Skip Navigation



BJSW Advance Access published online on June 16, 2006
British Journal of Social Work, doi:10.1093/bjsw/bcl055
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
37/6/987    most recent
bcl055v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hayes, D.
Right arrow Articles by Houston, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2006. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The British Association of Social Workers. All rights reserved

Article

‘Lifeworld’, ‘System’ and Family Group Conferences: Habermas’s Contribution to Discourse in Child Protection

David Hayes 1 * and Stan Houston 2

1 School of Sociology, Social Policy and Social Work, Queen’s University of Belfast, 7 Lennoxvale, Belfast BT9 5BY, UK
2 Lecturer in Social Work in the School of Sociology, Social Policy and Social Work at the Queen’s University Belfast

* To whom correspondence should be addressed.
David Hayes, E-mail: d.hayes{at}qub.ac.uk


  Abstract

Habermas’s critical social theory has been challenged on a range of fronts. However, the authors see merit in his mediation thesis as set out in the seminal text, Between Facts and Norms (1996). Adopting a pragmatist defence of the thesis, we review and demonstrate the effectiveness of what we believe is a coincidental expression of some of its main tenets--The Family Group Conference in Child Protection. Drawing further on Habermas’s work, we then proceed to re-work aspects of the conference’s core processes, thereby accentuating the possibility of empowering dialogue between its key participants: the families (who embody the ‘lifeworld’) and the social work professionals (who represent the ‘system’). In the final section, we argue that moral practice in child protection must be safeguarded by communicational procedures that explicitly address issues relating to the use of power and the need for ‘recognition’ between subjects.

Keywords: Habermas, family group conferences, empowerment, child protection.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Br J Soc WorkHome page
S. Houston
Communication, Recognition and Social Work: Aligning the Ethical Theories of Habermas and Honneth
Br. J. Soc. Work, October 1, 2009; 39(7): 1274 - 1290.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Br J Soc WorkHome page
M. Gray
Moral Sources and Emergent Ethical Theories in Social Work
Br. J. Soc. Work, September 22, 2009; (2009) bcp104v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Br J Soc WorkHome page
S. Houston
Further Reflections on Habermas's Contribution to Discourse in Child Protection: An Examination of Power in Social Life
Br. J. Soc. Work, August 12, 2009; (2009) bcp085v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Br J Soc WorkHome page
P. M. Garrett
Questioning Habermasian Social Work: A Note on Some Alternative Theoretical Resources
Br. J. Soc. Work, July 1, 2009; 39(5): 867 - 883.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Br J Soc WorkHome page
E. Blyth and H. Masson
Editorial
Br. J. Soc. Work, July 1, 2009; 39(5): 785 - 788.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.