Welcome to the latest edition of Ethics and Social Welfare. In this Editorial, alongside the usual introduction to the content of this issue, we want to tell you about some exciting developments for the journal.
We have, from the outset of the journal, been committed to providing a space for practitioners, students and those using services to publish in our Practice section. From the first meeting of the board of the journal in 2006 it was agreed that there should be a commitment to providing space in the journal for the discussion of ethical issues as they arise in practice. The idea was that the main section of the journal would be reserved for peer-reviewed academic papers, but that the ‘Practice section’ as it became known would be open for contributions from service users, carers, practitioners or from academics who wanted to make points about their own experience of ethical issues in practice. The fundamental aim of the section was to encourage a myriad of voices who are seldom or not heard in academic journals such as service users, carers, undergraduate students and practitioners to use any method (case studies, poetry, letters, reflective writing) which they felt comfortable with, to explore matters of ethics and practice. This meant that papers would not need to go through the publisher’s processing systems but sent direct to our newly appointed Practice Editors, Beverley Burke and Andrew Maynard who have continued to support and lead the section from 2006 until they stepped down from this role in 2020. The journal editors and board are very grateful for their hard work. They introduced the first section in 2007 with a particular welcome for contributions from ‘service users’ carers and practitioners’.
Whilst it has proved (unsurprisingly) difficult to get contributions from service users and carers, despite support and advice from the practice editors, over the years the section has included a remarkable range of papers of great interest from different sources. Some themes were quickly established in the first issue: academics talking about practical ethical issues in their field, especially relating to research ethics; students expressing their concerns about ethical practice on placement, and practitioners faced with difficult ethical decisions. It had been agreed that we would expect pieces of up to 3,000 words in length, and most contributions have been towards that maximum. Contributions have been from a great variety of settings, as in the first couple of issues where law court enquiries, mental health, and social work training were featured. These short papers from the practice section have also been perhaps surprisingly popular for readers of the journal. One early example of this was the paper in Vol 1, Issue 2, by Sandra Harrison, a retired practitioner, whose ‘Tom’s Story: An Unethical Tale’ was at the top or near the top of the most-read articles in the journal for a number of years. It was an engaging narrative of great humanity about her experience of intervening in the life of a young man with various forms of disability, including her decision to steer him away from the legal consequences of his misdemeanours.
A striking contribution was made by Lilias Ward who described the ethical dilemmas that arose when she agreed with a national TV company to make a secret film, exposing the treatment of elderly people in small unregulated homes, (Vol 2: 01). This film helped to bring about changes in law and policy, but inevitably involved her in deception whilst making the film. Kath Fitzgibbon questioned the ethics of the ‘helping’ relationship (Vol 2: 02), whilst Sharon Rodie reflected on the differing values involved in different professional perspectives (Vol2: 03).
It is in this space where we have published the winning contributions from the Jo Campling Memorial prize. These continued to make useful contributions, and have often been well received by readers. For example, a postgraduate student’s discussion about the inclusion of marginalised voices in literature reviews was a popular topic on social media, (Ribenfors 14: 02).
However, after many debates and a reflective and critical evaluation of the section it has become clear, that we would do well to re-launch the section by building on its initial aims and successes to attract a wider range of contributions from across the globe, and with even fewer restrictions on the style, length and format. After a thorough review we are now relaunching the practice section of the journal, which will be known as ‘Ethics in Practice’. The aim is to continue to encourage submissions from those outside of the academic field, as well as academics who wish to write on practice issues and we are keen to broaden the International contributions to this section. It has become apparent over the last few years that for many, the idea of writing a paper – albeit a shorter one – is something of a hurdle to attracting publications. Therefore our aim with the new ‘Ethics in Practice’ section is to encourage a diversity of formats, this might include short papers but we also welcome other forms of writing such as reflective blogs, poetry and interview pieces. Alongside this we recognise that for many the idea of writing for an academic journal can feel intimidating, and so we are looking to work more closely with potential contributors to help them develop contributions. In this edition of the journal we are launching what we hope will be a reinvigorated practice section with three contributions. A poem by Phillip Hill titled ‘There’s a Schizo on Our Street’, an accompanying ‘In Conversation’ piece with the poet and a short article on child and adolescent mental health services in Oman. The pieces are linked by their focus on mental health issues but are very different in their formats and we hope that this will not only stimulate discussion about the issues presented but also generate some ideas for further contributions.
The Jo Campling Memorial Prize has also been a feature of the Journal since its inception. For the past 13 years this has been a student essay prize with submissions invited each year and assessed by the board. It has become increasingly difficult to attract submissions for the prize in recent years, a sign perhaps of the increasing pressures on those studying in the field of balancing their studies alongside caring responsibilities and the needs to engage in paid work in order to be financially secure. We have also become aware that a number of other journals in the field now offer student essay prizes. With these issues in mind the board will now be awarding 2 Jo Campling Memorial Prizes each year to contributions published within the journal. One of these will be awarded to the best paper from an Early Career Researcher (either a Post Graduate Researcher or a person within 5 years of the award of their PhD). The second prize will be awarded to the best contribution published within the ‘Ethical Issues in Practice’ section of the journal.
The board are really excited by both of these developments and we look forward to receiving your submissions. If you are interested in writing for the ‘Ethics in Practice’ section or would like to discuss your ideas please contact Nicki Ward at [email protected].
And so, onto the excellent papers which appear in this issue of the journal. I’m very pleased to note that this issue of the journal is truly International. Alongside the paper from Oman published in our newly launched ‘Ethics in Practice’ section we have 6 incredibly diverse and interesting papers all of which come from outside of the UK. The papers consider both theoretical and applied issues of ethical concern and span a range of disciplines.
In the first of the articles, Line Festvåg and colleagues present an authoethnographic analysis of supporting a parent through transitions in care support. Set in the context of recent reforms in the Norwegian healthcare system the authors used the interesting method of collaborative autoethnography for their research. Despite the particular geographical context the article reflects many of the themes found in the literature on integrated care, or rather the failure of integrated care, noting that the systematic routines, procedures and practices work together to restrict opportunities for meaningful partnership and user involvement.
Karen Broadley writes about applied ethics in child protection. Drawing on an Aristotelian approach to virtue ethics, Broadley argues that such an approach offers a more appropriate guide for child protection practice than the technical rational approaches which have become increasingly embedded in social work practice in Western contexts, because it embeds the inclusion of practice wisdom. The article makes an interesting argument and considers both the strengths and potential weaknesses of such an approach. It also, in my opinion, provides an excellent example for students of social work and social care of how to apply theory to practice.
We have 2 articles in this issue which adopt a care ethics approach. Hee-Kang Kim considers the way that care ethics can act as a challenge to structural oppression in care settings. Drawing on the work of Joan Tronto, and IM Young’s concept of oppression, Kim’s paper aims to reveal the power and inequality of care and demonstrates the way that ‘care status’ acts as one of the axes of oppression within society. The second paper which adopts this approach, by Angelika Thelin, seeks to address the question ‘how do national policies in Sweden define and attend to self-neglect among older people with dementia’. Written in the context of Swedish policy this paper conducts a policy narrative analysis which explores how national policies in Sweden guide care managers.
Our 2nd paper from Australia focuses on Ethical challenges in research practice, specifically participatory and collaborative research with refugees. The experience of the authors, Jaya Dantas and Shelley Gower, is presented as a series of ethical challenges which they sought to overcome in their own research with refugees. The ethical challenges outlined such as balancing university requirements with participant self-determination, representation and benefits to participants will resonate with many fellow researchers and the authors explore how active participation and collaboration might help to overcome some of these challenges.
The final paper in this issue comes from Jerome Grand who considers how public community organising might serve as a defence against managerialism. Here community organising is used as a critical concept to analyse the role of the voluntary sector in the provision of social services in Switzerland. Drawing on a range of data collected between 2013 and 2018, and based on a case study of the situation in Switzerland and of one particular voluntary organisation, the author argues that this way of working challenges public management.