Reflective Practice And Risk Essay

Reflective Practice And chance EssayThe purpose of this essay is to critic every(prenominal)y evaluate the following singing with reference to my own coif experience in working with venture. As fond actors it is especially critical that we apply a resiliency-lens, that is, a strengths-based practice draw near (Saleeby, 2006, p.198).With the focus of this piece of practice on working with a family, this essay bequeath pre paramountly look the above statement from the survey of a Children and Families popment. The essay will cast down with a brief enlist of the practice experience that will be referred to and will then explore the creationions of resiliency and strengths-based practice as come up as convey judging and lay on the lineiness way. The tender, cultural and political concepts that shape practice in relation to take a chance man get onment will likewise be explored. A reflective discussion of my practice will follow and this will incorporate the c oncepts of resilience and strengths-based practice as well as endangerment appraisal and take chances caution and how this approach was utilised to complete nonice board Pre-Birth Assessment. This discussion will alike be set indoors a theoretical role model of reflection.The practice experience that will be referred to within this essay is the estimate process I undertook in order to prep ar for the completion of a Pre-Birth Assessment which had been requested by the Community Ante-Natal accouche part. The completed Pre-Birth Assessment would be sent to the topical anesthetic Authoritys Child tri only ife Officer. This was in line with the Local Authoritys High jeopardy Pregnancy Protocol. BB is 18 course of instructions old and pregnant with her second child. She lives al angiotensin converting enzyme in local consent housing in a small village. Her oldest child, CA, was at the time of the referral 9 months old. BBs partner, BA, who is develop 21, is currently in pr ison serving a deuce year sentence for Assault to Severe Injury. BA is not expected to decease released from prison until October 2010. The Midwife was concerned that BB would find it difficult to be intimate with the raw(a) baby as well as her female child and described BB as appearing to lack capacity in her understanding of responsibility of CAs health and welf are and the health and well-being of both herself and her unborn baby. The midwife in any case raised concerns approximately BBs mental well-being with respect to her partners immense term prison sentence and in particular raised concerns that BB was decision it difficult to contemplate the stimulate of her second child with step to the fore the support of her partner. The Midwife was satisfied that substance/drug misuse was not an issue with BB.The concept of resilience refers to a dynamic process of overcoming the negative effects of seek exposure, coping productively with traumatic experiences and avoiding th e negative pathways associated with fortunes. (Rutter, 1985 Luthar et al, 2000). From a developmental perspective, a pathway ordure become negative when circumstances lead to lower berth than expected progress or regression. Positive pathways elapse as individuals or families overcome adversities. Turning points represent times when a pathway alters direction, such(prenominal)(prenominal) as when skipper handling en equal to(p)s a family or individual to start on or return to a cocksure pathway. (Hill et al 2007). Gilligan (2004) likewise send words that three elements are seen as essential to understanding resilience which arises from a process and results in positive adaption in the face of adversity. Further to this, Fergus and Zimmerman (2005) fence that a key requirement of resilience is the presence of both stake and defensive factors that either help bring about a positive outcome or reduce and avoid a negative outcome. In order to illuminate how resilience white thorn operate, the key relationships in the lives of children and their families should be explored. The relationships the children and their families go through with the wider world as well as their relationships with professionals should also be included in this exploration. (Gilligan, 2004).According to Hill et al (2007) some of the findings concerning resilience among young people as they move into adulthood are relevant to parents. The capacities and supports that assist their resilience also help them manage stresses arising from parental roles. However, lots of the work on parent and family support has been based on the concept of coping and the development or building on the strengths of families facing difficulties quite a than that of resilience (Pugh et al, 1995 Quinton, 2004). Nevertheless, as Hill et al (2007) point out successful coping equates to resilience (Hill et al, 2007, p.19).In order to identify and bolster strengths, as well as reduce risk Corcoran and Ni chols-Casebolt (2004) consider how a risk and resilience ecologic framework (Kirby and Fraser, 1997) potful fit with social full treatment emphasis on authority and the strengths-based perspective. Corcoran and Nichols-Casebolt (2004) put forward the ideas that the strengths perspective underlies the concepts of cautionary factors and resilience in which people are not only able to survive, nevertheless also triumph over difficult life circumstances. The ecological emphasis of the framework expands the focus beyond the individual to a mention of systemic factors that can create problems as well as amend them. (Corcoran and Nichols-Casebolt, 2004, p.212)In describing elements and principles of strength-based practice, Saleeby (2000) asks us to imagine an equilateral triangle. P at the flush stands for promise and possibility whilst C on the left represents capacities, competencies and character. R on the angle to the right symbolises re bloodlines, resilience and reserves. victorious into account the character and air of the helping relationship using the work of Carl Rogers (1951) by utilising respect, genuineness, concern, collaboration and empathy as well having serviceable and give up interventions can provide a linguistic context for the family and/or individual to confront the difficult and consider the future.Central to the strengths approach is to begin making an sagaciousness of the assets, resources and capacities within the service user and equally within their environment e.g. household composition, extended family, neighbourhood and local conveniences as well as access to community resources. (Saleeby, 2000 Corcoran Nichols-Casebolt, 2004). Further to this, professional appraisal needs to focus on strengths as well as deficits, on protective as well as risk factors. (Werner Smith, 1992 Gilligan, 2001). What also needs to be understood, in terms of professional assessment is that protective and risk factors have been found to vary according to the attribute of adversity, type of resilient outcome and life stage. Also risk factors in one context may by protective in another. (Rutter, 1999 Ungar, 2004). riskiness assessment should be understood as collecting information on the two key risk elements these are known as the outcomes (also known as the consequences, harm or damage) and their likelihood (also known as chance or exposure) and to assess a risk both should be taken into consideration. (Carson Bain, 2008 Titterton, 2005). guess assessment is also described as a systematic order of battle of information to identify if risks are heterogeneous and identifying the likelihood of their future occurrence. It can also be employ to predict the escalation of the presenting behaviour as well as the service users motivation for change. (Calder, 2002)When considering outcomes Carson Bain (2008) urge that a risk assessment only requires from a legal, ethical and professional perspective to cover intelligent outcomes. The goal should be to include as much information, and as many considerations as necessary but to keep the decision as wide-eyed as possible. Including unreasonable outcomes quickly become counterproductive and in that respectby army poor practice. Further to this beneficial outcomes should also be taken into consideration. run a risk assessment should also take into account that risk is being considered, and can be justified because its likely benefits may be more essential than the possible harms. Quality risk assessment requires us to think about the amount of harm and/or benefits which might be achieved.When assessing likelihood Carson Bain (2008) suggest that the knowledge source and the quality of knowledge are variable. They advocate the adoption of the cognitive continuum model by Hammond (1978 cited in Carson Bain, 2008). This suggests that we should be able to tell apart six levels of knowledge. The lowest level being intuitive judgement side by side(p) is peer-aided judgement where two or more people will helping knowledge, experience and discuss assumptions and predictions. The third is system-aided judgement e.g. supervisor/manager aided. The last- indue three levels relate to the quality of scientific and empirical query which may or may not be available. However, as Carson Bain point out the value of the cognitive continuum is that it reminds us thatWhen making an assessment of likelihood we ought to use knowledge from the highest level, providing it is relevant knowledge.(Carson Bain, 2008, p.142)Therefore, when conducting an assessment, it is important that the nature of the interactions between the family and environmental factors are examined carefully, including both positive and negative influences and knowledge and meaning attached to them explored and weighed up with the family. What is utilitarian in this respect is the use of grids and visual aids such as resilience/vulnerability matrix (Daniel Wassell, 2002), My World Triangle and genograms. The expediency of these is enhanced when completed together with the service user. At this point it is useful to mention that there are two basic assessment tools used to assess risk. These are clinical which involves professional judgement, information from interrogation on risk factors and constructs risk management as well as allowing intervention strategies to be tailored to situation. The other is actuarial and is based upon statistical calculations of risk and uses scales to assess parental dangerousness. This method does not allow for children and their families unique meet of circumstances and also takes no account of child development theory. (Barry, 2007 Davies, 2008).Risk management is discovering and haughty the dimensions of the proposed risk into a plan to manage the risks it is involved with implementing, monitoring, influencing, controlling and reviewing the risk decision. Risk dimensions are features of risk that could be influen ced by the practitioner, for example the available (and the availability of) resources to manage the risk and uncertainty (Carson and Bain, 2008). Gurney (2000) defines risk management as processes devised by organisations to minimise negative outcomes and suggests that risk management moves along a continuum between control, legitimate authority and empowerment. Between the empowering and controlling ends of the continuum lie models of risk minimisation which seek to reduce harms and maximise benefits. (Manthorpe, 2000).However, in order to have good risk management we must be able to make effective use of all the dimensions of the risk assessment. Risk management suggest ways in which a decision may be best implemented. Different levels of resources may be applied. For example, the child who is sensed possibly to be at risk may be visited more frequently. People are an example of a major resource for risk management. The number of people being able to visit to check on a risk dec ision will be important but will be of little advantage if they are not sufficiently knowledgeable or skilled in identifying problems or opportunities and to make appropriate interventions. However, the availability of resources is money orientated and the availability of risk management resources in one part of the country (or neighbouring local authorities) could lead to a incompatible risk proposal being assessed from that in another local authority that does not have those resources available. (Carson Bain, 2008)Webb (2007) identifies social work as operating within a risk society, that is, a society which views risk as something which should be managed and can be identified and eradicated. Since the beginning of the 21st Century there have been several reports regarding child abuse deaths and, as pointed out by Ferguson (1997), there areFew more disturbing phenomena in forward-looking modern society than the premature deaths of socially valued children who were known to be a t high risk.(Ferguson, 1997, p. 228)Examples of high profile child death interrogatory cases include Victoria Climbi (2003), Caleb Ness (2003) and Baby P (2008). These are all very good examples of how the media and public blamed practitioners. The resultant media coverage of how risk assessment and risk management have failed along with demands for minimising risks and organisational and professional duty have, over the years, constrained the role of a social worker. With respect to this Houston and Griffiths argue thatApproaches to risk assessment and management in child protection have led to an emphasis on prediction, control and culpability. (Houston and Griffiths, 2000, p.1).Furedi (1997) argues that the worship of safety and the evasion of risk make up the new moral order, an order which is prescriptive, scrutinizing and deeply anti-humanistic. From this perspective, concern about identifying risk is becoming more dominant than concern about identifying need in assessment and resource tryst in risk management.Avoiding risk is a difficult business which cannot be reduced to simplistic methods and rather than try to calculate the incalculable social workers should develop mutually trusting, respectful relationships with service users. Also this approach to risk assessment and risk management may deny the social worker empowering approaches which respond to need, focus on prevention and which more centrally attempt issues of poverty and social inequality. (Stalker, 2003 Ritchie Woodward, 2009). Further to this Ritchie Woodward (2009) point out that if social workers are preoccupied with high risk situations they are less likely to find the space to work either creatively or therapeutically. Additionally, the Changing Lives musical composition (2006) suggested that the social work profession had become increasingly risk averse. 1 of the key areas identified in Changing Lives was the need to develop a new organisational culture and approach to risk management and risk assessment which promoted excellence. ( Scotch Executive 2006).In order to complete BBs pre-birth assessment I took into account risk factors and strengths which I had to analyse and reflect on. Calder (2002) offers a framework for conducting risk assessment by assessing all areas of identified risk and ensuring that severally is considered separately e.g. child, parent and surrounding environment. To counteract the risk factors present family strengths and resources were also assessed, for example good bonding, supportive networks. I undertook research regarding parental resilience and according to Hill et al (2007) a vast array of research shows that parents in poverty or facing other stressors usually cope better when they have one or more close relationships immaterial the household and these are activated to give practical, emotional or informational support. In the case of BB she had a practical and supportive relationship with her mother as well as the support of her extended family which included her grandmother. BB also had a good relationship with BAs family and his mother in particular was a source of support for BB as she regularly took CA overnight.Whilst completing the assessment I centred my practice on the strengths-based perspective. As Saleeby (2000) explains the work of the strengths-based approach is the work of empowerment as both a process and a goal. As a goal, those who are empowered seek a firmer sense of purpose, self-pride, the possibility of pickaxe and connections to resources. As a process it is the collaboration between a social worker and a family or individual, working together on a mutual plan that will move them closer to their aspirations.Utilising a strengths-based practice with BB was important as she was finding it difficult to interact with the Community wellness Visitor and Midwife. BB entangle that she was a bad parent as she was not conforming to the routines the health Visitor had recommend ed. BB also described how she felt that the Health Visitor was judging her and finding her wanting as a parent. Taking this conversation into consideration I realised that BB had no sense of self-efficacy, self-esteem or self-concept which Payne (2005) describes as resources that people have in order to cope. However, BBs strengths lay in the care of her daughter. She had a good bond with her daughter and was quick to attend to her needs. BB also had a routine in place with regard to mealtimes, naps and a bedtime routine. CA was also reaching her developmental milestones, had age appropriate toys and had the freedom of the living area. BB had also erected a baby provide to stop CA from gaining access to the kitchen and stairs.After a thorough compendium and supervisory discussions with my practice teacher I recommended that a Post-Birth Multi-Agency Conference not be convened. BB was happy to continue to work voluntarily with the Children and Families Area aggroup which would all ow ongoing assessment and intervention. However, I recommended that a Post-Birth Multi-Agency meeting be arranged to discuss future interventions as I was aware that the birth of the new baby could be a future pressure on BB. I also recommended a further assessment take place when BA returns to the family home in October 2010. These recommendations were accepted by the Child Protection Officer at the Local Authority.In conclusion, Kolbs Reflective Cycle (1984) was useful in the reflection of my practice concerning BB as it allowed me to take into account Scottish Social Services Council (SSSC) Codes of Practice, particularly Section 4.1 and 4.2. This reflective cycle also helped me look at BBs situation holistically by looking at resilience and risk, strengths-based practice and risk assessment and management. On reflection I felt confident that I had used the resources available to me well, particularly research and knowledge and I could justify my risk decision if harm was to occu r and would be able to explain how I came to my risk decision. Overall, I felt that my first practice was very much influenced by the negative issues associated with risk however, I believe that this placement allowed me to put risk, risk assessment and management into perspective and accepting that risk decisions should not be influenced by the blame-culture but from a balanced approach which takes into consideration beneficial outcomes. This will in the future enable me to better support service users.2,998 words