ABSTRACT

A recent body of research draws on the concept of child welfare inequality and shows that social inequalities, such as poverty, are reproduced in and through child welfare and protection interventions. We therefore examine how the recent preoccupation with risk relates to ways in which frontline social workers in child welfare and protection deal with poverty. Our contribution is based on a qualitative research project in a governmental organisation in Flanders (the Dutch-speaking part of Belgium) that implements the Australian risk assessment method Signs of Safety (SofS). We explore how frontline social workers who implement Signs of Safety in Flanders deal with risk in situations of poverty, and identify four strategies of discretion in dealing with poverty: (1) poverty as a complicating factor, (2) poverty as a concern, (3) poverty as an undercover concern for social workers, and (4) poverty as a social problem that requires structural responses. Our research findings particularly show that the interaction of frontline social work with organisational policy is crucial. Rather than framing poverty as ‘the wallpaper of frontline practice’, we argue that the complexity and struggle at stake in frontline practice becomes ‘wallpaper’ for child welfare and protection organisational policy in Flanders.

摘要

最近的一项研究借鉴了儿童福利不平等的概念，并表明社会不平等，如贫困，在儿童福利和保护干预措施中并通过干预措施得以再现。因此，我们研究了最近对风险的关注如何与儿童福利和保护领域的一线社会工作者处理贫困的方式有关。我们的贡献基于法兰德斯（比利时荷兰语区）政府组织的定性研究项目，该项目实施澳大利亚风险评估方法安全标志 (SofS)。我们探讨了在佛兰德斯实施安全标志的一线社会工作者如何应对贫困情况下的风险，并确定了四种应对贫困的谨慎策略：（1）贫困作为复杂因素，（2）贫困作为关注点，(3) 贫困作为社会工作者的隐秘关注，以及 (4) 贫困作为需要结构性应对的社会问题。我们的研究结果特别表明，一线社会工作与组织政策的互动至关重要。与其将贫困描述为“前线实践的墙纸”，我们认为前线实践中的复杂性和斗争成为法兰德斯儿童福利和保护组织政策的“墙纸”。