‘Stumbling through’? Relationship-based social work practice in austere times

Abstract

Abstract:In recent times relationship-based practice has become a familiar term in social work practice and education. Despite its widespread adoption, how relationship-based practice is understood varies widely. Drawing on contemporary conceptualisations of the child and family and individuals as psychosocial subjects experiencing social suffering, this paper explores how current social work practice can be understood in the context of neoliberalism and austerity. Setting these ideas in an historical context helps to inform our understanding as to why social work seems to be the focus of sustained political discontent and scrutiny, making it difficult to retain a balanced relationship-based professional stance. Contemporary responses to the current challenges of everyday practice are outlined and the contribution of psychodynamic and systemic ideas to promoting relationship-based practice is explored. The paper concludes by considering how the concept of social systems as defences against anxiety can inform our understanding of the resistance amongst practitioners to relationship-based practice and emphasises the importance of reflective spaces and places for developing and maintaining integrated, mature relational approaches to practice which both impact on practice at the individual casework and social structural level.

Family experiences of children’s social care involvement following a social work change programme

“…Like the families in Smithson and Gibson (2016) and Wills et al's (2016) studies though, the participants' narratives also attest to the filtering out of practical, material and limits of external supportive provision for families. In so doing, they highlight tensions around what change programmes and relationship-based skills can achieve for the wellbeing of families in the context of rising need and procedural imperatives with diminishing scope for face-to-face work and long-term engagement (Featherstone, Gupta, Morris, & Warner, 2016, Featherstone, White & Morris 2015, Hall, Parton 2014, Peckover & White 2010, Hingley-Jones & Ruch 2016, Howe 2010. Smithson and Gibson (2016) comment that change programmes offer some promise in terms of new directions in working, but these innovations 'still have to fit within current arrangements that provide the administrative and organisational burdens that make it difficult for social workers to focus on providing practical help and emotional support to families' (p. 9).…”

From communication to co‐operation: Reconceptualizing social workers' engagement with children

“…Alongside its history, other forces responsible for the contemporary configuration of social work practice derive from the wider social and political influences on social work and the rise of neo‐liberalism and its concomitant, managerialism, particularly in the United Kingdom, United States, Australia, and many European countries (Hingley‐Jones and Ruch, ; Ruch et al, ). In response to these pervasive trends, professional relationships with families have become, in recent times, overly bureaucratic and, in many instances, noticeably authoritarian in nature (Featherstone et al, ).…”

The Trouble With Fathers: The Impact of Time and Gendered-Thinking on Working Relationships Between Fathers and Social Workers in Child Protection Practice in England

“…More recently, there has been a renewed interest in strengths based models and substantial funding from the Department for Education’s Innovation Programme has been directed to promoting and evaluating the “Signs of Safety” model (Turnell, 2012). Over and above the question of whether such approaches can respond to the specific issue of father engagement, other critiques also argue that unless the social, political, and economic contexts within which families exist are explicitly recognized and addressed, these models will still focus on individual not structural failings (Hingley-Jones & Ruch, 2016; Roose, Roets, Van Houte, & Vandenhole, 2013).…”