Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-mp689 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T12:54:52.601Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Defining children's needs in out-of-home care: Methods and challenges of a collaborative research project

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 February 2016

Jan Mason
Affiliation:
School of Applied Social and Human Sciences, Social Justice and Social Change Research Centre, University of Western Sydney, Bankstown Campus, Locked Bag 1797, Penrith South DC, NSW 1797. Email: jan.mason@uws.edu.au
Robert Urquhart
Affiliation:
Social Justice and Social Change Research Centre, University of Western Sydney, Bankstown Campus. Email: r.urquhart@uws.edu.au
Natalie Bolzan
Affiliation:
School of Applied Social and Human Sciences, University of Western Sydney, Bankstown Campus. Email: n.bolzan@uws.edu.au

Abstract

The ‘future’ orientation of the out-of-home care research literature which has focused on outcomes of care has risked ignoring children's experiences of care in their ‘present(s)’. In this paper we describe a project, the design of which reflects an alternative to the traditional way of looking at childhood, of which this ‘future’ (adult constructed) orientation is part. We discuss the use of qualitative research methods to identify children's needs in care. The project has attempted to involve children as co-constructors of knowledge around their needs through participatory research methods. These methods have required us to recognise that children and their needs exist within a context of relational structures; to address the power imbalances between adult researchers and child participants; and to be flexible in responding to the consequences of a participative process. Challenges which have surfaced in the implementation of this research and our responses to them are described.

Type
Section Two: Research Methods
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2003

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Abramovitz, R. (1991) ‘Children's capacity to consent to participation in psychological research’, Child Development, 62, 11001109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Callaway, H. (1992) ‘Ethnography and experience: gender implications in fieldwork and texts’, in Okely, J. & Callaway, H. (Eds.), Anthropology and Autobiography, London: Routledge, pp. 2949.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colton, M.J. (1988) Dimensions of substitute child care: A comparative study of foster and residential care practice, Aldershot: Avebury.Google Scholar
Cree, V., Kay, H., & Tisdall, K. (2002) ‘Research with children: sharing the dilemmas’, Child and Family Social Work, 7, 4756.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, J., Watson, N. & Cunningham-Burley, S. (2000) ‘Learning the lives of disabled children: developing a reflexive approach’, in Christensen, P. & James, A. (Eds.), Research with children: Perspectives and practices. New York: Falmer Press, pp. 201224.Google Scholar
Gilbertson, R. & Barber, J. (2002) ‘Obstacles to involving children and young people in foster care research’, Child and Family Social Work, 7, 253258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goddard, C. & Carew, R. (1993) Responding to children: Child welfare and practice, Melbourne: Longman Cheshire.Google Scholar
Guba, E. & Lincoln, Y. (1989) Fourth generation evaluation, London: Sage.Google Scholar
Hill, M., Triseliotis, J., Borland, M. & Lambert, L. (1996) ‘Outcomes of Social Work intervention with young people’, in Hill, M. & Aldgate, J. (Eds.), Child welfare services. Developments in law, policy, practice & research, London: Jessica Kingsley, pp. 255269.Google Scholar
Hood, S., Kelley, P. & Mayall, B. (1996) ‘Children as research subjects: a risky enterprise’, Children & Society, 10, 117128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hutchby, I. & Moran-Ellis, J. (Eds) (1998) Children and social competence: Arenas of social action, London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
Kagan, J. (1980) ‘The psychological requirements for human development’, in Skolnick, A. & Skolnick, J.H. (Eds.), Family in transition, Boston: Little, Brown & Co, pp. 427437.Google Scholar
Kufeldt, K. & Thériault, E. (1995) ‘Child welfare experiences and outcomes’, in Hudson, J. & Galaway, B. (Eds.), Child welfare in Canada: Research and policy implication, Toronto: Thompson Educational Publishing, pp. 337351.Google Scholar
Levinson, B.A. (1998) ‘(How) Can a man do feminist ethnography of education?’, Qualitative Inquiry, 4(3), 337368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mason, J. & Falloon, J. (2001) ‘Some Sydney children define abuse: implications for agency in childhood’, in Alanen, L. & Mayall, B. (Eds.), Conceptualizing child-adult relations, London: Routledge & Falmer, pp. 99113.Google Scholar
Masson, J. (2000) ‘Researching children's perspectives: Legal issues’, in Lewis, A. & Lindsay, G. (Eds.), Researching children's perspectives, Buckingham: Open University Press, pp. 3445.Google Scholar
Mayall, B. (1994) Children's childhoods: Observed and experienced, London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
Mayall, B. (2002) Towards a sociology for childhood: Thinking from children's lives, Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar
O'Kane, C. (2000) ‘The development of participatory techniques: Facilitating children's views about decisions which affect them’, in Christensen, P. & James, A. (Eds.), Research with children: Perspectives and practices. New York: Falmer Press, pp. 136159.Google Scholar
Pretty, J.N., Guijt, I., Thompson, J. & Scoones, I. (1995) Participatory learning & action: A trainer's guide, IIED, Participatory Methodology Series, London: IIED (International Institute for Environmental Development).Google Scholar
Woodhead, M. (1990) ‘Psychology and the social construction of children's needs’, in James, A. & Prout, A. (Eds.), Constructing and reconstructing childhood, Hampshire: Falmer Press, pp. 6077.Google Scholar