Is Domestic Abuse an Adult Social Work Issue?

Within a global profession with a stated definition that includes ‘promoting social change and development, social cohesion and the empowerment and liberation of people’ (online), it would be expected that the issue of domestic abuse would be integral to the training and role of all social workers. This article reports on research, which highlighted both a lack of understanding of the role of adult social worker within cases of domestic abuse and also a desire for further training around the issue. However, this article sets out how the current UK (in particular, English) context of social work marginalises the issue of domestic abuse within practice with adults. This marginalisation has been achieved through the construction of domestic abuse as a children and families issue and limited duties, powers and resources within statutory work to support victims/survivors in their own right, rather than as ‘failing’ parents. However, the article argues that the role of social work education should be wider than teaching to the current policy or procedures and instead encourage a wider appreciation of the social, historical and political context. The article concludes with tentative suggestions for how domestic abuse could be considered within the social work curriculum for adult practitioners. This is in acknowledgement that social workers can be well positioned for the detection, investigation and support of those experiencing abuse.     

‘They don’t look like children’: child asylum-seekers,the Dubs amendment and the politics of childhood

In October 2016, following a campaign led by Labour Peer Lord Alfred Dubs, the first child asylum-seekers allowed entry to the UK under new legislation (the ‘Dubs amendment’) arrived in England. Their arrival was captured by a heavy media presence, and very quickly doubts were raised by right-wing tabloids and politicians about their age. In this article, I explore the arguments underpinning the Dubs campaign and the media coverage of the children’s arrival as a starting point for interrogating representational practices around children who seek asylum. I illustrate how the campaign was premised on a universal politics of childhood that inadvertently laid down the terms on which these children would be given protection, namely their innocence. The universality of childhood fuels public sympathy for child asylum-seekers, underlies the ‘child first, migrant second’ approach advocated by humanitarian organisations, and it was a key argument in the ‘Dubs amendment’. Yet the campaign highlights how representations of child asylum-seekers rely on codes that operate to identify ‘unchildlike’ children. As I show, in the context of the criminalisation of undocumented migrants‘, childhood is no longer a stable category which guarantees protection, but is subject to scrutiny and suspicion and can, ultimately, be disproved.     

Critical Nexus or Pluralist Discipline? Institutional Ambivalence and the Future of Canadian Sociology

While some scholars believe in a transdisciplinary future for the social sciences and humanities, we argue that sociology would do well to maintain its disciplinary borders, while celebrating the plurality of its intellectual, social, and political content. Although a pluralist position can threaten disciplinary coherence and increase fragmentation, we argue the counterbalance ought to be convergence around shared institutional norms of knowledge production. Establishing these norms is not easy, since there is a great deal of institutional ambivalence at play in the field of sociology. As such, sociology is pushed and pulled between two poles of at least four major continuums of knowledge production, which include the following: (1) interdisciplinary versus discipline‐based research; (2) political versus analytical scholarship; (3) professional versus public/policy sociology; and (4) local/national versus global audiences. Since both sides of these ideal‐typical continuums contain their own pathologies, we propose adopting a balanced position to correct for the shortcomings of each. Rather than imposing one philosophical or theoretical paradigm for the field, we suggest that embracing the "chaos" of our diverse forms of knowledge and centralizing and integrating findings will serve to strengthen our collective efforts in the long term. Alors que certains chercheurs croient en un avenir transdisciplinaire pour les sciences sociales et humaines, nous soutenons qu'il serait préférable pour la sociologie de maintenir ses frontières disciplinaires, tout en célébrant la pluralité de son contenu intellectuel, social, et politique. Bien qu'une telle position pluraliste puisse menacer la cohérence disciplinaire et accroître la fragmentation, nous défendons l'idée que la contre‐balance doit converger vers des normes institutionnelles communes de production de connaissances. La mise en place de ces normes n'est pas chose aisée. Une large quantité d'ambivalence institutionnelle est en jeu dans le domaine de la sociologie. Ainsi nous tendons vers quatre grands continuums de production de connaissances : (1) la recherche interdisciplinaire en opposition à la recherche par discipline ; (2) une érudition politique en opposition à celle analytique ; (3) une sociologie professionnelle contre une sociologie publique / politique ; et (4) un public local / national contre un public mondial. Dans la mesure où deux côtés de ces continuums idéaux‐typiques contiennent leurs pathologies propres, nous proposons d'adopter une position équilibrée pour corriger les lacunes de chacun. Ceci devrait être mieux reflété dans nos systèmes de récompense. Plutôt que d'imposer un paradigme philosophique ou théorique pour un domaine en question, nous suggérons de prendre en considération le «chaos» de nos diverses formes de connaissances, tout en centralisant et en intégrant plus efficacement nos conclusions. Ceci permettra de renforcer nos efforts collectifs sur le long terme.     

Critical theory meets America: Riesman, Fromm, and the lonely crowd

A reading of David Riesman’s classic The Lonely Crowd is presented that emphasizes its links with the critical theory of German psychoanalyst and social critic Erich Fromm. The intellectual and personal relationship between Riesman and Fromm brings into focus Riesman’s adaptation of the insights of European critical theory as well as the strengths of American social science and social criticism. Riesman’s relatively neglected theoretical approach has much to offer a sociology concerned with retaining its links to public debate and empirical evidence. Thanks to Robert Alford, Linda Boos, Steven Brint, Scott Davies, Cynthia Fuchs Epstein, Louis Greenspan, Rhoda Howard-Hassmann, Lisa Kowalchuk, Bonnie Oglensky, Rolf Meyersohn, Stephen Steinberg, Alan Wolfe and Dennis Wrong for comments on earlier versions of this paper. A McMaster University ARB grant provided funds for a trip to German where I read the extensive correspondence between Riesman and Fromm housed in the Erich Fromm archives maintained by Rainer Funk. The paper was first presented at the American Sociological Association annual meetings in Chicago in 1999.     

TANF Participation Rates: Do Community Conditions Matter?*

Abstract A general criticism of the 1996 Welfare Reform Act is that it is primarily the result of an urban political agenda, and it may hurt rather than help the rural poor. Under the new welfare system, the rural poor that are most likely to be affected are those who live in socially, economically, and spatially disadvantaged communities. More residents in these communities are likely to need TANF, clients in these communities are least likely to leave TANF by finding employment, and community organizations are likely to have more limited resources to help TANF recipients. The objective of this study is to examine the extent to which variations in community conditions account for differences in TANF participation rates. Using 1997 TANF data from the Mississippi Department of Human Services, we estimated OLS regression models of local TANF participation rates across 100 communities in nonmetro counties. The results indicate that TANF participation rates tend to be higher in communities with high concentrations of African Americans, less faith‐based activeness, more employment in retail trade, spatial concentration of the poor, and located in the Delta.