Search Results

This chapter describes in detail the format, structure, and content areas of some of the major family psychoeducation (FPE) studies. Single and multi-family models and other adaptations are discussed. Initial research in the UK focused on reducing high expressed emotion (EE), but subsequently FPE was extended to low EE families as well based on families' self-assessed needs and problems. Seminal programs in the US evolved in Pittsburgh, California, and New York State. In Europe, the Optimal Treatment Project of Ian Falloon and associates continues as an international collaborative group to promote the routine use of evidence-based practices (EBPs) for schizophrenia in clinical facilities, including FPE. Large sample studies indicate the efficacy of these bundled optimal treatments. Miklowitz and Goldstein's Family Focused Treatment for bipolar disorder is described. A final section on long-term effects ranging from seven-year to eleven-year follow-ups, in Germany, the UK, and Italy, showed positive effects.

This chapter expands the discourse on feminist practice in social work and restorative justice. It explores the ways in which restorative processes and social work can combine to fashion a feminist solution for addressing domestic violence. It analyzes the term family rights and argues that this concept must encompass respect for diverse family cultures and uphold universal human rights such as safety. The case study shows how restorative processes can render moot what the chapter calls the paradox of family rights—which is based on diversity and universality—by providing a space in which all are respected and rights are safeguarded. The chapter points to the potential of restorative process in cases of domestic violence, and does not shy away from the multiple cautions that are associated with restorative practices in cases of family violence.

This chapter discusses multiple family psychoeducational group interventions and their rationale for use with the family members of persons who have schizophrenia. Psychoeducation offered in multiple family groups (MFGs) for schizophrenia can be helpful in decreasing stress to family caregivers of people with severe mental illness and preventing relapse and hospitalization. Common group topics include theories of schizophrenia, its course, the positive and adverse effects of medications, the relationship between stress and symptoms, available resources for persons with schizophrenia and their families, the nature of professional interventions, managing family emotional responses to the illness, and mobilizing strengths for improved family functioning. The group process, as exemplified through a case study, is intended to help families experience less burden and stress, reduce their sense of stigma, help them assist each other with parenting, and normalize their communications.

From the earliest days of child welfare outreach programs, social workers have developed a wide variety of practices to engage families and communities in the care and protection of children. This chapter reviews some of the efforts to promote family-centered and community-based child welfare practices and their fit into restorative justice. Specific processes discussed include family group conferencing which originated in New Zealand, family unity meetings from Oregon, team decision making from Ohio, and Family Team Conferences from Alabama. The case study presented is an example of the team decision-making approach and illustrates its use in permanency planning. The chapter describes the skills social workers need to use restorative processes in child welfare, and speculates about future directions in restorative justice and child welfare.

This chapter discusses the four major restorative practices: victim-offender dialogues, family group conferences, peacemaking circles, and truth and reconciliation commissions. It offers individuals who have not participated in a restorative practice the opportunity to envision each of the processes from preparation through follow-through. While the practices highlighted are often used in the aftermath of crime, all of them can be adapted to addressing wrongdoing in a number of other contexts. Examined for each of the descriptions are foundational principles that underpin the practice, an overview of the preparation, the process of the actual encounter, and follow up. Finally, the chapter offers some thoughts about why the process can be so effective.

Centralizing states appropriated the authority of kin groups and ethnic and religious institutions over family life to varying degrees. The ways they regulated family and intimacy did not depend on whether they claimed commitments to secularism or whether family laws were framed in culturally specific discourses. Salient discourses about nations and their constituent cultural groups and traditions interacted with social structure, the nature of state-society engagements under predecessor regimes, the coalitions regimes aim to build, and regime projects to change state-society relations. These interactions influenced approaches to form citizens, recognize cultures, and make families. The chapter demonstrates that this new version of the state-in-society approach to social analysis explains the extent to which regimes changed the personal laws they inherited, the effects of these changes on women's rights, the autonomy of individuals, the nuclear family, sources of family law, and the extent of legal pluralism.

This chapter begins by exploring the potential benefits of restorative justice for child victims. It then reviews five restorative justice programs in New Zealand, Australia, and Canada. All these programs have included child victims, in some more than in others; they have all been evaluated and therefore provide valuable lessons from their levels of success, and most of them included sexual assaults, family violence and abuse. The chapter discusses the major concerns that emerge in relation to the involvement of child victims in restorative processes, and considers some of the solutions deployed in these case studies. The concluding section uses the Needs/Rights model to demonstrate the challenges to RJ involving child victims and its potential benefits for them.

This chapter cites research on the experiences of families of people in prison across the world, including the ways in which imprisonment shapes their lives and identities. It outlines grief, practical difficulties associated with maintaining the relationship in question, financial challenges, and stigma as the consequences for the imprisonment of a family member. It also highlights the emerging awareness of the importance of family ties for men and women in prison in relation to rehabilitation that has led to a number of significant and positive developments, such as the implementation of Her Majesty's Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS). The chapter explains that HMPPS Families group, which has been tasked with overseeing additional family-focused developments and family-related policies. It talks about the Families and Significant Others Strategy which encompasses activities such as visits and other aspects of prison policy that involve families directly.

This chapter describes promising reforms to the substance, process, and practice of family law that embody the vision set forth earlier. It explores more well-known ideas, such as divorce mediation and joint custody, and more recent developments, such as collaborative law, family relationship centers, and family group conferencing. It argues that these nascent reforms should be broadly adopted and fully funded.

This chapter discusses how, in addition to formal foster care in families, some state child welfare institutions also provide alternative care in family groups with a paid house mother on the site of the institution. This type of alternative care raises questions about whether this grouping is sufficient to simulate the benefits of family based care in relation to outcomes for children when they are growing up, and the impact on their transition to adulthood. The chapter looks at the experiences of seven young people in one city who had lived in this arrangement. It considers the differences for these young people during their childhood and as they prepared for possibilities to leave the family group care in the institution.

This chapter discusses how those affected by a disaster often form an extraordinary common bond. Self-help support and action group members say that only with others from 'their' disaster can they open up completely, without fear of judgement, about the most difficult aspects of their experience. The examples in this chapter illustrate the kinds of support groups that grew out of those disasters of the 1980s, including the King's Cross Families Action Group, the Herald Families Association, the UK Families Flight 103, the Marchioness Action Group, the Stairway to Heaven Memorial Trust, and the MV Derbyshire Families Association. There are a number of different options for the structure of family and survivor groups in terms of membership, legal status, and management. Some groups have set up unincorporated associations, while a few have chosen to apply for charitable status. Ultimately, representatives from the groups of the 1980s, as well as individual survivors and bereaved people, went on to form, join, and develop Disaster Action.

This chapter examines research evidence that underpins family group conferences (FGCs) and addresses its implications for policy and practice. There are powerful value-based reasons for engaging with FGCs. The evidence base around the process of FGCs is strong; families find the process, in the main, empowering and engaging. Meanwhile, the evidence base in relation to the outcomes of FGCs is mixed in relation to both safeguarding and care placements, as studies have found positive, negative, and neutral outcomes following FGCs. There is no doubt that there is a requirement for more outcome-focused studies of FGCs. Nevertheless, as many researchers argue, there is enough evidence and professional and family-based experience to make a powerful argument for the embedding of FGCs in child welfare policy and practice.

This chapter assesses family group conferences (FGCs) as an international model of decision-making. FGCs are used in at least 20 countries across the globe. They are internationally recognised as an effective way of engaging families in decision-making processes. As the model has been applied in other countries, it has been adapted to reflect the cultures and the historical and policy context of individual countries and jurisdictions. Some of the processes are very similar to the original New Zealand model while others are very different and are hybrids of the original model. The chapter then studies the different levels of service implementation of FGCs and considers some of the outcome studies from seven countries. It also focuses on China as a case study for a country attempting to introduce FGCs as a culturally appropriate method of child protection practice.

This chapter addresses the use of Family Group Conferencing in adult social care. For FGCs with adults, professional guidance and legislation has been supportive from the beginning. Advocates of FGCs welcome guidance and the introduction of key concepts such as personalisation, wellbeing, and person-centred approaches. Indeed, the foundations are in place for FGCs to become an embedded part of adult social care policy and service delivery for vulnerable adults. The messages from research are clear: FGCs offer the potential to engage families for the benefit of vulnerable adults consistent with the underlying principles of legislation and policy. For this to pick up speed and for the practice of FGCs in the UK to develop, it is important for FGCs to roll out into a wider range of adult settings such as adult mental health, and among more populations, including offenders, prisoners, and homeless people.

This concluding chapter argues for the potential of family group conferences (FGCs) to lead to positive outcomes for families in a diverse range of social work practice areas. The research and evidence base, while patchy, is clear on this. Policy makers, practitioners, and advocates of the FGC process have a responsibility to ensure that the practice does not become marginalised by austerity measures and increasingly risk-averse practice contexts. After all FGCs not only embody the key principles of key social work legislation and policy in the UK but also the values of social work practice. Indeed, the principles of FGCs are clearly aligned to the International Federation of Social Work definition of social work and the model provides the opportunity for local authorities to become increasingly reflective of the holistic approach to social work practice.

This chapter discusses women’s public portrait statues and public funerals. Apart from offering a survey of the statues themselves and their display context, the main focus is on the inscriptions on their bases and the reasons for setting them up. Two groups may be distinguished: women praised for their civic merits, and inscriptions merely recording the name and distinguished rank and family of the honorand. The last group was usually of the most elevated rank; though these women may well have bestowed benefactions or other services, their high rank sufficed as a reason for a statue. The chapter discusses the function and significance of women’s public statues both for the honorand and her family and for the city, and the rarer honour of a public funeral. Finally, a comparison is made between male and female honorands and dedicators of public statues on the basis of two regional samples.

This introductory chapter provides an overview of family group conferences (FGCs) in the UK. FGCs have been used in the UK since the early 1990s and are now used worldwide following their inception in New Zealand in the 1980s. FGCs belong to an area of social work practice often known as ‘strengths based approaches’ because they seek to utilise the existing and developing strengths of the family and reduce or eliminate concerns. They are used in a wide range of social care child welfare situations from early intervention onwards, but recent use has focused upon their use in child protection, pre-proceedings, and proceedings cases. Ultimately, they seek to empower families: their key principles include the family as primary decision maker, the use of private family time, and the independence of the FGC coordinator.

This chapter provides guidance for convening a family group conference (FGC). The FGC process is designed to be family-led and empowering. As much of the decision-making as possible should therefore be undertaken by the family, including decisions about the practicalities of the meeting. It is also important to consider the role that advocates can play in ensuring that the views of vulnerable family members are represented. An FGC can only be an empowering process for families if individuals are enabled to express their views. Ultimately, it is a complex and time-consuming piece of work and should be undertaken by a skilled and well-trained and supported coordinator. Indeed, ongoing training and support for coordinators is crucial and should include full FGC training, safeguarding training, and shadowing opportunities.

This chapter explores the legislative context for family group conferences (FGCs) in both the UK and across the globe. While FGCs do not have a legislative mandate in the UK, with the exception of Northern Ireland, legislation and subsequent policy lends itself to the FGC approach and indeed in some cases recommends the use of FGCs as best practice. Meanwhile, very few countries across the globe have a legislative mandate for FGCs. What is clear, particularly from the field of children's social care, is that FGCs have been effectively applied in a legislative context to divert children away from care proceedings and from local authority care. Moreover, service evaluations for those FGC services that are using FGCs in an adult social care context have highlighted that FGCs have been an effective tool for decision-making and planning for vulnerable adults, including adult safeguarding cases.