In the UK the public discourse on separated families has been rich with the stereotypes of ʹdeadbeat dadsʹ\ud and ʹobstructive mumsʹ. It is the author’s view that these stereotypes have also been common in public\ud service social work and concomitant legal practice with families, in part encouraged by uncritical\ud approaches to assessment perpetuated by mandated tools such as the Framework for Assessment of Children\ud in Need and their Families (DH, 2000), the Common Assessment Framework (2005) and the Integrated Children’s\ud System (2005). There are continuing concerns about the quality of assessments and that good practice in\ud this regard is inhibited by managerialist and bureaucratic approaches and imbalance between social work\ud practitioners and their legal representatives.\ud One negative outcome of this, particularly for children in contested contact proceedings, is denied\ud familial and cultural experiences and lost identity. The myth of the ‘deadbeat’ and ‘obstructive’ parent\ud means that many non‐resident parents are anonymous in practitioner’s minds and records, not helped as\ud many children’s stories are reduced to a ‘cut and paste’ approach to assessment. Such anonymity means\ud that possibilities offered by the non‐resident parent’s family, culture and community are denied and\ud unavailable to the child. Practitioners worry about accountability both within and out with the courtroom\ud and practice in an atmosphere of increased public hostility and scrutiny. Utility is determined not just by\ud statute but by working practices and culture, by knowledge and skills, and the prevailing social and\ud political priorities of the day and this does not necessarily favour positive outcomes for children and\ud nonresident fathers
To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.