IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/cysrev/v113y2020ics0190740918307539.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A critical consideration of the relationship between professional and public understandings of Family Support: Towards greater public awareness and discursive coherence in concept and delivery

Author

Listed:
  • McGregor, Caroline
  • Canavan, John
  • Gabhainn, Saoirse Nic

Abstract

The aim of this article is to consider critically the relationship between professional and public understandings of Family Support. It is based on research comprising baseline and follow-up population surveys carried out with 1000 respondents in each phase to establish levels of public awareness of the Parenting, Prevention and Family Support services provided by the Child and Family Agency in the Republic of Ireland (McGregor & Nic Gabhainn, 2016; McGregor & Nic Gabhainn, 2018). In the article, we draw on three main conceptual areas: Family Support, Public Awareness and Help-seeking. The findings either reflect some of the conceptual ambiguity in the academic field or illustrate major gaps between the theoretical and the actual. Thus, we found that, adults rely on informal supports in dealing with challenges and issues they face and that universal services are the next line of support, if informal sources are not enough, both of which reflect the literature. However, the findings show that the public do not see Family Support in terms of resource centers, specialist parenting programmes or other formal services. Rather, Family Support is more commonly associated with Child Protection. The findings and our analyses challenge us to provide better accounts of what Family Support is in order to ensure service-use, in particular in the context of preventing and / or intervening early to address the issues families face. Such accounts require more and better engagement with children, young people, parents and wider family members, and reflection by academics and researchers on the provenance of our own constructions of Family Support.

Suggested Citation

  • McGregor, Caroline & Canavan, John & Gabhainn, Saoirse Nic, 2020. "A critical consideration of the relationship between professional and public understandings of Family Support: Towards greater public awareness and discursive coherence in concept and delivery," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:cysrev:v:113:y:2020:i:c:s0190740918307539
    DOI: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.104952
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0190740918307539
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.104952?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mary Daly & Zlata Bruckhauf & Jasmina Byrne & Ninoslava Pecnik & Maureen Samms-Vaughan & Rachel Bray & Alice Margaria & UNICEF Office of Research - Innocenti, 2015. "Family and Parenting Support: Policy and Provision in a Global Context," Papers innins770, Innocenti Insights.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Toikko, Timo & Gawel, Aleksandra & Hietamäki, Juulia & Häkkilä, Laura & Seppälä, Piia & Zhu, Ning, 2024. "Macro-level predictors of child removals: Do social welfare benefits and services reduce demand for children’s out of home placements?," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Williams, Annie & Reed, Hayley & Rees, Gwyther & Segrott, Jeremy, 2018. "Improving relationship–based practice, practitioner confidence and family engagement skills through restorative approach training," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 170-177.
    2. Mona Sandbæk, 2017. "European Policies to Promote Children’s Rights and Combat Child Poverty," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-13, July.
    3. Roche, Steven, 2020. "Conceptualising children’s life histories and reasons for entry into residential care in the Philippines: Social contexts, instabilities and safeguarding," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    4. Luh Putu Maitra Agastya, Ni & Wise, Sarah & Kertesz, Margaret & Kusumaningrum, Santi, 2024. "Transformation of child welfare Institutions in Bandung, West Java: A case of deinstitutionalization in Indonesia," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    5. Steven Roche & Catherine Flynn, 2021. "Local child protection in the Philippines: A case study of actors, processes and key risks for children," Asia and the Pacific Policy Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 8(3), pages 367-383, September.
    6. Bernedo, Isabel M. & Almeida, Ana & Byrne, Sonia & González-Pasarín, Lucía & Pećnik, Ninoslava & Cruz, Orlanda & Uka, Ana & Skučienė, Daiva & Šumskaitė, Lina, 2024. "The use of evidence-based programmes in family support across Europe: A comparative survey study," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    7. Roche, Steven & Otarra, Carmela & Fell, Imogen & Belle Torres, Christine & Rees, Sydney, 2023. "Online sexual exploitation of children in the Philippines: A scoping review," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    8. Caroline McGregor & Carmel Devaney, 2020. "A Framework to Inform Protective Support and Supportive Protection in Child Protection and Welfare Practice and Supervision," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-23, April.
    9. Cohen, Franziska & Trauernicht, Mareike & Francot, Ryanne & Broekhuizen, Martine & Anders, Yvonne, 2020. "Professional competencies of practitioners in family and parenting support programmes. A German and Dutch case study," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    10. Sachin De Stone & Franziska Meinck & Lorraine Sherr & Lucie Cluver & Jenny Doubt & Frederick Mark Orkin & Caroline Kuo & Amogh Sharma & Imca Hensels & Sarah Skeen & Alice Redfern & Mark Tomlinson & UN, 2016. "Factors Associated with Good and Harsh Parenting of Pre-Adolescents and Adolescents in Southern Africa," Papers inwopa870, Innocenti Working Papers.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:cysrev:v:113:y:2020:i:c:s0190740918307539. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/childyouth .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.