Ghent University Academic Bibliography

Advanced

Constructing the 'child at risk' in social work reports: a way of seeing is a way of not seeing

Griet Roets UGent, Kris Rutten UGent, Rudi Roose UGent, Caroline Vandekinderen UGent and Ronald Soetaert UGent (2015) CHILDREN & SOCIETY. 29(3). p.198-208
abstract
In the context of the changing relationship between children, parents and the welfare state, professionals have to deal with notions of the “child at risk”. In child welfare and protection, the issue of normative judgement in (risk) assessment and documentation is an essential area for exploration for social workers. We examine the practice of report writing in which future professionals exercise power while assessing, documenting, and judging the child as “at risk”. We report on a study about a fictional social work case conducted with 152 students in Belgium, in which we developed a rhetorical analysis of the “terministic screens” used in writing reports.
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
year
type
journalArticle (original)
publication status
published
subject
keyword
child protection, child at risk, report writing, rhetorical perspective, risk assessment and documentation, EDUCATION, PROTECTION, EXPERIENCE, SERVICES, HISTORY
journal title
CHILDREN & SOCIETY
volume
29
issue
3
pages
198 - 208
Web of Science type
Article
Web of Science id
000352527100004
JCR category
SOCIAL WORK
JCR impact factor
0.808 (2015)
JCR rank
21/41 (2015)
JCR quartile
3 (2015)
ISSN
0951-0605
DOI
10.1111/chso.12115
language
English
UGent publication?
yes
classification
A1
copyright statement
I have retained and own the full copyright for this publication
id
5802077
handle
http://hdl.handle.net/1854/LU-5802077
date created
2015-01-11 10:52:33
date last changed
2016-12-19 15:40:03
@article{5802077,
  abstract     = {In the context of the changing relationship between children, parents and the welfare state, professionals have to deal with notions of the {\textquotedblleft}child at risk{\textquotedblright}. In child welfare and protection, the issue of normative judgement in (risk) assessment and documentation is an essential area for exploration for social workers. We examine the practice of report writing in which future professionals exercise power while assessing, documenting, and judging the child as {\textquotedblleft}at risk{\textquotedblright}. We report on a study about a fictional social work case conducted with 152 students in Belgium, in which we developed a rhetorical analysis of the {\textquotedblleft}terministic screens{\textquotedblright} used in writing reports.},
  author       = {Roets, Griet and Rutten, Kris and Roose, Rudi and Vandekinderen, Caroline and Soetaert, Ronald},
  issn         = {0951-0605},
  journal      = {CHILDREN \& SOCIETY},
  keyword      = {child protection,child at risk,report writing,rhetorical perspective,risk assessment and documentation,EDUCATION,PROTECTION,EXPERIENCE,SERVICES,HISTORY},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {3},
  pages        = {198--208},
  title        = {Constructing the 'child at risk' in social work reports: a way of seeing is a way of not seeing},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/chso.12115},
  volume       = {29},
  year         = {2015},
}

Chicago
Roets, Griet, Kris Rutten, Rudi Roose, Caroline Vandekinderen, and Ronald Soetaert. 2015. “Constructing the ‘Child at Risk’ in Social Work Reports: a Way of Seeing Is a Way of Not Seeing.” Children & Society 29 (3): 198–208.
APA
Roets, G., Rutten, K., Roose, R., Vandekinderen, C., & Soetaert, R. (2015). Constructing the “child at risk” in social work reports: a way of seeing is a way of not seeing. CHILDREN & SOCIETY, 29(3), 198–208.
Vancouver
1.
Roets G, Rutten K, Roose R, Vandekinderen C, Soetaert R. Constructing the “child at risk” in social work reports: a way of seeing is a way of not seeing. CHILDREN & SOCIETY. 2015;29(3):198–208.
MLA
Roets, Griet, Kris Rutten, Rudi Roose, et al. “Constructing the ‘Child at Risk’ in Social Work Reports: a Way of Seeing Is a Way of Not Seeing.” CHILDREN & SOCIETY 29.3 (2015): 198–208. Print.