The existing international research on the prevalence of poverty in Child Welfare and Protection (CWP) services points to a persistent discourse of ‘pedagogicalisation’, meaning that CWP interventions often construct social problems, such as poverty, as emerging from a failing education of families, and leave the social circumstances of the families unchallenged. Although front line practitioners in CWP can exercise professional discretion in dealing with poverty, policy and organisational cultures have a crucial impact on whether their efforts to engage with the lack of adequate societal resources of families remain informal and hidden or are being supported to transform CWP’s dominant approach to poverty. This study applies a Gramscian framework to examine instances of hegemony, common sense and good sense in policymakers’ discourses on CWP and poverty. Based on a qualitative content analysis of semi-structured interviews with n = 16 policymakers of the governmental organisation on CWP in Flanders, we provide insight into the hegemonic discourses of pedagogicalisation in Flemish CWP policy. Nevertheless, our results also provide evidence of counter-narratives. Although embryonic, instances of good sense hold seeds of change based on a recognition of the impact of poverty on families and of CWP’s role to strive for social justice.

中文翻译：

---

霸权、常识和良知：对政策制定者处理儿童福利和保护方面的贫困观点的葛兰西研究

现有的关于儿童福利和保护（CWP）服务中贫困普遍程度的国际研究指出了“教育化”的持续讨论，这意味着 CWP 干预措施经常会造成社会问题，例如贫困，这是由于家庭教育失败而产生的，并使家庭的社会环境不受挑战。尽管 CWP 的一线从业者可以在处理贫困问题上行使专业裁量权，但政策和组织文化对其参与解决家庭缺乏足够社会资源问题的努力是否仍然是非正式和隐蔽的，或者是否正在得到支持以改变 CWP 的主导地位有着至关重要的影响。解决贫困问题的方法。本研究应用葛兰西框架来检验政策制定者关于 CWP 和贫困的话语中的霸权、常识和良好判断力的实例。基于对佛兰德斯 CWP 政府组织 n = 16 名政策制定者的半结构化访谈的定性内容分析，我们深入了解佛兰德斯 CWP 政策中教学化的霸权话语。尽管如此，我们的结果也提供了相反叙述的证据。尽管还处于萌芽状态，但基于对贫困对家庭的影响以及 CWP 在争取社会正义方面的作用的认识，良好理智的实例蕴藏着变革的种子。