Professional Practice With Children Families And Carers Social Work Essay

Professional Practice With small fryren Families And C bers loving survey EssayAs a extend of the 2011 riots seen in the United Kingdom, Louise Casey (2012) was commissi angiotensin-converting enzymed by the every(prenominal)iance g everyplacenment to write a report entitled auditory modality to roiled Families. This essay leave behind critique the report and consider if government asceticism measures could impact in kindly disquiet provision and break by means ofcomes for religious good users. It will discuss the narrative of one family set in the report whom overtop intervention and nourish in order to shelter their tykeren (Casey 2012). It will bankrupt an outline of the training and impact of legislation and indemnity counselling on friendly effect dress for children, families and c arrs. advancemore it will consider domesticateman research and theories that inform friendly work make when on the job(p) with much(prenominal) families for instanc e ecological theories, mind, breeding span models of development, professional power and appendix theory. This essay will as soundly discuss the skills necessary for contemporary affable work practicians to manoeuver effectively with children and families. It will argue that inter-professional, anti-oppressive, multi-professional and reflective expend is paramount to thriving outcomes for families who require erect from run.The term get atd families was low of every used by David Cameron (Cameron, 2011), and later defined by the part for Communities and local anesthetic political relation (DCLG) as households having heartbreaking problems and chaotic personal histories. Cameron (2012) intends to consider those identified in the report as troubled 120,000 families, turn their animateds more or less. These families atomic number 18 characterised as having no adult in employment, children who do not attend school and family members partaking in anti-social behavio ur and criminal activities. By reducing costs and ameliorate outcomes, the results based funding scheme bring forths to flip-flop service delivery for families (Cameron, 2011). Welshman (2012), states that this insurance policy agenda is the latest reconstruction of the underclass debate. Giddens (1973, cited in Haralambos and Holborn, 2002) claims that Britain has an underclass of mountain who are disadvantaged on the labour market because they lack qualifications and skills, and may face discrimination, prejudice and marginalisation in society. The New Labour Government (1997-2010) linked disorderly behaviour to problem families and focussed on soulfulness deficiencies sooner than an acknowledgment of structural constraints, for instance the effects of poverty on family relationships and parenting (Hill and Wright, 2003 Gillies, 2005, in Parr, 2009).New Labour implemented Family Intervention assures (FIP) that were framed from the respect personationion Plan in 2006. This was criticized by a parental and family support organisation Parentline Plus (2006), as threats of punishments to parents would impact negatively on families, and parents could be less willing to look for support before they reached crisis (BBC intelligence, 2006). Initiatives like Signpost, provided intensifier levels of support and understanding of multidimensional complexities, comprising of effective intervention for children and families within their communities (Dillane et al 2001, cited in Parr, 2009 ). Featherstone (2006) maintains this initiative was within the context of the social investment state, supporting investment in human capital as opposed to reign economic provision provided by the state in the form of upbeat payments. Postle, (2002 cited in Parr, 2009) argues that Signpost intervention was social work at its trump out allowing social workers time for effective communion and confederacy running(a) rather than the policing of families.Levitas (2012 ) argued against research methodology used in the Casey Report (2012) and of the idea of multi-disadvantaged families be the source of societys ills. Levitas (2012) claims that the figure of 120,000 was lay outed on data from a secondary analysis of a Children and Families Report (2004). Literature suggests the figure of 120,000 families is underestimated, the number of multi-disadvantaged families is importantly great (Levitas, 2012 Hern, 2012). The initial 2004 muse found no evidence to indicate that the families were trouble makers as proposed but did find that they were families in trouble. As a result of changes in taxation, welfare benefits, spending cuts and the continuing effects of the economic downswing (Levitas, 2012).Welshman (2012) urge ons that history provides important lessons for policymakers and addressing some(prenominal) structural and behavioural causes of poverty is credibly to be more effective than counting and defining such families. He believes t here is little knowledge regarding reasons for behaviours and calls for research for combating problems that these families encounter. Casey (2012) has given an insight by using service users narratives and received positive responses from interviewees. However, her research does shake advertise limitations a small sample of sixteen families, all of whom were at crisis call for when they recognized working(a) with the FIP (Casey 2012). Soloman (2012) claims that vast number of vulnerable families are beingness left without any support. Casey (2012) made no reference to ethnicity and culture of the families, thus well-favored no insight into diversity (Clifford and Burke, 2009). Bailey (2012) believes that the report breaches ethical standards for social research, the families interviewed are participants in the FIP and therefore had a power of sanction over them, therefore it may ingest been difficult for the families to decline from the study. No pen randomness on the r un a risks of participation was provided he also suggests that ethical sycophancy was not applied for. Bailey, (2012) believes that there is a risk of identifying these families. Casey (2012) acknowledged that the information was not re pointative of 120,000 families but claims that it provides a sound basis for policy. Nevertheless, Bailey (2012) argues that there is no place for unethical research in everyday policy making.Comparative studies were not conducted on families with similar economic and social circumstances who are not described as troubled. Casey (2012) discussed intergenerational cycles of wickedness, violence, alcohol and drug step as well as worklessness being reasons for troubled families placing the oneness on individuals (Levitas, 2012). Kelly (2012) welcomes the Governments commitment to aid families. He proposes that most parents on low incomes are good parents and believes that it is naive to conflate illness, poor housing and poverty with nubble misus e and crime. Kelly (2012) also argues that many families involved with Family Action are socially isolated, invisible to support service who struggle on low incomes rather than displaying anti-social behaviours. The case studies gave the parents perspective, notwithstanding, the voice and opinion of the child was unheard. Ofsted (2010) found practitioners concentrated similarly much on the aims of the parents and overlooked the implications for the child. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child article 12 declares, the views of the child must be respected, Article 3 states that the childs best interests must be a primary fright (Unicef, 1992).This essay will now discuss social work practice in relation to one of the families identified in Louise Caseys Report (2012) Chris and Julie (appendix 1). In the past, adults like Chris and Julie who had encyclopaedism disabilities may exhaust been prevented from becoming parents, eugenic theories dominated, with the ai m to ensure children with similar disabilities were not procreated (Cleaver and Nicholson 2007). However, in recent years attitudes are changing in favour of people with learning disabilities giving them the kindred rights as separate citizens regarding sexuality and family life. An increased number of people with learning difficulties now lose wider opportunities for independent living. According to Haavik and Menninger (1981 cited in Booth and Booth, 1993, p 203) deinstitutionalization enabled many people with learning disabilities to participate in their community. Duffy (2006, cited in Thompson et al 2008), states that self-determination is a core principle in attaining citizenship in westward society.The shift in opinions and principles is evident in government legislation and counselor thus impacting on social work practice, for instance Valuing citizenry a new outline for learning impediment for the 21st century (2001), (DoH 2001) and Valuing People Now The pitch Plan (20102011) Making it happen for everyone gives counselor for all professionals supporting people with learning disabilities living in the community (DoH 2011). In relation to the case scenario, Article 8 of The charitable Rights Act 1998 (.1) provides Chris and Julie with a right to respect for private and family life, his home and correspondence however, any mental disorder with this right must be necessary and lawful with regard to public safety, national gage, prevention of public disorders and crime, or for the security carcass of rights and freedoms of others.Both Julie and Chris have a protected characteristic of disability and therefore under the comparison Act (2010) should be protected from direct and indirect discrimination from service providers. However, childrens rights are paramount and override those of their parents or carers (DoH, 1998). Access to learning disability services in England was governed by Fair Access to Care function (FACS) (DoH, 2003), until it was superseded by Putting People First (2007) and highlighted the affect for a personalise Adult societal Care System (DoH, 2007).Emerson et al (2005) found one in fifteen adults with learning disabilities living in England were parents and this research exclamatory that approximately half ofchildren born to parents with learning disabilities are at risk from abuse and twenty five per cent no longer lived with their parents (McGaw,2000). Further research indicates that the absolute majority of services are as yet inadequate in meeting the needs of families with learning disabilities (McGaw 2000). McInnis et al (2011) similarly found complexities in determining eligibility for service users. They indicated that decisions regarding eligibility are not only find out by assessment results but by local government resources. They advocate equation and argue that changes in assessment tools are necessary when working with families with learning difficulties. Chris and Julie reflec t these findings as they only received intervention when they confront difficulties caring for their children.The parental skills model would be advantageous for practitioners as it is knowing to assist the assessment process when working with Chris and Julie. The model focuses on life skills, familial history and access to support services. McGaw and Sturmey (1994) found that if difficulties arise for parents in any of the three areas it Service users maybe uncooperative and reluctant to engage with services, perhaps due to anxieties and fear of consequences. For example their children being removed from their care and their own childhood experiences. Cultural awareness and age appropriate interventions are necessary to enable partnership working (Egan, 2007 cited in Martin, 2010). Horwath (2011) found that although somewhat social workers faced barriers to the Child-focused Assessment mannikin, due to heavy workloads, time restrictions, process targets and limited training opp ortunities. Others found that additional bureaucracy gave them a security in their practice. Smale, et al. (1993) highlighted the following models of assessment questioning, procedural, and exchange model. The latter may be dependable when working in partnership with this family as the service users are viewed as experts and aids their potential for working together towards goals.When working with families communication can be complex effective communication would include energetic listening skills, person centred planning and intervention, also avoiding the use of professional jargoon (Anning et al, 2006). The worker should be aware of non-verbal communication and power imbalances in their working relationship (DoH, DfES, 2007). It may be advisable for this family to access advocacy services to promote equality, social inclusion and social justice (actionforadvocacy.org.uk, 2012). According to Yuill and Gibson (2011), advocacy promotes anti-oppressive practice.Horwath (2010) su ggests positive relationships are built on trust. This echoes the person centred principles of Rogers (1961, cited in Thompson et al, 2008) alter the practitioner to observe realistic emotional, somatic and behavioural responses from the child and family, that are essential for effective information gathering for assessments (DoH 2006). Martin (2010) argues in order to ensure an understanding of the service user narrative within a multi-professional context the practitioner should reflect and summarise and make accurate recordings. Information should be stored in accordance to the Data egis Act, 1989 (legislation.gov.uk) and also be share effectively between multi-agencies and safeguarding departments (Laming, 2003).Numerous children have died from abuse and neglect in the United Kingdom (Brandon et al, 2005). In 2000, Victoria Climbie was subjected to cruelty by her auntie and her partner which resulted in her loss of life. Laming (2003) describes Victorias death as a utter(a) failure of the system and inexcusable and recommended reforms (1.18 p.3). In England, the government published the Framework for the Assessment of Children in Need and their Families (DoH et al 2000) and additional policy counsel came about in Every Child Matters Change for Children (2003) that made all professionals accountable for safeguarding, child development, focusing on early intervention, joint guts of responsibility and information sharing with integrated front line services and an emphasis on children fulfilling their potential (dcsf.gov.uk 2012). The following year the Children Act (2004) divide 11 (DfES, 2005) gave clear guidance on multi-agency working and states that safeguarding children is everyones business.The Children Act 1989 (DoH,1989) and the Children Act 2004 (DoH,2004a) currently underpin child welfare practice in England. The former Act considers the concept of a child in need ( branch 17) and accentuates the vastness family support services who both( prenominal) promote the childs welfare and help safeguard and assist parents in their role. In addition Working Together to sentry transaction Children (2010) gives extensive guidance on collaborative working and defines roles and responsibilities of professionals (HM. Government 2010). This guidance is presently being revised and reduced to alleviate bureaucracy for professionals, however Mansuri (2012, cited in McGregor 2012) argues that the real safeguarding concerns are unmanageable caseloads, plummeting moral and cuts to support supply and criticises the government for failing to consult more practitioners regarding these changes.An example for effective working together that may benefit the family in the case scenario is Team around the Family (TAF) intervention. This encourages effective, early identification of additional need, it assesses strengths and is restorative in approach that provides the family opportunities for change and enhances multi-agency collaboration (ch eshirewestandchester,2012). Family mentoring services may also be useful in this case (catch-22.2012).Childrens run in England and Wales adhere to The Framework for the Assessment of Children in Need and their Families (DoH et al 2000). The Assessment Framework provides an ecological approach of the childs developmental needs, parenting capacity, family and environmental factors. This ecological approach was championed by Bronfenbrenner, (1979, cited Martin, 2010) found that by incorporating the microsystem, exosystem and macrosystem benefited both practitioners and service users by enabling wider societies find outs of culture and economic circumstances to be considered in assessment (Wilson et al, 2011). This evidenced- based framework aims to ensure that the childs welfare is both promoted and protected (Cleaver et al, 2004).This framework provides a consistent method of collating and analysing information, thus giving practitioners a more coherent understanding of the childs d evelopmental needs, the capacity of their parents and the influence of the extended family and other environmental factors that impact on the family (DoH al, 2000). However, Garrett (2003 Rose, 2002 in nipping et al, 2007) believe that the underpinning evidence for the Framework for the Assessment of Children in Need and their Families (2000) is problematic. Howarth (2002 in Crisp et al, 2007) suggests that accompanying specific guidance for children from black and ethnic minorities are less widely circulated than the framework document. Katz (1997, cited in Crisp et al, 2007) accuses the framework as being mechanistic checklists used by inexperienced staff as data collection tools and loosing focus on identifying and meeting the needs of children (Horwath, 2002 cited in Crisp et al 2007).Likewise, sake (2011) challenged all professionals to ensure that our child protection system is centred on the child or young person, as she believes the system has lost its focus on the childs needs and experiences and has been too focused on rules, time-frames in assessment and procedures. At present an initial assessment is carried out ten days from referral and a core assessment must be completed within thirty-five days of an Initial Assessment, and would be undertaken to set forth child protection enquires (DoH et al, 2000). Practitioners use twin tracking and pursue other possibilities for the family (scie-socialcareonline.org.uk). This may be ethically and emotionally difficult for practitioners they should ensure oversight and adhere to their professional standards of proficiency and ethics (HCPC, 2012).Munro (2011) urges the government to rank professional expertise and revise statutory guidance on service intervention and delivery and calls for more focus on understanding the inherent issues that influenced professional practice that resulted in Serious Case Reviews. Munro (2011) also calls for reforming social work training and placement provision for student s. The government accepted Munros recommendations and changes to the system will be implemented in 2012 (DfE 2011).Damien (see appendix 1) meets the doorstep criteria for intervention under section17 (10) of The Children Act (1989) as his health or development may be significantly impaired without support services. At present he does not appear to be at risk of significant ruin, however a core assessment may be beneficial in determining the appropriate support services (HM Government, 2010), examples include jejuneness Offending Teams (YOT) who deliver crime prevention programmes (youth-offending-team, 2012), Special Educational call for Coordinators (SENCO) and learning mentors provide support in educational settings (Good schools guide,2012). It is vital end-to-end the assessment process that practitioners are non-judgmental and use reflective practice and have an awareness of transference and counter-transference to disperse any negative responses and feelings (DoH, 2000 Wil son et al, 2008).The practitioner should hap on theories of human development through the lifespan as well as sociological, biological, psychological and psychosocial theories. For example biological theory would consider ancestral influences, physical development and instinctual behaviours whereas the sociological perspective would emphasise the importance of social factors (Horwath, 2010). It may be that the family are living in poverty and had have not been in receipt of full benefit entitlements or support services it would be advisable to contact relevant welfare agencies and seek professional assistance for financial support to aid this family (family-action, 2012).The Children Act (1989) states that for the majority of children their family is the most appropriate place for them to live. However, the local authority has a duty of care and Madison (see appendix 1) needs to be accommodated under section 20 of the Children Act (1989), as she is a child in need (section 17) or a child at risk of significant harm (section 47). Chris and Julie have parental responsibility for their children until they are adopted (D of H, 1989 2000 HM Government, 2010).When assessing families the practitioner should have an understanding of theories that inform practice. In relation to Eriksons (1982) theory of psychosocial details of development, it could be suggested that Madison is in the fifth tier of development known as Identity and Repudiation versus Identity diffusion. This stage usually will pass on between ages 12-18. Throughout adolescence children are becoming more independent and growth a sense of self. Madison could experience confusion in this stage as she has spent time in kinship and residential care. Erikson (1982) believes with encouragement, reinforcement, and through personal exploration adolescents can leave this stage with a tender identity and direction in life. If Madison fails to pass through this stage successfully she will be insecure about herself and her future (Erikson, 1982 cited in Wilson et al 2008). Hamachek (1988) suggests this theory is ambiguous in identifying behaviours of an individuals psychological growth throughout different stages of development.Chris and Julie have had one child adopted and have been futile to parent eight of their nine children. During assessment practitioners should have an understanding of appendix categories and relating behaviours it could be that some of Chris and Julies children developed anxious-ambivalent attachments. Role reversal may have taken place, thus resulting in the children becoming angry about the unreliability of the carer and possibly the reason for them displaying anti-social behaviours Ainsworth (et al., 1978 cited in Becket and Taylor, 2010). Early attachment theory was criticized for denying women equality in the workplace by implying that the risk of mothers leaving their children would be deadly to their childrens development (Beckett and Taylor, 2010). With regard to Julie and Chris, the local authority could undertake a pre-birth assessment and multi-professional case conference under (section 47) of the Children Act (1989) to evaluate parenting capacity, family and environment, and their ability to avow parenting to meet the childs developing and changing needs (Department of Health 1989 Department of Health, 2010). specializer assessment tools for parents with learning disabilities would assist the couple in their understanding and partnership planning (McGaw, 2000 cited in Wallbridge, 2012). Both Chris and Julie have completed a parenting take to the woods and this is positive as they had not done so previously (Casey 2012). Wallbridge (2012) claims successful support packages offer intensive, continuous training for parenting, for example group work and life skills in the home, both parents feeling valued are lots positive catalysts of change. A recent government report (2012) however, identified the child protection syste m as being reactive rather than proactive with regard to young people accessing services. It warned that professionals gave the parents numerous changes to improve their parenting skills and children were left to live with neglectful parents (publications.parliament.uk, 2012)This essay has critiqued the report Listening to Troubled Families by Louise Casey (2012) and found limitations in the methodology. It considered the needs of a family identified and critiqued the role and skills of a social worker in safeguarding. It has argued the importance of effective multi-professional collaboration, knowledge of contemporary legislation, practice and theories with regard to implementing partnership working to support children, families and carers. It also identified orthogonal explanations poverty, isolation and late intervention can impact on these families. Munro (2011) urges the government to value professional judgements and change statutory guidance in order to help safeguard child ren.BibliographyAction for Advocacy (2012) procurable at http//www.actionforadvocacy.org.uk/Accessed 25th October 2012Anning, A. Cottrell, D. Frost, F. Green, J. Robinson, M (2006) Developing Multi-professional Teamwork for Integrated Childrens Services. England. Open University Press.Bailey, N (2012) The Listening to Troubled Families report is an ethical failure.The Guardian, online 25th October 2012 in stock(predicate) at http//www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/oct/25/listening-to-troubled-families-reportAccessed 5th November, 2012BBC News (2006) Eviction threat in respect plan. BBC News online 10th January 2006 on hand(predicate) at http// parole.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4595788.stmAccessed 5th November, 2012Beckett, C., and Taylor. (2010) Human Growth and Development, Second Edition. capital of the United Kingdom. SAGE Publications Ltd.Booth, T and Booth, W. (2004a) Findings from a court study of care proceedings involving parents with intellectual disabilities, Journal o f Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities, 1 (3-4), pp.203-209Brandon,M.,Belderson,P.,Warren,C.,Howe, D.,Gardner,R.,Dodsworth,J.,and Black,J., (2005) Analysing child deaths and serious injury through abuse and neglect what can we learn? A biennial analysis of serious case reviews 2003-2005. online addressable at https//www.education.gov.uk/publications/eOrderingDownload/DCSF-RR023.pdfAccessed on 11th November 2012Cameron, D (2011) saddlery Troubled Families new plans unveiled. Thursday 15th December 2011. open at http//www.number10.gov.uk/news/tackling-troubled-families-new-plans-unveiled/Accessed 18th October 2012Cameron, D (2011) We need a social recuperation in Britain every bit as much as we need an economic oneonline Thursday 15th December 2011Available at http//www.number10.gov.uk/news/troubled-families-speech/ttp//www.number10.gov.uk/news/troubled-families-speech/Accessed 18th October 2012Casey, L (2012) Listening to Troubled Families, Department for Communities.Av ailable at http//www.communities.gov.uk/documents/communities/pdf/2183663.pdfAccessed on 10th October 2012Catch 22 (2012)Available at http//www.catch22.org.uk/Families?gclid=CImi3K_SxbMCFUbKtAodnQUA0QAccessed 10th November 2012Cleaver, H. and Nicholson, D. (2007) agnatic Learning Disability and Childrens Needs Family Experiences and Effective Practice. London. Jessica Kingsley Publishers.Children first the child protection system in England Education Committee (2012) onlineAvailable at http//www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmselect/cmeduc/137/13706.htma38Accessed 10th November 2012Cheshire West and Chester Council (2012) Team around the Family (TAF) online twelfth August 2012Available at http//www.cheshirewestandchester.gov.uk/default.aspx?page=2025Accessed on 1st November 2012Cleaver, H. Nicholson,D. (2007) Parental Learning Disability and Childrens Needs Family Experiences and Effective Practice. London. Jessica Kingsley Publishers.Clifford,D and Burke,B (2009) Anti-O ppressive Ethics and Values in Social Work. London. Palgrave Macmillan.Crisp,B.,Anderson,M.,Orme,J and Lister,P. (2007) Assessment FrameworksA Critical Reflection, British Journal of Social Work, 37, pp.1059-1077Daniel, B. Taylor, J. Scott, J (2009) Noticing and helping the neglected child. London Department for children, Schools and Families.Data surety Act 1989 onlineAvailable at http//www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/29/contentsAccessed 30th October 2012Davis, M. (2002) The Blackwell associate degree to Social Work. Oxford Blackwell Publishing.Department of Health, Department for Education and Skills (2007) Good practice guidance on working with parents with learning disability onlineAvailable at http//www.dh.gov.uk/prod_consum_dh/groups/dh_digitalassets/dh/en/documents/digitalasset/dh_075118.pdfAccessed 10th November 2012Department of Health (2001) Valuing People a new strategy for learning disability for the 21st century.Available at http//www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandsta tistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_4009153Accessed on 25th October 2012Department of Health (2002a) Fair Access to Care Services Guidance on Eligibility Criteria for Adult Social Care. London. Departmentof Health.Department of Health (1989) An invention to the Children Act 1989. HSMO. London.Department of Health (1989) The Children Act 1989 onlineAvailable at http//www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1989/41/contentsAccessed on 11th October 2012Department of Health, Home Office and Department for Education and Employment (2000) Framework for the Assessment of Children in Need and their Families, London. letter paper Office.Department of Health (2003) The Victoria Climbie Inquiry Summary Report of an Inquiry. London Department of Health.Department of Health (2010) Working Together to Safeguard Children A Guide to Inter-agency Working to Safeguard and Promote the Welfare of Children.Available at fromhttps//www.education.gov.uk/publications/standard/publicationdetail/page1 /DCSF-00305-2010.Accessed 10th October 2012Department of Health (2010) Valuing People Now The Delivery Plan 2010-2011. Making it happen for everyoneAvailable at http//base-uk.org/sites/base-uk.org/files/user-raw/11-06/valuing_people_now_delivery_plan_2010-11.pdfAccessed 20th October 2012Emerson,E. Malam, S. Davies, I Spencer, K.(2005) Adults with Learning Difficulties in England. London Office for National StatisticsEvery Child Matters 2004Available at http//www.dcsf.gov.uk/everychildmatters/Accessed on 19th October 2012Erikson, E (1982) The Lifecycle Completed, cited in Wilson,K.,Ruch, G., Lymbery, M.,Cooper, A. Becker,S.,Brammer,A.,Clawson, R.,Littlechild,B.,Paylor,I.,Smith,R. (2008)Social Work An introduction to contemporary practice. Essex. Pearson Education Limited.Equality Act 2010 online LondonAvailable at http//www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/pdfs/ukpga_20100015_en.pdfAccessed on 25th October 2012Family Action- Welfare SupportAvailable from http//www.family-action.org.u k/home.aspx?id=11578Family Placements Available from http//www.barnardos.org.uk/fosteringandadoption/foster_adopt/fostering/fosteringandadoption_fostering_placements.htmAccessed on 17th October 2012Family Action- Welfare SupportAvailable at http//www.family-action.org.uk/home.aspx?id=11578Accessed on 28th October 2012Featherstone,B. (2006) Rethinking family support in the current policy context, British Journal of Social Work, 36(1), pp.5-19Gardner, D.S. Tuchman, E. and Hawkins, R. (2010) Teaching Note A Cross-Curricular, Problem-Based Project to Promote Understanding of Poverty in Urban Communities. Journal of Social Work Education Vol.46, (1) pp 147-156Glaun, D and Brown, P. (1999) Motherhood, Intellectual Disability and Child Protection Characteristics of a Court Sample. Journal of Intellectual and Developmental Disabil