Engaging with Hard‐To‐Reach Clients: Towards the Last Resort Response by Welfare Workers
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2021 |
Outros Autores: | , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
Texto Completo: | https://doi.org/10.17645/si.v9i3.4315 |
Resumo: | Client non‐cooperation is a widely recognised problem in welfare services. Being ‘hard‐to‐reach’ is considered a risk especially for the most vulnerable clients, for example in terms of increased homelessness. Such clients pose challenges to social inclusion, and services make some allowances to achieve engagement. However, even a minimum level of cooperation is required from hard‐to‐reach clients. In the context of home visiting, we study welfare workers’ efforts to engage with clients who continuously avoid contact. We examine three services in Finland, England, and Sweden that provide floating support to clients in their own accommodation. Utilising Robert Emerson’s idea of ‘the last resort,’ we analyse how workers justify their decisions to continue or terminate the support with the hard‐to‐reach. The data consist of team meeting recordings and home visit observations. We aim to demonstrate that justifications deployed to make the decision to end the home visiting service or tighten control, draw on ‘last resort responses.’ We identify three types of justifications: retrospective summaries on past failures to reach the client, intensifying remedial actions to engage clients, and characterisations of clients as uncooperative. While such justifications can be seen to draw on shared ethics, they have different ethical implications. |
id |
RCAP_d83909eb8ba8f24377f1cbf9651ad136 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/4315 |
network_acronym_str |
RCAP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository_id_str |
7160 |
spelling |
Engaging with Hard‐To‐Reach Clients: Towards the Last Resort Response by Welfare Workersfloating support; hard‐to‐reach clients; home visiting; last resort; social work; welfare workersClient non‐cooperation is a widely recognised problem in welfare services. Being ‘hard‐to‐reach’ is considered a risk especially for the most vulnerable clients, for example in terms of increased homelessness. Such clients pose challenges to social inclusion, and services make some allowances to achieve engagement. However, even a minimum level of cooperation is required from hard‐to‐reach clients. In the context of home visiting, we study welfare workers’ efforts to engage with clients who continuously avoid contact. We examine three services in Finland, England, and Sweden that provide floating support to clients in their own accommodation. Utilising Robert Emerson’s idea of ‘the last resort,’ we analyse how workers justify their decisions to continue or terminate the support with the hard‐to‐reach. The data consist of team meeting recordings and home visit observations. We aim to demonstrate that justifications deployed to make the decision to end the home visiting service or tighten control, draw on ‘last resort responses.’ We identify three types of justifications: retrospective summaries on past failures to reach the client, intensifying remedial actions to engage clients, and characterisations of clients as uncooperative. While such justifications can be seen to draw on shared ethics, they have different ethical implications.Cogitatio2021-08-26info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttps://doi.org/10.17645/si.v9i3.4315oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/4315Social Inclusion; Vol 9, No 3 (2021): Home- and Community-Based Work at the Margins of Welfare: Balancing between Disciplinary, Participatory and Caring Approaches; 265-2752183-2803reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAPenghttps://www.cogitatiopress.com/socialinclusion/article/view/4315https://doi.org/10.17645/si.v9i3.4315https://www.cogitatiopress.com/socialinclusion/article/view/4315/4315Copyright (c) 2021 Sirpa Saario, Christopher Hall, Doris Lydahlhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessSaario, SirpaHall, ChristopherLydahl, Doris2022-12-20T11:00:03Zoai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/4315Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-19T16:21:33.626999Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Engaging with Hard‐To‐Reach Clients: Towards the Last Resort Response by Welfare Workers |
title |
Engaging with Hard‐To‐Reach Clients: Towards the Last Resort Response by Welfare Workers |
spellingShingle |
Engaging with Hard‐To‐Reach Clients: Towards the Last Resort Response by Welfare Workers Saario, Sirpa floating support; hard‐to‐reach clients; home visiting; last resort; social work; welfare workers |
title_short |
Engaging with Hard‐To‐Reach Clients: Towards the Last Resort Response by Welfare Workers |
title_full |
Engaging with Hard‐To‐Reach Clients: Towards the Last Resort Response by Welfare Workers |
title_fullStr |
Engaging with Hard‐To‐Reach Clients: Towards the Last Resort Response by Welfare Workers |
title_full_unstemmed |
Engaging with Hard‐To‐Reach Clients: Towards the Last Resort Response by Welfare Workers |
title_sort |
Engaging with Hard‐To‐Reach Clients: Towards the Last Resort Response by Welfare Workers |
author |
Saario, Sirpa |
author_facet |
Saario, Sirpa Hall, Christopher Lydahl, Doris |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Hall, Christopher Lydahl, Doris |
author2_role |
author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Saario, Sirpa Hall, Christopher Lydahl, Doris |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
floating support; hard‐to‐reach clients; home visiting; last resort; social work; welfare workers |
topic |
floating support; hard‐to‐reach clients; home visiting; last resort; social work; welfare workers |
description |
Client non‐cooperation is a widely recognised problem in welfare services. Being ‘hard‐to‐reach’ is considered a risk especially for the most vulnerable clients, for example in terms of increased homelessness. Such clients pose challenges to social inclusion, and services make some allowances to achieve engagement. However, even a minimum level of cooperation is required from hard‐to‐reach clients. In the context of home visiting, we study welfare workers’ efforts to engage with clients who continuously avoid contact. We examine three services in Finland, England, and Sweden that provide floating support to clients in their own accommodation. Utilising Robert Emerson’s idea of ‘the last resort,’ we analyse how workers justify their decisions to continue or terminate the support with the hard‐to‐reach. The data consist of team meeting recordings and home visit observations. We aim to demonstrate that justifications deployed to make the decision to end the home visiting service or tighten control, draw on ‘last resort responses.’ We identify three types of justifications: retrospective summaries on past failures to reach the client, intensifying remedial actions to engage clients, and characterisations of clients as uncooperative. While such justifications can be seen to draw on shared ethics, they have different ethical implications. |
publishDate |
2021 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2021-08-26 |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://doi.org/10.17645/si.v9i3.4315 oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/4315 |
url |
https://doi.org/10.17645/si.v9i3.4315 |
identifier_str_mv |
oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/4315 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://www.cogitatiopress.com/socialinclusion/article/view/4315 https://doi.org/10.17645/si.v9i3.4315 https://www.cogitatiopress.com/socialinclusion/article/view/4315/4315 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2021 Sirpa Saario, Christopher Hall, Doris Lydahl http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2021 Sirpa Saario, Christopher Hall, Doris Lydahl http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Cogitatio |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Cogitatio |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Social Inclusion; Vol 9, No 3 (2021): Home- and Community-Based Work at the Margins of Welfare: Balancing between Disciplinary, Participatory and Caring Approaches; 265-275 2183-2803 reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação instacron:RCAAP |
instname_str |
Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
instacron_str |
RCAAP |
institution |
RCAAP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
collection |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1799130662084542464 |