ABSTRACT
A similar rubric was to be applied to the proposed Children’s Officers, at least in the minds of Clare and Donald Winnicott. Then, central government had no more than a monitoring role in respect of the care of children deprived of family life, and formally speaking, none at all, save in exceptional circumstances, in respect of the welfare, upbringing, and moral education of children brought up within their own families or by relatives. Providing a “comprehensive service for the care of children deprived of the benefit of normal family life”, as the Children Act 1948 proclaimed in its preamble, meant ensuring as far as possible the same opportunities of education and advancement, and importantly the same “quality of life”. A similar rubric was to be applied to the proposed Children’s Officers, at least in the minds of Clare and Donald Winnicott. The ultimate function of the family in Winnicott’s view was to enhance the child’s creativity, spontaneity, and maturity.
