Acceso usuarios
Francisco Gómez Gómez, Raúl Soto Esteban
Los equipos psicosociales de la administración de justicia desde 1982 asesoran a los jueces en materia de conflictos familiares. El estudio que se presenta informa cómo se ha elaborado el discurso de este colectivo, y parte de la noción de discurso de Michel Foucault, desde su visión problemática. Luego recoge, a través de entrevistas y grupos de discusión, las opiniones de los trabajadores sociales y psicólogos de Madrid y Barcelona sobre la gestión del discurso. El estudio plantea un supuesto inicial sobre un menor protagonismo de los trabajadores sociales en la creación del relato que corresponde a una práctica común y busca una explicación y una descripción de lo sucedido. El trabajo que se presenta forma parte de una investigación académica básica y exploratoria de tipo cualitativo, basada en el principio fundamental de obtener los discursos principales para la resolución de los objetivos planteados como nuevas alternativas técnicas del trabajo psicosocial en los juzgados de familia y las tareas que desarrollarán los equipos psicosociales con las familias. Como conclusiones cabe resaltar que los trabajadores sociales forenses ven el futuro con optimismo, valoran su propia intervención en la ayuda a los jueces y creen que habría que impulsar una actuación profesional más propia. Los psicólogos y trabajadores sociales forenses entienden que hay un problema de falta de discurso psicosocial, por lo que es necesaria una mayor implicación en producir investigación en el área del discurso psicosocial. Aunque al evaluar la aportación de los trabajadores sociales la realidad resulta más pobre.
From 1982, psychosocial justice teams advise judges in family conflicts. This study explores how the discourse has been developed for this group. The article begins with the notion of discourse by Michel Foucault, from his problematic vision. Then, the views of social workers and psychologists on the management of speech, which have been collected through interviews and focus groups. The study raises an initial assumption of a lesser role of social workers in the creation of the story that corresponds to common practice and seeks an explanation and description of what happened. The object of this research was to expound and to reveal the place of the professional expert social worker in the psychosocial teams of the administration of justice in (Gomez & Soto 2015a). The social workers have an important role in the psychosocial teams in the administration of justice in the judges are at the receiving end of the social reports, the families are the object of this report and other professionals in the judicial system such as the psychologists, play their role in this team. Each professional group mentioned above requires a different type of task and a different assessment method: Social workers are the qualified professionals; the families are the object of the investigation, as they are the focus of the investigation. The opinion of the social worker is important and so is the perception of the situation of their professional group, in which they have the main role. The psychologists are the other professional group who serve the families and the courts during the investigation. Their perception of the discourse is valued as privileged witnesses. It is also interesting to note the significance of their contribution within this psychosocial collaboration. The techniques to be implemented can be defined as group discussion: the format is open, the components must be homogeneous and heterogeneous at the same time. The researcher suggests the topic of discussion and does not intervene any more except to guide the meeting or to control aspects of the meeting. The recorded information is then analyzed and the group then proposes a discourse referred to as the popular social perception. The in-depth interview is a technique of the qualitative dimension and does not require excesive intervention from the researcher; the aim of the in-depth interview is to draw a life history. The research compared the professional realities of forensic social workers in and from the view of psychologists and the social workers themselves. Psychologists were respected professionals of the social work, but they had important differences of opinion about the role they should play in the administration of justice and their relationships with the judges. The forensic social workers look at the future with optimism and value their intervention in support of the judges; they feel that they should promote a more professional line of action within the lexica and techniques of social work playing a more important role in their activities. The psychologists and forensic social workers understand that there is a lack of psychosocial discourse and a greater involvement is required in the production of research and documented work with -in the psychosocial discourse. In particular, when the contributions of social workers are evaluated, this reality is lacking.
