Abstract

Based on in‐depth interviews with thirty‐eight individuals on the front line of child welfare (educators, mothers, and child protection workers) this study analyzes the attitudes behind educators' acknowledged noncompliance with mandatory reporting of child abuse and neglect by teachers. Regulatory theory posits that “compliance” is affected by a mix of sanctions, capacity, motivation, and the perceptions of legitimacy and moral purpose associated with particular rules. Paradoxically, while the educators in this study were knowledgeable and supportive of the rule in principle, their accounts of reporting decision making were highly contextualized and ambivalent. The interview data suggests that existing theories of compliance may be usefully supplemented with an explicitly relational approach that better accounts for decision making in the contexts of care and dependency that characterize regulatory fields of human services such as education and child welfare.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.