Toward a professional dead end or a dynamic process of professional development? The paradoxes of shealy’s “The therapeutic parent: A model for the child and youth care profession”

Abstract

Certainly the publication of "The Therapeutic Parent: A Model for the Child and Youth Care Profession," with the opportunity for commentary, is a major contribution to the professionalization of the child and youth care field. I heartily endorse Jerome Beker's allocation of a complete issue of the Forum to this model of presenting viewpoints and findings that may be controversial. This in itself provides a needed 'open system' and momentum for our collective efforts to advance the field. My response to the paper will embrace the paradoxical. On one hand, I suggest that to literally follow the suggestion that we adopt the "therapeutic parent" model as herein presented is tantamount to consigning us to a dead end in developing the field as a profession. On the other hand, recognizing Dr. Shealy's work as contributing relevant perspectives, findings, and methodologies to be integrated into the work that has been going on for years, may further extend and enrich the substantial effort that has been long under way. This response will address this paradox through addressing the following areas: • The assumptions that Dr. Shealy makes concerning the status of child and youth care as a profession and about the efficacy of qualities associated with parents and therapists as a source of professional identity • The pitfalls of job analysis methodology, and some comments on the job analysis findings