{"id":229,"date":"2016-05-25T12:55:53","date_gmt":"2016-05-25T12:55:53","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blog.soton.ac.uk\/fshs\/?p=229"},"modified":"2016-05-25T13:03:03","modified_gmt":"2016-05-25T13:03:03","slug":"the-troubles-with-and-of-families-across-150-years","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blog.soton.ac.uk\/fshs\/2016\/05\/25\/the-troubles-with-and-of-families-across-150-years\/","title":{"rendered":"The troubles with and of families across 150 years"},"content":{"rendered":"

The case of COS constructions and interventions.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Professor of Sociology Ros Edwards, along with colleagues from other institutions, comments on the history of the Charity Organisation Society (COS) and how struggling families are placed in society today.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"Archives<\/a>
Archives dating back 150 years make it possible to trace shifts in perceptions of disadvantaged families<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

<\/p>\n

In the wake of the 2011 civil unrest, Prime Minister David Cameron identified the cause as inadequate parenting within \u2018what some people call problem and others call troubled families\u2019.\u00a0 The Troubled Families programme was born.\u00a0 Historically, this was the latest in a line of lenses through which to view families with problems and what to do about them.<\/p>\n

The voluntary agency Family Action has been central to the provision of services to struggling parents since its foundation as the Charity Organisation Society (COS) in 1869.\u00a0 Its archive of papers detailing nearly 150 years of case work allows us to trace shifts in perceptions of disadvantaged families and responses to them, especially in times of economic constraint.<\/p>\n

In the late 19th<\/span><\/sup> century, the poor were reliant on casual low paid work, living in poor quality and overcrowded accommodation, and suffering ill health and malnutrition, exacerbated by the Long Depression.\u00a0 The period was also characterised by a multiplication of overlapping charitable and relief agencies.\u00a0 The COS was founded in an attempt to control the distribution of charitable resources to those judged deserving, with the irredeemably destitute left to the parish Poor Law.<\/p>\n

In the late 19th<\/span><\/sup> century, family deprivation was regarded as a result of parental immoral character.\u00a0 As a COS founder, Octavia Hill, put it: \u201cMen, who should hold up their heads as self-respecting fathers, learning to sing like beggars, all because we give pennies\u2019.\u00a0 The COS assessed whether or not parents were capable of self-improvement and deserving of help through investigatory casework.<\/p>\n

Applicants were viewed through the lens of character with COS interventions reflecting the moral agenda.\u00a0 For example, Elizabeth Carey, a widow with six children, was granted a mangle so she could take in washing after references confirmed she was sober and steady.\u00a0 In contrast, the Thorpes and their starving children, living in a damp basement with little furniture, were considered to lack any self-reliance to build upon and referred to the Poor Law.<\/p>\n

By the time of the 1930s Great Depression such moral certainty had been subject to challenge. Factors beyond parents\u2019 control were recognised to cause family poverty. \u00a0Parents were regarded as amenable to, rather than undermined by help with problems.\u00a0 The COS case files show how assessments and interventions moved away from preoccupations with character and self-reliance, to focus on respectability, responsibility and appearance.<\/p>\n

In the face of mass unemployment COS provided grants for necessities and convalescent aid. For example, the Baines family were dependent on a small income from sick club insurance after Walter had an accident at work.\u00a0 The COS investigator described Walter as a skilled man who took an unskilled job in hard times, his wife as \u2018charming\u2019 and their children as well dressed.\u00a0 The Baines received several grants and a holiday.<\/p>\n

Around this time the COS also became interested in raising self-confidence to lift parents out of despair and ensure they were more presentable and better able to find work.\u00a0 In the 1940s and \u201850s anxieties about \u2018problem families\u2019 dominated welfare agendas, and apprehension about the effect of World War II on family stability mounted.\u00a0 In 1946 what was now named the Family Welfare Association (FWA) focused on therapeutic interventions to strengthen family relationships including marital counselling.<\/p>\n

By the early 1970s Oil Crisis, psychoanalytic ideas were embedded in statutory and voluntary work with families, including the Family Services Units which was eventually amalgamated with the FWA.\u00a0 Relational dynamics were positioned at the core of families\u2019 troubles.\u00a0 Previously applicants tended to be assessed as a household, with fathers often scrutinised over their willingness to work.\u00a0 By the 1970s the mother was identified as the key focus for intervention.<\/p>\n

While relational dynamics were problematised, the practical difficulties families faced seem similar to those in the previous century. For example, the Doones were managing on little money, living in badly maintained, overcrowded housing, and the children often missed school.\u00a0 Their caseworker decided these issues needed to be addressed before the relational root of their difficulties could be tackled. He liaised with the housing department and walked the children to school, but continued to view his primary role as helping the family to work on their relationships.<\/p>\n

The concern with family dynamics shifted across the latter part of the 20th<\/span><\/sup> century to an intensive focus on parenting \u2013 and latterly \u2018inter-parental\u2019 relationships.\u00a0 By the Global Financial Crisis of the early 2000s and pronouncement on the cause of the riots, poor parenting was ensconced as creating troubled families.\u00a0 Children\u2019s upbringing has emerged as the core of interventions, and a concern with domestic violence is fixed on its effects on children\u2019s life chances.<\/p>\n

Family Action\u2019s interventions under the Troubled Families initiative involve family support and delivery of parenting programmes \u2014 although case notes show that material issues often occupy much time.\u00a0 For example, Irene and her children were living in overcrowded unsuitable housing. They received minimal benefits and could not afford basic furniture.\u00a0 Chronic ill health affected Irene\u2019s mobility and she struggled to take her youngest child to school.\u00a0 While Family Action advised Irene on parenting and becoming \u2018work ready\u2019, effort was put into alleviating the family\u2019s severe practical and financial difficulties.<\/p>\n

Overall, the troubles of struggling families largely remain the same historically: poverty, ill health, inadequate housing, children\u2019s school attendance, as does the assumption of self-perpetuation.\u00a0 But the lens through which such deprivations are projected adjusts to fit the preoccupations of the day.<\/p>\n

The research on which this blog is based was funded by the ESRC under their Secondary Data<\/em><\/p>\n

Analysis Initiative II grant number ES\/L01453X\/1<\/em><\/p>\n

This content was originally published on the University of Leeds History & Policy Parenting Forum Blog<\/em><\/p>\n

Professor Rosalind Edwards, SSPC, University of Southampton<\/em><\/span><\/u><\/a>2<\/span><\/sup>; <\/em>Professor Val Gillies, Visiting professor, Goldsmiths University of London<\/em><\/span><\/u><\/a>3<\/span><\/sup>; and <\/em>Dr Nicola Horsley, CRSP, University of Loughborough<\/em><\/span><\/u><\/a>4<\/span><\/sup>.<\/em>\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The case of COS constructions and interventions. Professor of Sociology Ros Edwards, along with colleagues from other institutions, comments on the history of the Charity Organisation Society (COS) and how struggling families are placed in society today.  <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":50887,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1,880728,449985,248],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-229","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized","category-social-policy","category-social-sciences","category-sociology","column","twocol"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.soton.ac.uk\/fshs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/229","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.soton.ac.uk\/fshs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.soton.ac.uk\/fshs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.soton.ac.uk\/fshs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/50887"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.soton.ac.uk\/fshs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=229"}],"version-history":[{"count":6,"href":"https:\/\/blog.soton.ac.uk\/fshs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/229\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":236,"href":"https:\/\/blog.soton.ac.uk\/fshs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/229\/revisions\/236"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.soton.ac.uk\/fshs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=229"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.soton.ac.uk\/fshs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=229"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.soton.ac.uk\/fshs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=229"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}