Bureaucracy or professionalism?

Abstract

This study analyzes how the work tools of child protection services influence social work with child abuse. The article is empirically based on records, observations of the daily social work and interviews with families. The work tools include 1) rules and 2) professional knowledge and methods. The results show a complicated picture of how work tools are mixed. People‐processing, i.e., the transformation of families to administrative categories, can only be achieved by professional diagnosis because of the complexity of family conflict. The diagnostic discourse, however, is rarely theoretically argued, but mixes loose diagnostic categories with narratives of actual events and moralistic statements. It is argued that the treatment of families is politically determined. Nevertheless, there is a room for maneuver for professional ideals and skills. The study suggests that this freedom of discretion does not seem to be used extensively. Solutions seem to be chosen within the narrow repertoire of legislative recommendations.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 18 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.