CONNECTION PATTERN ENCOUNTERS......CHILD AND YOUTH CARE IN SOUTH AFRICA

This is not a"What to do" blog. It is a "What we encounter" blog.

It's still with last week's question......should girls, (young persons) in a Place of Safety be allowed to  'mix' with young persons in another "unit"? Short answer last week was "Yes". Not only is freedom of association a human right... and young persons are human.....Right?  But in child and youth care, trial and error learning is developmental learning.

If I ranked developmental need areas of the young persons within the facilities I directed, then relationships and relationship styles predominated....by far! In no matter which of the residential configurations ( village, cottage, dormitory, "unit's") child and youth care practice has much to do with furthering developmental social relationship styles. It's not whether social connection styles are right or wrong, but whether they are "clever"or "not that clever"...does this help or harm you?

It became quite useful to have some "handles" to assist in the observation and identification of friendship styles and so in interventive practice It's quite OK to have in-house jargon for various behaviours provided all in the facility know what they describe and use them. They are frequently more descriptive and avoid long technical psychological diagnostic labels. This may sound like trivialsation but we all know in child and youth care that it's earnestly serious stuff  this.

So here goes....these were some of the descriptive handles we used in the facility... This is something of what, as child and youth care workers, we encounter and is part of our developmental practice.

Sticky toffee paper syndrome. I saw this mainly with girls in both their peer and adult relationships. I guess it is commonly known as "clinging"..one unravels oneself from the left side cling, only to be clung on the right side... physically much too inappropriately, touchingly close. OK in very little children, but when this continues into the teens, it is obviously a developmental area with underlying relationship issues.

The Main Manna. We sometimes would refer to this social grouping jokingly as The Mafia. This group connected socially to share power and control. Also to protect each other and to get what they wanted through physical threat throughout the whole facility. This social style demanded and used the next social grouping style, that of the Skivvy.

Skivvies. In this social relationship style, servitude is regarded as the  key  social acceptance. As a "gofer".....if I fetch and carry,  I can maintain a so called friendship with others, and a relationship with adults. I must say that I saw this approach to social connection frequently among abused children. "What must I do next to please you?"

Gangs.  This is the one probably most feared in facilities. Apart from pre-adolescent single sex groupings.....normal...if we combine the Mafia with the skivvy many social social relationship needs are met. 

See-level pelmets.  This is the "We must be noticed... no matter what in order to be connected and socially accepted social style group. If we are noticed... we belong".....usually negative behaviours attract notice to this group. I had the black nail polish, black lipstick very short skirt, clip-clop shoes, jangly earing, the see my bum short skirt brigade.

Now for some others where description isn't needed.

Relationship reluctant, (shut off), Isolates, Do, Dare or Forfeit. In-group, Rivalous grouping, Familial..........and more...

 It seems that connections and styles of connections, socially.....friendship groupings, can be somewhat predictable in our settings. and this is where group residential work becomes an opportunity for child and youth care practice. It sometimes takes a while for starting out child and youth care workers to celebrate  what I used to call "the colours of the rainbow"...If you are allowed to see the relationship colours,.... then you know what needs to be done. We can explore more helpful relationship style alternatives.

There are any number of instructional "programmes"designed for presentation to young persons .... "Finding friends and keeping them", "Building and maintaining positive peer and adult reationships, "Becoming parentable". At one time I think I had 22 such programmes on the shelf. 

HOWEVER, when involved in Quality Assurance of diversion programmes for young persons in conflict with the law and placed by the courts in residential or non-residential facilities, we always sat and talked with the young persons to get their opinions and experience of such programmes.
Tom Garfat, in his  doctoral thesis kicks off with the statement that an intervention is only as effective as it is EXPERIENCED as effective. Well that was indeed confirmed by the young persons in such "sit down and go through sessions of pre-prepared material" programmes. They said  they always wrote in their evaluations that it was helpful only to satisfy the requirements of their sentence.

It gets, I think to this... Tell me ...I'll forget  . Show me ...I may remember.   Let me do...I'll learn forever.

Schooling is for passing. Experience is for learning. Child and youth care workers expose young people without fear to the university of life. Want a PhD? (Peoples Handling Degree), .....then MINGLE.

For child and youth care workers, the "what we do?' can become problematic. especially for setting out child and youth care workers and ....let us say managers with no background in the field. Our training and education does not always bridge the gap between theory and practice. It doesn't always provide the missing link. There is a principle in South Africa that is quite useful , I think. It is called "what works" It is probably the way to go. Usually it comes as a result of child and youth care workers sharing experiences. "For me this worked" "For me, this didn't work". Learning circles.

The thing is that for us and  young persons in care, socialisation is a given for learning and change.