Court Welfare Research Articles

What Works In Family Court Welfare

The concept of effective practice or 'what works' is normally applied to the Probation Service's criminal work. Gwynn Davis, Professor of Socio-Legal Studies in the Department of Law at the University of Bristol, explores the ways in which a 'what works' framework might be applied to family court welfare practice, cautioning against crude measurements of the impact of the court welfare officer's intervention.

In Court

Nigel Stone, Senior Lecturer in the School of Social Work, University of East Anglia, reviews recent appeal judgements and other judicial developments that inform sentencing, early release and court welfare practice.

Reviews : Family Court Welfare Inspection

Reviews : Family Court Welfare Inspection

In Court

Nigel Stone, Senior Lecturer, University of East Anglia, reviews recent appeal judgements and other judicial developments that inform sentencing, early release and court welfare practice

Perspective of the northern ireland guardian ad litem agency: - making a difference for children -

On 4th November 1996 a new figure was introduced to the child care arena in Northern Ireland. The Children (Northern Ireland) Order 1995 introduced, along with an overhaul of the legal system affecting children, a Guardian Ad Litem (GAL) with a duty to ascertain the wishes and feelings of the child, to advise the Court of these and to advise what is in the best interests in proceedings affecting that child. In England and Wales a Guardian Ad Litem had existed in Public Law since 1975. The Children Act enhanced and strengthened the role of the GAL but Courts and Social Services were already familiar to the opportunity and challenge presented by the presence of a GAL. While the facility to appoint a GAL existed for many years in England and Wales there has continued to be unease about the administration and funding of the service provided by local authorities and therefore potentially compromising the independence of the GAL from all parties to proceedings (Timms 1997). The Guardian Ad Litem service in England and Wales is currently under review and may in the future be under the same umbrella as the Court Welfare Service and the Official Solicitor. The importance of the decision by the DHSS to set up an independent agency to manage and administer the GAL service in Northern Ireland should not be underestimated. That point has been made time and time again to the Agency by Panel managers from England. It is an unusual but welcome position to be in as the new kid on the block. But there is a willingness among many interested in the GAL role to monitor and learn from our experiences as we have learned from the experiences of others over the years. It is still very early days in the life of a new agency to provide any definitive comment about the legal process and the niche occupied by the GAL. The challenges in this first year have been many and varied. From the planning and managing of a demand-led service to the specific case demands that require GALs to have an amalgamation of expertise in alcohol/ drug/solvent abuse/ physical/ sexual/ emotional abuse and neglect/ mental health/physical and learning disability. No worker could possibly be expert in all of these areas. The challenge for GALs is to draw on and capture the expertise of others not to attempt to usurp the expertise of others with their own. There continues to be excitement and curiosity about the role of the GAL and whether or not it is living up to the promise of being the voice of the child in specified public law proceedings. From an overview of the service it is clear that there are key attributes and processes inherent in the role that provide the opportunity for the GAL to make a difference for children. I will now go on to describe these under the headings of 1) independence 2) representing the child 3) mediation and negotiation and 4) critical appraisal.

The Dynamics of Relationships in Family Court Welfare Practice

Rachel Pollard, formerly a court welfare officer with Greater Manchester Probation Service and now a Counsellor at the University of Manchester, argues that to ignore the admittedly unfashionable insights of psychoanalytic thinking serves to impoverish the theoretical base of court welfare practice in understanding the interaction between the welfare officer and family members.

Re-thinking Domestic Violence: Where Next in Family Court Welfare Practice?

In the last five years the Probation Service, like most social work agencies, has been developing policies and practice guidelines in belated response to the demands of domestic violence. From her perspective as a Family Court Welfare Officer in Greater Manchester, Anne Ashworth warns of the limitations of the dominant orthodoxy of radical feminism and argues for a less prescriptive, multi-dimensional analysis of the diversity and complexities of intimate relationships.

The Curious Case of Co-Work in Family Court Welfare

Co-working, in its various forms, has been a feature of family court welfare work for many years. However, it has never become universally accepted by practitioners (or endorsed by their managers), as has been the case in group work and work with sex offenders. From his previous experience as a Senior Family Court Welfare Officer in Humberside and latterly as a trainer with the National Induction Programme, Brian Cantwell proposes that a firmer and more articulate commitment to the shared work ethic is needed if family court welfare practice is to develop, flourish and perhaps also compete successfully, in the belief that a culture of collective responsibility will become increasingly important in maintaining staff skill and confidence.

Lean and Mean: Public Protection in Westchester County

Having recently spent four months in the United States, with the opportunity to visit a number of correctional agencies, primarily the Westchester County Probation Department, Christine Sheppard, a probation officer with Norfolk Family Court Welfare Service, reports a number of innovations over there which may indicate the shape of things to come over here.

The Juvenile Court and Dependency Cases

Most child abuse and neglect reports do not reach the juvenile court. However, those that do constitute a significant and demanding portion of the court's workload. These cases are often the most serious and require intense efforts at preserving the family and a temporary or permanent change in custody for the child. The children involved are increasingly very young and have histories of repeated contact with the child welfare system. The limited available data about the effectiveness of the court and child welfare system's response to these cases are reviewed in this article and show that improvement is needed in protecting children and ensuring safe and stable placements for them.

The Resilience of Children

Janet Knight, a Court Welfare Officer in Kent, reflects on her own experience of bringing up a child with a father absent from before birth and the process of adjustment when contact was re-established seven years later.

Children's wishes, children's burdens

Abstract The authors are both practising family court welfare officers of more than ten years' standing, who draw on their experience of reporting to courts in contested private law applications for s.8 orders under the Children Act 1989. Taking the guiding principles of the Act as their starting-point they seek to locate the child's place within such proceedings. They discuss the concept of parental responsibility and give their views on the responsibilities of the court, court welfare officer and legal representative, as well as reflecting upon the rights and responsibilities of the child within those interrelationships. Proposing that ascertaining the wishes and feelings of the child is ‘no simple matter’, Cantwell and Scott make detailed reference to their own case material. They also link their commentary to some of the research findings in relation to children whose parents' separation is conflictual

Domestic Violence, Children's Safety and Family Court Welfare Practice

Anne Ashworth, Court Welfare Officer with Greater Manchester Probation Service, reviews contemporary research findings about the impact of partner violence on family life, with powerful implications for safeguarding the welfare of children in private family law proceedings following parental separation.

Book Reviews : ADRIAN JAMES AND WILL HAY, Court Welfare in Action. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1993, 224 pp

Book Reviews : ADRIAN JAMES AND WILL HAY, Court Welfare in Action. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1993, 224 pp

Book Reviews : Court Welfare in Action: practice and theory

Book Reviews : Court Welfare in Action: practice and theory

The challenge of raising one's nonbiological children

Abstract Childrearing is a challenge as well as a joy, whether the children are born to the parents or not. In the latter case, parenting is a matter of choice, sometimes influenced by necessity. In parenting of one's nonbiological children, there may be additional elements in the situation that affect all of the parties: previous experiences of the children, relationships with extended family members, and supervision by social welfare agencies or courts. The focus here is on the challenges, risks, and directions with which three groups of voluntary parents must come to terms: grandparents raising grandchildren, adoptive parents, and foster parents.

Reviews : Court Welfare in Action: Practice and Theory

Reviews : Court Welfare in Action: Practice and Theory

Listening to Children

Brian Cantwell, Senior Family Court Welfare Officer in Humberside, and Liz Trinder, Research and Development Officer with Save the Children North and East Division in Hull, report the initial findings of their recent research survey of court welfare work. The Children Act's requirement upon courts to have regard to the ascertainable wishes and feelings of the child in contested applications has clearly places renewed practitioner emphasis on ascertaining children's wishes, but there remains considerable variation in interpretation of 'good practice'.

Erratum: The Durability of Supreme Court Welfare Reforms of the 1960s

Previous articleNext article No AccessErratum: The Durability of Supreme Court Welfare Reforms of the 1960sPDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by Social Service Review Volume 67, Number 1Mar., 1993 Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/603961 Views: 1Total views on this site Copyright 1993 The University of ChicagoPDF download Crossref reports no articles citing this article.

Measuring the Effectiveness of Court Welfare Work II

Having addressed the difficulties inherent in measuring civil work effectiveness, Elaine Hay of Humberside Probation Service and Will Hay and Adrian James of Hull University offer some suggestions for the kinds of performance indicators which might be appropriate, taking into account the diversity and less quantifiable features of practice and the views of all the key participants in the family court.