gistfile1.txt

> In recent years, as the tenets of neoliberalism have been accompanied by the logics of ‘austerity’, countries like the UK have witnessed what Conroy (2010, p. 326) terms a ‘schizophrenic’ approach to policy and professional practice for children. On the one hand, he notes that the state has increasingly compelled individuals to take responsibility for themselves, rather than rely on state support. In this context, it is not surprising to see (if in this case implicitly) parents being blamed for not being able to talk to their children in the ‘right’ way to help them manage their emotions. On the other hand, Conroy notes that the state has sought to intervene in the intimate details of children’s lives as never before, especially in schools: from diet (in the name of pervasive fears about obesity), to toilet use, to their neurological functioning (Pykett, 2012; Gagen, 2015). If ‘schizophrenia’ is too strong a word, then the combination of a contradictory approach to the governance of childhood, alongside the withdrawal of the state from a wide range of services for children and families, has certainly created a significant schism