In the light of increased attention to the role of social work in UK adoption practices, this article takes a ‘turn to language’ and examines the neglected field of the words and phrases commonly used in the adoption process. It subjects these to a critical scrutiny and suggests that the vocabulary employed contains inaccuracies, euphemisms, misnomers and aspirational promises and carries implications that limit options and determine outcomes. The article provides other examples from social work practice with children and families and concludes that a critical approach to a profession’s everyday language use can uncover how power is exercised.
Bartel D and Ullrich P (2008) Kritische Diskursanalyse – Darstellung anhand der Analyse der Nahostberichterstattung linker Medien. In: Freikamp U, Leanza M, Mende J, Müller S and Ullrich P (eds), Kritik Mit Methode? Forschungsmethoden und Gesellschaftskritik. Berlin: Dietz (translation courtesy of Rubin P, University of Edinburgh).
4.
BASW (2016) BASW calls for evidence on the role of the social worker in adoption. BASW News. Available at: www.basw.co.uk/news/article/?id=1158. (See Featherstone, Gupta and Mills, 2018 for details of the ensuing report.).
5.
Bennet T, Grossberg L and Morris M (eds) (2005) New Keywords: A revised vocabulary of culture and society. Oxford: Blackwell.
6.
BiehalN (2007) Reuniting children with their families: reconsidering the evidence on timing, contact and outcomes. British Journal of Social Work37(5): 807–823.
CharmazK (2006) Constructing Grounded Theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis, London: Sage.
10.
CoakleyJBerrickJ (2008) Research review: In a rush to permanency: preventing adoption disruption. Child & Family Social Work13(1): 101–112.
11.
Community Affairs References Committee (2012) Commonwealth Contribution to Former Forced Adoption Policies and Practices, Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.
12.
DevineL (2017) The Limits of State Power and Private Rights: Exploring child protection and safeguarding referrals and assessments, Oxon: Routledge.
13.
EdelmanM (1977) Political Language: Words that succeed and policies that fail, New York: Academic Press.
14.
Family Futures (2009) Planning Transitions for Children moving to Permanent Placement, London: Family Futures.
FeatherstoneBGuptaAMillsS (2018) The Role of the Social Worker in Adoption – ethics and human rights: An enquiry, Birmingham: BASWAvailable at: https://www.basw.co.uk/adoption-enquiry/.
18.
FinchamFBeachSMooreTDienerC (1994) The professional response to child sexual abuse: Whose interests are served?Family Relations43(3): 244–254.
19.
FirkinsACandlinC (2011) ‘She is not coping’: risk assessment and claims of deficit in social work. In: CandlinCCrichtonJ (eds) Discourses of Deficit, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 81–98.
20.
FoucaultM (1982) The Archaeology of Knowledge and the Discourse on Language, New York: Vintage Books.
21.
FoucaultM (2007) Security, Territory, Population: Lectures at the Collège de France 1977–1978, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
22.
GarrettP (2015) Words matter: deconstructing ‘welfare dependency’ in the UK. Critical and Radical Social Work3(3): 389–406.
23.
GoffmanE (1974) Frame Analysis, New York: Harper & Row.
GumperzJLevinsonS (1991) Rethinking linguistic relativity. Current Anthropology32(5): 613–623.
26.
HallCSlembrouckS (2011) Categorisations of child ‘in need’ and child ‘in need of protection’ and the implications for the formulation of deficit parenting. In: CandlinCCrichtonJ (eds) Discourses of Deficit, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 63–80.
27.
HallCJuhilaKMatareseMvan NijnattenC (2014) Analysing Social Work Communication: Discourse in practice, Oxon: Routledge.
28.
HamerHFinlaysonM (2015) The rights and responsibilities of citizenship for service users: some terms and conditions apply. Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing22(9): 698–705.
29.
Hart D and La Valle I with Holmes L (2015) The Place of Residential Care in the English Child Welfare System. London: Department for Education.
Kelly B (1989) A case study of the relationship between rhetoric and practice in looked after children. Unpublished PhD thesis. Glasgow: University of Glasgow.
34.
Konrad KoernerE (1992) The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis: a preliminary history and a bibliographical essay source. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology2(2): 173–198.
Madrid-BranchM (2004) Tummy Mummy, Santa Fe, NM: Adoption Tribe Publishing.
37.
MasochaS (2017) A ‘turn to language’ as a response to the shifting contours of racist discourse. Practice29(3): 159–177.
38.
Meese G (1980) Creating a reason to write. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Conference on College Composition and Communication, Washington, DC, March 13–15.
39.
MehanH (1990) Oracular reasoning in a psychiatric exam: the resolution of conflict in language. In: GrimshawA (eds) Conflict Talk: Sociolinguistic investigations of arguments in conversations, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 160–177.
OrwellG (2004) Politics and the English language, London: Penguin.
42.
PIU (2000) Prime Minister’s Review of Adoption, London: Cabinet Office.
43.
RobertsM (2010) Should we be recovering from ‘dual diagnosis’? Some thoughts on language, expertise and empowerment. Advances in Dual Diagnosis3(1): 8–14.
