Constructing identity in child protection practice

Exploring the theme of identity further, the next authors D’Cruz (2004), Scourfield (1999) and Scourfield and Pithouse (2006), continue the debate by aiming to analyse just how this concept can be constructed in child protection. Each study chooses a different perspective with the first, Constructing meanings and identities in child

29 _{Stockholm syndrome is a psychological phenomenon in which hostages express empathy and sympathy}

58

protection practice by Heather D’Cruz (2004) aiming to explore how official meanings and identities within this domain are constructed. D’Cruz used the method of

ethnography to understand how meanings and identities are constructed in practice. She read sampled case files, interviewed practitioners who were the area managers at the time of the interview and then transcribed the taped interviews. The participant observation took place over twenty days at two sites in Australia, which she names as Urbania and Suburbia, ten days in each.

By using a ‘factured lens’ D’Cruz drew from the theoretical work of Foucault, Bourdieu and Potter in order to bridge a gap between practice and academia to offer what might be both ‘critical yet familiar’ (2004: 13). Her work is written primarily for practitioners. Yet, in order to understand and be able to follow her work one needs to first fully understand these philosophers’ theories which might, for the novice, be subjects that are difficult to grasp. D’Cruz’s work may therefore be more appealing for the academic audience, those who might be more familiar with these three chosen philosophers. However, D’Cruz does not appear to recognise this and is explicit that her intended audience is only the practitioner: the one who is embedded within the culture she planned to deconstruct and then reconstruct.

D’Cruz uses the metaphor of the ‘fractured lens’ throughout her work. ‘Fractured’ is used to represent the extremely ‘messy and complex’ realities she has engaged with and signified. ‘Lens’ is depicted as a way of seeing literally and

figuratively. And by using social constructionism as her epistemological perspective, her lens acknowledged that the researcher also generates and constructs knowledge. By then placing ‘child protection’ under her fractured lens, and drawing from

Foucault, Bourdieu and Potter, she discussed how each of these theories and approaches contribute to and give meaning to this concept (2004: 15).

59

D’ Cruz found that identity is defined through discourses that represent particular cultural ways of being and can only be meaningful if in relationship with a complementary identity e.g. woman can only be understood when considered in relation to man. She also found that the culture of child protection is patriarchal and witnesses women, in cases of child protection, being harsh on women because of a patriarchal assumption that the mother is responsible.

Yet despite considering how the identities of the clients are constructed and drawing from the theoretical perspective of social constructionism to allow for her own role within the research, she overlooked the personal and historical experience of the social worker and does not consider how their identity might impact on their practice. For example, when describing dominant cultural prescriptions of mothering, D’ Cruz argued that this is often shared by ‘mothers-as-clients’ and by ‘women-as- caseworkers’, but does not mention ‘mothers-as-caseworkers’ and thus overlooked another possible identity that could have been held by the worker (p. 193).

In The construction ofgender in child protection social work (1999) and Gender and child protection (2003), Jonathan Scourfield also found that child protection in the UK is underpinned by a patriarchal culture. Scourfield used ethnography as a tool to examine gender discourse in the occupational culture of a child care social work team. Scourfield spent three mornings a week for three months doing ‘participant observation’ and reading case files. He found that there was indeed a gap between what people said they did and what they actually did in practice.

Motivated by the belief that the failure to engage men should be seen as a problem, Scourfield recognised that social workers expect women to do most of the caring because of a societal expectation. The issue that emerged, therefore, was not

60

just about practitioners ignoring the father in an investigation but about an injustice to women who bore the scrutiny for their absence.

Through his use of interview extracts and ethnographic notes, Scourfield found that ‘women clients are constructed in relation to a notion of client masculinity’ (1999: 134). He also found that ‘tacit knowledge’was very important in constructing social work professional knowledge and he described it as ‘largely unarticulated, contextual understanding that is often manifested in nods, silences, humour and naughty nuances’ (1999:37).

Although Scourfield’s study explored the identity construction of clients in depth, the identity of the professional and how this may have been constructed is largely overlooked. This is a significant factor if we are to agree with White (1997) and assume that identity is constructed through routines and linguistic practices. Yet, Scourfield does return to the professional and their identity when he revisits his study in another article, which he wrote with Pithouse (2006) entitled ‘Lay and professional knowledge in social work: reflections on ethnographic research on child protection’. By expanding upon the gender bias concept discussed above, Scourfield continued the argument by proposing that in practice tacit knowledge is actually privileged over professional knowledge, despite there being a drive for the opposite to occur.

Scourfield and Pithouse found that social work and theory are separated in practice because theory seemed, to the workers, distant from the grass roots of what was actually being done and therefore social work practice was not theoretically informed when it should have been. They found that, rather than referring to theory, social workers were relying on a shared tacit knowledge. When it came to neglect and the bare minimum standards, social workers were replacing the occupational

61

guidance in favour of common sense and personal standards. This aspect of personal agency, and the role it can play in professional practice, is an issue that D’Cruz (2004) overlooked in her own work. But in this context, Scourfield and Pithouse (2006) recognised that social workers do import and apply their past and present

experience, from present and former identities, as they are members of society with everyday reasoning and decision making.

Both of Scourfield’s studies here agreed that the culture of child protection is a patriarchal one as fathers are ignored and mothers are scrutinised for their absence. This form of parental scepticism was also observed by White (1997) and Pithouse (1987). It is therefore interesting to note that despite regional and temporal

variations of the workplace, and despite focusing on one specific setting, ethnography can be used, to some degree, in the form of universal generalisation as certain

similarities in child protection practice emerge from different studies.

Another important theme to surface, when considering identity construction, is ‘tacit knowledge’ a concept that has been described as an important tool and is used in developing professional awareness and experience. It is a concept that is considered so powerful it has been seen to replace approved governmental guidance in favour of social workers’ subjective experiences of everyday reasoning and

decision making; a point that will be explored further within the next theme.