Potholes or corporate parenting? The personal is political

Sooner or later long-term accumulated Adverse Childhood Experiences cross the threshold for statutory intervention. In this way the loss of early intervention creates statutory intervention. By the time a child arrives at the threshold there may be co-occurring needs, each a high level, each inter-related. Intervention earlier would be more effective in addressing need and efficient in spending. Let’s not think that it would do away with high-level needs, these tend to occur suddenly and later than early intervention ages. We need early intervention, and we need specialism in statutory interventions, the right home for the right child at the right time, to be created, this will break us out of the generic sufficiency, heads on beds, cul-de-sac thinking.

Being attuned to need means having an unbroken feeling connectedness; there is communication, continuity, need is met by a resonating response.

It isn’t that one matters more than another. It is everything that matters. Everything is essential.

A resurgence of corporate parenting means arguing that other people’s children is the responsibility of everyone. It is not a decision between early and statutory, or  potholes and children’s care. Well-being comes in many shades. All are important.

Those of us with the liberty of not being restricted by government legislation that prevents them from addressing the ‘political’ have a particular responsibility over the next few months. It is up to us to make live that social work/care ethic that the personal is political. The ability we have to live a self-determined life, the way we are enabled or not to live our ordinary everyday lives, is a political act. Not party political, it is more important than that. We need to make the stories we want to live by.

With an election looming, potholes can easily make for a populist sound-bite.  Smooth roads might be one part of social essential provision. If it is then we can connect to it a wider view too.  We need a resurgence of corporate responsibility, for children of corporate parenting. The Care Review makes a false separation between types of parenting. The Care Review still needs contesting. With its populist budget cutting exclusive relationship world view it potentially diminishes the responses specialist responses some children need at some time in their life.

We need investment in infrastructure and services that will enable all children. Where we are now with the commissioning experiment tells us we need more than a market mechanism to do so. Fair access to all care that is needed needs to be distributed and this comes through assessing needs and planning appropriate responses. We need care as a social asset.

The case for prioritising collective interests is an everyday political choice. The personal is political. In the current financial turmoil service managers are placed in an invidious position with the pragmatics of decision making.  In the return of the social into our political thinking we show that these people matter as they are doing the job for all of us ensuring everyone and everything matters. It’s still called solidarity.