Suchergebnisse

PurposeAn integral feature of Special Guardianship Orders (SGO) is that the children should have some contact with their parents after the order is granted. Local authority social workers have a duty to plan and recommend levels and types of contact. But there is no policy guidance provided on how to undertake these duties, and little is known about the process that practitioners undertake. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the recommending of contact in special guardianship cases, and to provide data on what contact social workers are recommending the factors they take into consideration and the reasons for their decisions.Design/methodology/approachThe research involved a mixed-methods approach comprising of a questionnaire and focus groups. This part of the study comprised of an online questionnaire that was completed by 102 local authority social workers. Responses were downloaded into SPSS Statistics v22 for data analysis and a content analysis was conducted.FindingsQuantitative results from the questionnaire are reported in this paper. Respondents provided comprehensive details on what they include in their recommendations, including levels of contact frequency and specific directions. Practitioners rated the factors they considered in reaching their decisions, and gave their general views on special guardianship contact. Results indicated that practitioners are recommending less contact for fathers than for mothers, and may feel less positively about paternal contact. Bivariate analysis suggests that some older and more experienced social workers are recommending lower levels of contact.Research limitations/implicationsThe statistical significance of the results was limited by the relatively small sample size. It was therefore decided to limit bivariate analyses to consideration of just three independent variables: the social worker's age and number of years in practice, and the age of the child at the time of their SGO, against dependent variables concerning the levels of contact that had been recommended for mothers and fathers and how positive these were considered to be. Because of the limited sample size, most of the results were above this level, and so were not statistically significant.Practical implicationsSpecial guardianship has been in place for 12 years now, but apart from Jim Wade's 2014 study there has been no major research to guide and inform practice. Such major changes in child welfare require substantiating research, and this study is an attempt to begin filling that gap. The questionnaire part of this study has for the first time provided data on the views, motivations and practice of social workers across the country making recommendations on special guardianship contact.Social implicationsThe study provides a picture of the type of contact being recommended for birth parents. This information will be useful for practitioners, who might otherwise not know what their colleagues in other local authorities are recommending, and it is hoped that this will encourage further debate on the subject.Originality/valueSpecial guardianship has so far been poorly served by research. To the author's knowledge, apart from Wade's study there is very little research on the subject, and no significant research at all on special guardianship contact. This questionnaire, alongside the four focus groups that formed the second part of the study, provides the first picture of current practice across the country.

Purpose
Special guardianship order (SGO) assessments require social workers to make plans and recommendations for ongoing post-SGO contact between the child and the parents. However, there is very little policy to inform and guide practitioners on how these duties should be undertaken, and no studies that describe current practice. The purpose of this paper is to investigate how the recommending of contact in special guardianship cases is currently working, by holding focus groups with social workers and special guardians. This paper reports on the results of a study to examine what contact plans social workers are recommending, the thinking behind their decisions and the views of the special guardians who have to make those plans work.


Design/methodology/approach
The research involved a mixed methods approach comprising of an online questionnaire, two focus groups for social workers and two focus groups for special guardians. This paper describes the second part of the study and reports on the qualitative results from the four focus groups. The methodology was based on a pragmatist theoretical position, and used an interpretivist approach and elements of the analytical procedure of grounded theory in order to generate inductive research. The focus group method was chosen as the best way to gather rich information on the opinions and ideas of practitioners who are recommending contact and the carers who are managing it.


Findings
Participants provided a wide range of views on the issues, with practitioners describing the challenges of planning contact, and special guardians explaining the problems they faced with the parents. Involving special guardians in the study gave a chance to include the different perspectives of the people who have to make the contact recommendations work, and contrast their views on contact planning with those of the professionals. The study makes recommendations for practice, which recognise the difficulty of preparing an initial contact plan that will remain relevant for years ahead.


Research limitations/implications
The number of focus groups the author held was limited by the author's own personal resources and the time the author had available, and one group only had three social workers on the day. The author's involvement affected the responses, and the author's questions dictated the issues that were commented on, but the answers were the opinions that the participants wanted to express. The nature of the approach means that no two sets of focus group results would ever be the same. And as the direction of the discussions was largely dictated by the participants, the coverage of all aspects of contact was probably inconsistent.


Practical implications
This research sheds light on a crucial area of social work permanency planning, that has suffered from a lack of previous research, in order to better inform future practice. The paper reports on what contact plans social workers are recommending, the thinking behind their decisions and the views of the special guardians who have to make those plans work. It concludes with recommendations for improving future special guardianship policy and practice.


Social implications
The research clearly raises a number of specific difficulties faced by special guardians and problems with current policy and practice. These include the special guardians' lack of understanding about contact, the difficulty for social workers of long-term planning, the challenge posed by uncooperative parents who behave badly, the view of carers for the need for a greater emphasis on the quality and reliability of contact, and the challenge to careful contact planning posed by the adversarial court process.


Originality/value
Special guardianship has had a major impact on permanency planning since its introduction 12 years ago. However, apart from one DfE study in 2014, very little research has been produced to inform policy and practice. There have been no studies specifically on contact in special guardianship cases, despite contact being one of the two major factors in determining the success of SGO placements. This study has provided the first in-depth evaluation of social worker contact planning in special guardianship, and the first investigation of special guardians' views on contact.

John Lewis Gaddis' magisterial authorized biography of George Kennan tells the story of a brilliant diplomat who helped define postwar U.S. foreign policy-especially America's successful Cold War strategy. Yet the public triumph was matched with private frustration, and the prickly Kennan never won the influence he craved. Adapted from the source document.

Enthält Rezension von: Thompson, Nicholas: The hawk and the dove : Paul Nitze, Georg Kennan, and the history of the Cold War.- New York/N.Y. : Henry Holt, 2009

Since 2010, female servicemembers had been serving in war zones in Iraq and Afghanistan in the roles of Cultural Support Teams (CST). These unique teams were sent as attachments to Special Operations Units to deal with difficult war situations that culturally required female presence. Although serving in war and combat, these women were not recognized as combatants. In 2013, the Department of Defense rescinded the Direct Combat Exclusion Rule which previously excluded female military personnel from serving in direct combat occupations. The US Secretary of Defense announced all combat occupations were open to women. Four years later, more than 700 women had been recruited for, or transferred to post-integration combat roles, which continue to expand. While the women of the CSTs have continued to make great sacrifices for their country, many have not been recognized for their combat experiences. This pilot study seeks to understand the experiences of the female members of the Cultural Support Teams who integrated with combat units but were denied recognition for their combat experiences due to their gender. This study surveys current and former members of the US Army Cultural Support Teams. Through an understanding of their experiences, this study explores the definition of combat action, and the impact of that recognition—or lack thereof—on these female servicewomen and veterans.