Singh, Vidita2024-12-102024-12-102024https://hdl.handle.net/10315/42560Using ethnographic observation, this research paper investigates the work practices of a supervised visitation site in Ontario. Supervised visitation sites are used by families in high conflict divorces where children and their parents can meet for visits or exchanges under the supervision of “neutral” Staff who document their interactions in observation reports. These organizations are mandated by the Ministry of Children, Community, and Social Services and use discourses that state the environment is safe, neutral, and child-focused. Using Dorothy Smith’s Institutional Ethnography (IE), the researcher adopts the standpoint of a Site Observer or worker faced with the problematic: how can we understand safety, neutrality, and child-focused in locked spaces that require high levels of documentation, surveillance and reporting? Through extensive field notes, I map out the spaces used, the forms workers fill out and where they go, and the reporting structure, with special attention given to the visitation centre’s Service Agreement. My analysis of the ruling relations, that link local activities to institutional power show that the agency is not as safe, neutral, and child-focused as it claims to be. Instead, I discover: (1) safety is synonymous with security, (2) neutrality is enforced through compliance (non-compliance is managed by Staff), and (3) “child-focused” is limited to micro-level interactions. The findings argue that workers engage in multiple, overlapping work processes, identified as documenting, observing, communicating, tracking time/movement, and enforcing/referencing policy. These findings emphasize the need for policy and program changes that are more trauma-informed, choice-based and psychologically safe.enResearch Paper