![Sample our Health and Social Care journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5938/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Health-Social-Care.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
Australia and the United Kingdom have mandatory systems of case reviews, which are conducted whenever a child known to welfare or health services has died or been seriously harmed due to maltreatment. In the United Kingdom those conducting case reviews are required to involve family members in their deliberations. This study employed discourse analysis to examine the representation of family voices in 41 Overview Reports of Serious Case Reviews undertaken in England and published during 2014. The findings revealed that the contributions of family members were generally relegated or their legitimacy undercut by the positivist framing of most overview reports. However, the research also identified how the framing of family contributions within an interpretivist paradigm could engender highly complex understanding of deficiencies in child protection systems and lead to crucial new learning for professionals.
在澳大利亚和英国，福利及健康服务机构如果出现儿童因受虐待而死亡或严重伤害的情况，就要接受调查系统的强制性审查。在英国，调查会考虑儿童家人的意见。本文对2014年发表的41起“严重案例调查的审读”资料中家庭成员的意见做了话语分析。作者发现，家庭成员的意见多被淡化，其合法性被审查报告的实证主义结构所削弱。不过作者也找到在阐释性模式中结构家庭成员意见的办法，可以丰富对儿童保护体系缺陷的理解，为专业人员提供重要的新知。