Honour, actionplans and actionspace : A study about social workers work with honourrelated problems

The study aims to describe and analyse the relationship between norm and practice regarding social services casework on honour-related problems. The relationship between norm and practice involves the difference between the way it is intended that social workers shall operate in these cases and how they perceive that this works in practice. We interviewed two focus groups of eight Swedish social workers, four in each group. We also held an individual interview with a social services business developer. Focus group interviews were based on two vignettes; one depicting an honour-related case and the second an "ordinary" case. The purpose of the vignettes was to investigate whether there is a difference in the assessment and handling of ordinary versus honour-related cases. The results of the interviews were analysed using Hasenfeld's theory on Human service organizations. We also used Lipsky's theory on street-level bureaucracy. We displayed similarities to previous research showing that social workers are unsure of how to assess and act on honour-related cases. It was evident that the social workers we interviewed were confident working "ordinary" cases involving child abuse, but felt uncertain dealing with honour-related cases. Because they are less frequent they have developed neither routines nor guidelines for them. The study showed that social workers’ lack of knowledge of honour-related problems and differences in culture limits their effectiveness in these cases. The results suggest that the social workers we interviewed rely on outside expertise when they are insecure, and consequently feel that they have no need for action plans or guidelines in honour-related cases. Lack of guidance and inadequate knowledge presents difficulties for social workers to meet the girls’ needs for help and support