Interventions in a family preservation service, the narratives of single parent mothers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research study explores the experiences of single parent mothers with a family preservation service. Using a qualitative research approach, this study reports on interviews conducted with eight single mothers who parent a child with challenging behaviors. Examples of these behaviors are poor anger control, behavioral problems, impulsivity and behaviors associated with Attention Deficit Disorder with hyperactivity, Tourette Syndrome a d learning difficulties. Three questions guided this study: What is helpful and not helpful in counselling; What do the workers do that help the mothers to bring about changes in their family life; Do the experiences of gender and class affect women within the service context? if this is so, how? The findings of this study have been organized as an approach to practice developed from the women's narratives. Prominent components of this approach include: referral phase, introduction/goal setting, intensive work phase; follow-up phase, the client-worker relationship, other interventions and the change process. A description of each of these components is presented. The usefulness of the interventions is discussed in terms of the approach developed. Further, women's experiences dealing with the larger systems and parenting a child with challenging behaviors are explored. The implications of these findings for social work practice and research are discussed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".