Friday, 31 July 2015

Bertrand Russell on parental love



“Not only must children not be commanded to love their parents, but nothing must be done which has this result as their object. Parental affection, at its best, differs from sex love in this respect. It is of essence of sex love to seek a response, as is natural,since without a response, it cannot fulfil its biological function. But it is not the essence of parent love to seek a purpose.”




Source :   Russell, B. (1926) On Education   London, Unwin Books (1964,  p104)
This entry was first posted as an opinion piece on the home page of goodenoughcaring.com  website on July 27th, 2015.

Monday, 27 July 2015

What’s happened to childhood ?


This is a link to the video-cast of a Gresham College lecture What’s happened to childhood? delivered in February, 2014, by Professor Hugh Cunningham of the University of Kent .
gresham
In our current social, cultural, political and economic climate, some may feel that the underlying themes of the presentation have ever increasing pertinence.  You can watch and listen to Professor Cunningham  : here


This opinion piece first appeared on the home page of  goodenoughcaring.com on July 24th, 2015.

Thursday, 23 July 2015

Parental love in the 21st century : something to ponder.



“One of the difficulties attending parental love in our cultural moment is that the child, and first of all, the baby, has become the focus all so much expert know –how alongside so many redemptive hopes. Bringing up children now often seems to require a concentration of programmatic activity and consumerist expenditure so intense that love can flip into frustration and disappointment, though this may have Little to do with the child’s own individuality. The pleasures of love too often seem to have been displaced by a work and a production ethic in which parental achievement is judged by effort and by the honed product at its ever receding terminus.”
From All About Love Anatomy of an Unruly Emotion by Lisa Appignanesi (p289, 2011).

Saturday, 27 June 2015

‘The Mulberry Bush Issue’ of the goodenoughcaring Journal pilots speedily towards its July 1st, 2015, haven.




The Mulberry Bush issue of the goodenoughcaring Journal is piloting speedily towards its July 1st, 2015, haven.
John Diamond has provided us with an up to date inventory of the homeward bound Mulberry Bush cargo.  John Diamond  considers the Mulberry Bush’s cargo manifest  with An Introductionand supplies his  Reflections on the development of the Mulberry Bush,1948-2015John Turberville signals The Mulberry Bush approachCaryn Onions unfurls A multi disciplinary case studyAnnabelle Rose charts The role of psychodynamic theory, Zoe McCarthy  fathoms The role of play in the development of traumatised children, Andy Lole gives a bearing on  Developing a peer review network,   Dave Roberts enters a log about The Mulberry Bush Training and outreach team and Ray Burrows  opens up  An MBOX outreach case study.
Siobain Degregorio offers an additional article about her experience of student placement at the Mulberry Bush.
We are grateful to all those involved with the Mulberry Bush Organisation for allowing us reflect upon and celebrate the history and the work of ‘The Bush.’
Other items of cargo in the manifest of the 17th issue of the goodenoughcaring Journal include Jennie Bristow’s Helicopters or hands off: today’s parents can’t seem to winMaurice Fenton’s Doing the Right Thing for Children in Care and Support Seekers, and John Molloy’s  The Habit of Abuse. 
Michael J. Marlowe offers us Building Relationships with Troubled Children: Insights from Torey Hayden, John Stein believes Experience is the Best Teacher, Bethlehem Taylor remembers A Cockney Childhood in the East End Of London :1945-1960  and Charles Sharpe reviews Inequality, Poverty, Education A Political Economy of School Exclusion by Francesca Ashurst and Couze Venn and, Leading Good Care: the task, heart and art of managing social care by John Burton.
We believe Issue 17 of the goodenoughcaring Journal is a very special one and  hope you are are anticipating  with the excitement we are.

Thursday, 11 June 2015

Something to ponder : what’s happening to our education system ?



Given all the changes which have occurred in the English education system particularly since the Labour government's introduction of academies in 2000 it is not surprising that urban myths abound about the current state of the English education system. These include : 

“Academies are run for big companies to profit from.”
“Academies get rid of the bureaucracy of education and allow schools freedom.”
“Free schools are selective because they are set up by the better off or the more ambitious  parents in a community for their kids and not for children from poorer families.”
Here is some recent, though not necessarily conclusive, compelling or comprehensive evidence concerning these matters.


Academies and Free Schools



Academies are publicly funded schools which operate outside of local authority control. The government describes them as independent state-funded schools. Essentially, academies have more freedom than other state schools over their finances, the curriculum, and teachers' pay and conditions. Under the Labour government these were existing schools - often those considered to be under performing  - which elected to move out of local authority control.  An academy requires a sponsor - usually these are commercial organisations - which agrees a sum to which it underwrites the school’s finances. Free Schools are in essence the same as academies, they are set up and funded in the same way directly from central government. They are often called academies but they are usually set up by groups of parents, teachers, charities, trusts, religious and voluntary groups.

Who benefits in the new education system?

The usual government response to those who claim that the increasing number of free schools and academies set up by funds from the public purse is leading to the privatization of our public education system is that these schools are not privatized because they are legally required to be charities and the “for profit” organisations which run and sponsor them have set up charities which in a technical sense own the schools, and so these parent companies cannot and do not make money from their involvement with these schools. Recent evidence suggests this response lies firmly on the spurious side of dubious is counter to evidence concerning the relationship between public services and private organisations in education.
Many of the early sponsored academies which were established first by the Labour government were from the start under pressure to buy services from their sponsors, while the majority of these sponsors failed to honour their financial pledges to the schools (National Audit Office,2014).
Documents obtained under the Freedom of Information requests showed that state-funded academies chains have paid millions of pounds to closely associated businesses, directors, trustees and directors (Benn,2015). One of the many examples of this was highlighted by The Guardian in 2014 when it reported that Grace Academy, which operates 3 schools in the Midlands of England and was set up by a Conservative Party supporter, Lord Edmiston, had paid more than a million pounds to closely associated businesses, owned or controlled by Lord Edmiston, to members of the board of trustees and to the relatives of trustees. Leigh Academy Trust, run by the national schools commissioner, Frank Green has from 1910, paid over a £111,000 in consultancy fees, to Shoreline, a private company founded by Frank Green. Aurora Academies Trust paid over £213,000 to Mosaica Education for educational services, reimbursement of travel expenses and for use of its Paragon curriculum resource; three of the Aurora directors have a direct or indirect interest in Mosaica Education. Though these dealings were heavily criticised by the parliamentary Public Accounts Committee, they are not  illegal !
A claim made for Free Schools is that they are more likely to be set up in deprived areas and on the face of it this seems a good thing. An important question is however not just “Where is a school set up ?” but also “Who is admitted to the school?”
A recent wide ranging study by the Institute of Education led by Frances Green concluded, “That free schools were being established in relatively poor areas but recruiting fewer poorer pupils from those areas than might have been expected if selection had been random.”  (Green et al, 2015, p8)
One example of this was found in the London Borough of Tower Hamlets where in one free school 4.4% of the children were eligible for free school meals while the figure for all schools in Tower Hamlets in 2014 was 69%.
With a government whose constant mantra has been to improve the education of poor children, it is sobering to read the LSE/University of Manchester assessment of the government’s performance since 2010. The study concludes that there is a trend toward the narrowing of the school curriculum which excludes children with interests not covered by the traditionally academic subjects. It also observes,
“Inequalities in educational outcomes are affected by family poverty and by government policies on curriculum and assessment as well as by the pupil premium, for the most disadvantaged pupils. The fact that the gap between poorer, low achieving pupils and the rest has widened despite the government’s efforts to close it should give cause for concern”.

Sources
Benn, Melissa (2015) “Who runs our schools?” correspondence in The London Review of Books Vol 37, No 12 June 12th, 2015
Green.F., Allen R., & Jenkins, A. (2015) “Are Free Schools Socially Selective? A Quantitive Analysis.’ Centre for Research on Learning and Life Chances Institute for Education Accessed at http://www.llakes.ac.uk/sites/llakes.ac.uk/files/Are_Free_Schools_Socially_Selective_original.pdfon June 11th, 2015
London School of Economics and the University of Manchester (2015) The Coalition’s Record on Schools: Policy, Spending and Outcomes 2010-2015 accessed at http://sticerd.lse.ac.uk/dps/case/spcc/wp13.pdf on June 10th, 2015
National Audit Office, (2014)   Academies and maintained schools : Oversight and intervention accessed at http://www.nao.org.uk/report/academies-and-maintained-schools-oversight-and-intervention/   on June 11th, 2015
Syal, Rajeev. (2014) “Revealed: taxpayer-funded academies paying millions to private firms” in  The Guardian  January 12th, 2014 Accessed at http://www.theguardian.com/education/2014/jan/12/taxpayer-funded-academy-paying-millions-private-firms-schools-education-revealed-education on June 10th, 2015

This opinion item  was first posted posted in home page of  goodenoughcaring.com on 

Tuesday, 31 March 2015

No. 17 of the goodenoughcaring Journal – The Mulberry Bush Issue – goes online on July 1st, 2015.




On July 1st , 2015,   Issue 17 of the goodenoughcaring Journal will be published online. The core theme of our next issue is the work of the Mulberry Bush Organisation.
Founded as the Mulberry Bush School in 1948 by the child psychotherapist, Barbara Dockar-Drysdale, with support of the paediatrician and psychoanalyst, D.W. Winnicott, the Mulberry Bush has, throughout its history, offered therapeutic care, support and education to children. In recent decades the Mulberry Bush has diversified its services and provides therapeutic care and support to smaller groups and it has also developed as a centre for professional training in therapeutic care and education. The essays and articles about the Mulberry Bush will be written by people working there and by people who are or have been associated with it.
Other articles about childhood and child care matters will appear in this issue, as well as reviews of recent publications.
Further details about this Issue 17 will appear on this page during the coming weeks.



This item first appeared on the www.goodenoughcaring.com home page on March 31st, 2015


Wednesday, 4 March 2015

Where does the buck stop with Child Sexual Exploitation? Setting the record a little "straighter"





What happened to children who were sexually exploited by groups of adults in Rochdale, Rotherham and Oxfordshire is abhorrent to most of us. Those who were working to support children in these places at those times are no doubt filled with sadness and deep regret that somehow they were not able to make an effective intervention. Still, it is surely right that our primary priorities are to work towards ensuring that events like these cease and to make sure that the evil, cynical perpetrators of these crimes against children are the ones who are brought to justice.

David Cameron’s determination to jail people  – social workers, teachers and others involved with children  –  whom he alleges have ignored child abuse when they were aware of it may appear to be a decisive and populist reaction but it cannot be the solution to a labyrinthine problem. The idea that the threat of a jail sentence will improve the work performance of someone whose job is to engage with and help families and children who are often isolated, anxious, desperate, fearful and overly defensive, is absurd. There should be little doubt that the United Kingdom’s prime minister is sincere in wanting an end to child sexual exploitation though after more considered reflection he may ask himself how far his net will be cast in his search for guilty parties. Indeed he may even ask “Where does the buck stop ?” His adamant statement of intent is one of a leader whose government has cut education, social care and health services to children. This has left fewer people to do more and more work as the consequences of his government’s austerity measures make life for poor and vulnerable people increasingly intolerable. While our political leaders and our media are quick to pronounce upon the failure of public servants they are less meticulous in analysing its causes.

The Serious Case Review into Child Sexual Exploitation carried out at the request the Oxfordshire Safeguarding Children Group by an independent reviewer, Alan Bedford, suggests some social workers, police officers, health workers, teachers and their managers may not have dealt capably with what was happening to these children in Oxfordshire. No doubt some should be held to account for this but also we should remember that they are not the ones who committed unspeakably evil acts upon children. It may be a surprise to some, but the vast majority of people who in one way or another work to support and to educate children want the children to flourish. Those of us who have been involved in work with children at risk will understand how it is possible for mistakes to be made even when our action or our decisions are meant for the best. It would be good if some politicians were to acknowledge that this is also true in their line of work. 
What the somewhat squewed media  headlines omitted, as the prime minister used the publication of the Serious Case Review as the backdrop to his own child sexual exploitation publicity event – held yesterday (March 3rd, 2015) at 10 Downing Street  –  is that the text of the review contained a number of observations that were not a fit with the sensationalist way this tragic matter was being reported.  For instance the review’s author stressed how in the end, workers from a number of disciplines in children’s services ensured that these dreadful matters came to light. Setting the record straight, Alan Bedford concludes :
“Ultimately, it was the efforts of staff on the ground, and their observations and persistence, which was the main driver in the eventual identification of Child Sexual Abuse.
“The discovery of what later emerged in the Bullfinch inquiry and trial was led not by leaders and strategic bodies but by more junior staff working nearer the coalface. A drugs worker for the City Council, a social worker, and a detective inspector, on their own initiative, and in the absence of any strategic work, each led a number of meetings which were unknown to the OSCB or top managers. Their efforts eventually culminated in a shared recognition that there was group-related exploitation of multiple girls. Action from this point became coordinated and successful.
The report also comments on the honesty and openness of the workers questioned during the review process and mentions the progress the various agencies involved have made towards making improvements in their practice :
“The vast majority of the information for this SCR has come from the agencies’ own internal reviews, so the accounts of any deficits in performance have come from the agencies themselves voluntarily, and reflect a laudable willingness to be open about the past. They were equally forthcoming when the author made additional inquiries. The learning in Oxfordshire has already been significant, with much good practice now in place, and a professional mind-set now attuned to CSE, with children seen as children, however they behave. There is a growing arsenal of tools to identify, prevent, disrupt and prosecute CSE. Operation Bullfinch and subsequent prosecutions have shown concerted and rigorous action.” *
There are other observations which might be cited from the text but like those above they do not serve a table thumping, simplistic, righteous, scapegoating and narrow point view. It was interesting to note that while this was overwhelmingly the headline story on BBC television morning news yesterday, it was not mentioned at all today.
At the risk of sounding as moralistic as the prime minister, in the longer term we should strive to make sure as much as we can that this exploitation is brought to a halt by creating a society which truly cares about each of its individual members.  We may not always succeed but we should never stop trying. This will be a society which genuinely accepts the responsibilities implicit in that now cheapened phrase “We’re all in it together.”  We should be striving to create a community in which there are no winners or losers, where there are no exploiters of any kind and none who are exploited.
___________________________________________
*Excerpts from the Serious Case Review into Child Sexual Exploitation in Oxfordshire: from the experiences of Children A, B, C, D, E, and F. Accessed at http://www.oscb.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/SCR-into-CSE-in-Oxfordshire-FINAL-FOR-WEBSITE.pdf

This opinion item first appeared on the home page of the goodenoughcaring.com website on March 3rd, 2015