ABSTRACT
It may be said that risk and resilience he at two ends of a spectrum co-dependent on each other for existence. This chapter explores the concept of resiliency noting that it is used interchangeably within and between discourses and that there remains much disagreement around which factors constitute vulnerability and invulnerability. Gordon and Song (1994), for example, found that "the conditions we label as resiliency, resistance, invincibility and so forth, are relative, situational and attributional" (p. 31). This confusion has resulted in practitioners focussing too much on individual psychopathology (Lesko, 2001; Ungar, 2004; Wolin & Wolin, 1995). For the individual young person, her sense of personal and social empowerment can be dragged underneath the veil of expert lens which, I argue, is unhelpful as the focus moves to stated dysfunction and away from promise with an onus on the young person to, somehow, demonstrate exceptional outcomes or invulnerability in the face of risk and adversity. My own research and involvement with the St. Augustine's Project in Limerick City leads me to support Rutter's (1979) thesis that protective mechanisms operate as critical turning points in a child's life and can redirect his or her development. Those of us working with children and their families must be culturally sensitive in all of our attempts to make sense of their world. And it is their world. doi:10.1300/J024v29n01_03 [Article copies available for a fee from The Haworth Document Delivery Service: 1-8OO-HAWORTH. E-mail address:58 <docdeliveiy@haworthpress.com> Website: < https://www.HaworthPress.com" xmlns:xlink="https://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">https://www.HaworthPress.com > © 2007 by The Haworth Press , Inc. All rights resetved.]
