Skip to main content



Child-Maltreatment-Research-L (CMRL) List Serve

Database of Past CMRL Messages

Welcome to the database of past Child-Maltreatment-Research-L (CMRL) list serve messages. The table below contains all past CMRL messages (text only, no attachments) from Nov. 20, 1996 - March 6, 2018 and is updated quarterly.

Instructions: Postings are listed for browsing with the newest messages first. Click on the linked ID number to see a message. You can search the author, subject, message ID, and message content fields by entering your criteria into this search box:

Message ID: 9832
Date: 2015-05-30

Author:Hollows, Anne E

Subject:RE: Family Preservation focus and Child Protection focus

Dear Paul I apologise for the delay but have been unwell and only just getting back to answering emails. As you may remember i worked with Len on some of his material over a period of time and met you at UQ probably around 11 years ago. Your enquiry comes at a very interesting time in English thinking with some strong divisions in perspective. On the one hand there is a focus on 'Re-imagining child protection' (see recent book by White, Featherstone et al and eagerly followed in NZ) while on the other hand the UK government is introducing legislation to punish with imprisonment social workers who fail to report child protection concerns. Into this context a new project analysing trend data since 1991 (implementation of present legal provisions) has produced its first report for which I attach a link Rethinking child protection strategy: Learning from trends - UWE Research Repository I have attempted to answer your questions below. I will be very interested to see how your work develops With kind regards Anne Dr Anne Hollows Principal Lecturer in Social Work International & Business Portfolio Manager Course Leader, PG Dip Advanced Practice in Family Placement Robert Winston Building Sheffield Hallam University Collegiate Campus Sheffield S10 2BP telephone +44(0)1142252369 mobile +44 (0)7723407054 email a.e.hollows@shu.ac.uk twitter @annehollows @shusoccom Please note my working week is normally Monday to Wednesday ________________________________ From: bounce-119105812-6832669@list.cornell.edu [bounce-119105812-6832669@list.cornell.edu] on behalf of Paul Harnett [p.harnett@psy.uq.edu.au] Sent: 21 April 2015 08:00 To: child-maltreatment-research-l@cornell.edu Subject: Family Preservation focus and Child Protection focus In 1999 Dr Len Dalgleish approached this group about child protection practitioners views on what constitutes a child protection focus and family preservation focus in child protection decision making. He asked for replies to the questions below. From the replies he developed a questionnaire. Unfortunately Len passed away a couple of years ago, and the questionnaire was never published. A few items of the questionnaire remain from a workshop he presented. I worked with Len and would like to recreate the questionnaire with updated items for research I am doing. I would very much appreciate it if you could answer the questions below and send your replies to me. warm regards, Paul. *********************************************** 1. Thinking of the phrases "Family Preservation focus and Child protection focus" in the context of child protection, what do these phrases mean to you? Family Preservation focus: Providing support to families in order to avoid deterioration with the main aim of keeping the family unit intact Child protection focus: Emphasises the coercive nature of assessment and support/help/interventions with a focus on the safety of the children 2. If someone had a child protection focus, what sorts of statements would they make that would demonstrate that view? In general they might be more negative about the parents/family situation and focus on negatives - tending to assume that minor issues had negative meanings rather than possibly being part of the pattern of family life in general, tending to pathologies parental behaviours. At the same time they might well be adopting a family preservation approach in broad terms. 3. If someone had a family preservation focus, what sorts of statements would they make that would demonstrate that view? With a family preservation focus they would not necessarily be an absence of concerns for the children's safety but the statements might convey greater warmth and understanding and less pathologising. In general, Paul, I feel that the two are less incompatible than it might appear and the main difference is how the worker might perceive themselves, their role and theory capacity to work relationally with the family. -- Dr Paul Harnett, FAPS Senior Lecturer in Clinical Psychology, Room 410 School of Psychology (McElwain Building) University of Queensland St Lucia Brisbane 4072 Australia (The University of Queensland is located on the land of the Turrbal/Jagera people) ph: (07) 3365 6723 fax: (07) 3365 4466 www.pupprogram.net.au

Dear Paul I apologise for the delay but have been unwell and only just getting back to answering emails. As you may remember i worked with Len on some of his material over a period of time and met you at UQ probably around 11 years ago. Your enquiry comes at a very interesting time in English thinking with some strong divisions in perspective. On the one hand there is a focus on 'Re-imagining child protection' (see recent book by White, Featherstone et al and eagerly followed in NZ) while on the other hand the UK government is introducing legislation to punish with imprisonment social workers who fail to report child protection concerns. Into this context a new project analysing trend data since 1991 (implementation of present legal provisions) has produced its first report for which I attach a link Rethinking child protection strategy: Learning from trends - UWE Research Repository I have attempted to answer your questions below. I will be very interested to see how your work develops With kind regards Anne Dr Anne Hollows Principal Lecturer in Social Work International & Business Portfolio Manager Course Leader, PG Dip Advanced Practice in Family Placement Robert Winston Building Sheffield Hallam University Collegiate Campus Sheffield S10 2BP telephone +44(0)1142252369 mobile +44 (0)7723407054 email a.e.hollowsshu.ac.uk twitter annehollows shusoccom Please note my working week is normally Monday to Wednesday ________________________________ From: bounce-119105812-6832669list.cornell.edu [bounce-119105812-6832669list.cornell.edu] on behalf of Paul Harnett [p.harnettpsy.uq.edu.au] Sent: 21 April 2015 08:00 To: child-maltreatment-research-lcornell.edu Subject: Family Preservation focus and Child Protection focus In 1999 Dr Len Dalgleish approached this group about child protection practitioners views on what constitutes a child protection focus and family preservation focus in child protection decision making. He asked for replies to the questions below. From the replies he developed a questionnaire. Unfortunately Len passed away a couple of years ago, and the questionnaire was never published. A few items of the questionnaire remain from a workshop he presented. I worked with Len and would like to recreate the questionnaire with updated items for research I am doing. I would very much appreciate it if you could answer the questions below and send your replies to me. warm regards, Paul. *********************************************** 1. Thinking of the phrases "Family Preservation focus and Child protection focus" in the context of child protection, what do these phrases mean to you? Family Preservation focus: Providing support to families in order to avoid deterioration with the main aim of keeping the family unit intact Child protection focus: Emphasises the coercive nature of assessment and support/help/interventions with a focus on the safety of the children 2. If someone had a child protection focus, what sorts of statements would they make that would demonstrate that view? In general they might be more negative about the parents/family situation and focus on negatives - tending to assume that minor issues had negative meanings rather than possibly being part of the pattern of family life in general, tending to pathologies parental behaviours. At the same time they might well be adopting a family preservation approach in broad terms. 3. If someone had a family preservation focus, what sorts of statements would they make that would demonstrate that view? With a family preservation focus they would not necessarily be an absence of concerns for the children's safety but the statements might convey greater warmth and understanding and less pathologising. In general, Paul, I feel that the two are less incompatible than it might appear and the main difference is how the worker might perceive themselves, their role and theory capacity to work relationally with the family. -- Dr Paul Harnett, FAPS Senior Lecturer in Clinical Psychology, Room 410 School of Psychology (McElwain Building) University of Queensland St Lucia Brisbane 4072 Australia (The University of Queensland is located on the land of the Turrbal/Jagera people) ph: (07) 3365 6723 fax: (07) 3365 4466 www.pupprogram.net.au