This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Web of Science (11) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Gillies, V. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Meeting parents’ needs? Discourses of ‘support’ and ‘inclusion’ in family policy

London South Bank University, gilliev{at}lsbu.ac.uk

This paper will critically examine the assumptions structuring policy discourses of support and inclusion, and will link them to wider political and theoretical debates. Reflecting an increasing professionalization of childrearing practices, recent policy documents have emphasized the need for all parents to have access to support, advice and guidance. Implicit in this approach is the notion that ‘socially excluded’ parents in particular are isolated from the information and assistance that enables effective parenting. Meanwhile, the concepts of poverty and inequality are becoming increasingly detached from government definitions of social exclusion. Policies addressing the ‘condition’ of exclusion commonly emphasize a perceived disconnection from mainstream values and aspirations, as opposed to marginalization from material resources. In the case of family policy, interventions framed within the discourse of ‘parenting support’ stress the importance of helping parents to do the best they can for their children. However, tacit moral judgements direct the nature and type of support that is promoted, with a particular emphasis placed on advising and ‘including’ marginalized parents. In this paper, policy definitions of support will be analysed and their implications in terms of gender and class will be drawn out. It will be argued that despite a rhetoric of empowerment and investment, the current emphasis on support represents a top-down projection of values and standards on to families, thereby ‘supporting’ conformity rather than promoting access to parenting resources.

Key Words: class • exclusion • New Labour • parenting

Critical Social Policy, Vol. 25, No. 1, 70-90 (2005)
DOI: 10.1177/0261018305048968


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S. Parr Family Intervention Projects: A Site of Social Work Practice Br. J. Soc. Work, October 1, 2009; 39(7): 1256 - 1273. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Powell and S. Murray Children and Domestic Violence: Constructing a Policy Problem in Australia and New Zealand Social Legal Studies, December 1, 2008; 17(4): 453 - 473. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. Breheny and C. Stephens `Breaking the Cycle': Constructing Intergenerational Explanations for Disadvantage J Health Psychol, September 1, 2008; 13(6): 754 - 763. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. Connor We're onto you: A critical examination of the Department for Work and Pensions' `Targeting Benefit Fraud' campaign Critical Social Policy, May 1, 2007; 27(2): 231 - 252. [Abstract] [PDF]

				R. Lister Children (but not women) first: New Labour, child welfare and gender Critical Social Policy, May 1, 2006; 26(2): 315 - 335. [Abstract] [PDF]

				E. K. M. Tisdall Antisocial behaviour legislation meets children's services: challenging perspectives on children, parents and the state Critical Social Policy, February 1, 2006; 26(1): 101 - 120. [Abstract] [PDF]

				V. Gillies Raising the 'Meritocracy': Parenting and the Individualization of Social Class Sociology, December 1, 2005; 39(5): 835 - 853. [Abstract] [PDF]