‘I Have Different Goals Than you, we Can’t be a Team': Navigating the Tensions of a Courtroom Workgroup in a Prostitution Diversion Program

IF 0.7 Q4 SOCIAL WORK Ethics and Social Welfare Pub Date : 2022-04-03 DOI:10.1080/17496535.2022.2069544
Nancy D. Franke, Corey S. Shdaimah
{"title":"‘I Have Different Goals Than you, we Can’t be a Team': Navigating the Tensions of a Courtroom Workgroup in a Prostitution Diversion Program","authors":"Nancy D. Franke, Corey S. Shdaimah","doi":"10.1080/17496535.2022.2069544","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This study explores how professional stakeholders navigate individual and institutional goals, ethical standards, and perspectives within the courtroom workgroup of a prostitution diversion program. We draw from semi-structured qualitative interviews of current and/or past professional stakeholders (N = 22) and past program participants (N = 3). Though collaboration and consensus building among workgroups is a core tenet of problem-solving courts, findings from this study reflect a more complicated landscape. Respondent interviews illustrate the centrality of collaboration and role blurring; the necessity of reciprocity and balance in the team; challenges of role delineation; diversity in understandings about acceptable professional behaviour; and the protective techniques some stakeholders use to shield current and future participants from harm. Findings emphasise that while prostitution diversion programs are often seen as the least bad of several suboptimal options, stakeholders must balance their personal and professional ethics, expectations, and goals often without guidance in order to provide services and support to participants therein.","PeriodicalId":46151,"journal":{"name":"Ethics and Social Welfare","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethics and Social Welfare","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17496535.2022.2069544","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SOCIAL WORK","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

ABSTRACT This study explores how professional stakeholders navigate individual and institutional goals, ethical standards, and perspectives within the courtroom workgroup of a prostitution diversion program. We draw from semi-structured qualitative interviews of current and/or past professional stakeholders (N = 22) and past program participants (N = 3). Though collaboration and consensus building among workgroups is a core tenet of problem-solving courts, findings from this study reflect a more complicated landscape. Respondent interviews illustrate the centrality of collaboration and role blurring; the necessity of reciprocity and balance in the team; challenges of role delineation; diversity in understandings about acceptable professional behaviour; and the protective techniques some stakeholders use to shield current and future participants from harm. Findings emphasise that while prostitution diversion programs are often seen as the least bad of several suboptimal options, stakeholders must balance their personal and professional ethics, expectations, and goals often without guidance in order to provide services and support to participants therein.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
“我和你有不同的目标,我们不能成为一个团队”:在卖淫转移计划中应对法庭工作组的紧张局势
本研究探讨了专业利益相关者如何在卖淫转移项目的法庭工作组中导航个人和机构目标、道德标准和观点。我们从目前和/或过去的专业利益相关者(N = 22)和过去的项目参与者(N = 3)的半结构化定性访谈中得出结论。虽然工作组之间的合作和共识建立是解决问题法院的核心原则,但本研究的结果反映了一个更复杂的情况。受访者访谈说明了协作和角色模糊的中心地位;团队中互惠和平衡的必要性;角色描述的挑战;对可接受的职业行为的不同理解;以及一些利益相关者用来保护当前和未来参与者免受伤害的保护技术。调查结果强调,虽然卖淫转移项目通常被视为几个次优选择中最不坏的一个,但利益相关者必须在没有指导的情况下平衡他们的个人和职业道德、期望和目标,以便为其中的参与者提供服务和支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
20.00%
发文量
36
期刊介绍: Ethics and Social Welfare publishes articles of a critical and reflective nature concerned with the ethical issues surrounding social welfare practice and policy. It has a particular focus on social work (including practice with individuals, families and small groups), social care, youth and community work and related professions. The aim of the journal is to encourage dialogue and debate across social, intercultural and international boundaries on the serious ethical issues relating to professional interventions into social life. Through this we hope to contribute towards deepening understandings and further ethical practice in the field of social welfare. The journal welcomes material in a variety of formats, including high quality peer-reviewed academic papers, reflections, debates and commentaries on policy and practice, book reviews and review articles. We actively encourage a diverse range of contributions from academic and field practitioners, voluntary workers, service users, carers and people bringing the perspectives of oppressed groups. Contributions might include reports on research studies on the influence of values and ethics in social welfare practice, education and organisational structures, theoretical papers discussing the evolution of social welfare values and ethics, linked to contemporary philosophical, social and ethical thought, accounts of ethical issues, problems and dilemmas in practice, and reflections on the ethics and values of policy and organisational development. The journal aims for the highest standards in its published material. All material submitted to the journal is subject to a process of assessment and evaluation through the Editors and through peer review.
期刊最新文献
A Qualitative Case Study of Undergraduate Social Care Students’ Approaches to Social Justice in a Finnish Context Can Street-Level Bureaucrats Assist with Material Resources? Naming, Trivializing and Privatizing Economic Abuse in Israel In the Periphery: Ethical Considerations When Indirectly Involving Children in Research Ethics of Youth Work Practice in the Twenty-First Century: Change, Challenge and Opportunity The Possibilities of Indigenous Inquiry and Third Space Youth Development Work – Towards Decolonising Praxis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1