We start this issue of the journal with a reminder: there is still time to express your interest in contributing to the journal’s editorial work. Two key opportunities are currently open. First, we are recruiting a new Editor in Chief to take responsibility for the journal when I, as current Editor, step down. Full details are available here: http://bit.ly/CESWcfe At the same time, we have vacancies on the editorial board of the journal – details are available at http://explore.tandfonline.com/page/beh/cesw-editorial-board-open-call. I welcome informal enquiries from anyone who would like to know more about either of these positions, so please do get in touch if you would like to discuss further.
In this issue we open with a cluster of papers that address generic contemporary themes in social work, which are highly relevant to practice in any context. First is an EU-wide study by Therese Saltkjel in Norway of the association between material deprivation and welfare state generosity, which found that both absolute inequalities and levels of material deprivation were lower in more generous welfare states, with notable impacts for three social risk groups – individuals facing limiting long-standing illness, people without employment and those with poor education. Mercedes Rodríguez, M. Ángeles Minguela Recover and José A. Camacho Ballesta, from Spain, follow with a focus on a different form of welfare capital – proximity to social networks – the characteristics of which were found to influence the likelihood of receiving informal care. Both studies stimulate us to take pause for thought about the direction of travel for social work in terms of how it promotes investment in collective and community resources.
The generic theme continues with a paper by Maya Tcholakova, Viktoria Sotirova and Yoanna Tzvetanova exploring discrimination and oppression in social work practice in Bulgaria. The journal has carried relatively few contributions from this country and, as such, this paper provides an important window on the perspectives of both professionals and service users. Of concern is the low awareness both groups had of antidiscrimination legislation and regulations, in the context of discrimination and oppression being seen as widespread phenomena. Alessandro Sicora, writing from Italy, addresses the culture of blame and punishment in social work when things go wrong, and argues for reflective practice that can engage proactively with the concept of learning from professional mistakes in order to reduce the ensuing harm and improve the quality of services. Concluding this opening cluster of papers on generic themes, Siri Fjeldheim from Norway demonstrates how our perceptions of social work today are influenced still by classical texts. The author uses translation theory to challenge the notion of social work ‘borrowing’ from other disciplines, outlining instead a dynamic interchange of ideas and concepts between disciplines operating in the interdisciplinary field.
The remaining papers in this issue address different aspects of social work with children and their families. Ajwang Warria, writing from South Africa, explores social work’s contribution to the well-being of trafficked children in the context of what needs to be a multinational, multiagency, sustained response that focuses simultaneously on prevention, prosecution and protection. David Harrop and Vasilios Ioakimidis, writing from England, provide insight into the views and everyday professional lives of social workers working with children and families in the context of military conflict in occupied Palestinian territories. Patrick Dolan, Mary Shannon and Berni Smyth place a similar focus on ‘voices from the field’ in their study of practitioners in intensive family support services in the Republic of Ireland and in England, whose experiences provide important pointers to approaches that can engage hard to reach families. Carme Monserrat and Ferran Casas demonstrate the impact on educational attainment of children growing up in public care in Spain, with particular disadvantage for those in residential care. Ioana Popa, Paola Borrelli, Ruxandra Breda-Popa and Cristina Montomoli, writing from Italy and France, bring important insights about challenges for young people in Romania, a country that, like Bulgaria above, rarely features in the pages of this journal. Their study of the individual and family characteristics of young people who come to the attention of youth justice services identifies risk factors that can assist in targeting preventive intervention. And finally, Graeme Simpson and Katja Nowacki explore the tensions between the principles of child protection and parental support through the lens of two cases – Kevin in Germany and Peter in England – both of which altered the balance towards a children’s rights approach and thus triggered significant changes to social work practice.
We wish you thoughtful reading of this collection of papers, which provides a varied and diverse picture yet held together by common threads and themes.