scholarly journals Family Group Conferencing in Coercive Psychiatry: On Forming Partnership Between the Client, Social Networks and Professionals

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (6) ◽  
pp. 459-465
Author(s):  
Ellen Meijer ◽  
Gert Schout ◽  
Tineke Abma
2018 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 351-371
Author(s):  
Rosalie N Metze ◽  
Tineke A Abma ◽  
MH Kwekkeboom

Summary Family Group Conferencing as deployed in child care might be useful in elderly care to strengthen older adults’ social networks and self-mastery. When Family Group Conferencing was implemented for older adults in the Netherlands, social workers were reluctant to refer. To discover reasons for this reluctance, we examined social workers’ views and attitudes concerning Family Group Conferencing for their clients. Findings In an initial exploratory study, we distributed a survey among social workers who worked with older adults and were informed about Family Group Conferencing, followed by three focus groups of social workers with and without Family Group Conferencing experience. We also held semi-structured individual interviews with social workers and an employee of the Dutch Family Group Conferencing foundation. The respondents were positive about Family Group Conferencing, but hesitant about referring their older clients. Reasons were: they were already working with their clients’ social networks; they feared losing control over the care process; and they wondered how they could motivate their clients. They also reported that their clients themselves were reluctant, because they seemed to fear that Family Group Conferencing would lose them self-mastery, and they did not want to burden their social networks. Applications Our findings indicate that implementing Family Group Conferencing in elderly care is a complicated and slow process, partly because social workers have little experience with Family Group Conferencing. To facilitate social workers it might be necessary to offer them more guidance, in a joint process with the Family Group Conferencing foundation. One might also experiment with alterations to the Family Group Conferencing model, for example, by focusing less on family networks and more on reciprocity.


2017 ◽  
Vol 83 ◽  
pp. 255-263 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sharon Dijkstra ◽  
Hanneke E. Creemers ◽  
Jessica J. Asscher ◽  
Maja Deković ◽  
Geert Jan J.M. Stams

Practice ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 291-302
Author(s):  
Joan Rapaport ◽  
Geraldine Poirier Baiani ◽  
Jill Manthorpe

Author(s):  
Jonny Cohen ◽  
Dave Norton ◽  
Deanna Edwards ◽  
Kate Parkinson

This chapter assesses Family Group Conferencing in the youth justice arena. FGCs in the youth justice field sit under the umbrella of restorative justice. Restorative justice is the process of bringing together the ‘victim’ of a crime with the ‘offender’ to enable dialogue between the two parties with a focus on ‘repairing the harm’ to the victim. The restorative process is aimed at creating an outcome where the victim feels that justice has been served and that the offender is taking responsibility for their crime. The result is a ‘personalised’ justice process because it is the ‘victim’ who determines what needs to happen for them to feel that justice has been served. The chapter then looks at the ReConnect project, an FGC service based within Leeds Youth Offending service, to demonstrate that there is a broad need for family-centred responses to youth justice issues.


2002 ◽  
Vol 24 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 67-87 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark J. Macgowan ◽  
Joan Pennell

Author(s):  
Tyler W Corwin ◽  
Erin J Maher ◽  
Lisa Merkel-Holguin ◽  
Heather Allan ◽  
Dana M Hollinshead ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document