PropertyValue
?:about
?:abstract
  • When social control and social service workers go into the field, into the "native habitat" of some problem, a variety of tacit structures and controls that mark office work with its standardized documents and formal meetings are weakened or absent entirely. As a result, compared to office settings, social control work in field settings tends to become open, contingent, unpredictable, and on occasion even wild. This article provides a strategic case study of the distinctive features of social control decision-making in the field, drawing on observations of field work by psychiatric emergency teams (PET) from the 1970s. PET typically went to the homes of psychiatrically-troubled persons in order to conduct evaluations for involuntary mental hospitalization. This article will analyze the varied, situationally-sensitive practices these workers adopted to evaluate such patients in their own homes. (xsd:string)
?:contributor
?:dateModified
  • 2019 (xsd:gyear)
?:datePublished
  • 2019 (xsd:gyear)
?:doi
  • 10.17645/si.v7i1.1788 ()
?:duplicate
?:hasFulltext
  • true (xsd:boolean)
is ?:hasPart of
?:inLanguage
  • en (xsd:string)
?:isPartOf
?:issn
  • 2183-2803 ()
?:issueNumber
  • 1 (xsd:string)
?:linksDOI
is ?:mainEntity of
?:name
  • Contingent control and wild moments: conducting psychiatric evaluations in the home (xsd:string)
?:provider
?:publicationType
  • Zeitschriftenartikel (xsd:string)
  • journal_article (en)
?:sourceInfo
  • GESIS-SSOAR (xsd:string)
  • In: Social Inclusion, 7, 2019, 1, 259-268 (xsd:string)
rdf:type
?:url
?:volumeNumber
  • 7 (xsd:string)