U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Residential Programmes for Children and Youth: An Exercise in Re-Framing

NCJ Number
106168
Journal
British Journal of Social Work Volume: 15 Dated: (1985) Pages: 145-154
Author(s)
F Ainsworth
Date Published
1985
Length
10 pages
Annotation
This analysis identifies the common functions of residential programs for children and youth in the health care, education, social welfare, and criminal justice systems and considers how the nature and mandate for a particular type of program affects its social status as well as that of its practitioners.
Abstract
Care is the central function of all group residential programs. Responsibility for children and youth and responsiveness to their developmental needs is the basic concept underlying all care. Care has four components: treatment, teaching, nurturing, and control. The relative importance of these components and the ways they are conducted vary according to whether the program is operated through the health, education, welfare, or criminal justice system. Another important factor is whether the mandate for the care comes privately, from the parent; from a licensed or accredited professional such as doctor or a social worker; from the public sector in the form of a local or national government agency; or from some combination of these three sources. The type of mandate and the type of care both affect its status. Programs focusing on health and education have higher status than those involving criminal justice or welfare. Programs operating through private mandates have higher status than those operating through public mandates. Programs serving the total population have higher status than those serving a residual population. A program's credibility with the public is also a function of historical and cultural factors. These propositions suggest the usefulness of considering group care to be a separate field of study that would lead to the development of a body of knowledge and core of skills for practitioners working in a variety of settings. Diagrams and 5 references.