Should social care staff be Facebook friends with the people they support?

Author:

Bates Peter,Smith Sam,Nisbet Robert

Abstract

Purpose – Local policies often prohibit care staff from online contact with the people they support. The purpose of this paper is to review the reasons put forward for this ban and seek explanations. Design/methodology/approach – The paper examines relevant literature on the use of social networking by disabled and nondisabled people. This paper offers a critique of common policies and justifications and poses a challenge to those who impose such regulations. Findings – The paper finds no support for current policies. Research limitations/implications – The authors found only a limited amount of research in this area, and research findings were not commonly utilised by policy makers. Practical implications – Policy makers and regulators need to take a more rigorous and person-centred approach to rule making in respect of social media. Social implications – A widespread ban on the use of social media in communications between staff and the people they support is exposed as paternalistic and exacerbating infantilisation and exclusion rather than seeing disabled people as digital citizens. Regulators and those with responsibilities for safeguarding need to adopt a more empowering and person-centred approach. Originality/value – This paper will only make a difference if regulators and those with responsibilities for safeguarding adopt a more empowering and person-centred approach rather than the fear-based blanket prohibitions that have applied to date.

Publisher

Emerald

Subject

Law,Sociology and Political Science

Reference38 articles.

1. Atfei, J. (2014), “Social media at work – when enough's enough”, available at: www.kingsleynapley.co.uk/news-and-events/blogs/employment-law-blog/social-media-at-work-when-enoughs-enough (accessed 30 September 2014).

2. Barnett, E. (2011), “Facebook cuts six degrees of separation to four”, Telegraph, 22 November, available at: www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/facebook/8906693/Facebook-cuts-six-degrees-of-separation-to-four.html (accessed 30 September 2014).

3. Bates, P. , Lymbery, M. and Emerson, E. (2013), “Exploring boundary attitude”, The Journal of Adult Protection , Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 26-36.

4. Cain, S. (2012), Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World That Can’t Stop Talking , Penguin, London.

5. Communications Act (2003), Section 127, available at: www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/21/pdfs/ukpga_20030021_en.pdf

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3