Adoption Support and the Negotiation of Ambivalence in Family Policy and Children's Services
| Published date | 01 March 2008 |
| Date | 01 March 2008 |
| Author | Barry Luckock |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6478.2008.00412.x |
JOURNAL OF LAW AND SOCIETY
VOLUME 35, NUMBER 1, MARCH 2008
ISSN: 0263-323X, pp. 3±27
Adoption Support and the Negotiation of Ambivalence in
Family Policy and Children's Services
Barry Luckock*
In this paper ambivalent commitments to parenting and family life by
the New Labour government are explored by reference to the example
of adoption support. Developments in adoption illuminate contrasting
expectations in family policy and children's services more generally.
Traditional normative concerns to support family status and parental
autonomy are unsettled by contemporary anxieties about child out-
comes and social mobility. Impatience with the attitudes and behaviour
of parents has led to a `progressive universalism' in which enhanced
parenting services and expectations for all are combined with increas-
ingly insistent and targeted interventions for the particularly needy,
reluctant or recalcitrant few. At the same time demands for greater
service modernization and professional effectiveness have led govern-
ment to position parents as (potential) consumers too. The paper
discusses these policy and practice tensions and concludes that new
spaces are being opened up for the negotiation between parents and
professionals about rights and responsibilities in family life and its
support.
INTRODUCTION
This paper discusses a core dilemma for government in trying to reconcile
ambivalent commitments to family and parenting in family policy and
children's services. In the first part, `adoption support' is used as a case study
to explore certain contested assumptions about family life that can be seen to
underpin current strategies in family policy in England, and to consider their
impact on expectations of service provision. `Adoption support' is the term
introduced in statute by the Adoption and Children Act 2002.
1
It covers a
3
ß2008 The Author. Editorial organization ß2008 Cardiff University Law School. Published by Blackwell Publishing Ltd,
9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA
*School of Social Work and Social Care, University of Sussex, Essex House,
Falmer, Brighton BN1 9QQ, England
b.a.luckock@sussex.ac.uk
1 See Adoption and Children Act 2002, s. 2(6).
range of services and approaches to services for adopted children and their
new and previous family members.
2
The suggestion is that a study of
adoption and the mode of professional support it attracts, especially where
children are placed from public care, might help expose an underlying
ambivalence about the purpose and nature of family policy, particularly in
relation to the work of the newly developing `children's services'. Through
an examination of the ambiguous social expectations of family life and
parenting that have informed adoption law and policy, it becomes possible to
see more clearly why questions about the proper distribution of rights and
responsibilities in family policy more generally remain so contested. It also
enables consideration of what might count as effective professional support
for children and parents and on what basis that support is to be provided.
In particular, it is argued that an exploration of strategies of `adoption
support' highlights the intrinsic tension in family policy and family law
between concerns about what might be called securing family membership
and status,on the one hand, and seen as facilitating parenting competence
and child outcomes, on the other. In the first case the policy concern is one of
legitimation. This derives predominantly from a normative interest in the
integrity of the social unit of the family, albeit one based on changing
assumptions about what counts as the norm. The primary values here are the
stability and continuity of family relationships and the development of a
sense of family identification, belonging, and participation for children and
of discretion or autonomy in family decisions for parents. Of course, what
counts as `family' has changed, as the prescription of a limited range of
approved family forms has increasingly given way to the recognition of a
diversity of chosen family relationships. Instead of a legal and policy
requirement for family membership, rights, and responsibilities to be fixed
within the traditional template of heterosexual marriage and procreation, a
much wider range of `family practices'
3
are becoming socially sanctioned.
The normative discourse of `family', whether seen as template or practice,
embodies certain functional goals too. These link concerns about social order
and stable community life with those about individual child well-being. They
do so through a family-focused lens. Where the emphasis is on the develop-
mental nature and function of the family the concept of `socialisation'
4
is
influential. Where the emphasis is on the democratic dynamics and potential
of family life it is the `agency'
5
of family members, including children, as
individuals that is of conceptual and policy interest. However, the integrity
4
2 `Adoption support services' mean `(a) counselling, advice and information, and (b)
any other services prescribed by regulations, in relation to adoption'.
3D.Morgan, Family Connections: An Introduction to Family Studies (1996); J.
Eekelaar, Family Law and Personal Life (2006).
4T.Parsons and R. Bales, Family: Socialisation and Interaction Process (1955).
5A.Giddens, The Transformation of Intimacy. Sexuality, Love and Eroticism in
Modern Societies (1992); C. Smart and B. Neale, Family Fragments? (1999).
ß2008 The Author. Editorial organization ß2008 Cardiff University Law School
To continue reading
Request your trial