Exploring the Anti-professional Turn in English Foster Care: Implications for Policy, Practice and Research

Author:

Kirton Derek1

Affiliation:

1. School of Social Policy, Sociology and Social Research, University of Kent , Canterbury CT2 7NF, UK

Abstract

Abstract Following decades in which professionalisation was widely assumed to be a permanent (and growing) feature of foster care in England, the government signalled a clear anti-professional turn in its 2018 publication Fostering Better Outcomes (FBOs). This rejected the notion that foster carers should be regarded as professionals and indicated that there should be a return to the term foster parent. This article analyses FBO, its feeder reports and evidence submitted by stakeholders to map the shifting debate surrounding professionalisation. This includes both direct commentary on its (de)merits, but also discussion of components such as pay, conditions, motivation, training, expertise, a national college or register and related questions of supporting and valuing foster carers. A number of important flaws are identified within the review process. These include an ahistorical and insular treatment of professionalisation, its conflation with employment, a homogenisation of foster care and deployment of a familial discourse that fails to engage with its complexities and ‘hybrid’ nature between work and family. The consequence is a confused policy stance where professionalisation is rhetorically rejected while many of its core elements are endorsed. Implications of the anti-professional turn for policy, practice and research in England but also internationally, are discussed.

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Social Sciences (miscellaneous),Health (social science)

Reference44 articles.

1. Maltreatment in foster care: A review of the evidence;Biehal;Child Abuse Review,2014

2. A sense of belonging: Meanings of family and home in long-term foster care;Biehal;British Journal of Social Work,2014

3. Using thematic analysis in psychology;Braun;Qualitative Research in Psychology,2006

Cited by 2 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