ABSTRACT
Emily Keddell presents the results of a rigorous study set in New Zealand which compares: risk-averse and risk-friendly practitioners in child welfare decision-making. Attitudes of practitioners to risk issues were studied using vignettes. The study found that non-governmental social workers were more inclined to be risk-averse by comparison with statutory child welfare workers. Qualitative data from the study is integrated with concepts of ‘moral injury’ in terms of situations where social workers perpetrate, fail to prevent or witness acts that contravene their moral code. They propose that for social workers to operate in a healthy and service-user-driven manner, they must retain the ability and flexibility to engage in reflection and responsive practice. Based on case study material, the article discusses issues for social workers engaged in anticipatory risk work, working in a pre-crime space in an effort to prevent terrorist atrocities.
