Funerals and families: locating death as a relational issue

Situated at the intersection of the Sociology of Death and Sociology of the Family, this paper argues that the organization and funding of funerals is an overlooked and available lens through which to examine cultural and political norms of familial obligation. Drawing on interviews with claimants to the Department for Work and Pensions’ Social Fund Funeral Payment, the paper shows how both responsibility for the organization and payment of a funeral is assumed within families, and how at times this can be overridden by the state. In highlighting the tension between reflexive choice and political norms of family espoused in this policy context, it supports Gilding's ( 2010 ) assertion that understanding family practice through reflexivity alone neglects the institutions and conventions within which ‘doing’ family takes place. In so doing, the paper further makes a case for families and relational negotiations and tensions to be more explicitly included within sociological understanding(s) of death more generally.     

The shared leadership of teams: A meta-analysis of proximal,distal, and moderating relationships

The current meta-analysis examines the relationship between shared leadership and team performance. It also assesses the role of team confidence (i.e., collective efficacy and team potency) in this relationship. Mediation analyses supported the hypothesis that team confidence partially mediates the effects of shared leadership on team performance. We also found support for the notion that shared leadership explains unique variance in team performance, over and above that of vertical leadership. Furthermore, a variety of substantive continuous and categorical variables were investigated as moderators of the shared leadership–team performance relationship. Specifically, the relationship between shared leadership and team performance was moderated by task interdependence, team tenure, and whether performance was objectively versus subjectively measured. Finally, results suggest that the approach used when measuring shared leadership can also play a role in the observed validity. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.     

‘It’s like we’re locked in a box’: Girls’ and mothers’ experiences of the police and legal system following child sexual abuse

This article focuses on girls’ and mothers’ experiences of police and criminal justice system responses and the impact of investigation processes following reporting of child sexual abuse. Participants spoke of a lack of timely therapeutic provision and the subsequent role of female caregivers in providing support. Problems with criminal justice processes and the subsequent impact on families’ wider lives were also discussed. Findings suggest that criminal justice processes need to be better attuned to these micro level impacts and should show more sensitivity to the overall experience of children in the aftermath of sexual abuse. Implications for practice are discussed.     

Troubled families: vulnerable families' experiences of multiple service use

This paper draws on a small‐scale study examining the experiences of highly vulnerable families with complex and enduring needs. The previous UK government and the current government have sought to develop policy and service initiatives that target families who present high levels of need and require high cost services. However, to date remarkably little is known about family perspectives and experiences. In this paper, family accounts of their experiences are presented and it is suggested that from these come some difficult practice questions. The family data reveal evident gaps in existing practice and challenges social work to ‘think family’ in new ways. The paper explores how families understand they are understood at the point of engagement, the assumptions that are made about family knowledge, and how families share and withhold information about their needs and experiences. In the discussion, the argument is made for the development of nuanced practice capable of recognizing and working with the ways highly vulnerable families ‘do family’, and the processes that support and inhibit professional interventions.