社会工作者对挪威护理程序中独立专家的作用和职能的看法:贡献与贬值

IF 1.6 3区 社会学 Q2 FAMILY STUDIES Child & Family Social Work Pub Date : 2023-06-04 DOI:10.1111/cfs.13054
Rakel Aasheim Greve, Øivin Christiansen, Tone Jørgensen
{"title":"社会工作者对挪威护理程序中独立专家的作用和职能的看法:贡献与贬值","authors":"Rakel Aasheim Greve,&nbsp;Øivin Christiansen,&nbsp;Tone Jørgensen","doi":"10.1111/cfs.13054","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Independent experts are commonly used in child protection care proceedings to assess families and contribute to a sound basis for care order decisions. Yet the role and function of these experts varies across contexts, with issues raised concerning the quality and impact of their reports. Based on six focus group discussions (FGDs) with child welfare service (CWS) social workers in Norway, this study aims to advance the understanding of how independent experts are used when it comes to child protection. Reflexive thematic analysis was conducted, which revealed that the social workers mostly found the experts' contributions useful in that they provide a fresh pair of eyes and reduce the complexities in a case. However, the use of independent experts also had some negative aspects. The social workers experienced that their competence was undermined in court and had some experience working with experts whose work was of poor quality, which was unrecognized by quality control measures. This study raises timely questions about the role of the expert and suggests a clearer distinction between the function of providing expert knowledge to complement the social workers' assessments and the function of providing an independent assessment of the family on behalf of the courts.</p>","PeriodicalId":10025,"journal":{"name":"Child & Family Social Work","volume":"29 1","pages":"102-111"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/cfs.13054","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Social workers' perspectives on the role and function of independent experts in care proceedings in Norway: Contributions and devaluation\",\"authors\":\"Rakel Aasheim Greve,&nbsp;Øivin Christiansen,&nbsp;Tone Jørgensen\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/cfs.13054\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Independent experts are commonly used in child protection care proceedings to assess families and contribute to a sound basis for care order decisions. Yet the role and function of these experts varies across contexts, with issues raised concerning the quality and impact of their reports. Based on six focus group discussions (FGDs) with child welfare service (CWS) social workers in Norway, this study aims to advance the understanding of how independent experts are used when it comes to child protection. Reflexive thematic analysis was conducted, which revealed that the social workers mostly found the experts' contributions useful in that they provide a fresh pair of eyes and reduce the complexities in a case. However, the use of independent experts also had some negative aspects. The social workers experienced that their competence was undermined in court and had some experience working with experts whose work was of poor quality, which was unrecognized by quality control measures. This study raises timely questions about the role of the expert and suggests a clearer distinction between the function of providing expert knowledge to complement the social workers' assessments and the function of providing an independent assessment of the family on behalf of the courts.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10025,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Child & Family Social Work\",\"volume\":\"29 1\",\"pages\":\"102-111\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/cfs.13054\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Child & Family Social Work\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cfs.13054\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"FAMILY STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Child & Family Social Work","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cfs.13054","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"FAMILY STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在儿童保护照料程序中,通常会使用独立专家对家庭进行评估,并为照料令决定提供可靠依据。然而,这些专家的角色和职能在不同情况下各不相同,他们报告的质量和影响也存在问题。本研究以与挪威儿童福利服务机构(CWS)社会工作者进行的六次焦点小组讨论(FGD)为基础,旨在进一步了解在儿童保护方面如何使用独立专家。研究进行了反思性专题分析,结果显示,社会工作者大多认为专家的贡献非常有用,因为他们提供了一双新的眼睛,减少了案件的复杂性。不过,独立专家的使用也有一些负面影响。社工们发现,他们的能力在法庭上受到了削弱,而且有些专家的工作质量很差,没有得到质量控制措施的认可。这项研究及时提出了关于专家作用的问题,并建议更明确地区分提供专家知识以补充社会工作者评估的职能和代表法院对家庭进行独立评估的职能。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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
Social workers' perspectives on the role and function of independent experts in care proceedings in Norway: Contributions and devaluation

Independent experts are commonly used in child protection care proceedings to assess families and contribute to a sound basis for care order decisions. Yet the role and function of these experts varies across contexts, with issues raised concerning the quality and impact of their reports. Based on six focus group discussions (FGDs) with child welfare service (CWS) social workers in Norway, this study aims to advance the understanding of how independent experts are used when it comes to child protection. Reflexive thematic analysis was conducted, which revealed that the social workers mostly found the experts' contributions useful in that they provide a fresh pair of eyes and reduce the complexities in a case. However, the use of independent experts also had some negative aspects. The social workers experienced that their competence was undermined in court and had some experience working with experts whose work was of poor quality, which was unrecognized by quality control measures. This study raises timely questions about the role of the expert and suggests a clearer distinction between the function of providing expert knowledge to complement the social workers' assessments and the function of providing an independent assessment of the family on behalf of the courts.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
5.90%
发文量
92
期刊介绍: Child and Family Social Work provides a forum where researchers, practitioners, policy-makers and managers in the field of child and family social work exchange knowledge, increase understanding and develop notions of good practice. In its promotion of research and practice, which is both disciplined and articulate, the Journal is dedicated to advancing the wellbeing and welfare of children and their families throughout the world. Child and Family Social Work publishes original and distinguished contributions on matters of research, theory, policy and practice in the field of social work with children and their families. The Journal gives international definition to the discipline and practice of child and family social work.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Issue Information Issue Information An anchor in instability or an inhibitor for development? Professional perceptions of siblinghood in family group homes in Israel Conflicts with Friends and Romantic Partners: Qualitative and Quantitative Analyses of the Experiences of Girls in Care
×
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