000			02052nab a22002297ab4500
003			NY
005			20170510142229.0
007			cr |||||n|||||
008			170101p xxu|||||o|||||00| 0 eng||
040			_aNY _cNY
041	0		_jeng
100	1		_aSayer, Andrew.
245	1	0	_aResponding to the troubled families programme _h[electronic resource] : _bframing the injuries of inequality / _cAndrew Sayer.
300			_app. 155-164.
440		0	_aThemed section on ‘looking for trouble?’ critically examining the uk government's troubled families programme
520			_aGovernment initiatives such as the Troubled Families Programme present a difficult problem for social scientists: how to discuss the policies without accepting and appearing to legitimise the problematic framing of social problems that they embody. The programme is characteristically neoliberal in its silence on structural inequality and in its targeting of certain families as deficient and wholly responsible for their situation. Like so many such programmes, its primary addressee is arguably not merely those targeted by the policies but the wider electorate. The paper discusses the dilemmas of challenging the policy's framing. First it makes some general points about the different characters of political and academic discourses, before examining some key features of the framing of TFP, its conceptualisation of social causes of problems and individual responsibility, and how social scientists might respond. It then draws upon the work of George Lakoff to comment on how the impact of policy and political discourse depends on the kinds of value systems it invokes, before concluding.
538			_aMode of access: Internet.
653			_aFraming, political discourse, social causes, responsibility, values
773	0		_tSocial policy and society. _g2017, Vol. 16, No. 1 _x1474-7464 _wocm49954477
856	4	0	_uhttp://ezproxy01.ny.edu.hk:2048/login?url=https://doi.org/10.1017/S1474746416000373 _zClick here to access full-text article
942			_2lcc _cE-ARTICLE
999			_c18543 _d18543