Thesis submitted for the award of Doctor of Philosophy by Publication
An ecology of judgement:Sense-making in child welfare and protection social work
Candidate: Duncan Helm
Awarding institution: University of Stirling
Date of submission: March 2017
Abstract
An ecology of judgement:Sense-making in child welfare and protection social work
This thesis is submitted for the award of PhD by publication. It comprises four interconnected, published research papers linked by a contextualising narrative. The publications are all peer-reviewed research articles published between 2012 and 2017 in relevant UK journals. I am the sole author of three of the papers and first author of one paper.
My thesis considers how social workers make sense of complex and uncertain information in child welfare and protection social work. My first paper considers the how an understanding of human judgement and sense-making can influence social worker's capacity of child-focused thinking. My synthesis of the literature indicated that social workers' styles of judgement are strongly bounded or influenced by external factors such as complexity of information and time available to make decisions. It is this "bounded" model of rationality which I have employed to provide the theoretical and conceptual framework for this thesis.
I have included two papers exploring data which I collected in a non-participatory ethnographic study of social workers' sense-making in a local authority children and families team. These papers represent a valuable contribution to current understandings of social work sense-making. This naturalistic study identified a number of key themes and processes in sense-making which are directly relevant to developing and maintaining best practice.
The final paper was developed over the period of my PhD studies. The paper builds on existing research and develops theories of bounded rationality into a conceptual model which I have referred to as an "Ecology of Judgement" for child welfare and protection social work. By modelling the complex interplay between the mind of the social worker and the information environment in which they are operating the model has utility inpractice development and research.
Table of contents
Abstractp2
1. Introduction p5
2. Background to the study p10
2.1.Summary of papers p12
3. Defining terms in judgement
and decision-makingp14
3.1. Rationality p16
3.2 A cognitive continuum p20
3.3 Descriptive models of judgement p21
3.4 Normative models of judgement p23
3.5 Prescriptive models of judgement p23
3.6 Bounded Rationality p24
3.7 Intuition p27
3.8 Sense-making p31
4. Constructing judgement p33
5. Writing about judgement and
decision-making p36
6. Developing research p41
6.1 Research design p46
7. Developing a model for social work
judgement and decision-making p65
8. Conclusions p96
9. Reference list p118
10.Appendices
Paper 1 – Judgements or assumptions?
Paper 2 – Ecology of judgement
Paper 3 – Sense-making in a social work office
Paper 4 – Can I have a word?
Appendix 1 - Research access agreement
Appendix 2 - Ethics Proposal
Appendix 3 - PID Scale
Appendix 4 - Seminar report
Appendix 5 - Symposium presentation
Appendix 6 - Seminar presentation
1. Introduction
This thesis sets out to further develop the knowledge base regarding the way in which social workers make sense of information and decide what course of action to take as a consequence of these judgements. My interest in this topic flows from my experiences as a social worker and educator in child welfare and protection and my thesis considers social work judgement and decision-making within the specific field of child welfare and protection. While the subject matter and the findings of my research are defined within this particular practice setting, they are set within the broader fields of social work practice and judgement and decision-making. To set the context for my studies I refer to the International Federation of Social Workers (IFSW) for an overarching definition of the purpose and nature of the profession.
“Social work is a practice-based profession and an academic discipline that promotes social change and development, social cohesion, and the empowerment and liberation of people. Principles of social justice, human rights, collective responsibility and respect for diversities are central to social work. Underpinned by theories of social work, social sciences, humanities and indigenous knowledge, social workengages people and structures to address life challenges and enhance wellbeing." (IFSW 2014, p1)
To achieve these aims social workers are routinely and repeatedly required to make challenging and complex judgements and decisions in the course of their daily professional practice. Particularly within the field of child welfare and protection, errors of judgement and decision-making have been the subject of numerous inquiries and reviews (e.g. Laming 2003, O'Brien et al. 2003, Hawthorn and Wilson 2009) and high-profile (often highly politicised) and negative media reporting (Jones 2014). While the learning from such inquiries may have improved practice (for example, through more rigorous and well-structured judgement and decision-making) there will always be the possibility of error when social workers are required to make sense of complex and uncertain information. What we see now is thata climate of fear and blame surrounds child welfare and protection work which itself has a significant impact on the quality of practice (Ferguson 2011, Munro 2011). Improving the quality of judgement and decision-making in child welfare and protection is certainly an important aim but it is difficult to achieve. Before seeking to improve something, one needs to know how it operates in its current state. My studies suggest that child welfare and protection decision-making is still under-researched and only partially understood. My field research has sought to illuminate the ways in which social workers do this 'sense-making' and use these insights to inform the ongoing development of practice and further research.
The IFSW definition indicates that judgement and decision-making in social work practice is informed by a coherent yet continually evolving set of values or principles, theories and knowledge.The British Association of Social Workers (BASW) considersbalanced professional judgement to be a key principle of professional integrity, stating that"Social workers should make judgements based on balanced and considered reasoning, maintaining awareness of the impact of their own values, prejudices and conflicts of interest on their practice and on other people" (BASW 2014, p10). Adams et al. (2009) believe that criticality and open-mindedness need to run throughout all aspects of social work practice so that social workers can bring objectivity to their application of these theories, knowledge and values in achieving their professional aims. This study observes and reflects upon the ways in which social workers seek to maintain objectivity in judgement and decision-making
The word "social" in the term "social work" is a particularly important one to consider when studying social work judgement and decision-making, Firstly, social work is concerned with the needs and experiences of human beings so social workers need to work with the tension between the individual/personal and social/political dimensions of people's complex and multifaceted problems (Halmos 1978). Social workers therefore need to encompass a range of explanatory theory frameworks in their thinking, from the individual/psychological to the political/structural. Secondly, social work is concerned with relationships (personal, social and cultural) and seeking to understand the meaning and significance of these relationships brings with it an inherent uncertainty as these meanings are multiple, contested and subjective. Making judgements and decisions in conditions of complexity, subjectivity and uncertainty is extremely challenging and this thesis serves to deepen current insights into the practices and systems which social workers employ in sense-makingactivity.
Social Work in Scotland is distinct from other nations in the UK and is carried out within a particular framework of legislation and policy that reflects the history and social construction of contemporary Scottish society. In particular, Scottish social work practice is framed by the Social Work (Scotland) Act 1968 which introduced the Children's Hearing and created local authority social work departments with responsibility for child welfare and protection. Where a local authority social worker believes that compulsory measures of care may be needed for a child or young person, they may refer them to the Reporter to the Children's Hearing. If the Reporter believes that the grounds of referral (set out in s52 of the Act) are met then the child or young person may be brought in front of the Children's' Panel, a tribunal of lay-people who will consider an assessment of the child or young person's needs and circumstances before identifying a suitable plan (or disposal) to support them.
This study focuses specifically on judgement and decision-making in child welfare and protection social work so it is necessary to set out some key features of the practice landscape in this introduction, starting with law and policy.
The Children (Scotland) Act 1995 sets out the powers and duties for local authority social workers and allied professionals. It was the primary legislation underpinning the practice which I observed in my field research (Paper 3 and Paper 4) and the provisions of the Act set out some important definitions to guide professional practice and thresholds. Section 93(4) of the Act defines a child 'in need' as being in need of care and attention "because:
(i)he is unlikely to achieve or maintain, or to have the opportunity of achieving or maintaining, a reasonable standard of health or development unless there are provided for him, under or by virtue of this Part, services by a local authority;
(ii)his health or development is likely significantly to be impaired, or further impaired, unless such services are so provided;
(iii)he is disabled; or
(iv)he is affected adversely by the disability of any other person in his family;
(b)who is “looked after” by a local authority, shall be construed in accordance with section 17(6) of this Act."
This section sets a threshold for social workers deciding whether or not a child or young person may be eligible for support under s22 of the Act and is therefore a crucial construct in decisions about appropriate and proportionate provision of services to children and young people. Another important threshold is defined in s53 which states that "Where information is received by a local authority which suggests that compulsory measures of supervision may be necessary in respect of a child, they shall:
(a)cause inquiries to be made into the case unless they are satisfied that such inquiries are unnecessary; and
(b)if it appears to them after such inquiries, or after being satisfied that such inquiries are unnecessary, that such measures may be required in respect of the child, give to the Principal Reporter such information about the child as they have been able to discover."
Social Work practice is constructed in relation to social and political influence and because these two spheres come together so strongly in child abuse inquiries and child death reviews, these processes have been particularly influential in shaping policy and practice. A significant case review is a "multi-agency process for establishing the facts of, and learning lessons from, a situation where a child has died or been significantly harmed." (Scottish Government 2015, p4). Learning from such reviews in Scotland has had a deep impact on contemporary practice. For example, Lord Clyde's review of the removal of children suspected to have been sexually abused in Orkney (Clyde 1992) led to the development of Scotland's first national child protection guidance (Scottish Office 1998) and improved standards for forensic interviewing.
The death of Kennedy McFarlanein Dumfries and Galloway sparked a significant case review (Hammond 2001) with wide-reaching consequences. A multi-disciplinary child protection audit and review resulted in the report "Its everyone's job to make sure I'm alright" (Scottish Executive 2002) which, in turn, made a comprehensive set of recommendations to improve practice, with communication and information sharing seen to be central to multi-agency judgement and decision-making. A key element of these proposals was the introduction of a single shared assessment and this development was taken forward through the set of policies and frameworks known collectively as "Getting it right for every child" often shortened to the acronym GIRFEC or the "Getting it right" approach(Scottish Executive 2005).
Within the "Getting it right" approach there are a number of key themes: The Scottish Government (2016) advises that GIRFEC:
- is child-focused.
It ensures the child or young person – and their family – is at the centre of decision-making and the support available to them. - is based on an understanding of the wellbeing of a child.
It looks at a child or young person’s overall wellbeing – how safe, healthy, achieving, nurtured, active, respected, responsible and included they are – so that the right support can be offered at the right time. - is based on tackling needs early.
It aims to ensure needs are identified as early as possible to avoid bigger concerns or problems developing. - requires joined-up working.
It is about children, young people, parents, and the services they need working together in a coordinated way to meet the specific needs and improve their wellbeing.
This thesis contains papers which reflect practice during the period 2010 to 2016. Field research included in the thesis is based on data collected in 2012. In the course of this linking narrative I will comment on the exercise of judgement and decision-making within the context of the times and the specific field of child welfare and protection practice. I have limited the scope of this thesis to judgement and decision-making carried out by children and family social workers. I acknowledge that few judgements are made purely within this professional group and, as reflected in the GIRFEC principles above (Scottish Government 2016) services for children (and therefore judgements and decisions about children's needs) involve working together across disciplines. While this decision does necessarily limit the potential for insights into interdisciplinary practice, it has allowed me to study the issues at hand with considerable depth and the insights gained have applicability both in terms of directly informing social work practice and identifying new areas for research and theory.
2. Background to the study
My doctoral studies have, over 5 years, synthesised my experiences as a social worker, practice educator and academic, providing me with a reflexive vantage pointfrom which to make sense of experiential learning and use that insight to inform developments in social work judgement and decision-making. I have had the opportunity throughout my career as a social worker and a social work academic to critically analyse the tensions and challenges which I have encountered, directly and indirectly, in the exercise of finely balanced professional judgements about vulnerable children and young people's welfare and wellbeing. Given the subjectivity inherent in making such judgements, this is an important opportunity to offer a considered view on those individual experiences and the insights they may offer.
In 2010 I wrote a text called "Making Sense of Assessment" (Helm 2010) in which I synthesised some of the key messages from research and provided child and family social workers with an opportunity to deepen their skills and understanding in professional judgement and decision-making. In writing this text I began to explore areas of theory and research which I had not previously encountered in the mainstream social work literature and was struck by the potential for this body of knowledge to helpfully inform new insights. The publication of "Making Sense of Assessment" therefore represents the starting point for the development of the papers which comprise this thesis. I have explored these theories in more depth in these papers and taken forward the knowledge base through my own ethnographic research.I have presented my portfolio of peer-reviewed papers in broadly chronological order. Although Paper 2 ('The Ecology of Judgement') was formally published in 2016, the paper is based on a seminar which I held in 2010 which informed the nature of the study so I have brought the paper forward in the ordering to reflect the theoretical nature of my work at this time before my ethnographic fieldwork began.
Different theories of judgement and decision making have exerted particular influences on social work and the consequences of these influences can be traced in policy and cultures of practice. My review of the literature and synthesis of the messages from research has highlighted the considerable and enduring influence of unbounded models of rationality in social work practice. Drawing on theories of bounded rationality I have developed an ecological model of social work judgement which adds to the existing body of knowledge and offers an alternative model for researching and guiding developments in policy and practice to the benefit of service users and social workers.
This study has also captured important data about the way in which social workers make these judgements in day-to-day practice. There is a paucity of naturalistic (e.g. qualitative, ethnographic) studies of judgement and even fewer studies have managed to capture the essence of social work judgement and decision making, so this study makes an important contribution to the ongoing work of understanding and improving the quality of professional practice. Bounded rationality posits that the structure of the environment (e.g. amount of information andtime available for judgement) in which a judgement is made has as much influence as the internal criteria of the person making the judgement (such as preferences): Ecological rationality occurs when there is a good fit between the structure of the task environment and the forms of intuitive judgement (or heuristics) being employed. By developing a model of ecological rationality for social work, I have added significantly to the debate and production of knowledge about what constitutes rationality in this profession and how it can best be developed and promoted in practice.This is a forward orientation and in this section of the thesis I will consider the significance of the selected papers and the wider body of my work for policy, practice, research and theorisation of social work judgement and decision making.