Social workers, invariably committed and caring individuals, aim to do the job to the best of their abilities. Good news stories, of which there are many, rarely make the headlines. But when children or adults known to the care system die or are abused at the hands of their carers we understandably search for reasons. Calls that change is needed, expressed in inquiries, courtrooms and the media, have often become translated into a reassessment of regulation.
The first regulatory body for social work, the General Social Care Council, came into being in 2000. Since 2005, anyone who uses the title of social worker must be registered. Failure to adhere to regulatory standards can result in the registrant being admonished or ultimately removed from the register.
Since the profession first became regulated, the number of concerns raised has remained stable. The number of social workers annually struck off or admonished is small, which suggests that the majority of social workers practice to required professional standards. The current regulator for social work in England, the Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC), produces an annual report. Its 2013 Fitness to Practise Report shows that of the 84,000 social workers registered, there were complaints about less than 1%. These resulted in seven social workers being struck off, seven suspensions, one caution and one condition of practice order.
While the number of regulatory investigations is well documented, relatively little is known about how professionals engage with being regulated. Not much research into the effectiveness of professional registers has been undertaken. Even less is known about how social workers engage with registration – what it means to them, how it is viewed and how it serves to influence social work practice. Theoretical materials from a number of fields suggest that regulatory approaches requiring people to adhere to certain rules are problematic, and can result in worse outcomes.
I will be presenting a paper at the Joint Social Work Education Conference (JSWEC) at the University of London in July. This is based upon my research with social workers, which asked them about the positive and negative impacts of registration on them and their work.
I found that the majority of social workers interviewed welcomed being a registered profession. They spoke of hopes that registration would improve the status of social work and how it is perceived by the public and media. However, cases against social workers which received media interest had an impact, and had led to some social workers feeling personally vulnerable, more fearful of coming to the attention of the regulatory body and, in that context, more likely to side-step or avoid regulatory requirements.
In private this was about not being seen to be involved in activities that might affect suitability to remain on the register. The example most often given was the use of alcohol in a public place, but consideration was also given to political or campaigning activity. No one said they intended to change their behaviours – only that they would manage how they could be scrutinised. So, for example, people would stop talking about their private life at work, or be extra cautious in public spaces.
In professional life, cautious practice with service users was noted. Social workers spoke of "doing things by the book" – either by exactly following procedure, or using ethical codes from regulators as a guide to practice. While there is nothing wrong with this, practitioners felt the reality of social work practice was that it takes place in environments where resources are limited, so playing by the book was seen to reduce ingenuity and creativity in managing limited resources. Many people expressed regret, and said that it would be service users who were affected.
Both professionals and the public need to understand what registration has helped achieved if they are to recognise its value. Regulators have a duty to regulate effectively, but as this research has shown, regulation can create perverse incentives to adhere to rules. The HCPC should look at assessing the impact of these if it is to justify its worth to the profession and to service users.
Lel Meleyal is lecturer in social work and social care at the University of Sussex. Her paper Defensive behaviour in public and private domains: The impact of regulation on English social workers will be delivered at JSWEC, Royal Holloway, University of London on 24th July 2014
Why not join our community? Becoming a member of the Guardian Social Care Network means you get sent weekly email updates on policy and best practice in the sector, as well as exclusive offers. You can sign up – for free – online here.