Can we start to say Race again when discussing youth and justice? This demand emerges from the findings of the participatory action research reported in this article. Fifty young people, in custody or in contact with youth offending teams (YOT), discussed the support that would enable them to desist from offending behaviour. Race was a prism through which they saw their experience. Rather than naming racism, family appeared to be a covert, legitimate, way of talking about identity, solidarity and difference. Family ties, overlaid with experiences of race and racism, could be reasons for engaging in behaviour that was seen as criminal. Family, overlaid with ethnicity, could become a source of support to enable young people to cope with the challenges of being involved in and desisting from offending behaviour. At a time where policy and political language has shifted from rac(ism) to a culturalist discourse focused on ethnicity or religion, naming Race and racism remains vital. Only by acknowledging the differentiating power of Racism can the experience of young people in contact with YOT be understood. Only by appreciating the value of shared experience of race (within families and communities) can appropriate pathways towards alternative futures be offered.
This article draws on the published work of Frantz Fanon to engage critically with the findings of a qualitative study of experiences within an alternative black mental health centre in Liverpool. Fanon’s critique of colonialism and exhortations for revolutionary action chime with the activist beginnings of this centre, and the positive experiences of service recipients are juxtaposed with previous negative experiences in the mainstream mental health system. Notions of place and space are particularly emphasised. These crucial variables were also arguably at the heart of Fanon’s critique of Western psychiatry and its institutional failings. The relative neglect of Fanon within psychiatry has arguably been to the detriment of the provision of appropriate care and support for black communities in the UK.
Ethnicity and adoption have taken centre stage in the Coalition Government's focus on child care social policy in the UK. The current political perspective is one of promoting the placement of children of minority ethnic heritage with white families, in order to avoid delay in adoption where no families of a similar ethnic heritage are available. John Wainwright and Julie Ridley reflect on the contemporary debate by discussing the findings from a commissioned service evaluation of an adoption agency that specialised in recruiting families of black, Asian and dual heritage, and placing children of black and minority ethnic (BME) heritage. This service evaluation provides evidence that focusing on recruiting BME individuals and families and matching them with children of similar heritage can be effective. The evaluation utilised mixed methods, including interviews with staff in the service, prospective and current adopters, and statistical information that informed an understanding of the type of ethnic matches made. Comparison was also made with a general adoption service within the commissioning agency using the same data collection methods.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.