhood and Youth

Three European studies

Working at the ‘edges’ of carewith young people and families:

England, Denmark, France and Germany

International perspectives on parent supportDenmark, France, Germany, Italy & the Netherlands

Beyond Contact: Work with families of children placed away from home

England, Denmark, France and the Netherlands

Partners include...England Janet Boddy, University of Sussex

June Statham, Institute of Education

Denmark Inge Danielsen, University College Copenhagen

France Hélène Join-Lambert and Séverine Euillet, Université Paris Ouest Nanterre La Défense

Germany Herbert Colla, Michael Tetzer, Simon Garbers, University of Lüneburg

Italy Cinzia Canali, Fondazione Zancan, Padova

Netherlands Esther Geurts, Netherlands Youth Institute

Why cross-national research? To inform policy development

Not simply ‘transplanting’ programmes or services

But generating ideas and understandings• To look ‘with fresh eyes’ – to learn from difference• What’s possible?• What could be adapted or trialled in an English context?• What can we learn from other ways of conceptualising and

delivering support?

Being careful not to idealise!

... and not comparing like with like

Population contextsUK Denmark France Germany Italy Nether-

lands

Total population (millions)

63.5 5.6 65.3 80.3 59.4 16.7

% of children (0-15) at risk of poverty

18.1 10.0 18.8 14.9 25.9 13.6

% children 0-17 living in households with very low work intensity

16.3 5.8 7.2 6.8 6.8 6.4

% of GDP on social protection benefits targeting families & children

1.9 4.5 2.7 3.2 1.4 1.3

2012 data: http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/statistics/themes

Cross-national comparability?Rates of child poverty

Single adult household

with childrenCouple household

with children

Not working Working No

workersOne

workerTwo or more

workers

UK 27.8 4.8 30.3 8.6 1.0

US 90.7 31.1 86.9 28.1 5.8

2008 data: http://www.oecd.org/statistics/

Learning from difference

‘It is interesting to hear the common problems across countries, but it is more important to know how you find solutions.’

Senior manager, Dutch NGO

Contexts in national policy

Familiar concerns, including…• social inclusion, maternal working, parental separation

• partnership with parents

• engaging specific groups of parents

• accessibility of support

… and of course, austerity

Different understandings of rights (for children and families)

Policy discourses of ‘rights’ to support – for example…• Germany

Rights for young people and parents in relation to ‘Help with Upbringing’ (Hilfe zur Erziehung)

DenmarkAll citizens have a social worker

Netherlands and DenmarkParents of looked after children have the right to a

dedicated support workerYoung people’s rights to decision-making in care planning

Italy and DenmarkCare plan must (in law) follow the whole family

The role of the state in family life France Civil Code (1804)

• specifies the ‘absolutisme’ of parental responsibility• family is protected in law as a ‘private domain’

Germany Basic Law (1949):• marriage and the family enjoy the special protection of the state• parents have a natural right, as well as a duty, to provide care

for and bring up their children Denmark Constitution (1953)

refers to rights of children, not to rights of family UK

no formal constitution, and arguably no explicit family policy (e.g., Hantrais 2004)

Conceptual continuity between universal and targeted services

General universal services (e.g., schools and out-of-school settings)

General preventive services(e.g., health care)

Specific preventive services (e.g., Pedagogical/ Psychological Consultancy in schools)

Measures to prevent placement (e.g. family treatment / support) Placement

Universal services for children Services for children at risk

Municipal (local authority) social worker

Legal requirement for � 50 statutory assessment of child’s needs

Denmark: estrenget principle

Professionalised, with degree-level qualifications• Professionally-led interventions (individual or group-

based), ranging from mainstream support through to dedicated workers for parents of looked after children

Professionally differentiated• Multi-agency working or multi-disciplinary teams

• Social services and family support teams commonly include pedagogues, psychologists, social workers, lawyers and family mediators, maternity and public health nurses, and doctors

The workforce

Professional approaches

‘We have a very high responsibility ... Our decision affects the whole life of the child. So this high responsibility needs people very well educated to know about what they do. … They must not know only one solution, you need a whole range. [You need to be] educated in talking to people, not just in work with children, [but] finding solutions for life, for development. So we need excellently educated people doing this job.’

National Policy Adviser, Germany (from Boddy et al, 2008)

A professionalised and professionally differentiated workforce working across levels of need

• Including social workers, psychologists, social pedagogues, and other graduate professionals

Do we expect too much of UK social work?‘given the scope (and risks and pressures) of the social work task, is it reasonable to expect social workers in England to do a job, albeit with support from less qualified workers, that is shared among members of multi-professional graduate teams in other European countries?’

(Boddy and Statham 2009, p14)

In conclusion