Analytical Thinking and Decision Making in Social Work

This critical essay discusses the decision-making process for assessing, intervening, and evaluating a social worker's role in placing an adopted child. It explores the principles, theories, and approaches used in social work, such as equality and diversity, anti-discriminatory practice, and ecological systems theory. The essay also highlights the importance of evidence-based practice and knowledge of legislation in making informed decisions. It provides insights into the challenges and considerations in finding suitable placements for adopted children.

ANALYTICAL THINKING AND DECISION MAKING IN SOCIAL WORK
1

Introduction
On the basis of the second placement, that included Finding Placement in adoption this critical
essay has been written (Gray, Plath and Webb, 2009). The critical discussion in this essay
includes the decision-making process for assessing, intervention and evaluating of a social
worker dealing with the placement of an adopted child in the context of my effectiveness as an
agency's remit. The remit for student's placement dealt with placement to support children in
needs of families. This essay discusses theoretical consideration of the principles adopted while
dealing with the situation and a decision making an approach that can deal with the practice and
evaluating the risk of harm or abuse or safeguarding along with the necessary legislation has
been identified (Beckett, 2010). Evaluation of this case analysis allows arriving at an appropriate
way to deal with the social work situation.
The case study in the context of the agency’s remit
Insights into the context of the placement in view of the agency’s remit can reveal the situation
that had been faced. The placement was with an adoption agency working in partnership with the
Local Authority (Reynaert, Bouverne-de-Bie, and Vandevelde, 2009, pg. 518-534). The
overarching aim was to provide secure and loving families for children in need of forever homes
to support children and families for as long as they need. The agency ethos is underpinned by
Article 21 of the United Nations (UN) Convention on the Rights of the Child, which included
that every child has a right to a family life which if it cannot be provided by the family of origin,
should be provided by a permanent alternative family. It aims at recognizing children, who have
suffered separations and adversity may require some support at different times in childhood and
beyond and acknowledging the importance of early intervention or decision making for the child
(Howell, 2009, pg. 149-166). Having in-depth knowledge about their birth family history and
understanding the reasons for the separation is important in developing a positive sense of
identity and in forming new attachments.
The Family Finding Team looks for adopters for all children, whether individuals or sibling
groups. Similarly, the adopters are also varied, from couples to single adopters. It is important
that the Family Finders have a strong understanding of the child and their needs, so as to find a
2

suitable, safe and supportive family for them. The team consists of Head of the service,
Consultant Social Worker, currently three Family Finding Social workers and the Team
coordinator who supports the team with all administrative duties (O'Sullivan, 2010). My vital
role within the agency is to find adopters for the children, who are able to meet the child's needs
and ensuring they are safe and are a supportive family. In my placement, there are no formal
assessments tools and a defined procedure used to complete. Although at every stage of the
process you will be assessing the compatibility and suitability of the match between the child and
prospective adopters, in order to make a decision or recommendation for the right place for the
child (Dyke, 2016). During this process, I ensured that the Adoption standards are followed and
the needs and wishes of the child are at the center of the decisions made. This is done through
various meetings like Permanency Planning Meeting, Looked after Child review whereby
information is gathered from professionals and services involved. The scope of this discussion
explores varied knowledge that is used for decision-making and for the appraisal procedure. The
challenges that are faced in the process of evaluating the values of equality, diversity and while
working with non-consensual adoption will be undertaken for this purpose (Payne, 2015).
Academic Discussion
In order to find placement for the child and look out for an appropriate family there needed to
assessment and intervention (Brammer, 2009). The child is in a vulnerable state, hence
appropriate evaluation and assessment will not only reveal the child’s past environment, but also
future compatible environment in which the child can suitably be placed. The basic principle for
assessment and intervention was based on the principles of equality and diversity. Equality
principle entitles to be treated in a fair manner within society and behave in a fair manner with
others. The principles of equality emphasize providing the adopted child with equal opportunities
and access to resources, rights, and opportunities to be supported in a different manner. Diversity
implies instilling culture and practice which recognizes, values, respects and harness difference
in benefits amongst all (Jones, 2017). As discrimination implies differentiating amongst one to
another, implies unfair treatment of others especially children who are adopted. In order to
overcome discrimination, the principles of equality have to be focused on the primary aspect of
social care. Focus while finding a family for the child in aiming at placement service was
3

focused upon principles of equality, such that he gets opportunities in his life to prosper. While
dealing with the child’s placement, a team has to be formed and each member’s opinion has to be
obtained on various aspect of the placement. This will allow overcoming the issue related to
diversity and help attain equality. Moreover, it will allow assimilating divergent views of all
team members’s such that the child’s vulnerability can be overcome.
In order to assess and intervene in the case, principles of ADP/AOP was applied in the approach
(Jeffery et al, 2013, pg.120). ADP (anti-discriminatory practice) and AOP (anti-oppressive
practice) is a part of social work and is essential in social practice. Increasing diversity in
globalization and technological adaptation requires conscious efforts to adapt. Though ADP and
AOP are used in an interchangeable manner, the commitment of the same is at establishing social
justice. This principle applied in the current approach aimed at developing sensitivity to
existence around oppression and discrimination, such as to empathize with the child's past
condition. Recognizing that there is no comfortable ground while arriving at the solution and an
effort to overcome traditional practice has to be aimed at (Beckett and Horner, 2015). Non-
discriminatory and anti-oppressive assessment allows achievement of anti-discriminatory
practice. It becomes pertinent that the child without family is more likely to face oppression and
discrimination. However, making certain that AOP and ADP are suitable adhered to will enable
overcoming of such vulnerabilities for the child.
Theory applied for the purpose of evaluating the social case is ecological systems theory.
Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Theory aims at explaining the inherent qualities of a child
along with the environment he interacts with, which will influence his growth and development.
The theory aims at stressing the importance of analyzing a child in varied environments which
are known as the ecological systems, for analyzing his development. The immediate environment
system of the child is termed as the microsystem, it is the smallest environment which includes
home, daycare, school, community environment or peer groups (Heslop and Meredith, 2018).
Mesosystem is the connections which the child develops in his school or outside environment.
This system includes interaction that a child develops in essence of the system of the
microsystem. Exosystem is focused on the indirect environment, it includes linkages which
might exist amongst two or more settings, one amongst them might include indirectly developing
the child. Macrosystem includes the social and cultural values, which are the distance collection
4

of individuals and places affecting the child. Chronosystem takes into consideration the changes
that occur overtime period. It includes the influence of changes and constancy in the child’s
environment hence encompassing changes to the child’s family structure, address, parent’s
employment status, societal changes such as wars and economic cycles as well (Gray, Joy, Plath
and Webb, 2014, pg. 23-40). Evaluation of the child’s case reveals that there might have been
some risks or vulnerabilities in the child’s family which has led to the need for placement. While
assessing or evaluating a new family where the child can be placed in a suitable manner,
continuous assessment has to be undertaken to reveal that such instances does not arise. Without
bringing about many changes to each of the system as defined in the above discussions, the risks
or vulnerabilities will have to be filtered out. Thereafter, a yearly assessment of such
vulnerability and risks has to be assessed.
Though the theory is useful in explaining influences in a child's development and growth, it
overlooks the importance of context. The influence of context factor into the development of a
child is a crucial factor. Each child's context might be different, which leads to the formation of a
separate type of environment. The theory fails at understanding that children can cross-boundary
to develop complex identities. The theory views children as an object and moreover systems are
not linear in nature. However, this theory can contribute to understanding the dynamic
interactions between various personal and environmental factors. The ecomap method is
generally used by a social worker for depicting the social and personal relationship of the child
with his environment (Cocker and Hafford-Letchfield, 2014). The ecomap method is used for
tracing of the child to be placed for adoption relationship with his environment surrounding.
Task-centered practice (TCP) includes a social work technology to arrive at specific, measurable
and achievable goals. A TCP allows a social work practice model encompassing four steps
process to resolve targeted problems. The first step aims at defining target problems, then
establishing goals to help attain targeted problems. The third step includes the child and the agent
sharing outcomes of the species carried out steps. The tasks focus on a central goal setting
process for arriving at the results of placing the child in an appropriate family (Rutter and
Brown, 2015). The TCP approach allowed partnering with service users and significant others so
as to place the child in an appropriate family. Working in partnership in statutory setting and the
legislation requires adhering to Working Together 2015, Children Act 1989 and Adoption
5

Framework. The statutory duties of local authority’s in children’s social care is included in the
Children Act of 1989, Working Together to Safeguard Children and the Adoption and Children
Act 2002, specifies that child placement as a part of social work operates within the legislative
framework including law, regulation, and guidance (Howe, 2009). The various acts while
partnering of care ensures children wellbeing of children right from infancy to the period in
adulthood.
Systematic decision-making approach and evidence-based practice
A systematic decision-making approach is integral which is best undertaken by the organization's
structure, referred to as the Unit Model. The entire workforce of the organization is organized
into small teams, consisting of a Consultant Social Worker, a placement agent, unit Clinician and
two Social workers (Munro, Brown and Manful, 2011). These Units organized into groups with
similar services with the group manager undertaking managerial levels of responsibility. This
Unit model of an organization's structure helps to undertake systematic decision-making for
children placement and it brings about improvement to such decisions. The Unit model allowed
bringing together the various skills present amongst the member of the team, brainstorming ideas
regarding the child’s placement and in enhancing the overall effectiveness of the entire process.
The unit model reduces individualistic decision-making, which could have led to unconscious
discrimination against certain service group users on someone's personal biases (Wilkins and
Godfred, 2013). Through Unit meetings, it was possible to evaluate the various environments
that were impacting the child and in adopting a task-centered approach for selecting an AOP and
ADP environment for the child.
In order to evaluate the case varied knowledge in research, policy, and legislation was needed.
Knowledge of research was needed for EBP as it could contribute in an effective manner to the
current case evaluation. Evidence-based practice (EBP) includes a conscientious, judicious and
explicit application of current best evidence in undertaking decisions related to an individual.
EBP allows integrating patient values, clinical experience along with best research evidence for
decision making in the care environment (Kirkman and Melrose, 2014). Clinical experience
indicates the assimilated agent's experience in, education and skill levels. EBP was adopted by
6

each member in the Unit model such that all skills, expertise with knowledge can be assimilated.
EBP provides bringing in experiences as a way to devise an appropriate care environment for the
individual involved in the case. EBP is integral in this case as a child's development will be
impacted for the selected for placement and this will be devised by way of research, child's
values and preferences (Taylor, 2017). The child’s values and preferences will be selected based
upon the child's previous family settings and then will be matched with the placement's family
values and cultures. This will ensure that the influences remain similar in pre and post-placement
period. Working with individuals in the team member does not imply it will work for varied
individuals. EBP is needed for arriving at a suitable outcome for the child but there are certain
limitations and criticism as well. The major limitation of EBP is that the best evidence is not
available. In absence of availability of reliable data, it becomes difficult to draw conclusions
which in turn hinders decision-making process of the unit and reduces the likelihood of a
favorable outcome (Sen and Broadhurst, 2011). Another pertinent limitation encompasses the
current environment changes of the child more dynamically as compared to the past. This limits
the relevance and applicability of scientific and experimental evidence that was generated in a
separate manner.
Knowledge of legislation needed was in the domain of Working Together 2015, Children Act
1989 and Adoption Framework. The knowledge regarding this legislation allowed to undertake
procedures in conformance to the standards as specified in these legislations (Roesch-Marsh,
2017). A major practice that is accommodated in this case evaluation is Stephen Webb's
adherence to an ethical stance as being the key strength in social work. Ethical stance allows
progressive and distinctive practice applications. The effectiveness of my current practice will be
evaluated in accordance with the ethical stance that I have undertaken. In case the goals related
to placement is achieved in accordance with the task-centered approach then my practice will be
deemed to be effective. As a relatively inexperienced practitioner being able to develop an
evidence-based protocol for guiding decision can be considered to be a measure of effectiveness
(Kemshall, Wilkinson and Baker, 2013). Reducing the risks of placement breakdown and
improving long-term outcomes for adopting parents and children will ensure the effectiveness of
the overall procedure.
7

Management of Risk of harm, abuse, safeguarding and/or capacity issues
Social organizations need to ensure bureaucratic structures and systems improve protection of
vulnerable children (Taylor, 2013). This can be ensured by scrutiny and control decisions
undertaken by agents. Though management decisions are applied to social workers and agents
responsible for child placement, a social worker's behavior is seen to be important. Risk and
safeguarding of children are integral in social work, it has gained tremendous prominence with
the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014 coming into effect from April 2016. With
major legislative changes being brought about will help focus on themes of suicide, self-harm,
female genital mutilation, domestic abuse and internet and technology-based abuse and child
sexual exploitation (Webb, 2016). There are a number of boards for the purpose of registering
complaints and safeguarding of children in accordance with the law, regulations, and guidance.
When dealing with children with specific placement needs, then an agent needs to be aware of
the aspects of well-being. In order to manage issues related to risks and safeguarding, individual
views of the Unit members, wises and feelings need to be ascertained. A role member in support
has to be developed, who will participate in decisions and be able to communicate regarding the
child’s right for promoting and protecting dignity (Le Guin, 2015). Prior to placing of the child
in the new environment or new family, environmental factors have to be analyzed in great detail
to evaluate the possibility of the existence of such threats. The new definition of a ‘Child at Risk'
has replaced the term ‘Child in Need' under section 17 of the Children Act 1989. It has been
seen as a duty of local authority and social workers, especially agency remit to evaluate a child at
risks and to report it under Section 130 of the Act. In the present case where the child has
suffered the loss of family due to reasons whatsoever is at a greater vulnerability in facing the
various risks (Trevithick, 2014). While finding placement and then finally placing the child in
the foster care, it is a general assumption that the child does not further require evaluation. this
prevents the inability to recognize any potential harm being caused to the child in the new
environment. The assessment cycle according to the new act and regulations encompasses
continuous gathering of information, its analysis, decision making, planning intervention and
delivering of the assessment, evaluation and review report. The new legislation guidance
procedure states a systematic methodology which needs to take place at least once every year to
denote Signs of Safety principles.
8

Conclusion
While conducting role as a social worker, there can be various conflicts that need to be faced
with values of knowledge, equality, and diversity. Dealing with any case of foster care requires
assessing of the previous environment and then finding suitability to the new environment.
However, during such child placement, elements of law, knowledge, and research along with
values and cultures have to be kept in mind. Decision making has to be task-centered and
emphasize the complexities of finding placement. A complete and comprehensive placement is
one which provides a safest and secure option for the child along with the opportunity to promote
the well-being of children. The child needs to be continuously supported and protected through
the traumatic life-changing set of the event on the basis of EBP such vulnerability of the child
can be reduced as much as possible.
9

References
Beckett, C. and Horner, N., 2015. Essential theory for social work practice. Sage.
Beckett, C., 2010. Assessment & intervention in social work: Preparing for practice. Sage.
Brammer, A., 2009. Social work law. Pearson Education.
Cocker, C. and Hafford-Letchfield, T. eds., 2014. Rethinking anti-discriminatory and anti-
oppressive theories for social work practice. Palgrave Macmillan.
Dyke, C., 2016. Writing analytical assessments in social work. Critical Publishing.
Gray, M., Joy, E., Plath, D. and Webb, S.A., 2014. Opinions about evidence: A study of social
workers’ attitudes towards evidence-based practice. Journal of Social Work, 14(1), pp.23-40.
Gray, M., Plath, D. and Webb, S., 2009. Evidence-based social work: A critical stance.
Routledge.
Heslop, P. and Meredith, C., 2018. Social Work: From Assessment to Intervention. SAGE
Publications Limited.
Howe, D., 2009. A brief introduction to social work theory. Macmillan International Higher
Education.
Howell, S., 2009. Adoption of the unrelated child: Some challenges to the anthropological study
of kinship. Annual Review of Anthropology, 38, pp.149-166.
Jeffery, D., Clement, S., Corker, E., Howard, L.M., Murray, J. and Thornicroft, G., 2013.
Discrimination in relation to parenthood reported by community psychiatric service users in the
UK: a framework analysis. BMC psychiatry, 13(1), p.120.
Jones, E., 2017. Critical thinking and professional judgement for social work.
Kemshall, H., Wilkinson, B. and Baker, K., 2013. Working with Risk: Skills for contemporary
social work. Polity.
Kirkman, E. and Melrose, K., 2014. Clinical judgement and decision-making in children's social
work: An analysis of the'front Door'System. Department for Education.
10

Le Guin, U.K., 2015. The dispossessed. Hachette UK.
Munro, E.R., Brown, R. and Manful, E., 2011. Safeguarding children statistics: the availability
and comparability of data in the UK. London: Department of Education.
O'Sullivan, T., 2010. Decision making in social work. Macmillan International Higher
Education.
Payne, M., 2015. Modern social work theory. Oxford University Press.
Reynaert, D., Bouverne-de-Bie, M. and Vandevelde, S., 2009. A review of children’s rights
literature since the adoption of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the
Child. Childhood, 16(4), pp.518-534.
Roesch-Marsh, D.A., 2017. Writing Analytical Assessments in Social Work, Chris Dyke, Chris
Dyke. The British Journal of Social Work.
Rutter, L. and Brown, K., 2015. Critical Thinking and Professional judgement for social work.
Learning Matters.
Sen, R. and Broadhurst, K., 2011. Contact between children in out‐of‐home placements and their
family and friends networks: A research review. Child & Family Social Work, 16(3), pp.298-
309.
Taylor, B., 2013. Professional decision making and risk in social work. Learning Matters.
Taylor, B.J., 2017. Decision making, assessment and risk in social work. Learning Matters.
Trevithick, P., 2014. Humanising managerialism: Reclaiming emotional reasoning, intuition, the
relationship, and knowledge and skills in social work. Journal of Social Work Practice, 28(3),
pp.287-311.
Webb, S.A., 2016. Professional identity and social work. The Routledge Companion to the
Professions and Professionalism, pp.355-370.
Wilkins, D. and Godfred, W.D.B., 2013. Critical Analysis Skills for Social Workers. McGraw-
Hill Education (UK).
11

12