Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

Lost identities and the need for a\ud framework for intervention

By James Reid and T. Murphy


In the UK the public discourse on separated families is rich with the stereotypes of 'deadbeat dads' and 'obstructive mums'. It is the author’s view that these stereotypes are also common in public service social work with families, in part encouraged by uncritical approaches to assessment perpetuated by mandated tools such as the Framework for Assessment of Children in Need and their Families (DH, 2000), the Common Assessment Framework (2005) and the Integrated Children’s System (2005). There are continuing concerns about the quality of assessments and that good practice in this regard is inhibited by managerialist and bureaucratic approaches.\ud \ud One negative outcome of this, particularly for children in contested contact proceedings, is denied familial and cultural experiences and lost identity. The myth of the ‘deadbeat’ and ‘obstructive’ parent means that many non-resident parents are anonymous in practitioner’s minds and records, not helped as many children’s stories are reduced to a ‘cut and paste’ approach to assessment. Such anonymity means that possibilities offered by the non-resident parent’s family, culture and community are denied and unavailable to the child. \ud \ud The authors believe that a Framework for Intervention is necessary of which assessment would be one part. This paper critiques contemporary public social work practice with children and their families in the UK and explores the possibilities of better outcomes for children offered by Framework for Intervention

Topics: HQ, K1
OAI identifier:

Suggested articles


  1. (2002). (Available at: or DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2006.00773.x)
  2. (1999). Absent Fathers? doi
  3. (2008). Analysis of calls from fathers to Family Rights Group’s advice service’ in
  4. (1998). Assessment in Social Work. doi
  5. (2005). Assessment of Parenting Capacity. Literature Review.
  6. (2002). Beyond the Welfare Principle’ Child and Family Law Quarterly,
  7. (1997). Child Protection: Risk and the Moral Order. doi
  8. (2007). Children and Families – Assessment and Planning’
  9. (2001). Comparative Hypothesis Assessment and Quasi Triangulation as process knowledge Assessment Strategies in Social Work Practice. doi
  10. (2001). Constructing Men in Child Protection Work’. doi
  11. (2008). Family Relationships: children's perspectives. London: One Plus One.
  12. (2008). Fathers and the Social Work Curriculum’ doi
  13. (2008). Fathers Matter Volume 2: Further findings on fathers and their involvement with social care services.
  14. (2008). Fathers Matter Volume 2: Further findings on fathers and their involvement with social care services. London: Family Rights Group Flouri, E.
  15. (2006). Fathers Matter: Research findings on fathers and their involvement with social care services.
  16. (2009). I’m not saying it was easy: Contact problems in separated families. London: Gingerbread Penfold,
  17. (2001). Knowledge, truth and reflexivity: The problem of judgement in social work’, doi
  18. (2004). Living with risk: Mental health service user involvement in risk assessment and management, doi
  19. (2005). Making Contact happen or making contact work?
  20. (1986). Narrative Psychology: the storied nature of human conduct. doi
  21. (2001). National Survey of Child Support Agency Clients. London: DWP
  22. (2003). Non-resident parent contact.
  23. (2006). Parenting Support: Guidance for Local Authorities in England. Nottingham: DCSF Department for Education and Skills
  24. (1996). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. London: Penguin; (2nd Rev Ed)
  25. (1997). Practising Social Work Law, doi
  26. (2002). Representativeness revisited: Attribute substitution in intuitive judgment’ doi
  27. (2005). Residence and Contact Disputes in Court, Volume 2. London,
  28. (1992). Rights and Utility in Anglo-Australian Family Law', doi
  29. (1999). Risk Assessment and Decision Making’, In
  30. (2006). Social Work, Law, Money and Trust: Paying for Lawyers in Child Protection Work', doi
  31. (2009). Supervision reviewed: reflections on two different social work models in England and Sweden', doi
  32. (1978). Taking Rights Seriously. London: Butterworth Eekelaar, doi
  33. (2007). The Children’s Plan; building brighter futures.
  34. (1973). The Coercive Social doi
  35. (1990). The extent, nature, and validity of sexual abuse allegations in custody/visitation disputes’, doi
  36. (2005). The General Household Survey. London: Office for National Statistics [Accessed Online 04/07/09:] ONS
  37. (1998). The Normal Chaos of Family Law’. doi
  38. (1996). The paramountcy principle: Consensus or Construct?' doi
  39. (2008). The Pyramid Principle: logic in writing and thinking. Harlow, Essex: Financial Times / Prentice Hall (3rd edition)
  40. (2003). The social work assessment of parenting: An exploration’, doi
  41. (1995). Values and Ethics’, In doi
  42. (2002). Values, ethics and social work’ in doi
  43. (2000). Working with fathers.
  44. (2006). Young adults’ perceptions of courtordered contact’.

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.