doi.org/10.1017/S1035077200000079

Article type: Original Research

PUBLISHED 1 January 2008

Volume 33 Issue 1

Child protection, risk assessment and blame ideology

Philip Gillingham and Leah Bromfield

name here
Philip Gillingham1

name here
Leah Bromfield2 ORCID logo

Affiliations

1 Deakin University Waterfront Campus, philipg@deakin.edu.au

2 Australian Institute of Family Studies, leah.bromfield@aifs.gov.au

Contributions

Philip Gillingham -

Leah Bromfield -

CITATION: Gillingham P., & Bromfield L. (2008). Child protection, risk assessment and blame ideology. Children Australia, 33(1), 1647. doi.org/10.1017/S1035077200000079

download full pdf
https://childrenaustralia.org.au/journal/article/1647
go to url

Abstract

In this article we use qualitative data drawn from a sample of child protection cases to demonstrate how the process of attributing blame to parents and carers for child maltreatment is a significant influence on decisionmaking, sometimes to the detriment of assessing the future safety of children. We focus on two cases which both demonstrate how the process of apportioning blame can lead to decisions which might not be considered to be in the best interests of the children concerned. We conceptualise blame as an ‘ideology’ with its roots in the discourse of the ‘risk society’, perpetuated and sustained by the technology of risk assessment. The concept of blame ideology is offered as an addition to theory which seeks to explain the influences on decision making in child protection practice.

This PDF has been produced for your convenience. Always refer to the live site https://childrenaustralia.org.au/journal/article/1647 for the Version of Record.