Multi Agency Social Work

Topics: Health care, Social work, International Federation of Social Workers Pages: 20 (6092 words) Published: May 7, 2013
Health and Social Care in the Community 13(2), 155–163

Multi-agency working in services for disabled children: what impact does it have Blackwell Publishing, Ltd.

on professionals?
David Abbott LLB Hons, M.Phil, M Soc Sc, Ruth Townsley BA Hons, PhD and Debby Watson BA Hons, MSc, CQSW Norah Fry Research Centre, University of Bristol, UK

David Abbott Norah Fry Research Centre University of Bristol 3 Priory Road, Bristol, BS8 1TX E-mail:

Abstract Whilst agencies in many sectors have been encouraged to work together to better meet the needs of service users, multi-agency working is now a central feature of government policy. In relation to children’s services, the National Service Framework, the English green paper, ‘Every Child Matters’ (DfES, 2003) and the Children Bill (DfES 2004) give a high priority to an integrated approach to service provision. This paper focuses on multiagency working for disabled children with complex health-care needs, a group of children who, perhaps even more than most, require the many professionals who support them and their families, to work more closely together. Drawing on the findings from a 3-year qualitative research study, this paper examines the impact of working in a multi-agency service on professionals. Interviews with 115 professionals concluded that staff were overwhelmingly positive about working as part of a multi-agency service. They reported improvements to their working lives in areas such as professional development, communication, collaboration with colleagues, and relationships with families with disabled children. However, whilst professionals felt that they were able to offer families a more efficient service, there was concern that the overall impact of multi-agency working on disabled children and their families would be limited. Keywords: disabled children, impact on professionals, multi-agency working Accepted for publication 5 October 2004

Introduction and background
Disabled children with complex health-care needs Children with complex health-care needs and their families have the same range of needs for services and support as other disabled children. But they also have additional care needs specifically related to the use of medical technology. This group of children typically require technical and/or medical equipment in the home, both because of their need for intensive ongoing care, and to compensate for the loss of a vital bodily function such as the ability to breathe or feed independently (Wagner et al. 1988). The combination of this group of children’s needs for health, social care and education means that it is inevitable that several agencies will be involved throughout their lives. Research © 2005 Blackwell Publishing Ltd

has shown that on average, families of disabled children have contact with at least 10 different professionals, and, over the course of a year, attend at least 20 appointments at hospitals and clinics (Care Co-ordination Network UK 2001). For families of disabled children with complex health-care needs, these numbers are likely to be very much higher. It is well established that the range, diversity and different levels of support are, in themselves, major problems for families (Townsley & Robinson 2000; Kirk & Glendinning 1999, Sloper & Turner 1992). The sheer number of professionals who may be involved in supporting a disabled child in the community can often lead to a lack of continuity and coordination and may leave families uncertain about who to contact regarding specific problems (Kirk & Glendinning 1999, Townsley & Robinson 2000; Wilcock et al. 1991). 155

D. Abbott et al.

Multi-agency working – the policy imperative Multi-agency working became a policy imperative when the new Labour Government fixed on ‘partnerships’ as an alternative ethos to the internal market and competition in services (Alexander & Macdonald 2001). Current legislation requires professionals to...

References: Alexander H. & Macdonald E. (2001) Evaluating policy-driven multi-agency partnership working: a cancer prevention strategy group and a multi-agency domestic abuse forum. UK Evaluation Society Annual Conference, 5 –7 December 2001, Belfast. Banks P. (2002) Partnerships Under Pressure. King’s Fund, London. Brown B., Crawford P. & Darongkamas J. (2000) Blurred roles and permeable boundaries: the experience of multidisciplinary working in community mental health. Health and Social Care in the Community 8 (6), 425 – 435. Cabinet Office (1999) Modernising Government (White Paper). The Stationery Office, London. Care Co-ordination Network UK (2001) Information Sheet. Department for Education and Skills (2003) Every Child Matters. Department for Education and Skills (2004) Children Bill. The Stationery Office, London. Department of Health (1997) The New NHS. Modern. Dependable (White Paper). The Stationery Office, London. Department of Health (1998) Partnership in Action (New Opportunities for Joint Working Between Health and Social Services) – a Discussion Document. Department of Health, London. Department of Health (2001) Valuing People (White Paper). The Stationery Office, London. Doyle B. (1997) Transdisciplinary approaches to working with families. In: B. Carpenter (Ed.) Families in Context: Emerging Trends in Family Support and Early Intervention. David Fulton Publishers Ltd, London. Glaser B. & Strauss A. (1967) The Discovery of Grounded Theory. Aldine, Chicago. Hart S. (1991) The collaborative dimension: risks and rewards of collaboration. In: C. McLauglin & M. Rouse (Eds) Supporting Schools. David Fulton, London. Kirk S. & Glendinning C. (1999) Supporting Parents Caring for a Technology-Dependent Child. National Primary Care Research and Development Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester. Lacey P. (1997) Multidisciplinary Teamwork: Practice and Training. Unpublished PhD Thesis. School of Education, University of Birmingham. Lacey P. & Ouvry C. (Eds) (2000) People with Profound and Multiple Learning Disabilities: a Collaborative Approach to Meeting Complex Needs. David Fulton Publishers, London. Mukherjee S., Beresford B. & Sloper P. (1999) Unlocking Key Working – an Analysis and Evaluation of Key Worker Services for Families with Disabled Children. The Policy Press, Bristol. Peck E., Gulliver P. & Towell D. (2002) Modernising Partnerships: An Evaluation of Somerset’s Innovations in the Commissioning and Organisation of Mental Health Services. Institute of Applied Health and Social Policy, Kings College, London. Revans L. (2003) Pioneers together. Community Care 3–9 April, 28 –30. Sloper P. & Turner S. (1992) Service needs of families of children with severe physical disability. Child: Care, Health and Development 18, 259–282. Snell J. (2003) Do you speak my language? Community Care 27 February–5 March, 28 –30. Taylor S. & Bogdan R. (1984) Introduction to Qualitative Research Methods: The Search for Meaning. John Wiley & Sons, New York. Townsley R., Abbott D. & Watson D. (2004) Making a Difference?
The research team was commissioned to carry out this work by the Family Fund an organisation which champions an inclusive society where families with severely disabled or seriously ill children have choices and the opportunity to enjoy ordinary life. The research was funded by the Community Fund.
© 2005 Blackwell Publishing Ltd, Health and Social Care in the Community 13(2), 155–163
Multi-agency working
Exploring the Impact of Multi-Agency Working on Disabled Children with Complex Health Care Needs, Their Families and the Professionals Who Support Them. The Policy Press, Bristol. Townsley R. & Robinson C. (2000) Food for Thought: Effective Support for Families Caring for a Child Who Is Tube-Fed. Norah Fry Research Centre, Bristol. Wagner J., Power E.J. & Fox H. (1988) Technology-Dependent Children: Hospital Versus Home Care. J P Lippincott, Philadelphia.
Watson D., Townsley R., Abbott D. & Latham P. (2002) Working Together? Multi-agency Working in Services to Disabled Children with Complex Health Care Needs and their Families: A Literature Review. Handsel Trust, Birmingham. Wilcock H., Armstrong J., Cottee S., Neale G. & Elia M. (1991) Artificial nutritional support for patients in the Cambridge health district. Health Trends 23, 93–100. Willis M., Kelly D. & McCulloch A. (2003) Take your partners. Community Care 18 –24 September, 42– 43.
© 2005 Blackwell Publishing Ltd, Health and Social Care in the Community 13(2), 155–163
Continue Reading

Please join StudyMode to read the full document

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Multi Agency Work Essay
  • Essay on Social Work
  • social work Essay
  • social work Essay
  • Social Work Agency Interview Essay
  • Multi Agency Working Essay
  • Swami Vivekananda as a contributor in Social Work Essay
  • Social Work Interview & Agency Tour Essay

Become a StudyMode Member

Sign Up - It's Free