Child welfare inequalities in the four nations of the UK

Abstract

Comparative International data on patterns of inequality in child welfare interventions, for example, the proportion of children about whom there are substantiated child protection (CP) concerns or who are in out-of-home care (CLA), are far less developed than data about inequalities in health. Few countries collect reliable, comprehensive information and definitions, methods of data collection and analysis are rarely consistent. The four UK countries (England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales) provide a potential 'natural experiment' for comparing intervention patterns. This study reports on a large quantitative, descriptive study focusing on children in contact with children's services on a single date in 2015. It found that children's chances of receiving a child protection intervention was primarily related to family socio-economic circumstances, measured by neighbourhood deprivation, within all four countries and in every local area. There was a strong social gradient which was significantly steeper in some countries than others. Ethnicity was another important factor underlying inequalities. While inequalities in patterns of intervention between the four countries were considerable, they did not mirror relative levels of deprivation in the child population. Inequalities in intervention rates result from a combination of demand and supply factors. The level and extent of inequity raise profound ethical, economic and practical challenges to those involved in child protection, the wider society and the state.

Educational outcomes of children in contact with social care in England: a systematic review

“…Consideration of SEP, which is a complex, multifaceted construct not fully captured by a single indicator [21, 22], is especially important due to its strong relationship with CSC contact [23]. Sebba et al [12] and Luke and O’Higgins [17] did adjust for free school meal eligibility and deprivation using the income domain affecting children index (IDACI) from the English indices of deprivation (see, e.g.…”

Paradoxical evidence on ethnic inequities in child welfare: Towards a research agenda

“…It is possible, for example, that these patterns in the low deprivation neighbourhoods reflect the wider 'Inverse Intervention Law' (Bywaters et al, 2015;Hood et al, 2016) which found that in every quintile of neighbourhood deprivation, low average deprivation local authorities were intervening more frequently than high deprivation ones. Recent evidence suggests that the primary factor underlying the Inverse Intervention Law may be that high average deprivation local authorities have less funding relative to demand than low deprivation local authorities, leading to a greater propensity to deflect referrals away from statutory child protection services (Bywaters et al, 2018a;2018b). In the low deprivation neighbourhoods (quintiles 1 -3), less than 20 percent of all children in this representative sample lived in high average deprivation local authorities.…”

“…One final piece of relevant evidence that emerged from the CWIP study was an examination of the proportion of children who were looked after children in legal terms but, in practice, placed not in foster or residential care but with either one or both parents or with a relative or family friend (Table 7). The proportions of such placements vary considerably between the four UK countries of England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales (Bywaters et al, 2018b). The overall percentage of looked after children in residential or foster care was similar between ethnic groups, between 81% and 85% (Table 7), but there was a sign that there might be differences related to ethnicity and deprivation.…”

Stripping the Wallpaper of Practice: Empowering Social Workers to Tackle Poverty

“…The social determinants of health, education, and economic outcomes have been well documented (Lee and Burkam 2002;Marmot et al 2010;Wilkinson and Pickett 2006). Recent UK evidence has also quantified the relationship between deprivation and child welfare interventions, finding that a child's chances of becoming looked after or being placed on the child protection register (or subject to a child protection plan) greater for those living in the most deprived areas of the UK (Bywaters et al 2018). Despite this, poverty has become the wallpaper of social work practice, "too big to tackle and too familiar to notice" (Morris et al 2018, p. 370) during a sustained period of economic recession, public spending cuts and little public or political will to increase welfare expenditure.…”