Sunday, 27 July 2014

A pause for thought : Single Mothers



The following is a short extract from an extensive and intense essay, “Mothers” written by Jacqueline Rose and published in Volume 36, Number 12 of the June 19th, 2014 issue of the London Review of Books. The full text of the essay can be accessed at http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n12/jacqueline-rose/mothers
This autumn Jacqueleine Rose becomes the Diane Middlebrook and Carl Djerassi Professor of Gender Studies at Cambridge University.
 A single mother stands as a glaring rebuke to the ideal. Throughout the 1980s and 1990s, the number of single mothers in this country rose faster than at any other time in history, seemingly unaffected by an increasingly strident Conservative rhetoric of blame. The most pervasive image was of an unemployed teenager who had deliberately got herself pregnant in order to claim benefits, although as Pat Thane and Tanya Evans point out in Sinners? Scroungers? Saints?*, their study of 20th century unmarried motherhood, she was ‘very rarely to be found’. Over the past century single mothers have variously been one or other or all three of those epithets, the first and last stringing them between opprobrium and holiness (neither of this world), the second more prosaically casting them as objects of moral contempt. The single mother, it seems, was the original ‘scrounger’ the terms which allows a cruelly unequal society to turn its back on those it has thrown on the scrapheap. This manipulative, undeserving mother was the perfect embodiment of the ‘dependency’ culture, an idea which is being revived today in order to justify an ever more thorough dismantling of the welfare state. It is also worth noting how far her vulnerability and her needs, not to speak of those of the children for whom she has sole responsibility, seem to count against her   -   lone parents, especially unmarried mothers, are still today one of the poorest groups in Britain.
  
Sinners? Scroungers? Saints Unmarried Motherhood in 20th Century England by Pat Thane and Tanya Evans (Oxford, 240pp., August 2013, 978 0 19 968198 3).
This opinion item first appeared on the home page of the goodenoughcaring.com website on July 27th, 2014

Tuesday, 15 July 2014

Goodbye, Mr Gove

It is a relief of sorts that Michael Gove has become the former Secretary for Education. Mr. Gove may have talents in a number of  fields but surely most with a thoughtful approach to how children might be reared and educated would not see his talents as lying in the field of children’s growth and learning. The post of government Chief Whip seems more suited to him.  Mr Gove has presided over many cuts to children’s services and driven through such reactionary changes to the education system as the free schools and the academy programmes. It is evident these last two have tended to be anything but free and are there only to support the needs of special interest groups, to provide fat profits for private companies and to serve those who have a vested interest in maintaining privilege and wealth for the powerful few.
Freedom has not been served by Mr. Gove’s  support for “conned by rote” learning, a method free of imagination and creativity which serves  to dull the mind and rear more zombies for an economic system which pays them just enough to keep quiet about the gravitation of undue wealth towards less than 10% of the world population while an increasing number live in abject poverty in an environment which is all too often “free” of education.
Perhaps, in relation to education in England, as we say “Goodbye, Mr. Gove,” we should not forget, that though he may have been one of the most divisive and destructive of education ministers, the seeds of what he allowed to grow were planted by the previous Labour government. It is to be hoped that with Mr.Gove’s departure  those in all political parties with a responsibility for the education and nurture of our children will now heed more considered, better informed counsel and that soon all our children's services will truly meet the needs of each child, encourage imagination and creativity rather than serve the threats of the selfishness of those who govern, and those who are submissive to the avarice predominant in our  discredited immoral economic system.


This opinion item was first published July 15th, 2014  on the home page of the  www.goodenoughcaring.com website where you can find hundreds of articles about children's nurture and children's learning. 

Friday, 27 June 2014

Another View on the Intentions of Scotland’s 16 and 17 years old voters



More High School Wins For Yes
Yes Scotland continued to notch up more high school debate wins, with a trio of successes, including victories in Scotland’s biggest cities.
A debate at St Mungo’s Academy in Glasgow  saw the Yes side win 59% of the vote, with No on 23% and 18% undecided.
Michael Gray, an activist from the city emphasised Scotland’s firm financial foundations at the Bridgeton school, including how we’re the 14th wealthiest country, ahead of the UK, France and Japan.
Alison Johnstone MSP and Kenny MacAskill MSP led Yes Scotland to overturn a pre-poll shortfall of 17 points into a 56% victory.
Ms Johnstone told her audience that an independent Scotland could create a written constitution, enshrining many of the country’s values and fundamental policies.
Alison Johnstone, Lothian’s Green MSP said: ‘I was delighted to speak at Gracemount High. The pupils had clearly done their preparation so it was a lively and engaged debate, just as it should be.
“The speakers for No kept repeating that we don’t have to change the UK’s constitution to see progress, but I argued that one of the big opportunities from independence for young people was to enshrine values like free education in a modern, written constitution. More and more young people are realising that they can be part of a generation that votes Yes to take control of Scotland’s future.”
This morning, Gavin Lundy, a member of Generation Yes, defeated local MSP Margaret McDougall at Garnock Academy in North Ayrshire.
Gavin increased the Yes vote by 24% to see the pro-independence side win the post-debate poll by 54% for Yes and 46% for No.
Sarah-Jane Walls, Yes Scotland’s Operations Manager said: “David Cameron blundered by saying that Yes hasn’t won a single school debate, which simply isn’t true. These comprehensive victories add to the steady flow of young moving over to Yes.
“Many of Scotland’s young people are realising that we can continue with free higher education and secure the powers needed to grow the economy and create more jobs with a Yes vote.”

___________________________________
This opinion piece was first posted on the goodenoughcaring.com website home page on June 27th, 2014.

Saturday, 7 June 2014

Down from the mountain and into the glen comes Issue 15 of the goodenoughcaring Journal






The road from Braedownie, Glen Clova

Issue  15 of the goodenoughcaring Journal will come down  from the mountains and into the glens on Sunday, June15th, 2014.  Given the international interest in affairs Scottish this year one of the themes in this issue is Scotland and childhood and a spectrum of articles emanating from Scotland written for us by David Divine, Ni HolmesJeremy MillarMark SmithLaura SteckleyCalum Strathie, and Charles Sharpe may to an  extent speak in different ways of the experience and meaning of childhood, child care and education in Scotland in the past and present but in the main they  have an eye to the future of the upbringing of children both in Scotland and further afield. Supporting these are two rarely seen pieces by A.S. Neill and Robert Louis Stevenson and  an extract from The Legends of Scottish Saints edited and translated from the Aberdeen Breviary by Alan Macquarrie.
In other articles, Noel Howard  critically examines the new Child and Family Agency in Ireland while following the wide interest shown in his first article, Kevin Ball has written us a sequel which considers the principles which guide the Independent Regulation 33 Visitor to children’s homes.  Cynthia Cross writes about the enigma of staff relationships in residential child care,John Stein considers relationship with parents in residential child care, Charles Sharpe reviews Adrian Ward’s new book on leadership in residential child care and Adrian Ward tells us how it came to be written.


This news item was first posted on the home page of the goodenoughcaring.com website on June 7th, 2014.

Tuesday, 27 May 2014

Matters of opinion : Scots teenagers and their voting intentions in the coming referendum on Scottish independence.

On May 20th, 2014 a Daily Telegraph sponsored blog was posted online by the Daily Telegraph columnist, Jenny Djul about the voting intentions of Scottish teenagers in September’s referendum on Scottish independence . This would not have concerned us except that the blog was reproduced as a feed on the news page of a widely read, highly respected and influential network site which is concerned with the care and welfare of children and young people. The problem with news feeds like these is that they can be random and there is no guarantee that there will be a subsequent more balanced feed on any given topic from another source.
The teenage vote carries more influence in the upcoming referendum because the Scottish Government decided to lower the minimum age at which an individual might vote from 18 years to 16 years of age.
At goodenoughcaring there is not an official or indeed a collective view about what the voting intentions of teenager in the referendum should be. We welcome people’s different views on this. Our general approach is that any view related to the care and education of children and young people is valid as long as it is thoughtful and is not abusive or unfairly prejudiced toward children and young people, the adults who look after them, and the communities from which they come.
We are interested in a balanced discussion about this issue and we have posted a copy of the blog here together with some responses to it. We would welcome further comments.



From The Daily Telegraph Blog, May 20th, 2014


If Scottish teens are backing the Union, in whose name are the Nats fighting.


By Jenny Hjul

Alex Salmond must be regretting his push for a change in the voting rules to get young people on board for his independence referendum. The SNP’s cynical ploy to extend the suffrage to 16- and 17-year-olds, based on a mistaken belief that youngsters would vote Yes, has backfired spectacularly as enfranchised teenagers across Scotland endorse the Union.
David Cameron said on the Today programme that in the school debates he’d been to, the No campaign had triumphed, and his experience is borne out in the latest polls. Almost two-thirds of voters under 18 are worried about the economic future of a separate Scotland.
The Carrington Dean survey of teens aged 15-17 found that 41 per cent believe their parents would be worse off, compared to 21 per cent who think that they’d be better off. The survey also found that 64 per cent worry about the economic outlook post-independence, while only 17 per cent said they weren’t concerned.
School referendums since March this year show the SNP has an impossible task ahead with young voters: 84 per cent No, 16 per cent Yes in Craigmount High in Edinburgh; 70 per cent No, 30 per cent Yes at Hazelhead Academy in Aberdeen; 72 per cent No, 28 per cent Yes in Forres Academy in Moray; and 75 per cent No, 25 per cent Yes in Orkney High Schools, according to Better Together. In Lockerbie, 70 per cent voted in favour of remaining in the UK.
In Aberdeenshire, where the SNP won every seat in the last Scottish parliamentary elections, a mock referendum of more than 11,000 schoolchildren eligible to vote on 18 September found that almost 9,000 wanted to stay in the UK.
The Nationalists say that many young people have open minds on the issue and could be persuaded to change their opinions before September. But they should be careful not to sound too patronising. The fact that so many youngsters have rejected the separatists’ spin is not a reflection of a politicised generation but a sign that parochial nationalism has not captured the imagination of today’s youth.
A Better Together rep said after a debate in his school: "A lot of my friends went in undecided but after listening to both sides, they understood that being part of the UK means we have so many more opportunities than we would if we went it alone. "I think nationalism is a thing of the past. When we live in such an interconnected world and can speak face to face with our friends across the world at the touch of a button, why would we want to shut ourselves off from our neighbours just down the road?",/p>
Another youngster, writing in a national newspaper, said: "Ultimately, I can’t help but ask what the purpose of independence is? Why fix something that isn’t broken?"
University students are also predominantly in favour of the status quo. A student referendum at the University of Strathclyde was won by the Unionists with 55 per cent of the vote, against 45 per cent for the Nationalists.
And when more than 1,500 students from Glasgow Caledonian University were asked how they would vote, 63 per cent said No and 37 per cent said Yes. In February last year, more than 2,500 students at Glasgow University took part in a similar event and 62 per cent voted to stay in the UK, compared to 38 per cent against.
Young people today are the products of a social media revolution and their cultural context is global. They do not see their future in terms of shrinking horizons; they are children of the universe and their outlook is boundless.
It might be convenient for the Nationalists to dismiss young voters if they don’t toe the secessionist line, and say they represent a tiny part of the electorate. But their resounding No saps energy from the separatists, and gives their elders pause for thought.
If tomorrow’s student radicals – as well as its leaders, legislators, policy makers and law enforcers – are committed to the United Kingdom, then the Nationalists have to ask themselves: in whose name are they fighting?
Jenny Hjul, 
20 May, 2014




Comments
Stuart Russon writes,

I fully support lowering the voting age.  I can only go by my own experience and I reckon 13 or 14 would have been about the age I feel I could be trusted to vote properly and not just put an Andy Gray panini sticker (I was then and am now an Aston Villa supporter) over the ballot sheet.
I think I probably would’ve been more to the right at that age though. I still had the same instinctive desire for fairness that I do now but I had yet to learn how unfair and unbalanced society could be. I wasn’t particularly well informed about the news and it is only recently (last 10 years or so) that I’ve realised how much of the news that was reported to me was biased. Miners were thugs, football fans were thugs, socialism/communism was to be feared etc. etc. I could go on for yonks.

So I suppose if I do have a view on this aside from ‘yes, lower the voting age’ it would be to be cautious and aware of the propaganda machines that would be set-off to chase the young vote as perhaps younger people are more susceptible to direct marketing. I’ve no reason to make this sweeping statement except that I think I probably was more easily swayed and paid less attention to the detail when I was young which often means missing out on the truth I think.

Cynthia Cross observes,
Over the years I have pondered what I think about 16 year olds having the vote and on balance I think “Why not?”

I can’t think that their reasons for voting a particular way would be any worse than that of the average adult (who ever they are)  As John Stein says,” they will have to live with the outcome longer.”

I remember in 1951, when I was 16,  standing as Labour candidate in mock elections at school and think that issues were taken very seriously, and most people read the party manifestos.

Better education in critical thinking and problem solving would be helpful. Instead of mugging up facts to remember for exams and then forget, exams could be taken in reference libraries with access to the internet, so children could be given questions to solve, that involved finding information, verifying it is authentic, and showing that they know how to use it. Have we got the teachers to teach this, or the examiners to mark it?

About Scottish Independence, any sort of nationalism is worrying.  I cross out nationality on any forms I fill in and write born in England – it has caused problems on occasions.

Having said that I understand that Scottish, child care, justice education and  welfare law is better than that of England and of course I applaud the Scots wanting to get rid of nuclear weapons.


Jack Colhoun remarks,
From all the radio and television programmes I have heard and seen about this it seems to me these new 16 and 17 years old voters in Scotland think about their politics with more consideration than their elders.


John Stein writes,
What the right age for enfranchisement is, requires me to really think. Here in the USA I had not known 17-year-olds were allowed to vote, until I went to Wikipedia, which says that currently, 19 states allow 17-year-olds to vote in primary elections if they will be 18 in time to vote in the general election.
My thoughts are that the voting age should be based on whatever age the majority of the people of that age have the maturity to make an informed decision, and the responsibility to inform themselves. 16 seems reasonable. Many at that age are still in school, and therefore likely to be exposed to issues in class. More, in class there should be a mix of people with different views, so that healthy discussions could take place, beginning in class and continuing after class. The rest of us tend not to have that opportunity, with people, at least in this country, tending to associate with those with similar views, and refraining from expressing their views on political matters when associating with others whose views they do not know.
I remember first becoming interest in politics as a high school student. John F. Kennedy was campaigning in our home town (Reading, PA), and we were to leave school to attend. My best friend was most interested in politics and watched the nominating conventions on tv religiously, so he convinced me to go with him and got me interested. He was quite liberal. (He has since become so conservative that he refuses discuss politics with me).
My final point, on the issue of independence, the younger voters will have to live with the outcome longer than the older voters, and should be allowed to vote.


Jeremy Millar comments
I completely agree with Mark’s analysis of the Telegraph piece. As if David Cameron would ever visit a school in an area affected by his party’s ‘welfare reforms’. The YES campaign are vibrant and putting forward a positive message. People of all ages and social class are debating the issues. I believe that on the day people will take the leap of faith despite the fear factor being peddled persistently through the London controlled media.




Mark Smith writes
This certainly is biased - but perhaps no more or less than we might expect from the Telegraph - it epitomises a metropolitan arrogance that we're too wee, too poor, too stupid to govern ourselves. It's interesting even to look at the examples cited. At a very quick glance they're very middle class schools (but even here I'd question the results). There are other examples out there. Have a look at the futureukandscotland website for more academic analysis or google to watch and listen to the Queen Margaret University debate on the referendum here
My reading of the situation is somewhat ironic in that under 18s have actually experienced competent government under the SNP and do not have the sense of grievance that previous generations have experienced.

Having said that, for what it's worth my own kids tell me that there's a definite move towards a Yes vote amongst their pals.


This news and opinion article first appeared on the home page of the goodenoughcaring.com website on May 21st, 2014





Sunday, 25 May 2014

Information for young Scottish voters : new survey evidence - Under 18-year olds’ views on Scottish Independence

With 100 days left before the vote on whether Scotland should become an independent country on Monday, 9 June, AQMeN hosts an event to present findings from a new survey on the youngest voters in this referendum.

The referendum on Scotland’s constitutional future in September 2014 will see 16- and 17-year old voters coming to the polls for the first time at the national level in Scotland. Following on from the AQMeN survey project last year, the team from Edinburgh University’s School of Social and Political Science will present updated findings based on a completely new survey conducted in April and May 2014. The survey addressed voters who will be able to participate in the referendum this September but who are currently under the age of 18 and therefore excluded from other representative surveys on this topic. While some polling institutes include 16- and 17-year olds in their samples, there are too few members of this age group in those polls to allow for any specific in-depth engagement with this age group.
The only comprehensive, representative survey of this age to date has been conducted as part of this project illustrating how the newly enfranchised young people suggested they would vote in 2014 and allowing us to examine what drove their decision making. Using the new data we will now be able to see whether one year later the campaigns have been able to engage with young people in an effective way and thus changing their views and perceptions.


At this event participants will hear presentations from the Edinburgh University team members
  • Dr Jan Eichhorn (Social Policy)
  • Prof Lindsay Paterson (Social Policy)
  • Prof John MacInnes (Sociology)
  • Dr Michael Rosie (Sociology)
Discussing a range of topics including:
  • The methodology of the survey
  • The referendum voting intentions of the young people
  • Their evaluation of the information provided and the sources they use
  • The way in which young people discuss the referendum and what impact that has on their views
  • How their general political attitudes relate to their constitutional preferences
  • Comparisons to the adult population regarding voting intention and evaluations of an independent Scotland
Attendance is free of charge, but places are strictly limited and registration is required. Please sign up here in order to secure your place 
Venue: Royal College of Physicians, 9 Queen Street, Edinburgh
Date: Monday, 9 June 2014
Time: 09.30 – 12.30


Venue: Royal College of Physicians, 9 Queen Street, Edinburgh
Date: Monday, 9 June 2014
Time: 09.30 – 12.30






There will be coffee and tea during the registration from 09.30 until 10.00. The presentation will begin subsequently and will be followed by an open discussion with the audience and the research team providing ample space for questions and engagement.



This news and information item first appeared on the home page of  goodenoughcaring.com on May 25th, 2014

Sunday, 15 December 2013

Sometimes it’s best to keep it in the oven a little longer : issue 14 of the goodenoughcaring Journal will be on the table for December 18th, 2013

Hungry and perceptive visitors to our kitchen will notice that the oven is still on and our assortment of savouries will not be out on the table until Wednesday, December 18th. Some recipes demand a slower cooking time, but we are sure you will agree the wait is well worth it. This is perhaps the finest menu we’ve ever presented. The flavour of this issue is imbued in the main by the work and ideas of Clare and Donald Winnicott and their influence on our thinking about how children develop, and how social work can help troubled children and their families. We also have other dishes for those who wish to explore a wider cuisine.
More than a baker’s dozen of authors have drawn generously from the contents of their Winnicottian and other larders. Kiaras Gharabaghi writes  about the quality of the professional education for Child and Youth care . John Burton writes about compliance and abuse in care settings,Cynthia Cross considers the Donald Winnicott’s thoughts about residential child care, while Luci Ashbourne asks how we can understand the the organisational re-enactment of traumatised children and young people. John Fallowfield cites Donald Winnicott among others in his essay about child development and observation in social work, Joel Kanter writes about Clare’s and Donald’s notion of the social worker/therapist as 'transitional participant' when in relationship with children traumatised by dislocation, Patrick Tomlinson cites Winnicott’s game "The Squiggle "in his article about communicating with traumatised children, and Charles Sharpe refers to Clare Winnicott's interview with Alan Cohen, and the writings of others to consider what she has to offer residential child care. Jeanne Warren’s essay is a consideration of the Scottish philosopher, (and contemporary of the Winnicotts) John Macmurray’s and the American educationalist, Nel Nodding’s ideas about the education of children. Charlotte Witheridge writes about the application of psychodynamic thinking to residential work with children and Mark Smith questions the application of the psychodynamic approach to residential work with children.
Bob Royston presents an article in our series of childhood of memoirs adding to our new bake's relish with an account of a period in his life living in a ‘country club.’ John Stein adds spice our new bake with recollections of Richard T. Cass, the first social worker he ever met and tells us about what he learnt from Richard, Kevin Ball puts forward a framework that should assure quality in residential child care as he gives a comprehensive explanation and evaluation of the role of the Regulation 33 visitor, and Sara Kirkwood's article about children's experiences of foster respite care in a Scottish hutting community rounds off our classic fare, though “The Girl from the Workhouse” an article from a magazine ‘conducted’ by Charles Dickens is a fascinating petit four.
We hope visitors to the goodenoughcaring website and readers of the Journal will agree that they are in for a pre-winter holiday treat.