Adolescent substance use in the context of the family: a qualitative study of young people’s views on parent-child attachments, parenting style and parental substance use

BACKGROUND: Adolescent substance use can place youth at risk of a range of poor outcomes. Few studies have attempted to explore in-depth young people's perceptions of how familial processes and dynamics influence adolescent substance use. OBJECTIVES: This article aimed to explore risk and protective factors for youth substance use within the context of the family with a view to informing family based interventions. METHODS: Nine focus groups supplemented with participatory techniques were facilitated with a purposive sample of sixty-two young people (age 13-17 years) from post-primary schools across Northern Ireland. The data were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Three themes emerged from the data: (1) parent-child attachments, (2) parenting style, and (3) parental and sibling substance misuse. Parent-child attachment was identified as an important factor in protecting adolescents from substance use in addition to effective parenting particularly an authoritative style supplemented with parental monitoring and strong parent-child communication to encourage child disclosure. Family substance use was considered to impact on children's substance use if exposed at an early age and the harms associated with parental substance misuse were discussed in detail. Both parent and child gender differences were cross-cutting themes. CONCLUSION: Parenting programmes (tailored to mothers and fathers) may benefit young people via components on authoritative styles, parental monitoring, communication, nurturing attachments and parent-child conflict. Youth living with more complex issues, e.g., parental substance misuse, may benefit from programmes delivered beyond the family environment, e.g., school based settings

The Power of Feminist Judgments?

Recent years have seen the advent of two feminist judgment-writing projects, the Women’s Court of Canada, and the Feminist Judgments Project in England. This article analyses these projects in light of Carol Smart’s feminist critique of law and legal reform and her proposed feminist strategies in Feminism and the Power of Law (1989). At the same time, it reflects on Smart’s arguments 20 years after their first publication and considers the extent to which feminist judgment-writing projects may reinforce or trouble her conclusions. It argues that both of these results are discernible—that while some of Smart’s contentions have proved to be unsustainable, others remain salient and have both inspired and hold important cautions for feminist judgment-writing projects

Safe Staffing and Workload Management in Social Work: A Scoping Review of Legislation, Policy and Practice

In Northern Ireland social work specific legislation is planned for safe staffing across the governmental sector. As part of a broader research project to inform this development, we conducted a scoping review seeking examples of safe staffing definitions, safe staffing-related legislation, policy and practice in social work and associated professions from the UK and internationally. We searched English language databases in 2023 web sites and reference lists as well as grey literature.Finding no international examples of social work-specific safe staffing definitions, legislation or policy outside of Children’s Services, we offer a tentative definition to the current debate. Our scoping review found examples of individual social workers and local teams developing caseload management practices to promote “safer” working, which may be useful for policymakers and regulators to consider. However these need greater conceptual clarity, consensus over definitions and outcomes, and evaluation for cost-effectiveness. Given the limited evidence in this area, recommendations include the need for further research to ascertain what “safe staffing” does, can and should mean in social work, and what can work in different contexts and at different levels of policy and practice to inform service user and social worker safety in social work.<br/

Safer and Effective Staffing Research and Policy Development Older People’s and Children’s Social Work in Northern Ireland:Report 1- The Starting Point: Baseline Analysis

The issue of safe staffing in the Health and Social Care (HSC) sector has come to the fore because of recruitment and retention challenges, staff burnout, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, and exacerbated by the cost-of-living crisis, whereby those from areas of higher deprivation are at increased risk of statutory social work intervention (Bywaters et al., 2020; Limb, 2022; McFadden et al., 2015; McFadden et al., 2024a; McFadden et al., 2024b; Moriarty et al., 2018; Ravalier et al., 2022; The Guardian, Dec 2022; Vassilaki et al., 2022). The World Health Organisation (WHO) emphasises that safe staffing is not simply about the number of staff but also about having staff with required competencies equitably distributed and with support from the broader health system (WHO, 2016). Safe staffing should also mitigateburnout, workforce turnover and improve retention issues arising from workloads in excess of human capacity and highly stressed working environments (CIPD, 2022). In the UK, various operational tools and policy guidance govern staffing in different HSC sectors. Adult social care, regulated by the Care Quality Commission, defines safe staffing through specific guidelines (Care Quality Commission, 2024). Nurses adhere to policy guidance and tools such as the care hours per patient day (CHPD) to determine safe staffing levels (Carter, 2016; Gianassi and Rudman, 2018), the Shelford Safer Nursing Care Tool (2013), RCN Toolkit for Older People’s Wards (2012), Rhys Hearn (1970), the National Services Scotland Care Home Staffing Model (2009; as cited in Mitchell et al., 2017), and the Delivering Care Framework (2015) is similarly utilised in Northern Ireland. The Nursing and Midwifery Council underscores that safe staffing is not only about numbers but also skills-mix and considers other staff and settings (Nursing &amp; Midwifery Council, 2016). There are less developed operational tools and frameworks established on safe staffing in social work. In the Department of Health, Northern Ireland, Social Work Workforce Review (2022, Recommendation 2b), safe staffing is a priority area, with regional consistency in social work practitioner numbers a current focus of attention (Davidson et al., 2022). In Scotland, regulations for safe staffing are outlined in the Integrated Health and Social Care Workforce Plan (2019) and legislation is due to be enacted in Scotland in 2024 (The Health and Care Staffing; Scotland Act 2019). Intensive research in Scotland on social worker caseloads is available in the ‘Setting the Bar’ Report (Millar &amp; Barrie, 2022) published by Social Work Scotland. The report estimates indicative workloads for Childrens’ Services of no more than 15 cases (children) and for adults 20-25 cases per staff member. Experiences in the U.S. and Finland suggest that numbers alone may not guarantee a safe service (Child Welfare Information Gateway; Yliruka et al., 2022) however, numbers provide a baseline of what is realistic before social workers experience burnout and reduction in wellbeing

Perceptions of safe staffing, self-reported mental wellbeing and intentions to leave the profession among UK social workers:a mixed methods study

The purpose of the present study was to examine social workers perceptions of safe staffing levels and correlate these perceptions with standardised measurements of wellbeing in the UK. This cross-sectional mixed methods study analysed data from 406 social workers from November 2022 until late January 2023. Data were collected using anonymous online surveys including both qualitative and quantitative methods examining mental wellbeing, burnout, and intentions to leave the profession post-COVID-19. Findings revealed that only one-third of social workers responding perceived that they work in an environment of safe staffing. There were also significant differences in wellbeing and an increase in personal, work-related, and client-related burnout in social workers who believed their service did not operate a safe staff-to-service user ratio. Likewise, compared to those who perceived their service to operate within a safe staff-to-service-user ratio, those who perceived unsafe ratios were more likely to communicate their intention to leave the profession. Qualitative findings helped contextualize the quantitative results. These findings suggest that increased demand for social work services, shortage of qualified social workers, high workloads, inadequate resources, and retention problems, contribute to additional pressure on existing staff and have implications for policy, practice, and research in social work