Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-18T11:19:34.431Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

What Kind of Trouble? Meeting the Health Needs of ‘Troubled Families’ through Intensive Family Support

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 October 2015

Janet Boddy ,
June Statham ,
Ian Warwick ,
Katie Hollingworth  and
Grace Spencer
Janet Boddy
Affiliation:
School of Education and Social Work, University of Sussex E-mail: [email protected]
June Statham
Affiliation:
Thomas Coram Research Unit, UCL Institute of Education E-mail: [email protected]
Ian Warwick
Affiliation:
Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, UCL Institute of Education E-mail: [email protected]
Katie Hollingworth
Affiliation:
Thomas Coram Research Unit, UCL Institute of Education E-mail: [email protected]
Grace Spencer
Affiliation:
Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Sydney E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The policy rhetoric of the UK Coalition government's ‘Troubled Families’ initiative, and that of New Labour's earlier Respect Agenda, share an emphasis on families’ responsibilities, or rather their irresponsibility, and their financial costs to society. Giving children a chance of a better life coincides, in this framing, with reducing costs for the taxpayer. The research reported here was based on a national study of Family Intervention Projects (FIPs), funded by the UK government between 2009 and 2012, beginning under New Labour, continuing over a period when the FIP programme was discontinued, and ending after the Troubled Families programme had begun. The research involved over 100 in-depth interviews with stakeholders, including service managers, family key workers, and caregivers and children in twenty families, to consider critical questions about the kinds of trouble that families experience in their lives, and how they are recognised in the policy and practice of intensive family intervention.

Keywords

Familysupportinterventionparentchildhealth
Type
Themed Section on Intensive Family Support Services: Politics, Policy and Practice Across Contexts
Information
Social Policy and Society , Volume 15 , Issue 2 , April 2016 , pp. 275 - 288
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Balls, E. (2007) ‘Childcare and child poverty – delivering solutions’, speech, Daycare Trust Conference, QEII Centre, London, 13 June, http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http:/www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/newsroom_and_speeches/speeches/econsecspeeches/speech_est_130607.cfm [accessed 22.07.2015].Google Scholar
Batty, E. and Flint, J. (2012) ‘Conceptualising the contexts, mechanisms and outcomes of intensive family intervention projects’, Social Policy and Society, 11, 3, 345–58.Google Scholar
Berry, M., Cash, S. J. and Brook, J. P. (2000) ‘Intensive family preservation services: an examination of critical service components’, Child and Family Social Work, 5, 3, 191–203.Google Scholar
Boddy, J., McQuail, S., Owen, C., Petrie, P. and Statham, J. (2008) Supporting Families of Young People Entering Public Care: European Models, Final report to Department for Children Schools and Families, London: Institute of Education.Google Scholar
Boddy, J., Statham, J., Warwick, I., Hollingworth, K. and Spencer, G. (2012) Health Related Work in Family Intervention Projects, Final Report to the Department of Health, London: Institute of Education, http://www.cwrc.ac.uk/documents/Final_FIPs_report(acceptedApril2012).pdf.Google Scholar
Brown, G. (2009) Speech to the 2009 Labour Party Annual Conference, Brighton, 29 September, http://www2.labour.org.uk/gordon-brown-speech-conference [accessed 31.12.14].Google Scholar
Burney, E. (2009) Making People Behave: Anti-social Behaviour, Politics and Policy, Cullompton: Willan Publishing.Google Scholar
Cameron, D. (2011) ‘Troubled families’, speech, 15 December, London: Cabinet Office, https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/troubled-families-speech [accessed 31.12.2014].Google Scholar
Casey, L. (2012) ‘Evidence does exist for Family Intervention Projects’, British Medical Journal, 345, e4485.Google Scholar
Churchill, H. (2013) ‘Retrenchment and restructuring: family support and children's services reform under the coalition’, Journal of Children's Services, 8, 3, 209–22.Google Scholar
Daniel, P. (2014) ‘Children and families’, in Bochel, H. and Daly, G. (eds.), Social Policy, 3rd edn, Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 298–322.Google Scholar
Department of Communities and Local Government (2012) The Troubled Families Programme: Financial Framework for the Troubled Families Programme's Payment-by-Results Scheme for Local Authorities, London: Department for Communities and Local Government.Google Scholar
Department of Communities and Local Government (2014) Troubled Families Leadership Statement, London: Department for Communities and Local Government.Google Scholar
Department of Communities and Local Government (2015) More than 105,000 Troubled Families Turned Around Saving Taxpayers an Estimated £1.2 Billion, https://www.gov.uk/government/news/more-than-105000-troubled-families-turned-around-saving-taxpayers-an-estimated-12-billion [accessed 03.07.2015].Google Scholar
Dixon, J., Schneider, V., Lloyd, C., Reeves, A., White, C., Tomaszewski, W., Green, R. and Ireland, E. (2010) Monitoring and Evaluation of Family Interventions (Information on Families Supported to March 2010), Research Report DFE-RR044, London: Department for Education.Google Scholar
Edwards, R., Ribbens McCarthy, J. and Gillies, V. (2012) ‘The politics of concepts: family and its (putative) replacements’, British Journal of Sociology, 63, 4, 730–46.Google Scholar
Featherstone, B., White, S. and Morris, K. (2014) Re-imagining Child Protection: Towards Humane Social Work with Families, Bristol: The Policy Press.Google Scholar
Flaherty, E. G., Thompson, R., Litrownik, A. J., Theodore, A., English, D. J., Black, M. M., Wike, T., Whimper, L., Runyan, D. K. and Dubowitz, H. (2006) ‘Effect of early childhood adversity on child health’, Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, 160, 12, 1232–8.Google Scholar
Fletcher, A., Gardner, F., McKee, M. and Bonell, C. (2012) ‘The British government's Troubled Families Programme’, British Medical Journal, 344, e3403.Google Scholar
Fram, S. M. (2013) ‘The constant comparative analysis method outside of grounded theory’, The Qualitative Report, 18, 1, 1–25.Google Scholar
Grunwald, K. and Thiersch, H. (2009) ‘The concept of the “lifeworld orientation” for social work and social care’, Journal of Social Work Practice, 23, 2, 131–46.Google Scholar
Home Office (2003) Respect and Responsibility – Taking a Stand against Anti-Social Behaviour, White Paper, Cm 5778, London: The Stationery Office.Google Scholar
House of Commons Health Committee (2014) Children's and Adolescents’ Mental Health and CAMHS, Third Report of Session 2014–15, London: House of Commons.Google Scholar
Morgan, D. (2013) Rethinking Family Practices, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Morris, K. (2013) ‘Troubled families: vulnerable families’ experiences of multiple service use’, Child and Family Social Work, 18, 2, 198–206.Google Scholar
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights/World Health Organisation (2008) The Right to Health, Fact Sheet No. 31, Geneva: United Nations.Google Scholar
Ribbens McCarthy, J., Hooper, C.-A. and Gillies, V. (eds.) (2013) Family Troubles? Exploring Change and Challenges in the Lives of Children and Young People, Bristol: Policy Press.Google Scholar
Ridge, T. (2009) Living with Poverty: A Review of the Literature on Children's and Families’ Experiences of Poverty, Research Report No. 594, London: Department for Work and Pensions.Google Scholar
Sousa, L. and Costa, T. (2010) ‘The multi-professional approach: front-line professionals’ behaviours and interactions’, International Journal of Social Welfare, 19, 4, 444–54.Google Scholar
Tausendfreund, T., Knot-Dickscheit, J., Post, W. J., Knorth, E. J. and Grietens, H. (2014) ‘Outcomes of a coaching program for families with multiple problems in the Netherlands: a prospective study’, Children and Youth Services Review, 46, 203–12.Google Scholar
Thoburn, J. (2013) ‘“Troubled families”, “troublesome families” and the trouble with Payment by Results’, Families, Relationships and Societies, 2, 3, 471–5.Google Scholar
Tyler, I. (2013) Revolting Subjects: Social Abjection and Resistance in Neoliberal Britain, London: Zed Books.Google Scholar
White, C., Warrener, M., Reeves, A. and La Valle, I. (2008) Family Intervention Projects an Evaluation of Their Design, Set-up and Early Outcomes, Research Report DCSF-RW047, Nottingham: DfES.Google Scholar