Reviews : Lesbian Mothers, Custody Disputes and Court Welfare Reports Moira Steel Family Meetings, Play Therapy and Child Custody Jean Swann UEA Social Work Monographs, 1990; £4.50 each, pbk
| Published date | 01 September 1990 |
| Author | Barbara Hotchkin,Judith Pugsley,Ann Hall,Patrick Winter |
| DOI | 10.1177/026455059003700312 |
| Date | 01 September 1990 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
140
Lesbian
Mothers,
Custody
Disputes
and
Court
Welfare
Reports
Moira
Steel
Family
Meetings,
Play
Therapy
and
Child
Custody
Jean
Swann
UEA
Social
Work
Monographs,
1990;
£4.50
each,
pbk
.
Steel
should
be
essential
reading
for
all
welfare
officers.
She
identifies
many
widely
held
myths
and
brings
together
various
pieces
of
research
that
refute
them.
Some
myths
arise
from
confu-
sion
with
male
homosexual
behaviour
regarding
promiscuity
and
instability.
There
is
a
myth
that
children
will
be
more
exposed
to
sexual
activity.
In
fact
there
is
no
evidence
that
children
brought
up
by
lesbians
are
more
likely
to
become
homosexual
themselves.
Furthermore,
given
that
most
child
sex-
ual
abuse
is
perpetrated
by
men,
we
must
bear
in
mind
the
lower
sexual
risk
in
female
households.
The
author’s
study
of
7
welfare
reports
is
valuable
in
showing
how
dif-
ferently
different
welfare
officers
deal
with
lesbianism
-
from
ignoring
it
to
giving
it
great
prominence.
Areas
of
prejudice
and
ignorance
are
noted:
there
is
a
danger
of
officers’
prejudices
reinforcing
those
of
the
court.
Highly
recommended.
Jean
Swann’s
work
is
also
timely,
albeit
carrying
a
misleading
title
She
is
not
a
practitioner
and
we
do
not
get
new
ideas
about
play
therapy.
We
do
get
a
sensible,
largely
well
informed
discussion
about
how
far
recent
Court
Welfare
Officer
practice
may
give
in-
adequate
attention
to
the
actual
views
of
children.
Given
the
growing
em-
phasis
on
this
matter
in_child
care
law,
this
monograph
is
welcome.
Ms
Swann
suggests
the
family
meeting
model
is
essentially
directed
to
conflict
resolutions
between
parents,
It
is
not
a
satisfactory
context
for
children
to
express
their
views.
Parents
at
this
time
are
often
insensitive
to
their
children’s
needs.
Even
when
they
agree,
children
may
still
feel
somewhat
unheard.
She
articulates
a
long
running
dilemma:
on
one
hand
children
should
not
be
asked
to
choose
and
will
virtual-
ly
always
feel
torn;
on
the
other,
the
worker
should
consult
the
child
atid
indeed encourage
expression,
which
can
be
therapeutic.
We
are
sometimes
over-attached
to
our
theories
and
are
rightly
challenged
to
hold
these
mat-
ters
in
tension.
At
a
recent
NAPO/ACOP
conference,
interestingly,
the
cry
was
for
more
training
for
work
with
children.
Ms
Swann
reflects
some
widely
shared
unease
about
the
excessive
use
of
a
family
meeting
approach
when
parents
do
not
agree.
But
how
many
workers
operate
this
model
so
purely?
In
Birmingham
regular
use
of
family
meetings
does
not
stop
us
from
setting
up
other
and
varied
kinds
of
meetings
and
interviews.
Within
the
family
meetings
we
frequently
make
space
to
be
with
the
children
alone.
Ms
Swann
underestimates
the
family
meeting
itself
as
a
source
of
information
about
families
to
the
worker.
Nevertheless
this
is
a
very
useful
piece
as
we
all
face
increasing
pressure
to
find
more
na-
tional
and
consistent
standards
of
practice.
Judith
Pugsley,
with
Ann
Hall,
Barbara
Hotchkin
and
Patrick
Winter
Court
Welfare
Officers,
Birmingham
.
To continue reading
Request your trial