Neuroscience and family policy

what becomes of the parent?

Pam Lowe, Ellie Lee, Jan Macvarish

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

This article discusses the findings of a study tracing the incorporation of claims about infant brain development into English family policy as part of the longer term development of a ‘parent training’, early intervention agenda. The main focus is on the ways in which the deployment of neuroscientific discourse in family policy creates the basis for a new governmental oversight of parents. We argue that advocacy of ‘early intervention’, in particular that which deploys the authority of ‘the neuroscience’, places parents at the centre of the policy stage but simultaneously demotes and marginalises them. So we ask, what becomes of the parent when politically and culturally, the child is spoken of as infinitely and permanently neurologically vulnerable to parental influence? In particular, the policy focus on parental emotions and their impact on infant brain development indicates that this represents a biologisation of ‘therapeutic’ governance.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)248-269
Number of pages22
JournalCritical Social Policy
Volume35
Issue number2
Early online date26 Feb 2015
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2015

Fingerprint

family policy
neurosciences
parents
infant
brain
parents training
emotion
governance
discourse

Keywords

  • early intervention
  • family policy
  • neuroscience
  • parenting
  • therapy culture

Cite this

Lowe, Pam ; Lee, Ellie ; Macvarish, Jan. / Neuroscience and family policy : what becomes of the parent?. In: Critical Social Policy. 2015 ; Vol. 35, No. 2. pp. 248-269.
@article{92017e8313a944b2a13224d1b8ece5d0,
title = "Neuroscience and family policy: what becomes of the parent?",
abstract = "This article discusses the findings of a study tracing the incorporation of claims about infant brain development into English family policy as part of the longer term development of a ‘parent training’, early intervention agenda. The main focus is on the ways in which the deployment of neuroscientific discourse in family policy creates the basis for a new governmental oversight of parents. We argue that advocacy of ‘early intervention’, in particular that which deploys the authority of ‘the neuroscience’, places parents at the centre of the policy stage but simultaneously demotes and marginalises them. So we ask, what becomes of the parent when politically and culturally, the child is spoken of as infinitely and permanently neurologically vulnerable to parental influence? In particular, the policy focus on parental emotions and their impact on infant brain development indicates that this represents a biologisation of ‘therapeutic’ governance.",
keywords = "early intervention, family policy, neuroscience, parenting, therapy culture",
author = "Pam Lowe and Ellie Lee and Jan Macvarish",
year = "2015",
doi = "10.1177/0261018315574019",
language = "English",
volume = "35",
pages = "248--269",
journal = "Critical Social Policy",
issn = "0261-0183",
publisher = "SAGE",
number = "2",

}

Neuroscience and family policy : what becomes of the parent? / Lowe, Pam; Lee, Ellie; Macvarish, Jan.

In: Critical Social Policy, Vol. 35, No. 2, 2015, p. 248-269.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Neuroscience and family policy

T2 - what becomes of the parent?

AU - Lowe, Pam

AU - Lee, Ellie

AU - Macvarish, Jan

PY - 2015

Y1 - 2015

N2 - This article discusses the findings of a study tracing the incorporation of claims about infant brain development into English family policy as part of the longer term development of a ‘parent training’, early intervention agenda. The main focus is on the ways in which the deployment of neuroscientific discourse in family policy creates the basis for a new governmental oversight of parents. We argue that advocacy of ‘early intervention’, in particular that which deploys the authority of ‘the neuroscience’, places parents at the centre of the policy stage but simultaneously demotes and marginalises them. So we ask, what becomes of the parent when politically and culturally, the child is spoken of as infinitely and permanently neurologically vulnerable to parental influence? In particular, the policy focus on parental emotions and their impact on infant brain development indicates that this represents a biologisation of ‘therapeutic’ governance.

AB - This article discusses the findings of a study tracing the incorporation of claims about infant brain development into English family policy as part of the longer term development of a ‘parent training’, early intervention agenda. The main focus is on the ways in which the deployment of neuroscientific discourse in family policy creates the basis for a new governmental oversight of parents. We argue that advocacy of ‘early intervention’, in particular that which deploys the authority of ‘the neuroscience’, places parents at the centre of the policy stage but simultaneously demotes and marginalises them. So we ask, what becomes of the parent when politically and culturally, the child is spoken of as infinitely and permanently neurologically vulnerable to parental influence? In particular, the policy focus on parental emotions and their impact on infant brain development indicates that this represents a biologisation of ‘therapeutic’ governance.

KW - early intervention

KW - family policy

KW - neuroscience

KW - parenting

KW - therapy culture

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84924975207&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/0261018315574019

DO - 10.1177/0261018315574019

M3 - Article

VL - 35

SP - 248

EP - 269

JO - Critical Social Policy

JF - Critical Social Policy

SN - 0261-0183

IS - 2

ER -