New families, new governance and old habits

Abstract

In December 2011, the UK Government formally launched its ‘troubled families’ initiative. This is a focused programme of interventions, coordinated at local level and paid for by results. It has been described by the Prime Minister as a part of the ‘social recovery’ that has to be set alongside the economic recovery that is his government's priority. It is illustrative of a decisive shift in the nature of the welfare state as it reflects the neo-liberal political project. It also reflects a purposed shift in social attitudes towards troubled and troublesome families, driven to a considerable degree by a vicious popular press. It is indicative of a marked shift in the pendulum from ‘rehabilitation’ to ‘rescue’ as the focus of welfare practice with children and families. Recent developments in the promotion of adoption of children in the UK should be viewed in this light. This paper considers how those families with tense or divergent relationships with the state are to be governed in the context of a state and a set of social attitudes that represents a decisive break with the post-war welfare consensus.

Keywords::

• neo-liberal
• adoption
• troubled families
• governance

Notes

^1. Unless otherwise stated, comments attributed to Cameron in this paper are taken from the speech he made on 15 December 2011 at the Sandwell Christian Centre in Oldbury, West Midlands at the launch of the TFP.

^2. The TFP was designed to operate on a payment by results basis. Hence, cash sums would be made to providers of services against specific outcomes. For example, if all 3 of the ‘education and crime/ antisocial behavior’ outcomes were achieved, the provider would receive £700 per family. The outcomes were defined as: ‘each child of the family has had fewer than 3 fixed exclusions and less than 15% of unauthorized absences in the last 3 school terms; and a 60% reduction in anti-social behavior across the family in the last 6 months; and offending rate by all minors in the family reduced by at least 33% in the last 6 months (DLGC, 2013c, p. 10).