Managing behaviour in child residential group care: unique tensions

Abstract

A B S T RA C T Residential group care workers are frequently required to support children with extremely challenging and aggressive behaviour. Our knowledge about the tensions that may exist for workers that manage difficult behaviour is theoretically and empirically underdeveloped. The aim of this exploratory study was to contribute to our understanding of the dynamics of behaviour management in the residential environment by identifying the worker-reported tensions involved in the management of challenging and disruptive behaviour. Seventeen South Australian residential group care workers participated in semistructured interviews in which they were asked to describe their management of behaviour. These interviews were subjected to thematic analysis. The analysis revealed several dynamics that influence workers' management of challenging behaviour: the sense of parenting at a distance, the pressure for consistency, the desire for balance between control and connection, the desire for normality and the inconsistent nature of relationships. These findings contribute to our knowledge about the interpersonal context in which behaviour is addressed in the residential group home and enhance our understanding of the unique tensions that workers' experience in managing behaviour in the residential environment. The findings have implications for the development of staff training and the support of residential care workers managing challenging behaviour.

How a Sample of Residential Childcare Staff Conceptualize and Use Attachment Theory in Practice

“…Therefore, theory could become rhetoric or risk being misused, creating a disconnection from the evidence base. Nevertheless, in line with previous research, staff use knowledge of young people's backgrounds, to make sense of difficult relationships and conflicting presentations (McLean, 2015;Tomkins, 2014). These findings extend current understanding by highlighting that staff pay particular attention to the impact of repeated loss, separation, and associated mistrust; and young people's developmental, as opposed to chronological, age.…”

“…Certainly, current findings indicate the likely impact of contextual factors upon relationships and attachment-informed care. Research increasingly outlines staff tension in defining their role; particularly the continuum of being staff but also like family (Fowler, 2015;Kendrick, 2013;McLean, 2015;Steels & Simpson, 2017). Other findings express concern regarding the dynamics of group care, including the impact of young people's behaviour on each other (McLean, 2015;Mullan, McAlister, Rollock & Fitzsimons, 2007) and balancing the needs of individuals, with those of the wider group (Furnivall et al, 2007;McLean, 2015).…”

“…Research increasingly outlines staff tension in defining their role; particularly the continuum of being staff but also like family (Fowler, 2015;Kendrick, 2013;McLean, 2015;Steels & Simpson, 2017). Other findings express concern regarding the dynamics of group care, including the impact of young people's behaviour on each other (McLean, 2015;Mullan, McAlister, Rollock & Fitzsimons, 2007) and balancing the needs of individuals, with those of the wider group (Furnivall et al, 2007;McLean, 2015). Similarly, existing research reflects the issue of having limited or uncertain time with young people in residential care, with a particular focus on the value of time in building relationships (Cahill et al, 2016;Steels & Simpson, 2017;Tomkins, 2014).…”

Developing a positive living group climate in residential youth care: A single case study

“…He also expresses the need for the discussions and open dialogue with the children in dealing with the instruments. McLean () describes how group workers express the desire to support children in a normal way, instead of only managing their behaviour. A suggestion for future research could be to investigate how group workers and children experience this tension.…”

“…Despite its importance, attention to developing a positive living group climate seems to be "under pressure," due to recent international evolutions in residential youth care (Clark & Newman, 1997;Frensch & Cameron, 2002;Jongepier & Struijk, 2008;Ledoux, 2004;McLean, 2013;Souverein, Van der Helm & Stams, 2013;Thoburn, 2016;Whittaker et al, 2016).First of all, non-residential youth care is generally promoted: Families are regarded as the first resource, and residential youth care should be avoided. Residential youth care is considered to be a last resort (Boendermaker, van Rooijen, & Bert, 2013;Frensch & Cameron, 2002;James, Landsverk, Leslie, Slymen, & Zhang, 2008;Knorth, Harder, Zandberg, & Kendrick, 2008;Thoburn, 2016;Van Loon, 2007).…”