UNMASKING AGENDAS..CHILD AND YOUTH CARE IN SOUTH AFRICA

A faceboook type question.....
Are you old enough to remember THIS?

When South Africa hosted the World Rugby Cup in 1995,there was a move in Johannesburg to "clean up" the city of street children. Obviously to make a good impression on overseas visitors. The boys were "picked up", literally, in trucks and transported, forcibly removed to "farms". Farm work was said to be a form of therapeutic reclaiming. I can't think of a more obviously masked child and youth care agenda than this.  It didn't last. The boys found there way back into the streets and to the genuine reclaiming programmes of the street shelters. The boys saw through the masked agenda . They voted with their feet.

In a previous blog, I was critical of the South African government for initiating social service programmes that it could not, or does not sustain. "Dry seasons" for child and youth care workers, late and little pay, projects closed. irregular pay. Isibindi projects nationally was cited as an example.

In the first place, adopting projects like Isibindi could have a masked agenda. In the social media, child and youth care workers complained about the strong focus demand and complexity of State  Monitoring and Evaluation. (M&E) reports. Salaries had been known to have been withheld. The complaint was that daily, frequently essential practical professional interventive work with children on the ground suffered as a result. The problem with statistics is that targets, quantity, numbers, so many children in a project, so many visited, and so on, reflect nothing of the quality of service rendered to children and young people by the child and youth care workers. 
Then, Departments, Provinces and Ministers trot out figures. .......Looks good!  Ruling party, departments, Minister's profiles get a statistical boost.
Dr to patient, " Your x-ray shows that you have two broken ribs. But don't worry. We took it to Foto First, and they fixed it." 

In an apartheid South Africa, Prof Norman Powell, University of New York  a black American, defied sanctions to give a keynote address at a National Association of Child Care Workers (NACCW) Conference. He used an analogy of a cookie cutter and a pudding bowl. He told this story.
At an airport, awaiting his flight, he sat next to a Mexican youth. They got talking and before departure, Norman gave him his business card and forgot the incident. Some years later, he got a call from the boy. He had been placed in a Child and Youth Centre somewhere in the USA. He asked for help. "There is NOTHING in this place that in any way provides for me as a Mexican. I don't fit here. They don't recognise me as a Mexican."
NORMANS RESPONSE....." Play the game! Play the system. If you don't, you will never get out." The youth was in a cookie cutter setting. No pudding bowl in sight, and no plate of different shaped cookies.
That's it. Young persons very quickly learn, or have to learn, how to "work the system" "play the game" for survival in a cookie cutter setting of dominant language, Euro or North American middle class values, dominant religion, spirituality, diet, problem solving and leadership style. Could be an unconscious or maybe a conscious lifestyle agenda. It may even be a genuine belief that a particular cookie cutter culture is a lifestyle that serves young person's best interests. One hopes that a cookie cutter setting is not a deliberate masked agenda.

When, in the pre-democratic South Africa, I was Director of an Anglican ( Episcopalian), faith-based Home for boys, the number of admissions steadily decreased. I was told by the then apartheid ruled Department of Welfare in the Province that there was a resistance to placing boys. "They come in as one church, but go out as "Tutu se Kerk" (Tutu's Church). Apart from the then political agenda, there was some validity in the rationale. A religious denominational cookie cutter programme. There was a resident Anglican chaplain on the staff. The boys were required compulsorily to attend Anglican worship services in the beautiful stone chapel in the complex. This had to stop.

Unfortunately it can be that proselytising is a masked agenda in a child and youth care facility or programme.

In the previous Children's Home as Director I inherited a history of children bussed every Sunday to a particular sect as church. The sect required that the children compulsorily spend two hours a day in bible reading and bible study. The sect requirement was that they read the whole bible in a year. (every year). Proselytising was actually a masked agenda there. The local press got hold of this and threatened exposure. Before I arrived, the principle of own church worship was in place. Cookie cutter became a pudding bowl. 

It's clear, proselytising agendas in child and youth care programmes  happen. Children in a residential facility are a "captured congregation". I have even heard it told to children, "If you don't convert,things will never get better for you."

I am in no way suggesting that all South African child and youth care agendas are masked in some way. On the contrary, we are known world-wide as dedicated, hardworking, and professional in our therapeutic practice . All I am saying is, be on guard, be sensitive, be aware, look out for possible underlying organisational motivation that falls outside of our professional and ethical focus.

Then ...masks off.   

FOR GOODNESS SAKE 2 SOUTH AFRICAN CHILD AND YOUTH CARE

It's still in essence, related to thinking around assault in the workplace.

REMINDER ONE.....  the question at the end of last week's blog.... In our  practice with children and young people, what do we DO to grow young persons from extrinsic toward intrinsic reward motivated thinking and behaviour?  Doing good for goodness sake.

REMINDER TWO...In South Africa, some systems, approaches and so called methods/techniques are not allowed. Let me re-quote from the South African Norms and Standards.
"15. Behaviour Modification (such as punishment/reward systems or privilege systems) - other than as a treatment/development techique within a documented individual treatment programme which is developed by a team (including the the young person) and monitored by an appropriately trained multi-disciplinary team."

Very soon, in my first appointment, and VERY fresh, an articulate young boy, clearly an elected one man delegation, came to my office. "Please", he said, " will you make rules with the punishments we will get if we break them".  Today I hear words like "sanctions, even "consequences" used incorrectly as "punishments". hurt , pain, revenge. Together we drew up a schedule of rules and punishments. The system worked to the children's advantage. It was just a neat way for the young people to calculate the "Trade Off !" "I bunk school for a day when the fishing is good  - one week  gardening.......worth it!" "Late night with boyfriend  - one week gated.....worth it!"....and so on, and so on.... Trade offs do not work toward moral development.

Nor do Peer Courts; which for me proved to be even less useful in moral thinking. Again the pay-off when peers are asked to allocate sanctions against friends, enemies and power groups was just another exercise in the avoidance of pain.

There are then systems/approaches techniques worth contemplation and interrogation. Do they, or don't they support children's learning of more appropriate moral thinking and pro-social behaviour ? 

FIRST THE NO, NO's!
Already mentioned, the set rules and punishments and peer court systems.

First on the list of NO, NO's in the South African norms and standards is Behaviour Modification. (BM). Because Behaviour Modification is so very different in concept from Behaviour Management, it is worth interrogation.   BM is summarised as "a set procedures that can be used to change behavior (sic)"  This sounds good in itself. It was designed however for persons (and children) labelled with some psychiatric disorder or fairly debilitating behavioural challenges. Then is added, "even people who are normal or average can have behaviour deficiencies, excesses or inappropriateness's". It is said to be a very broad field. So it's not that suprising that the term is used to name almost any system of procedures/techniques used to change behaviour. Which it is not.

I recall in "those days" Psychology 101 used laboratory rats to give credibility to certain theories about human learning Rats ram mazes, avoided the shocks of electrified  cage bars , pushed coloured knobs to release food. It all had to do with Skinner-based stimulus -  response reward and the avoidance of pain......"conditioning" . 

If you get a book on classic  Behaviour Modification check the index to see how frequently those words appear.....stimulus, response, conditioning. Then check for "systematic desensitisation", extinction", "escape and avoidance", stimulus control", "punishment", "token economy". I can sense Brian Gannon turning in his grave! We use a totally different language in child and youth care in our programmes, which, I hope, is different also in concept. 

In the South African child and youth care system, another NO, NO. ...not allowed:    Levels and Points systems. It requires that staff allocate demerit points against a young person for certain behaviours. At the end of the day or week, these are added up and are used to place the young person into a group level or grade. Each of these levels or grades then are allowed or disallowed certain privileges. Sometimes they are given colour grading like gold, silver, bronze. brown. At its worse we saw brown group children  made to wear a distinctive brown uniform and perform the domestic duties of the facility. Distinctive identifying insignia and clothing is disallowed in the UN convention on the rights of children.

The international expert on Points and Levels systems is Karen Vanden Ven who over many years has researched the effectiveness of this system and its ilk, as a moral thinking developmental tool.
I quote ...."it became apparent that the point and level systems were destructive, actually denying ingredients youngsters needed for effective treatment. Karen vanden Ven has advice for child and youth care workers.
"Place greater emphasis on activities and relationships which are the essence of the child and youth care approach"
www.cyc-net.org>VandenVen Point Pack 

From the NO, No's to the useful.

Let's start where Karen vanden Ven left off.... Activities and Relationships. I found The Circle of Courage a really very useful tool when planning activities. It helps to plan experiences of doing good for others and receiving good from others without return         ( Generosity),... the experience of giving in itself, reward enough . I found an activity calendar useful. Planned as an annual monthly weekly and INDIVIDUAL sets  Spring flowers to an old-age home, Blankets to a Hospice, Surprise for a member of staff or a another young person.  ..... I love the notion that child and youth care workers are creative and design activities, experiences and environments for moral learning.... for goodness sake.

And so comes Encouragement rather than Praise.  better than "I really think you did well", the use of, "How do you feel about what you did?" 

Positive Peer Culture (PPC).    Not to be confused with Peer Management, but can be associated with Peer Mentoring. Its my day for quotes !!!! Rev A Carr refers to "peer assistance". ...."a way for ( young persons) to learn how to care about others and put their caring into practice. It relies strongly on communication skills, self exploration and decision making". "
"(Young persons .....provide supervised assistance to other (young persons) to help think through and reflect on concerns they may be experiencing."........."It can be a bridge between professional counselling and young people who won't use professional counselling" https:www.researchgate.net/publication/234566298_Theory_and_Practice_of_Peer_Counselling

Rev Carr cites Verrath H and Brendtro L. 1974 Positive Peer Culture. NY Aldine Publishing Company. Our Larry Brendtro of Circle of Courage. PPC has been around in child and youth care practice for 44 years !!!! It would be good to see it at work more frequently in South African child and youth care practice. 

Now just to mention some of the foundational approaches that we are trained and educated to use in child and youth care practice in South Africa.  Again, and again... Relational child and youth care.  Then,  Life space Counselling, problem solving approach, Natural and Logical Consequence. All these approaches and techniques I believe,  if carefully, intelligently and professionally practiced ,assist young persons along the developmental continuum of thinking from extrinsic personal reward to intrinsic societal value- based behaviour. There is a key question that we ask ourselves reflectively in practice. What is really happening here? and "what are these young persons really learning about doing good for the sake of doing good. ... good for goodness sake.













   

FOR GOODNESS SAKE 1.. CHILD AND YOUTH CARE IN SOUTH AFRICA

In about 1995/6 young people in trouble with the law in South Africa were released from prisons. A rapid plan was implemented to accommodate them. One of the facilities was a building used as a substance rehabilitation centre for adults in the grounds of the Zonderwater Prison in Gauteng Province. The residents were moved into an adjacent building and the boys moved directly from the prison into this new "Detention Centre".

Many of the staff appointed were moved, having been prison wardens. I was allocated to train staff there in "Operation Upgrade".

I live with vivid memories.

It was from here that there was a mass escape of 65 boys despite dogs and helicopters. It was here that I first experienced "rampage" - the crisis damaging stage of escalated group anger behaviour.

But, what may seem a minor pattern, sticks with me. Arriving within the barbed- wire fenced precinct, any number of boys would urgently gather around like men in a labour queue. "Carry your bags, Sir!" . 
Once my training equipment was deposited in the training venue, out pop open hands palms up. "Money for BB!"  BB is Boxer Brand tobacco used for rolling cigarettes. It was sold at the only available in-house tuck shop. (An old, frequently used trick. Organisations give pocket - money, then take it away at a profit).

Need I say it?   It's a learned world view  - "doing good for someone is coupled with the expectation of gained personal physical reward, personal benefit, favour, or protection" Was it learnt in the prison system?  No doubt. Was it perpetuated in the structural system of the Detention Centre. No Doubt. Is this somehow linked to mass escape and group rampage? No doubt.

Two questions, around socialisation arise from this, I think.

What motivates a young person to achieve (do good at something)? What motivates a young person to do good for others (no matter what)? The two questions are somehow related. Each  has implications for development goals and practice as child and youth care workers. After all, we say proudly, that, as social service practitioners, we use a developmental approach. We say that we establish, through assessment, where the child is now developmentally, and then use our knowledge of development to establish where the child more appropriately should be. Then we work to bridge the gap or delay. Moral thinking seems to be a something of a forgotten domain in our child and youth care practice in South Africa. 

The developmental theory that approaches the two questions is that of Kholberg's developmental theory of Moral Thinking. It could prove useful in our developmental practice.

Because Kohlberg makes the point that the Moral Thinking theory is not essentially linked to action, I like using a "seatbelt" analogy based somewhat on Kohlberg. 

Pre-moral thinking: " I don't or cannot grasp the good of wearing my seatbelt,I wear it because my auntie gives me chocolate if I put it on". (doing good things for physical reward) A very early way of moral thinking. If you get stuck here, hands pop out for BB.

Stage two, I wear my seat belt . My auntie doesn't give me chocolate any more but she tells me that I am a very good boy  when I do and I want to please her. She ALWAYS wears hers and I want to be like her. (praise and acceptance in a significant relationship)

My Auntie is no more. I wear my seat belt now because I don't want to be caught by the police and fined. (avoidance of  punishment)

I wear my seat belt to protect me from harm in a crash.(avoidance of pain)

I encourage/insist that my passengers wear their seat belts so that they do not get hurt in a crash (The beginnings of thinking in terms of the good of others through my behaviour).

I wear my seat belt because I think that EVERYONE should do so. It provides better safety on the roads for all road-users and so for all society. ( It makes me feel good to advocate for greater safety for all society) Wearing a seat belt contributes to the well being of everyone and to social order. 

I am prepared to chain myself to pole outside the Minister of Transport offices to get an undertaking that better controls of transport safety are implemented.  ( prepared now to suffer pain for the cause of human good. -  a better life for all).

The concept of Generosity creeps in here. The idea of doing good for the sake of doing good.,without expectation or receiving anything in return. And receiving good without feeling obligated,  indebted to some kind of repayment.(It is a move in general terms from external to intrinsic reward. Both for achieving well and for doing good...... good for goodness sake).

Now for the reality. In my experience, in looking at quality assurance and in general, many of our facilities still use organisational systems that could well, through modelling,and application, re-enforce the earlier stages of moral thinking in young people's behaviour. 

It's  may be of value now to give names to practice systems that are to be found, or have been used, in our child and youth care practice.
Here we go.... and those I forget you will surely pardon :
Reward and Punishment, Behaviour Modification( BM), Set rules and Sanctions,. Points Systems, Level Systems Token Economy, Peer Courts, Peer Management, Relational and Activity-based System, Consequential Learning ,Activity-based System, Life-space Counselling (LSC) Positive Peer Culture (PPC),  Restorative Justice.

In South Africa, the Norms and Standards set out what is DISALLOWED in our moral development, therefor our behaviour management systems...... the two hang together..

Most are obvious. but here is the standard that probably creates the most organisational and practice dilemmas. 

Excluded in practice then, IS:

"15. Behaviour Modification (such as punishment/reward systems, or privilege systems) - other than as a treatment / development technique within a documented individual treatment/developmental programme (IDP)  (my brackets), which is developed by a team ( including the young person)(sic) and monitored by an appropriately trained multi-disciplinary team." (Inter-ministerial Committee on Young People at Risk. Minimum Standards South African child and youth care system. 1998.) These Norms and Standards STILL HOLD GOOD FOR ENFORCEMENT>

WOW !!! So, now. What do we DO in practice to develop the moral thinking of children and young people through the use of developmental practice,  modelling and systems approaches to grow those in our care from extrinsic reward to intrinsic reward thinking and experience? 

Part two..... next week will interrogate the practice implications further. Watch out for next weeks blog !


  

























    

   

AVOIDING WORKPLACE ASSAULT... CHILD AND YOUTH CARE IN SOUTH AFRICA

As a way of a preamble. This is not in any way designed to be a lecture on behaviour management. Its just "me", talking from my experience ,"self'" and some little knowledge. 

There were two posts in the social media that grabbed me this week. The first was a post that one of the provinces in South Africa significantly increased the stipend/salary of its child and youth care workers. Then followed typically African comments "happy for you"even though there were some who had received very little and some who had not yet been paid for the last three months.

The second was a post that said that we must create a "therapeutic culture" in our child care facilities. It went on to link such a culture to more effective child and youth care intervention and in the response of young people in care. this post mirrored exactly what I was trying to say in my last blog.

Thing is, both of these posts contain truths that have an impact on the phenomena of workplace assault.

A therapeutic culture and workplace recognition are essential foundations for effective behaviour management which is the focus of this weeks blog.
There were some early research work done into the culture of residential care on the effectiveness of re-claiming  children and young people. First. It was found that CONSISTENCY of approach throughout the facility had, in itself, a positive effect. Notwithstanding the quality of the programme approach, if it was consistently applied by child and youth care workers, the effect was positive for children. We need to come back later to this.

Secondly, no matter what the quality and approach in the  programme, 11% of all the residents will be re-claimed merely because they have an inner resilience to do so. So-called "success" cannot be applied to that 11%. In child and youth care work we have learnt rather to refer to"the reduction of failure".

Thirdly, The more the regimentation in the culture of the facility, the less effective was the intervention..... procedures like "line ups", designated seats in the dining-room, food dished up for you and then just placed before you instead of dishing up for yourself, same "lights out" for everyone.... the list goes on....   

So let 's take these early findings together. One of the early experiences and understanding that I had to "get through", internalise" to the young persons in care was that our approach was individualised  ..... a consistent was the not every one would be treated the same. The consistency was: "different strokes for different folks". We would however explain why one child was not treated the same as the other if we were held to account by the other children, It meant that we all understood, we were there for different reasons, and that each had a need to be treated differently if that was needed for healing. That had to be a consistent.,.... predictable... Behaviour management within a culture of individual treatment reduces the potential  assaultive behaviour.

It means that the facility has to adopt, articulate, and apply a defined therapeutic approach to behaviour management as a credo... a belief. One we all understand and all "buy into". It's a "social contract" into which all , including the children, have to buy into, at the point of admission, and then experiences as a consistency 

Other fairly early research, but which I regard as classic,compared a punitive approach to behaviour management, versus non-punitive approaches. Here's the suprise.... there was found to be no real difference. (Walters. G.C. & Grusec J.E. Punishment. 1977.) This quote, however, is useful. "It is generally believed that harsh corporal punishment, teasing, ridicule, and other attacks on self esteem are bad for children" They then go on to say set out punitive measures that "so call"work. ( withdrawal of privileges. material objects) . 

 In South Africa, the law forbids any for of corporal punishment.....anything painful....and also the withdrawal of some of the so-called privileges (contact with significant others, or material objects.....availability to the news ,food, ...the list goes on.....)  

So where are we? There is clearly a difference between behaviour management and the socialisation of a young person at risk. The principle is that it is better for a child to be pro-social than to be NOT a-social. Its better to contribute to society than to avoid punishment. They conclude: "We would be better off relying as little as possible on punishment as a way of change"(pp 250). My experience is that punishment has only a short term effect. We, in a therapeutic space have to go deeper than "avoid punishment behaviours" (which are soon learnt). We have to consider what the child internalises, learns about the world from what we do and say. and  what contributes to their world view. For me, the thinking of the child should be not so much about what consequences my behaviour has for me, as what consequences my behaviour has for others.

For us to respond as child care workers to the behaviour of young people in a way developmental, requires that we get an "aha" experience in the moment. For me, there were three questions that I found useful, Tom Garfat's question.. "What is the child getting out of this behaviour? " At a fairly simple level.....to be noticed? to take control?,  to take revenge? "I'm not see or heard" "I don't have control over aspects of my life where I should be able to make decisions for myself , "I'm hurting , so you must hurt"....or what?. In a therapeutic space this gives us clues as to what we must do to meet those needs positively

The second question, I found useful. "What is the child learning from my approach to this behaviour ? " It 's then , I think, that we realise:  process is more important that .outcome. Inappropriate, a-social, or anti-social behaviour must stop, BUT, what has the child learnt about the behaviour of adults, and so the world .....soon to be my world? 
Central to behaviour management, then, seems to me to be  understanding the behaviour from the child's point of view. A need for us to enter the child 's world for a moment; to step into the child's shoes and to walk her journey.. to BE the child for a moment.

Then,... responding, not reacting.

I knew I could not remove myself from the effect of a child's behaviour on the personal "me"..... the "me", that is "me".  It was important for me to answer the question "What is this behaviour triggering in me?"and later, in supervision, to try to identify the reason why. Having gotten to its effect on what I was experiencing, it was a huge step in my professionalisation to be able to step out and enter the child's world view for a moment. Then to respond rather than to react. and to respond with knowledge technique, skill, nd self .. driven by values..... values become a central component of bahaviour management and socialisation 

Even so, anti social behaviour happens...   And so now to that otherwise unanswered question in the last number of my blogs..Do you lay charges or do you not lay charges? 

I have personally never laid charges against any young person in m care. I lean toward the concept of restorative justice , which can be undertaken within the facility. or within the justice setting. I'm not sure whether that will satisfy the comments that appear on social media.