Through the Pivotal Blog, we are publishing in full "Views from the Bridge" a book about the Bridge Project in Chesterfield.
We are publishing this book in chapters. Every week a new chapter will be uploaded to the blog. So make sure you bookmark this page or subscribe to the RSS feed.
If you have questions for the authors, please contact us and we will pass them on.
Get up to date before you begin this chapter.
We have already published the following:
Project Headlines and Foreword
Chapter 6
Working with Parents
Many of these children lived under conditions of hardship and stress, in overburdened and fragmented families where relationships were eroded and strained, sometimes destructive and even violent. In some cases there was sudden and unexpected loss and change. The mother was under stress and this would affect the child from the beginning. In the early days she may have been too preoccupied or depressed to respond to her baby's mood and needs, and involve herself in the world. Even when this was a satisfying time for mother and child the sustaining interaction between them was in some cases abruptly impaired by sudden harsh weaning, often coinciding with a restriction on exploration and play, punitive management and sometimes neglect. Benathan M and Boxall M, 1996 Effective Interventions in Primary Schools, Nurture Groups p18, London : David Fulton
In the above passage Boxall was describing the situation she met in the late1960's. Put your hand up if you think things are better now.
Some parents of the young people attending the Bridge Project had their child(ren) at a very young age and abdicated parental responsibilities to their own parents, the child's grandparents. In some families the main carer had had periods of serious illness or their partner or children had and in several cases there had been the death of a significant person in the family. All but three sets of parents had separated in the past and most of the mothers now had a new partner. Three of the young people were adopted; some were in the care of the local authority and others fostered by a relative. Drink, drugs and domestic violence feature in the backgrounds of some.
As described in another chapter, the work with parents begins as soon as the referral to the Bridge Project is accepted. When the referral is agreed - often this is quite a bit before their first attendance - the Lead Teacher meets the young person with their parents, usually in the family home. The fact that the beginnings of this new relationship are usually made during a home visit is important.
The parents of pupils referred to the Bridge have typically had many dealings with authority, be that schools, social services or health workers. These are likely to have left them feeling inadequate and labelled as poor parents. Even if the criticism has never been voiced aloud, parents may well feel the underlying message of these transactions is of failure and criticism. Indeed, they may well feel it for themselves without any outsider meaning to transmit that judgment. Establishing a positive relationship in relations with the Bridge is vital.
As Boxall and Lucas say in Nurture Groups in Schools (2002, 2009),
Parents (of children with difficulties) are often difficult to engage. Many of them live under extreme and disabling personal stress. .........they have the burden of finding their way to an unfamiliar place to face a bewildering discussion and the visit can be counterproductive. Many first appointments are not kept, and if kept are rarely sustained.
The fact that the first meeting with the lead teacher is in the young person's home plays a part in convincing parents that this might be a new kind of relationship. It is also more difficult to arrange a "no-show" in the home. In that first meeting the Lead Teacher stresses that this is to be a partnership and begins by asking all present what they want to achieve. He isn't part of their past and doesn't come to criticise or pass judgement. He takes the position, "This where we are."
This positive tone is continued by his phoning home daily with reports about how the young person is settling and ensuring the call always begins with a positive comment about the child even when there is a concern to share. Many of the contacts parents have previously had with school have been solely about problems: when the child has done something wrong, is about to be excluded and so on.
The fact that the Lead Teacher was brought up in the area, has a local accent and talks without jargon helps parents feel that they are not going to be lectured to or patronised. Whilst one couldn't and wouldn't write accent and place of birth into a person specification, being jargon-free certainly helps and remaining non-judgmental is critical.
Parents have been asked for their views about contacts and relations with Bridge and 100% considered the information provided to be good or very good and gave the same rating for the approachability of the Bridge staff. Parents were also convinced that staff would act on the actions they had agreed to. These positive ratings expressed by parents about the Bridge were in contrast to their opinions of communications with their child's mainstream school.
In the jargon, the mother of Kenny would "no longer engage with any agency". That phrase reflects the language of hierarchy and coldly ignores the traumas she had suffered. Previous to involvement with the Bridge Project, she had suffered bereavement and there was further illness in the family. Now she would not meet with anyone who made her feel uncomfortable about how she was bringing up Kenny and when she was forced to deal with authority she threatened to have him put into care.
Through his positive approach the Lead Teacher built a relationship with Kenny's mother and after building trust with her she agreed to attend a local authority-run programme for parents who have difficulty with their kids.
Colin lived alone with his mother. He had a strong need for physical contact and despite being quite a tall lad would try to sit on the knee of his school teaching assistant. This physical contact was something the mother could not provide and was so obdurate that the Family Resource Worker withdrew as she felt she could make no progress. Colin was an early referral in the life of the Bridge and the staff - relatively inexperienced at that time - doubted that they could do much for him as he was so difficult. He found interactions with his peers very difficult and had at times to be prevented from retaliating physically when others made a comment. His relationships with the others were so bad that at times he had to eat alone.
After some time had passed and staff had seen some improvements in Colin, his mother was invited to come into the Bridge Project each day to play board games with him. The teaching assistants worked with her, showing her how to converse with her son and trying to get her to lessen her need to win every game. At times she would avoid the session by saying she needed to go the toilet and not returning for a long time - a bit like a pupil avoiding a disagreeable lesson. But some improvement was made. His school teaching assistant also came along to the Bridge and observed how the staff managed Colin and took those strategies back to school when Colin reintegrated.
As written elsewhere by us (Chapter 5: Turning Points), it isn't always obvious that the work done in the Bridge has had any benefit. However, a year later Colin was doing much better in school and asked to come to the Bridge for a period of work experience. I hadn't seen him for over a year and was surprised to notice how different he looked - a new hairstyle helped. He could also speak out in public, something he just would not and could not do back in his earlier times. The night before I met him again Colin had stayed at a friend's house to support him, coming into the Bridge next day without having been home. This meant that he had not had opportunity to take his medication for ADHD but he managed the day very well. These events would have knocked him completely off course a year earlier.
We have mentioned Pat elsewhere - one of a very large family most of whom did not attend school. Pat's father had very traditional views on many things and when he heard that Bridge pupils were expected to help prepare meals and to clean up afterwards was adamant that his lad would not be washing dishes or drying them. None of his lads washed up at home as this was "girls' and women's work." The Lead Teacher was determined not to let this go and went to the home to persuade Pat's father to allow it by telling him that it would be unfair on the other Bridge boys, as they had all agreed to share these chores. The father came to see that the other boys might feel aggrieved and thought they might take it out on Pat. Whatever the merits of the arguments used to persuade him, it felt right that this father with his strongly- held views did meet the Bridge staff halfway. The washing-up was never really a problem for Pat.
As described, parents of Bridge pupils are often brought into dealings with education, social services and health professionals and here Bridge staff can be very supportive and ensure communication is aided. The Bridge staff have developed good relations with CAMHS and can discuss potential referrals for their appropriateness and help ensure the family or child attends any appointments offered. Bridge staff attend Team Around the Child meetings, liaise with any of the agencies who are trying to work with members of the family and fulfil the role of "named person".
All of these activities are of great value for the help and support they give families during the period of attendance at the Bridge, but are also critical in the longer term in bringing parents who are at a distance from those who offer help closer to accepting that help. That is vital in - and after - the reintegration to school phase.
The aim of the work done at the Bridge is to help family and school to manage any future issues more effectively than previously and the work done does help bring parents "into the fold" so to speak, ready to take advantage of the help that is offered in future. However, the Bridge experience has shown that reintegration typically goes very well at first. However, after only a relatively short exposure to the nurture approach with its high level of support for the parents, it is not surprising that, without that support, problems arise again. Most stem from within the family and again that is not surprising, given that many of them have been struggling with problems for many years.
The plans for the Phase Two of the Bridge Project include additional measures to support parents not only through the time the child spends at the Bridge but - crucially - beyond into the reintegration phase. This will be arranged by ensuring that each family has a linked Family Resource Worker allocated from the local Multi-Agency Team.