Search results

Hazel Schofield explains how the Supported Needs Project at Kensington & Chelsea Volunteer Bureau is challenging traditional perceptions of voluntary work.

The disproportionate representation in juvenile justice systems of children who are, or have been, in the care of the state is a major cause of concern internationally. However, the experiences of this particular group are largely absent from both policy debates and the international research base. This paper aims to correct that deficit by exploring the lived experiences of residential care, justice-involved children.

An interpretivist investigation of care experienced children’s perceptions of their experiences, involving semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of 19 children in England who were simultaneously in residential care and subject to youth justice supervision. Data were analysed using thematic content analysis.

Care-experienced children described how their experiences of residential care environments and regimes have undermined their sense of how they see themselves, now and looking to the future. Against this background of disrupted identity, they also reported stigmatising interactions with staff that leave them feeling labelled both as a generic “looked-after child” and as a “bad kid”.

The findings are based on the perceptions of a group of children in the criminal justice system, which, although reflecting the experiences of those with negative outcomes, may not be representative of all children in residential care.

The findings have implications for those responsible for the care and development of care-experienced children, as well policymakers concerned with reducing the numbers of care-experienced children in youth justice. Those responsible for the care and development of care-experienced children should consider steps to reduce how factors outlined here disrupt a child’s sense of self and introduce criminogenic labelling and stigma.

Despite a number of studies seeking to understand why the number of care experienced children in the youth justice system is disproportionate, there is very little empirical work that seeks to understand the experiences and perceptions of children currently both in care and the criminal justice system. This paper seeks to correct this deficit, by detailing how children who are both in residential care and subject to youth justice supervision view their care experiences. The implications of this for policy, practice and further research are then explored.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a response to a recent government-commissioned review of residential care (Narey, 2016), and the subsequent government response (Department of Education (DfE), 2016), which minimises the correlation between the experience of being looked after and becoming involved in the youth justice system. The Narey review emphasises on the role of early adversity in looked after children’s offending behaviour but minimises the significance of experiences during and after care, and downplays the effect of policies and practices that may exacerbate looked after children’s involvement in the youth justice system.

The paper builds upon a systematic literature review conducted for the Prison Reform Trust (Staines, 2016) to demonstrate the extent of current knowledge about how risk factors, adverse experiences during and after care and the criminalisation of looked after children combine to increase the likelihood of involvement in criminal proceedings. The paper also highlights gaps in the research evidence, particularly in relation to gender and ethnicity.

The findings suggest that the Narey review (2016) and the government response (DfE, 2016), are misguided in their attempts to minimise the role of care in looked after children’s disproportionate representation within the youth justice system. The paper cautions against the over-simplification of a complex relationship and emphasises on the importance of recognising the intersection between different factors.

The paper uses secondary sources to develop an original argument to rebut claims within a recently published review.

This article is an extended version of an ‘experts’ briefing' commissioned to inform senior child welfare managers in English local authorities and voluntary agencies about the available evidence to inform the provision of effective services in complex child protection cases. It starts by noting how differences in the approach to service provision in different jurisdictions affect both the nature of research conducted and its transferability across national boundaries. It then summarises the characteristics both of parents who are likely to maltreat their children and also of the children most likely to be maltreated. The factors that make some families ‘hard to engage’ or ‘hard to help/change’ are then discussed, as are the essential elements of effective professional practice in child protection. Particular attention is paid to effective approaches to helping families and young people who are hard to identify or engage.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Index by subjects, compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Out‐of‐home care has been a subject for policy debate since child welfare policies were first developed. Too often the debate is marked by ill‐informed sound‐bites linking “care” with negative descriptors such as “drift” or “languish”. The purpose of this paper is to urge a more nuanced understanding informed by the large volume of research from across jurisdictional boundaries.

The historical, cultural and political contexts in which studies on children's out‐of‐home care have been conducted are reviewed, since these impact on the characteristics of the children, the aims of the care service in any particular jurisdiction, and the outcomes for those entering care. The paper also scopes the large volume of English language descriptive and process research (and the smaller number of outcome studies) on the different placement options.

The outcomes of out‐of‐home care are different for different groups of children, and care needs to be taken not to over‐simplify the evidence about processes and outcomes. The generally negative view of the potential of out‐of‐home care is not based on evidence.

The authors, from their North American and UK/European perspectives, provide an analysis of the strengths and weaknesses, both of the available research and of the care services themselves.