Narrative and Argumentation in a Case of Alleged Child Abuse
Keywords:
Narrative, abduction, rhetoric, social work, Munchausen Syndrome by ProxyAbstract
The relationship between argument and narrative has been the subject of much debate, particularly in the area of law, where a number of theorists have argued for the priority of one over the other in the decision-making process, the premise being that argumentation and narrative are two distinct text forms. Through the rhetorical analysis of a series of expert reports in a case of alleged child abuse, we seek to explore the dynamics between argumentation and narrative. In so doing, we argue that while certain actions may undermine the robustness of an argument, it is these very actions that make possible the telling of a persuasive story. We conclude with a plea for the development of rhetorical skills among social workers so as to be better able to discern future directions for the benefit of service users
References
Artingstall, K. (1998). Practical aspects of Munchausen by Proxy and Munchausen Syndrome investigation. CRC Press.
Baldwin, C. (2005). Who needs fact when you’ve got narrative? The case of P, C &S vs. United Kingdom. International Journal for the Semiotics of the Law, 18(3-4), 217–241.
Baldwin, C. (2008). Rhetoric, child protection and the violation of human rights. British Journal of Community Justice, 6(1), 35–48.
Baldwin, C. (2011). Narrative rhetoric in expert reports: A case study. Narrative Works, 1(2), 3–20.
Baldwin, C. (2013). Narrative social work: Theory and application. Policy Press.
Bartlett, E. J., & Wilson, J. C. (1982). A study of narrative rhetoric: Final report. National Institute of Education (US).
Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED234414.pdf
Booth, W. (1961). The rhetoric of fiction. University of Chicago Press.
Bennett, W. L., & Feldman, M. S. (1981). Reconstructing reality in the courtroom: Justice and judgment in American culture. Rutgers University Press.
Bex, F. J. (2009). Analysing stories using schemes. In H. Kaptein, H. Prakken, & B. Verheij (Eds.), Legal evidence and proof: Statistics, stories, logic (pp. 93–116). Ashgate.
Bex, F. J. (2013). Abductive argumentation with stories. ICAIL-2013 Workshop on Formal Aspects of Evidential Inference, Rome (Italy). Retrieved from http://www.florisbex.com/papers/bexAbdArg.pdf
Bex, F. J., Prakken, H., &Verheij, B. (2006). Anchored narratives in reasoning about evidence. In T. M. van Engers (Ed.), Legal knowledge and information systems, JURIX 2006: The Nineteenth Annual Conference, Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications 152 (pp.11–20). IOS Press.
Bex, F. J., van den Braak, S. W., van Oostendorp, H., Prakken, H., Verheij, H. B., & Vreeswijk, G. A. W. (2007). Sense-making software for crime investigation: How to combine stories and arguments? Law, Probability and Risk, 6(1–4), 145–168.
Bex, F. J., &Verheij, B. (2010). Arguments, stories and evidence: Critical questions for fact-finding. In F. H. van Eemeren, B. Garssen, D. Godden, & G. Mitchell (Eds). Proceedings of the 7th Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation (pp. 71–84). ISSA.
Bex, F. J., Koppen, P. J., Prakken, H., & Verheij, B. (2010). A hybrid formal theory of arguments, stories and criminal evidence. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 18(2), 123–152.
Bex, F., & Verheij, B. (2013). Legal stories and the process of proof. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 21(3), 253–278.
Bruner, J. (1990). Acts of meaning: Four lectures on mind and culture. Harvard University Press.
Eberhard, J. M. (2012). An annotated bibliography of literature on the rhetoric of health and medicine. Present Tense: A Journal of Rhetoric in Society, 2(2). Retrieved from http://www.presenttensejournal.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Masri-Eberhard.pdf
Fairclough, N. (2010). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. Routledge.
Frank, A. (2010). Letting stories breathe: A socio-narratology. University of Chicago Press.
Hall, C. (1997). Social work as narrative: Storytelling and persuasion in professional texts. Ashgate.
Hall, C., & Matarese, M. (2013). Narrative. In C. Hall, K. Juhila, M. Matarese, & C. van Nijnattan (Eds.), Analysing social work communication discourse in practice (pp. 79–97), Routledge.
Hall, C., Sarangi, S., & Slembrouck, S. (1997). Moral construction in social work discourse. In B.L. Gunnarsson, P. Linell, & B. Nordberg (Eds.), The construction of professional discourse (pp. 265–291). Longman.
Hall, C., Sarangi, S., & Slembrouck, S. (1999). The legitimation of the client and the profession: Identities and roles in social work discourse. In S. Sarangi & C. Roberts (Eds.), Talk, work and institutional order: Discourse in medical, mediation and management settings (pp. 293–322). Mouton de Gruyter.
Hall, C., Slembrouck, S., & Sarangi, S. (2006). Language practice in social work: Categorisation and accountability in child welfare. Routledge.
Hannken-Illjes, K. (2007). Undoing premises: The interrelation of argumentation and narration in criminal proceedings. In F. H. van Eemeren, J. A. Blair, C. A. Willard, & B. Garssen (Eds.) Proceedings of the sixth conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation (pp. 569–573). Sic. Sat.
Hannken-Illjes, K. (2011). Narratives as resources in criminal case work. Narrative Inquiry, 21(1), 175–188.
Harman, G.H. (1965). The inference to the best explanation. Philosophical Review, 74(1), 88–95.
Herman, D. (2009). Basic elements of narrative. Wiley-Blackwell.
Hydén, L-C. (1997). The institutional narrative as drama. In B. L. Gunnarsson, P. Linnell, & B. Norberg (Eds.), The construction of professional discourse (pp. 245–264). Addison-Wesley Longman.
Josephson, J.R. (2001). On the proof dynamics of inference to the best explanation. Cardozo Law Review, 22(5–6), 1621–1643.
Lucaites, J. L., & Condit, C. M. (1985). Re-constructing narrative theory: A functional perspective. Journal of Communication, 35(4), 90–108.
Mart, E. (1999). Problems with the diagnosis of factitious disorder by proxy in forensic settings. American Journal of Forensic Psychology, 17(1), 69–82.
Meadow, R. (1977). Munchausen syndrome by proxy: The hinterland of child abuse. Lancet, 2(8033), 343–345.
Morley, C. (1995). Practical concerns about the diagnosis of Munchausen syndrome by proxy. Archives of Disease in Childhood, 72(6), 528–529.
Olmos, P. (2013). Narration as argument. OSSA Conference Archive. Paper 123. Retrieved from https://scholar.uwindsor.ca/ossaarchive/OSSA10/
papersandcommentaries/123
Parrett, H. (1987). Argumentation and narrativity. In F. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, A. J. Blair, & C. A. Willard (Eds.) Argumentation: Across the lines of discipline: Proceedings of the Conference on Argumentation 1986 (pp. 165–176). Foris.
Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1986). Evidence evaluation in complex decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(2), 242–258.
Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1991). A cognitive theory of juror decision making: The story model. Cardozo Law Review, 13(2-3), 519–557.
Pennington, N., &Hastie, R. (1992). Explaining the evidence: Tests of the story model for juror decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62(2), 189–206.
Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1994). The story model for juror decision making. In R. Hastie (Ed.), Inside the juror: The psychology of juror decision making (pp. 192–224). Cambridge University Press.
Quintilian, M. F. (95 CE/1920). Institutio Oratoria (H. E. Butler, Trans.). Loeb Classical Library. (Original work published c. 95 CE). Retrieved from: http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Quintilian/Institutio_Oratoria/4B*.html#2
Randall, W. L., & McKim, A. E. (2008). Reading our lives: The poetics of growing old. Oxford University Press.
Riessman, C., & Quinney, L. (2005). Narrative in social work: A critical review. Qualitative Social Work, 4(4), 391–412.
Russell, B. (2004). Sceptical Essays. Routledge.
Social Work Outlaw (2015, 9 July). The case that made me question the whole point of being a social worker. Community Care. Retrieved from: http://www.communitycare.co.uk/2015/07/09/case-made-question-whole-point-social-worker/?cmpid=NLC%7CSCSC%7CSC0192015-0709
Spence, D. P. (1986). Narrative smoothing and clinical wisdom. In T. Sarbin (Ed.). Narrative psychology: The storied nature of human conduct (pp. 211–232). Praeger.
Thagard, P. R. (1978). The best explanation: Criteria for theory choice. Journal of Philosophy, 75(2), 76–92.
Urek, M. (2005). Making a case in social work: The construction of an unsuitable mother. Qualitative Social Work, 4(4), 451–467.
Wagenaar, W. A., van Koppen, P. J., & Crombag, H. F. M. (1993). Anchored narratives: The psychology of criminal evidence. St Martin's Press.
Walton, D. N. (2001). Abductive, presumptive and plausible arguments. Informal Logic, 21(2), 141–169.
Wertz, F. J., Charmaz, K., McMullen, L., Josselson, R., Anderson, R., & McSpadden, E. (2011). Five ways of doing qualitative analysis: Phenomenological psychology, grounded theory, discourse analysis, narrative research, and intuitive inquiry. Guilford Press.
White, J. B. (1987). Rhetoric and law: The arts of cultural and communal life. In J. S. Nelson. A. Megill, & D. N. McCloskey (Eds.), The rhetoric of human sciences: Language and argument in scholarship and public affairs (pp. 298–318). University of Wisconsin Press
Wilks, T. (2005). Social work and narrative ethics. British Journal of Social Work, 35(8), 1249–1264.
Wilson, R. G. (2001). Fabricated or induced illness in children: Munchausen by proxy comes of age. British Medical Journal, 323(7308), 296–297.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright for articles published in Narrative Works is retained by the author(s), with first publication rights granted to Narrative Works. By virtue of their appearance in this open access journal, articles are free to use, with proper attribution, in educational and other non-commercial settings.
