Family Policy and the Governance of Anti-Social Behaviour in the UK: Women's Experiences of Intensive Family Support

Abstract

In seeking to make sense of the role of intensive family support in the governance of anti-social behaviour, this paper focuses analytical attention on one case study project, the Family Support Service. It draws on interview material from five women whose experiences were tracked in repeat interviews over an 18-month period. The Family Support Service entailed intense surveillance and supervision of marginalised populations in domestic private spaces and did, therefore, have controlling and disciplinary qualities, particularly with regard to the families living in ‘core’ residential accommodation. Yet, in spite of this, the Family Support Service also contained a significant social welfare ethos based on finding long-term sustainable solutions to individuals’ problems, not least security of housing and income. This paper argues that while we must confront the worrying and disconcerting aspects of intensive family support, the intervention might be conducive to helping disadvantaged and troubled families access better lives. There is a need for further research, however, about how to achieve less punitive types of family intervention and, therefore, how progressive change for vulnerable families might be generated.

Conceptualising ‘The Relationship’ in Intensive Key Worker Support as a Therapeutic Medium

“…Whether explicit of not, practice will be based on a particular professional ideology and draw on particular bodies of knowledge (Scourfield, 2010). Indeed, the extent to which projects aim to remoralise is often based on occupational cultures and professional habitus (Parr, 2015) and in my own research I have found evidence of the ways in which key working promotes self-regulation and remoralisation (Parr, 2011). This raises questions about the extent to which an emerging professional occupation such as key working is guided by a particular professional ideology and underpinned by a specific body of knowledge and value base (Parr, 2015).…”

“…In the final section however, I draw attention to more critical perspectives on key working that highlight how it is neither unproblematic nor a morally neutral endeavour. In so doing, the aim of this paper is to contribute to a growing body of analytical work on this type of intervention and the key worker role more broadly (Davies, forthcoming;Batty, 2013;Mason, 2012;Flint and Batty, 2012;Flint, 2012;Parr, 2011Parr, , 2008.…”

Domestic Surveillance and the Troubled Families Programme: Understanding relationality and constraint in the homes of multiply disadvantaged families

“…This framing of the problem legitimises the focus of state intervention on the domestic activities of working class women (Parr, 2011a) and thus reinforces gendered and classed divisions of domestic labour. However, critics who reject such interventions on the grounds that they enforce middle class domestic standards upon working class families risk playing into such othering discourses, by assuming that working class families have different standards and want different things for their family home.…”

“…Discourses of parental responsibility obfuscate the reality that mothers rather than fathers tend to be held responsible for their children's conduct and welfare (Nixon and Hunter, 2009;Parr, 2011a;Ashe, 2014). The relationship between family intervention services and housing providers in addressing 'anti-social' behaviour has particular implications for personal privacy and the right to family life (Brown, 2004).…”

“…More positive evaluations of the family interventions model therefore identify their potential to generate innovative and creative approaches to intervention which connect both emotional and practical support (Parr, 2011b;Hayden and Jenkins, 2014) in ways which families (and especially mothers) appreciate (Parr, 2011a;Morris, 2012;Bond-Taylor, 2015).…”