Search results for ‘Publisher:"cardiff university"’ Sort:
Results 1 - 4 of 4
Identifying and understanding inequalities in child welfare intervention rates: comparative studies in four UK countries. Single country quantitative study report: Wales
- Authors:
- ELLIOTT Martin, SCOURFIELD Jonathan
- Publisher:
- Cardiff University
- Publication year:
- 2017
- Pagination:
- 31
- Place of publication:
- Cardiff
This report highlights the link between social inequality and child welfare interventions. It draws on an analysis of routine administrative data from Welsh local authorities on the children on child protection registers and in care (looked after) on 31 March 2015. Findings include: there is a clear social gradient whereby for every level of deprivation the rates of children on child protection registers and looked-after by local authorities increase – this gradient is steeper in Wales than in the other three UK nations; there is no statistically significant difference between boys and girls in terms of child protection registration rates at each level of deprivation; when comparing age groups, there is an opposite pattern for child protection registration and looked-after children, with younger children more likely to be on child protection registers and a larger proportion of older children being looked after; the highest rate of both child protection and looked-after children is in mixed ethnicity children; neglect, physical abuse and emotional abuse are the main reasons for being on the child protection register; there was a clear social gradient for all the categories of child protection measures, preparation for adoption, voluntary accommodation and youth justice; in Wales there is no statistical evidence of an inverse intervention effect, where at any given level of deprivation more intervention takes place in local authorities which are less deprived overall; while in England there was a clear reduction in spending per child on children’s services between 2010-11 and 2014-15, in Wales there was an increase over this same period – as expected, local authorities which are more deprived overall spent more on children’s services. (Edited publisher abstract)
The participation of P in welfare cases in the Court of Protection
- Authors:
- SERIES Lucy, FENNELL Phil, DOUGHTY Julie
- Publisher:
- Cardiff University
- Publication year:
- 2017
- Pagination:
- 190
- Place of publication:
- Cardiff
This report considers how effectively the person who is alleged to lack mental capacity can participate in Court of Protection (CoP) proceedings which are about their health, welfare or deprivation of liberty. It considers in depth what a ‘human rights model of participation’ looks like and identifies three essential principles of a human rights-based approach to participation: the dignity principle, the evidential principle, and the adversarial principle. Key features to promote participation in the Court of Protection are then assessed against this model. These cover: access to a court; evidence and information before the Court; representation in proceedings; attending court; special measures and reasonable adjustments, such as funding for intermediaries to assist with putting questions during a hearing; and training of judges and representatives. It then looks at the same issues for the Mental Health Tribunals in England and Wales, to see whether this offers a better approach. It finds that several aspects of the CoP model for participation are not working because the system was established on a model of ‘low participation’ that is no longer compatible with developments in international human rights law under the European Convention on Human Rights and the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. To increase levels of participation, it concludes that there needs to be revisions to the rules and practice directions, increased resources for various elements of participation, and by looking at when and how cases should come to the CoP. The report makes 20 recommendations for improvements. (Edited publisher abstract)
An evidence based review of the risks to children and young people who are educated at home: final report
- Authors:
- FORRESTER Donald, et al
- Publisher:
- Cardiff University. CASCADE
- Publication year:
- 2017
- Pagination:
- 98
- Place of publication:
- Cardiff
A review commissioned by the National Independent Safeguarding Board in February 2017 to explore possible risks in relation to safeguarding, health and well-being for children and young people who are educated at home. It included a rapid literature review; a review of child practice reviews and serious case reviews where home education was a factor; telephone interviews with stakeholders, including home educators and representatives from Welsh Government; and an online survey of home educating parents. Home education was identified as a feature in 11 Serious Case Reviews and Child Practice Reviews. These included families where home education was used as either part of a withdrawal from services following the identification of safeguarding concerns and or part of a strategy by parents that prevented, limited or controlled professional contact with children. Although home education is not a risk factor for child abuse or neglect, where there are concerns for a child’s safety or well-being home education significantly reduces professional access and child safety monitoring opportunities. The review makes recommendations to create a more constructive and transparent partnership between parents and the state when children are home educated. These include recommendations for an enhanced support service and clearer assessment of the needs and well-being of home educated children, and an improved response to children where actual or suspected harm is identified and the child is or becomes home educated. (Edited publisher abstract)
Welfare cases in the Court of Protection: a statistical overview
- Authors:
- SERIES Lucy, et al
- Publishers:
- Nuffield Foundation, Cardiff University. School of Law and Politics
- Publication year:
- 2017
- Pagination:
- 107
- Place of publication:
- Cardiff
This report describes the findings of two statistical studies on the Court of Protection (CoP’s) health, welfare and deprivation of liberty jurisdiction. The first study examined 200 case files held in the CoP’s main registry in London and 51 case files from CoP cases heard by High Court judges in the Royal Courts of Justice. The second study used the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) to ask local authorities and NHS bodies in England and Wales about their involvement in CoP welfare litigation. Both studies relate to the year 2014-15. The report provides data on a wide range of issues, including access to justice, participation of P in welfare cases, transparency, duration of proceedings, cost of proceedings and the future of the Court of Protection. The studies found that unlike its predecessor jurisdiction, in the Family Division of the High Court, most common cases heard under the CoP’s welfare jurisdiction today concern social welfare questions, such as: where a person should live; how they should be cared for; and questions about relationships such as whether contact with particular individuals should be restricted, and whether a person has the mental capacity to consent to sex or marriage. If found that social care professionals and local authorities are now the main users of the CoP’s jurisdiction, not medical professionals and healthcare bodies. The studies also indicate that these cases are more complex, involve more hearings and parties, take longer and cost more, than hearings about medical treatments. (Edited publisher abstract)