The Accumulation of Standards for Treatment Decisions in Social Work (1847-2018)

The choice of treatment in social work is characterized as discretionary since it should be adapted to the individual context and there are diverse and debatable ways to improve living conditions in question. Existing research has found that streel-level bureaucrats, such as social caseworkers, bas...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Filip Wollter
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Social Work & Society 2020-05-01
Series:Social Work and Society
Online Access:https://ejournals.bib.uni-wuppertal.de/index.php/sws/article/view/654
id doaj-75892f4260e54b75978db392ebc3e8ee
record_format Article
spelling doaj-75892f4260e54b75978db392ebc3e8ee2021-05-29T05:41:53ZengSocial Work & SocietySocial Work and Society1613-89532020-05-01181The Accumulation of Standards for Treatment Decisions in Social Work (1847-2018)Filip Wollter0The Department of Social Sciences, Ersta Sköndal Bräcke University College The choice of treatment in social work is characterized as discretionary since it should be adapted to the individual context and there are diverse and debatable ways to improve living conditions in question. Existing research has found that streel-level bureaucrats, such as social caseworkers, base their discretionary decisions on multiple standards, or “actions prescriptions”. Taking this pluralism into account, this article explores and contextualizes the development of standards for discretionary treatment decisions, using the case of Swedish public social casework (1847-2018). The aim is to expose and compare various approaches and types of discretion, their origins, and the conditions of their coexistence. The study has two main empirical findings. First, the development of new standards for the exercise of discretion is justified by the fact that the new standard is a better knowledge base for treatment decisions. The driving motor of these changes is mainly advocacy by civil society organizations. Second, as the advocacy of new standards was successful, in several cases, it has resulted in the accumulation, or sedimentation, of standards. The consequence is that an increasing number of discretionary actors balance different action descriptions and negotiate for discretionary power. https://ejournals.bib.uni-wuppertal.de/index.php/sws/article/view/654
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Filip Wollter
spellingShingle Filip Wollter
The Accumulation of Standards for Treatment Decisions in Social Work (1847-2018)
Social Work and Society
author_facet Filip Wollter
author_sort Filip Wollter
title The Accumulation of Standards for Treatment Decisions in Social Work (1847-2018)
title_short The Accumulation of Standards for Treatment Decisions in Social Work (1847-2018)
title_full The Accumulation of Standards for Treatment Decisions in Social Work (1847-2018)
title_fullStr The Accumulation of Standards for Treatment Decisions in Social Work (1847-2018)
title_full_unstemmed The Accumulation of Standards for Treatment Decisions in Social Work (1847-2018)
title_sort accumulation of standards for treatment decisions in social work (1847-2018)
publisher Social Work & Society
series Social Work and Society
issn 1613-8953
publishDate 2020-05-01
description The choice of treatment in social work is characterized as discretionary since it should be adapted to the individual context and there are diverse and debatable ways to improve living conditions in question. Existing research has found that streel-level bureaucrats, such as social caseworkers, base their discretionary decisions on multiple standards, or “actions prescriptions”. Taking this pluralism into account, this article explores and contextualizes the development of standards for discretionary treatment decisions, using the case of Swedish public social casework (1847-2018). The aim is to expose and compare various approaches and types of discretion, their origins, and the conditions of their coexistence. The study has two main empirical findings. First, the development of new standards for the exercise of discretion is justified by the fact that the new standard is a better knowledge base for treatment decisions. The driving motor of these changes is mainly advocacy by civil society organizations. Second, as the advocacy of new standards was successful, in several cases, it has resulted in the accumulation, or sedimentation, of standards. The consequence is that an increasing number of discretionary actors balance different action descriptions and negotiate for discretionary power.
url https://ejournals.bib.uni-wuppertal.de/index.php/sws/article/view/654
work_keys_str_mv AT filipwollter theaccumulationofstandardsfortreatmentdecisionsinsocialwork18472018
AT filipwollter accumulationofstandardsfortreatmentdecisionsinsocialwork18472018
_version_ 1721422468086759424