IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v43y1996i3p303-314.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Child protection or professional self-preservation by the baby nurses? Public health nurses and child protection in Ireland

Author

Listed:
  • Butler, Shane

Abstract

An exploratory, focus group methodology was used to elicit the views of public health nurses (PHNs) on the topic of child welfare and protection in the context of new legislation and evolving child care policy in Ireland. The nurses' views were considerably at variance with the officially stated commitment to inter-disciplinary collaboration and coordination within the Community Care Programmes of Ireland's regional health boards. The PHNs feared that involvement in child care proceedings of a social control or adversarial nature would compromise them in terms of their traditional curative and preventive health roles, and, on this basis, argued that social workers should retain the bulk, if not all, of the responsibility for such child care activity. The nurses also defined their work roles in terms of their own traditional, professional commitment to individuals, families and communities, and felt less bound by or even aware of the corporate responsibility of their employing health board. It is concluded that the enactment of new legislation and allocation of additional resources do not resolve the issues of inter-disciplinary collaboration in this area.

Suggested Citation

  • Butler, Shane, 1996. "Child protection or professional self-preservation by the baby nurses? Public health nurses and child protection in Ireland," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 303-314, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:43:y:1996:i:3:p:303-314
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0277-9536(95)00378-9
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

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

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Anthony J. Onwuegbuzie & Rebecca K. Frels, 2015. "A Framework for Conducting Critical Dialectical Pluralist Focus Group Discussions Using Mixed Research Techniques," Journal of Educational Issues, Macrothink Institute, vol. 1(2), pages 159177-1591, December.
    2. Sigad, Laura I. & Beker, Guy & Lev-Wiesel, Rachel & Eisikovits, Zvi, 2019. "“Alone with our interpretations”: Uncertainty in child abuse intervention among healthcare professionals," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 206-213.

    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:socmed:v:43:y:1996:i:3:p:303-314. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    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.