Persecution Strategies in Children’s Social Care
Dear North Tyneside Metropolitan Borough Council,
Re Academic Paper
Department of Social Science, the Psychology Section, University of Örebro
THE RHETORIC CASE
Persecution strategies in a child care order investigation
By: Linda Ärlig
Full text here: http://tinyurl.com/bm9lckg.
Taking full account of the contents of the academic paper
referenced above, please provide answers to the following questions under the FOI
A. Is the Council aware of this research and does it account for it in its children's social care practice?
B. In dealing with cases, what policy and practice has the Council put in place in order to ensure the protection of parents (and their children) whose children are involved in child care proceedings from Persecution Strategies being used by individual and/or colluding social workers (and departmental legal professionals) as described in Linda Ärlig's academic paper, THE RHETORIC CASE - Persecution strategies in a child care order investigation?
C. If so, how does the Council ensure such protection?
Whilst the relevant laws in the report are different in England and Wales the 56 identified Persecution Strategies in the paper can be summarised by the following be behaviours:
The authority knows best
Blackening the names of the parents
Making children and parents to appear in need of care
Pushing through and sticking to decisions that have been made
• Disregarding laws and regulations
• Destroying relations of importance to the family
• Influencing the reader
• Disregarding elementary aspects of objectivity
The use of Rhetoric, Withholding and Fabrication techniques in the 56 strategies results in biased, non-factual and inaccurate reporting as summarised in the following six groups:
Influencing the reader through language
Making the client seem pathological
Ignoring objectivity aspects
Exercising power and control
"The authorities know best"
"Feel-believe-think-experience- interpret"
D. When such issues are raised by parents, (allegations of
persecution including issues regarding factuality), that may fit into such strategies, behaviours and groupings in childrens’ care matters, can parents access trained, competent, effective and independent investigators with suitable forensic systems in order that a full independent investigative assessment of such matters can take place? Is full file disclosure available, and are the files reviewable before any determination of the case regarding
children occurs?
E. What training and monitoring systems are in place to identify any such issue?
F. How many instances of any allegations of such strategies being in use have:
1. Been alleged in the last year?
2. Been investigated in the last year?
3. From 2. how many were identified as evident by the number of cases of occurrence?
4. What range of remedies were then applied?
The Persecutions Strategies are listed below for your
convenience.
PERSECUTION STRATEGIES
1 Rhetorical strategy
2 Insinuating strategy
3 Positive-negative argumentation strategy
4 Negative reinforcement strategy
5 Negative synonym strategy
6 Repetition strategy
7 Hammer strategy
8 Multi-minus strategy
9 Contrast strategy
10 Strategy of selective use of words indicating
uncertainty
11 Generalisation strategy
12 Strategy of making trivial statements in a negative
context
13 Strategy of making the client seem pathological
14 Strategy of implying that the client’s criticism stems
from the client’s pathological condition
15 Therapy strategy
16 Strategy of making the client seem peculiar
17 Strategy of making the client’s behaviour seem too
intense
18 Strategy of persecution by use of the fundamental
attribution error
19 Scapegoat strategy
20 Strategy of calling attention to non-existent "facts"
21 Suppression strategy
22 Strategy of ignoring the client’s perspective
23 Strategy of vagueness
24 Strategy of gradually suppressing details
25 Strategy of using the impersonal form
26 Exaggeration strategy
27 Quantitative strategy
28 Fabulation strategy
29 Strategy of gradual intensification
30 Lying strategy
31 Strategy of presenting irrelevant information
32 Implicit theory strategy
33 Strategy of exploiting and exaggerating events
34 Strategy of collecting negative historical events of
little or no relevance
35 Strategy of referring to unspecified others
36 Presumptive strategy
37 Control and power strategy
38 Provocative strategy
39 Strategy of trying to accuse the client of lying
40 Anti-democratic strategy
41 Strategy of presenting insulting values and comments
42 Strategy of restricting the credibility of others’
opinions
43 The social authorities know best
44 Strategy of emphasising social authorities’ resources
45 Strategy of exceeding the limits of your competence
46 Moralising strategy
47 Strategy of justifying yourself and your actions
48 Strategy of stressing one’s own experience
49 Strategy of making vague references to experiences
50 Strategy of ascribing an experience to the client
51 Strategy of ascribing a negative attitude to the client
52 Interpretational strategy
53 Strategy of using strategic interpretation
54 Strategy of using signs as evidence
55 Strategy of interpreting everything negatively
56 Negative prognosis strategy
Yours faithfully,
Jane Clearly
Information Officer
The Advocacy Fund (PS1 FOI)
Dear Jane Clearly
Under the Freedom of Information Act individuals can request any recorded
information held by a public authority or any information they think a
public authority may hold. For a request to be valid under the Act, the
request must describe the information requested.
Public authorities are not required to read and evaluate themselves
against an academic paper, or any other type of paper, when responding to
a freedom of information request. As you have asked us to respond to the
request taking full account of the paper, we do not consider your request
to be a valid request for recorded information held as defined by the Act
and therefore will not be answered.
If you are unhappy with the way the Council has handled your request, you
may ask for an internal review. Please contact the Information Governance
Team no later than 40 working days after the date of this letter, after
which time we will consider the matter closed.
Information Governance Team
North Tyneside Council
Quadrant
The Silverlink North
Cobalt Business Park
North Tyneside
NE27 0BY
e-mail [1][North Tyneside Council request email]
Further information is also available from the Information Commissioner
at:
Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
[2]www.ico.gov.uk
Regards
Geoff Snary
Law and Governance
North Tyneside Council
Quadrant
The Silverlink North
Cobalt Business Park
North Tyneside
NE27 0BY
Tel: 0191 643 2333
Fax: 0191 643 2451
This email has been scanned for viruses, spam and inappropriate content by
Mimecast Unified Email Management Services.
References
Visible links
1. mailto:[North Tyneside Council request email]
2. http://www.ico.gov.uk/
We work to defend the right to FOI for everyone
Help us protect your right to hold public authorities to account. Donate and support our work.
Donate Now