Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
In recent years, across North America and the UK, child protective service agencies have increasingly begun to rely on bureaucratic, technocratic, and regulatory mechanisms for detecting and managing abuse and neglect. Coupled with a shift from concern for the general social welfare of children to a heightened preoccupation with risk or dangerousness to children, risk assessment systems are becoming integral to child protection practice. Though risk assessment systems aim to enhance the effectiveness of child protection investigations and service provision, as well as filter out high risk cases from the rest, such systems may foster and reproduce often concealed relations of gender, race, and class. This paper presents a review of the risk assessment trend in child welfare, its general objectives, and some criticisms raised to date. Through a feminist analysis of the social construction of mothering, we re‐examine risk assessment. We argue that the risk assessment trend has the potential to entrench oppressive relations of gender, race, and class in child welfare practice with mothers. We suggest that an approach to risk assessment which incorporates a ‘mothering narrative’ might offer a more thorough evaluation of the conditions that shape the context within which risk to children emerges.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Krane et al. (2000) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: