Pre-birth child protection and the reproductive rights of fathers
Keywords:
Reproductive justice, fathers, pregnancy, infant removalAbstract
INTRODUCTION: Whilst acknowledging that child-welfare-involved pregnant women occupy a uniquely precarious position in terms of their human dignity and rights, this paper focuses on the vulnerabilities of fathers of children subject to child protection assessment before birth.
APPROACH: This article draws on data from two qualitative research studies focused on social work practice in Scotland. The first study created ethnographic data with and about eight fathers who were experiencing pre-birth child protection involvement with their babies. The second study did not include fathers themselves, yet research data were created through interviews with 10 birth mothers, which reinforced findings of the prior research in relation to men being written out of planning and legal processes before their children were born.
FINDINGS: Taking a reproductive justice lens to the findings of the studies reveals how this population of fathers are exposed to legal and social precarity in relation to their paternal role. Through the advice of social workers, women were encouraged not to name the fathers of their as yet unborn infants on their child’s birth certificate, creating an immediate barrier to fathers’ involvement.
IMPLICATIONS: The article demonstrates that a reproductive justice framework (L. Ross & Solinger, 2017) can be applied to understand how men’s rights to parent their children may be compromised by child protection involvement in the family. Acknowledging the power held by social workers is a crucial step in beginning to address the social inequalities around “reproductive destiny” (L. Ross, 2006, p. 4) experienced by fathers.
References
Barker, R. W. (1997). Unborn children and child protection – legal, policy and practices issues. (United Kingdom) (Social Work Law: An Interface for Policy and Practice Development). Liverpool Law Review: A Journal of Contemporary Legal and Social Policy Issues, 19(2), 219–229.
Beddoe, L. (2022). Reproductive justice, abortion rights and social work. Critical and Radical Social Work, 10(1), 7–22.
Broadhurst, K., Mason, C., Bedston, S., Alrouh, B., Morriss, L., McQuarrie, T., Palmer, M., Shaw, M., Harwin, J., Kershaw, S. (2017). Vulnerable birth mothers and recurrent care proceedings, final main report. Nuffield Foundation.
Broadhurst, K., Alrouh, B., Mason, C., Ward, H., Holmes, L., Ryan, M., & Bowyer, S. (2018). Born into care: Newborn babies subject to care proceedings in England. The Nuffield Family Justice Observatory.
Broadhurst, K., & Mason, C. (2020). Child removal as the gateway to further adversity: Birth mother accounts of the immediate and enduring collateral consequences of child removal. Qualitative Social Work, 19(1), 15–37.
Broadhurst, K., Mason, C., & Ward, H. (2022). Urgent care proceedings for new-born babies in England and Wales: Time for a fundamental review. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family, 36(1), 1–31.
Brown, L., Callahan, M., Strega, S., Walmsley, C., & Dominelli, L. (2009). Manufacturing ghost fathers: The paradox of father presence and absence in child welfare. Child & Family Social Work, 14(1), 25-34.
Corner, R. (1997). Pre-birth risk assessment in child protection (Social work monographs; 161). Social Work Monographs, University of East Anglia.
Critchley, A. (2019a). Jumping through hoops: Families’ experiences of pre-birth child protection. In L. Murray, L. McDonnell, T. Hinton-Smith, N. Ferreira, & K. Walsh (Eds.), Families in motion: Ebbing and flowing through space and time (Ch 8; pp. 135-154). Emerald Publishing.
Critchley, A. (2019b). Quickening steps: An ethnography of pre-birth child protection in Scotland [Doctoral dissertation]. The University of Edinburgh. https://era.ed.ac.uk/handle/1842/36134
Critchley, A. (2020). “The lion's den”: Social workers' understandings of risk to infants. Child and Family Social Work, 25, 895–903.
Critchley, A. (2022a). Giving up the ghost: Findings on fathers and social work from a study of pre-birth child protection. Qualitative Social Work, 21(3), 580–601.
Critchley, A. (2022b). No room to change? Fatherhood, masculinities and child welfare. In A. Tarrant, L. Way, & L. Ladlow (Eds.), Men and welfare (Ch 15). Routledge.
Critchley, A., Grant, M., Hardy, M., & Cleary, J. (2023). Supporting roots. Scottish Government. https://www.gov. scot/publications/supporting-roots/documents/
Critchley, A., & Keddell, E. (Forthcoming). Risks and Representations: Creating consensus narratives about risk with pregnant women involved with child protection systems in Aotearoa New Zealand and Scotland. Critical Social Policy.
Davis, A. Y., Dent, G., Meiners, E. R., & Richie, B. E. (2022). Abolition. Feminism. Now. Hamish Hamilton.
Dettlaff A. J., & Boyd, R. (2020). Racial disproportionality and disparities in the child welfare system: Why do they exist, and what can be done to address them? The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 692(1), 253–274.
Deutscher, P. (2008). The inversion of exceptionality: Foucault, Agamben, and “reproductive rights”. South Atlantic Quarterly, 107(1), 55–70.
Dukes, A., & Palm, G. (2019). Reproductive justice and support for young fathers. Infant Mental Health Journal, 40, 710–724.
Ewart-Boyle, S., Manktelow, R., & McColgan, M. (2015). Social work and the shadow father: Lessons for engaging fathers in Northern Ireland. Child and Family Social Work, 20(4), 470–479.
George, M. (2020). Queering reproductive justice. University of Richmond Law Review,54(3), 671–704.
Gomez, A. M., Downey, M. M., Carpenter, E., Leedham, U., Begun, S., Craddock, J., & Ely, G. (2020). Advancing reproductive justice to close the health gap: A call to action for social work. Social Work, 65(4), 358–367.
Griffiths, L. J., Johnson, R. D., Broadhurst, K., Cusworth, L., Bedston, S., Akbari, A., Lee, A., Alrouh, B., Doebler,
S., Ford, A., & Ford, D. (2020). Born into care: One thousand mothers in care proceedings in Wales. Nuffield Foundation.
Grˇundeˇlová, B., & Stanková, Z. (2019). The shadow fathers in social work with families: Barriers to whole-family working. The British Journal of Social Work, 49(7), 1913–1931.
Hestbæk, A. D., Höjer, I., Pösö, T., & Skivenes, M. (2020). Child welfare removal of infants: Exploring policies and principles for decision-making in Nordic countries. Children and Youth Services Review, 108. https:doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2019.104572104572.
Keddell, E., Cleaver, K., & Fitzmaurice, L. (2021). The perspectives of community-based practitioners on
baby removal prevention: Addressing legitimate and illegitimate factors. Children and Youth Services Review, 127. https:/doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2021.106126
Keddell, E., Fitzmaurice, L., Cleaver, K., & Exeter, D. (2022.) A fight for legitimacy: Reflections on child protection reform, the reduction of baby removals, and child protection decision-making in Aotearoa New Zealand. Ko ̄tuitui: New Zealand Journal of Social Sciences Online, 17(3), 378–404.
Keddell, E., Cleaver, K., & Fitzmaurice, L. (2023). Experiences of baby removal prevention: A collective case study of mothers and community-based workers. Qualitative Social Work, 22(2), 266–285.
Lavalette, M., Beddoe, L., Horgan, G., & Sewpaul, V. (2022). Abortion rights and Roe v Wade: Implications for social work – voices from the social work academy. Critical and Radical Social Work, 10(3), 491–498.
Liddell, J. L. (2019). Reproductive justice and the social work profession: Common grounds and current trends. Affilia, 34(1), 99–115.
Mason, C., Robertson, L., & Broadhurst, K., (2019). Pre-birth assessment and infant removal at birth: experiences and challenges. Summary. Nuffield Family Justice Observatory.
Mason, J. K. & Laurie, G. T., with Aziz, M. (2011). Mason and McCall Smith’s law and medical ethics (8th ed.). Oxford University Press.
Mygov.scot. (2021). Parental responsibilities and rights. Fathers. https://www.mygov.scot/parental-responsibilities-rights/fathers
O'Donnell, M., Lima, F., Maclean. M., Marriott, R., & Taplin, S. (2023). Infant and pre-birth involvement with child protection across Australia. Child Maltreatment. https://doi.org/10.1177/10775595231186647
Office of the Children’s Commissioner of New Zealand (2020). Te Kuku O Te Manawa – Ka puta te riri, ka momori te ngākau, ka heke ngå roimata mo tōku pēpi. http://www.occ.org.nz/
Perez-Vaisvidovsky, N. (2023). Family practice with fathers, social care, and capabilities. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1111/jftr.12528
Perez-Vaisvidovsky, N., Halpern, A., & Mizrahi, R. (2023). A systemic perspective on father engagement with child-and family-related social work interventions in Israel. In A. Tarrant, L. Way, L.,& L. Ladlow (Eds.), Men and welfare (Ch 14). Routledge.
Phillip, G., Yousanamouth, L., Bedston, S., Broadhurst, K., Hu, Y., Clifton, J., & Brandon, M. (2020). “I had no hope, I had no help at all”: Insights from a first study of fathers and recurrent care proceedings. Societies, 10(4), 89. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc10040089
Philip, G., Bedston, S., Youansamouth, L., Clifton, J., Broadhurst, K., Brandon, M., & Hu, Y. (2021). “Up Against It”: Understanding fathers’ repeat appearance in local authority care proceedings (Full Project Report). The Centre for Child and Family Justice Research, Lancaster University.
Philip, G., Youansamouth, L., Broadhurst, K., Clifton, J., Bedston, S., Hu, Y., & Brandon, M. (2023). “When they were taken it is like grieving”: Understanding and responding to the emotional impact of repeat care proceedings on fathers. Child and Family Social Work, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1111/cfs.13061
Price, K. (2017). Queering reproductive justice toward a theory and praxis for building intersectional political alliances. In M. Brettschneider, S. Burgess, & C. Keating (Eds.), LGBTQ politics: A critical reader (Ch 5). NYU Press.
Roberts, D. E. (2017). Killing the black body: Race, reproduction, and the meaning of liberty (1st ed.). Vintage Books. Original published 1997.
Roberts, D. E. (2021). Race. In Hannah-Jones, N. (Ed.), The 1619 project (Ch 2). Penguin.
Ross, E. (2016). Locating the foetal subject: Uncertain entities and foetal viability in accounts of first-time pregnancy. Women's Studies International Forum, 58, 58–67.
Ross, L. (2006). Understanding reproductive justice: Transforming the pro-choice movement. off our backs, 36(4), 14–19.
Ross, L., & Solinger, R. (2017). Reproductive justice: An introduction. University of California Press.
Russell, C. (2018). Rights-holders or refugees? Do gay men need reproductive justice? Reproductive Biomedicine and Society Online, 7, 131–140.
Scott, R. (2000) Maternal duties toward the unborn? Soundings from the law of tort. Medical Law Review, 8, 1–68.
Scottish Government. (2021). National guidance for child protection in Scotland. https://www.gov.scot/publications/ national-guidance-child-protection-scotland-2021/
Snelling, J. M. (2022). Beyond criminalisation: Abortion law reform in Aotearoa New Zealand. Medical Law Review, 30(20), 216–242.
Solinger, R. (2002). Beggars and choosers: Motherhood is not a class privilege in America. Labor History, 43(4),411–418.
The Promise. (2021). Plan 21-24. https://thepromise.scot/resources/2021/plan-21-24.pdf
Tarrant, A. (2021). Fathering and poverty: Uncovering men’s participation in low-income family life. Policy Press.
Waggoner, M. R. (2017). The zero trimester. Pre-pregnancy care and the politics of reproductive risk. University of California Press.
Waterhouse, L., & McGhee, J. (2016). Agamben and the political positioning of child welfare-involved mothers in child protective services. Families, Relationships and Societies, 5(1), 97–108.
Weinberg, M. (2016). Paradoxes in social work practice. Mitigating ethical trespass. Routledge.
Wilkinson, A. B., & Norrie, K. McK. (1999). The law relating to parent and child in Scotland (2nd ed.). W. Green.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Aotearoa New Zealand Association of Social Workers
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
By completing the online submission process, you confirm you accept this agreement. The following is the entire agreement between you and the Aotearoa New Zealand Association of Social Workers (ANZASW) and it may be modified only in writing.
You and any co-authors
If you are completing this agreement on behalf of co-authors, you confirm that you are acting on their behalf with their knowledge.
First publication
By submitting the work you are:
- granting the ANZASW the right of first publication of this work;
- confirming that the work is original; and
- confirming that the work has not been published in any other form.
Once published, you are free to use the final, accepted version in any way, as outlined below under Copyright.
Copyright
You assign copyright in the final, accepted version of your article to the ANZASW. You and any co-authors of the article retain the right to be identified as authors of the work.
The ANZASW will publish the final, accepted manuscript under a Creative Commons Attribution licence (CC BY 4.0). This licence allows anyone – including you – to share, copy, distribute, transmit, adapt and make commercial use of the work without needing additional permission, provided appropriate attribution is made to the original author or source.
A human-readable summary of the licence is available from http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0, which includes a link to the full licence text.
Under this licence you can use the final, published version of the article freely – such as depositing a copy in your institutional research repository, uploading a copy to your profile on an academic networking site or including it in a different publication, such as a collection of articles on a topic or in conference proceedings – provided that original publication in Aotearoa New Zealand Social Work is acknowledged.
This agreement has no effect on any pre-publication versions or elements, which remain entirely yours, and to which we claim no right.
Reviewers hold copyright in their own comments and should not be further copied in any way without their permission.
The copyright of others
If your article includes the copyright material of others (e.g. graphs, diagrams etc.), you confirm that your use either:
- falls within the limits of fair dealing for the purposes of criticism and review or fair use; OR
- that you have gained permission from the rights holder for publication in an open access journal.
