Intimacy and Distance in Social Workers’ Communication with Children

Dr Sophie Hallett, Dr Sally Holland and Professor Mark Hadfield, Cardiff University, Wales.

Dr Fiona Morrison and Professor Viv Cree, Edinburgh University, Scotland.

Professor Gillian Ruch, University of Sussex, England.

Dr Karen Winter, Queen’s University Belfast, Northern Ireland.

Structure of presentation

• Social work communication with children• The research project• An context of the social worker-child relationship– The public and policy environment– The team and working environment– The child’s home and community environment

• Emerging findings on how intimacy and distance are created, managed and maintained

Social work communication with children

Our current knowledge: a) Subject to competing demands: child

protection/child rights; child/parent; process driven/relationship based.

b) Indirect: much of what we know is based on SW and child reported experiences and analysis of documents

c) Fragmented: studies tend to focus on practitioners or children

The research project: 2013-15

• Based in 8 social work teams in 4 UK nations – 2 teams working with disabled children, 6 are child

protection/early response teams.

• Phase 1: participant observation in team rooms and observation of 80-100 visits with children

• Phase 2: Video-stimulated recall interviews with 12-16 pairs of children and their social workers in two sites.

• Development of training materials for practitioners.

Policies, legislation and public discourses

Local working environment

Micro-communicat

ions

Policies, legislation and public discourses

• Children’s social work policy is devolved in UK• Many shared trends and challenges:– Austerity budgets– Target driven approaches to case management– Serious case reviews highlight children can be

marginalised– But, children’s participation high on agenda – Public and media criticisms of social work

Local working environmentsBy observing across eight teams we can discern how intimacy and distance with children is shaped by:• Urban/rural environments and demography• Leadership and informal team cultures• Practical issues such as restricted car parking,

‘hot desking’, staff turnover• Resources such as advocates and specialist

services

Micro-communications

• Creating intimacy and distance through – Verbal interactions– Locations in house and in room– Touch– Food and drink

Observation example 1

Observation example 2

Observation example 3

Observation example 4

Limitations and next steps

• These are early findings – much more data collection and analysis to come

• Phase 1 data collection brings to the fore the practitioner perspective. Phase two will bring children’s perspectives and experiences to the fore.