Social Workers' Perceptions of Family Distress at Long-Term Care Placement

2003 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 29-48 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donna B. Davisson ◽  
Pearl M. Mosher-Ashley
2020 ◽  
Vol 77 (3) ◽  
pp. 160-167
Author(s):  
Kelvin Choi ◽  
Esther T Maas ◽  
Mieke Koehoorn ◽  
Christopher B McLeod

ObjectivesThis study examined time to return-to-work (RTW) among direct healthcare and social workers with violence-related incidents compared with these workers with non-violence-related incidents in British Columbia, Canada.MethodsAccepted workers’ compensation lost-time claims were extracted between 2010 and 2014. Workers with violence-related incidents and with non-violence-related incidents were matched using coarsened exact matching (n=5762). The outcome was days until RTW within 1 year after the first day of time loss, estimated with Cox regression using piecewise models, stratified by injury type, occupation, care setting and shift type.ResultsWorkers with violence-related incidents, compared with workers with non-violence-related incidents, were more likely to RTW within 30 days postinjury, less likely within 61–180 days, and were no different after 181 days. Workers with psychological injuries resulting from a violence-related incident had a lower likelihood to RTW during the year postinjury (HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.86). Workers with violence-related incidents in counselling and social work occupations were less likely to RTW within 90 days postinjury (HR 31–60 days: 0.67, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.95 and HR 61–90 days: 0.46, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.69). Workers with violence-related incidents in long-term care and residential social services were less likely to RTW within 91–180 days postinjury.ConclusionsWorkers with psychological injuries, and those in counselling and social work occupations and in long-term care and residential social services, took longer to RTW following a violence-related incident than workers with non-violence-related incidents. Future research should focus on identifying risk factors to reduce the burden of violence and facilitate RTW.


2006 ◽  
Vol 3 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 147-174 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Lubetkin ◽  
Rachel A. Annunziato ◽  
Deirdre Downes ◽  
Orah R. Burak

2011 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. 74-80 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan Tregeagle ◽  
Rosemary Hamill

This article presents the findings of a study of unplanned and planned placement changes in foster care programs designed for restoration or time-limited assessment for long-term care. In this study, the causes of placement changes in the program are analysed to assess whether stability could be improved. The study was undertaken by examining computer records of placement changes over a 6-year period, in five Temporary Family Care (TFC) programs. Once these changes were identified, social workers were asked to describe the circumstances of the placement change for each named child. These were then categorised into two groups: unplanned and planned placement changes. Unplanned changes are those that were not anticipated at initial entry to care, nor during scheduled case reviews. The frequency of unplanned changes was 2% of all placements; within this group of unplanned changes no child had more than two unplanned moves and only 0.6% of children had two unplanned changes. Planned placement changes were those changes considered as part of routine case decision-making according to the requirements of the ‘Looking After Children’ (LAC) system. These changes occurred in 4.5% of all planned placements. Some children experienced both planned and unplanned changes. The changes were then categorised according to the reasons for change. Some placement changes appeared unavoidable. This finding leads to questions about whether instability can ever be entirely eliminated. The TFC programs appear to have a lower rate of breakdown than that reported in the literature; however, variations in study design make comparisons difficult.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph L. Durand

This study examines the impact of surveillant care managerialism upon the practice of three social workers employed within the community support sector in Ontario health care. It applies the “Foucauldian Toolkit” of Jason L. Powell to examine the nature of the discourse shaping their practice and how they are both complicit and resistant to these discourses. It introduces recognition theory as counter discourse and argues that through the unique knowledge gained through relationships of respectful recognition that social workers act justly. Moreover it is argued that the relationships between social workers and their clients is the source of our unique knowledges as practitioners. Finally, this study examines the implications of social workers integrating a Foucauldian understanding of the reflexive relationship of power/knowledge and how through intersubjective relationships, we practice, create identities and serve the needs of justice even in a system and profession which does not acknowledge it as a requirement.


2021 ◽  
pp. 146801732110103
Author(s):  
Susanny J Beltran ◽  
Vivian J Miller ◽  
Tyrone Hamler

Summary Involvement in the political process in the United States is critical for social work professionals, as social policies dictate funding and programming in social work practice. Yet, there is little to no focus given to the regulation writing process in the social work literature in the United States. This article contributes to the scant body of knowledge that addresses the regulatory process from a social work perspective. A brief overview of the regulation writing process is provided, followed by a case study using the regulations for the U.S. Older Americans Act Long-Term Care Ombudsman Program to illustrate the process. Findings A total of 85 comments, submitted to the Federal Register docket, were analyzed using content analysis. Findings reveal that comment submissions varied greatly in terms of length, source, and input. Notably, findings indicate low participation from the social work profession. Application The open comment period of the regulation writing process offers a free, but effortful, window of opportunity for social workers to engage in post-legislative advocacy. There is a need to support the involvement of the social work profession in the regulation writing process, through practice and training enhancements.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document