Towards knowledge‐based practice in complex child protection cases: a research‐based expert briefing
| Published date | 12 March 2010 |
| Date | 12 March 2010 |
| Pages | 9-24 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.5042/jcs.2010.0114 |
| Author | June Thoburn |
| Subject Matter | Education,Health & social care,Sociology |
Journal of Children’s Ser vices • V olume 5 Issue 1 • Marc h 2010 © Pier Professional L td 9
10.5042/jcs.2010.0114
Abstract
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.
Key words
child maltreatment; effective child protection; hard to reach and hard to help families
services at ‘levels 3 or 4’ (Hardiker, 1991; Garbers
et al, 2006). However, it is argued in this article
that these services have the best chance of being
effective if they are integrated with high quality
level 1 and level 2 services (‘universal’ and targeted
at potentially vulnerable families).
‘Effectiveness’, for the purposes of this
article, is defined as the prevention of further
maltreatment or significant impairment to the
child’s development. This includes child well-being
outcomes but also ‘service output’ measures – the
extent to which appropriate services are offered
and taken up to ensure that the child’s needs
Introduction
This article focuses on UK children who are
assessed as (or would be if they were referred
or referred themselves for assessment) either
‘children in need’, in other words ‘whose health or
development is likely to be “significantly impaired”
without the provision of [an additional/ targeted
social care] service’ (Children Act 1989, Section
17b), or children in need of a child protection
enquiry (Children Act 1989, Section 47). The
children and their families will be receiving, or
ought to be receiving, ‘specialist’ services – as
defined in Every Child Matters (HM Government,
2003) – to prevent further harm or reparative
Towards knowledge-based
practice in complex child
protection cases: a research-
based expert briefing1
June Thoburn
University of East Anglia, UK
Journal of Children’s Ser vices • V olume 5 Issue 1 • Marc h 2010 © Pier Professional L td
10
Towards knowledge-based practice in complex child protection cases: a research-based expert briefing
legislation). The approach is one of statutory rights
to a service based on professional assessment of
need, in contrast to the narrower ‘risk assessment’
approach more common in most states in the US,
Canada and Australia, although in some parts of
some states a broader service model has been
adopted in the past few years (Gilbert et al, 2008).
The mandate to seek to work in partnership
with parents and children is stronger in European
jurisdictions than in the US and has an impact on
the broad ‘shape’ of the services as well as the
detailed interventions.
Specifically, this ‘European approach’ to
service provision usually results in a wider range
of services to a larger proportion of vulnerable
families, provided sequentially or concurrently, and
often over longer periods (eg. Gilbert et al, 2008;
Boddy et al, 2009b). Protective services are usually
part of a broader service to meet the identified
needs of family members and therefore have to be
understood, and evaluated, in terms of the broad
approach to service provision as well as in terms of
specifically defined methods or interventions. This
contrasts with the US, where much of the relevant
‘what works’ research has been conducted. In these
jurisdictions the emphasis tends to be on specified
interventions or programmes commissioned
from service providers to combat identified
problems such as children’s behavioural difficulties
or offending behaviour. These are often tightly
defined (‘manualised’) and therefore more readily
evaluated using ‘experimental’ methodologies,
notably the randomised controlled trial (RCT).
They more frequently have a defined beginning,
middle and end, specified in a contract, than
is the c ase in needs-/rights -based European
jurisdictions . Examples of man ualised programmes
are the Incredible Years par ent training
programme ( Webster-Stratton & H erbert, 1999),
now adapted for deprived com munities in the
UK (Sutton et al, 2004; S cott et al, 2006), and
the Triple P parenting progr ammes developed
in Australi a (Sanders et al, 2009). Barlow an d
colleagues (2008) provide an overview of the
evaluations of these programme s and Barlow and
Schrader-MacM illan (2009) relate the evaluation
literature to families where there is concern
about emoti onal abuse.
In contrast, although there is a very large body
of relevant UK and European research (some of
which, is referred to in this article), most of it is
process or ‘formative’ research providing detailed
information, from a usually small number of cases
studied in depth, on the characteristics of children
are met in a way which is likely to enhance their
opportunity to grow and develop as they move
through childhood into adult life. With vulnerable
children the five Every Child Matters well-being
dimensions2 map onto the dimensions and domains
for individual children and their families in the
Assessment Framework ‘triangle’ (DH et al, 2000),
including a ‘sense of permanence’ and a ‘sense of
cultural and personal identity’ (Parker et al, 1991;
Thoburn, 1994).
This article is an extended and more fully
referenced version of one of the ‘expert briefings’
being commissioned by the English Department
for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF) (see
Thoburn & Making Research Count, 2009).
It does not set out to be a comprehensive
literature review and did not involve a web-
based search – the four-month time scale
precluded such an approach – but rather draws
on published literature reviews and research
syntheses and other work in which the author
has been involved (including The Lancet [2008]
special issue on safeguarding children research).
The secondary sources on which it draws also
include practice texts (mainly by US and UK
social work academics). Any claim to originality
lies in its purpose: namely to guide managers,
commissioners and service planners, many of
whom will not have had the benefit of training in
research literacy or research methods, through
the complex knowledge base relevant to child
protection, including the ‘wicked’ issue of how
to improve the effectiveness of the services they
provide in complex child care cases.
Scoping the relevant
services and research
Child maltreatment is multi-faceted and different
service approaches are likely to be effective with
different types of family at different stages of
recognition of actual or likely maltreatment. As a
necessary consequence, the body of research is
diverse, multi-faceted and multi-method. In this
article, the UK and international research (mainly
from the US) is flagged up. It is important to point
out that differences in the approach to service
provision in different jurisdictions affect both the
nature of research conducted and its transferability
across national boundaries (Gilbert, 1997; Thoburn,
2007; Boddy et al, 2009a; Ruffolo et al, 2009).
Services in England, as in other European Union
jurisdictions, are based on the UN Convention on
the Rights of the Child (as interpreted in England
by the Children Act 1989 and subsequent children
To continue reading
Request your trial