Helen Richardson Foster Making Sense of the Child’s Lived Experience in Child Protection Conferences for Neglect I’m Helen Richardson Foster From the university of Sheffield I’m going to tell you a bit about my Phd. The title of my presentation is ‘Making Sense of the Child’s Lived Experience in Child protection conferences for Neglect’. Helen Richardson Foster

Today I will talk about: Background to the research Research questions & methodology Sample characteristics The type of data presented in conference How does data presented relate to the child’s daily lived experience? Today I will talk to you about: The background to the research, the rationale for the study Then briefly outline the research questions and methodology Then I’m going to talk about one aspect of the findings so far which is the type of data presented in the child protection conference, and specifically how this relates to the child’s daily lived experience

The Rationale for the Research: ESRC Case Studentship “…failure to see through the eyes of the child” (Lord Laming, 2009) Why neglect? Why child protection conferences? Study is an ESRC Case studentship which is collaborative research studentship, and my partners are two local safeguarding children boards It was inspired by the findings of the Laming Inquiries, Serious Case Reviews and research which found that in child protection work practitioners can struggle to view the situation THROUGH THE EYES OF THE CHILD and to pay attention to what life is like for the child on a daily basis Eg Baby P Why neglect – because this is a particularly complex and difficult type of harm to work with (SEE NEXT SLIDE FOR DEFINITION) Why Child protection conferences Child protection conferences are a critical part of decision making in the child protection process. Research on their efficacy is dated (Farmer & Owen 19956, Bell 1996) and no studies have specifically focused on conferences in cases of suspected neglect.

The Working Together Definition of Neglect “…the persistent failure to meet a child’s basic physical and/or psychological needs, likely to result in the serious impairment of the child’s health or development. Neglect may occur during pregnancy as a result of maternal substance abuse. Once a child is born, neglect may involve a parent or carer failing to: provide adequate food, clothing and shelter (including exclusion from home or abandonment); protect a child from physical and emotional harm or danger; ensure adequate supervision (including the use of inadequate care-givers); or ensure access to appropriate medical care or treatment. It may also include neglect of, or unresponsiveness to, a child’s basic emotional needs.” (HM Government, 2013 p86)

Research Questions 1) Who shares what information about a child and their family at a child protection conference? 2) To what extent is information about parenting capacity, context and issues explored in relation to the impact on the developmental needs of the child? 3) How has information been obtained and presented about the child’s experiences, wishes and feelings? 5) To what extent do conference members provide information about a day in the life of the child? 6) What difference is there to the quality of information about individual children and their lived experience if more than one child in the family is discussed at the conference? 7) What information is used to inform the content of the child protection plan? 8) What promoters and inhibitors do the workforce identify in relation to maintaining a child focus? So with this in mind these are the research questions the study planned to explore (Run through briefly = maybe don’t read out)

Methodology and Sample Stage 3: Focus Groups Stage 1: Conference Data Stage 2: Interviews with Conference Staff Audio recording and documentary analysis. Where neglect main presenting concern or category of harm. Face to face with conference chairs & their managers; and minute takers & their managers. Exploration of Stage 1 findings with staff from all agencies who attend conferences 14: 3 ICPCS, 11 reviews   26: 9 chairs, 13 minute takers, 2 managers & 2 supervisors 6: 3 in each area   This is how the research was undertaken There were three main phases to the data collection: Conference data – audio and documentary analysis of 14 conferences. Opportunistic sample of first 14 to consent, February to September last year, in just one LSCB area Individual interviews with Conference Staff, chairs and minute takers and their managers Focus groups with staff who attend conferences In 1 LA / LSCB In 2 LA /LSCBs In 2 LAs/ LSCBs

The Conference Data – Characteristics 1 11 reviews, 3 initial conferences Reviews: 3- 24 months, average of 9.5 months 6 ‘baby only’ conferences 5 large families of 4+ children Family attendance: 12 mothers, 5 fathers, 3 teenage children Practitioners 2 to 13, 10 average 35 mins to 2 hours 8 mins, average 1hr17 mins I’m going to tell you a bit about some of the findings from the conference data gathered in stage one Large families – average time 1h45mins, 1 x 10 children, 2 x 6 children. 45 children discussed overall

The Conference Data – Characteristics 2 All previously known to Children’s Social Care Predominantly white British Domestic violence Alcohol and drug use Parents: learning difficulties; mental health; physical health Children: Autistism; offending Characteristics – all previously known to children’s social care to some extent. 8/14 where the parents’ involvement was at CP level - 5 where mother’s previous children removed from her care. Other 6 – CIN type, universal services or DV referrals. Predominantly white – only one Asian family, and a child in one family was possibly mixed race. Thus the sample was 93% white British, which is in contrast to the overall ethnic mix of the area at 80% white British and that of the CP population - snapshot information obtained at the time of starting the research was that 75% neglect cases the children were White British. Domestic violence was a feature in 8/14 cases Drug or alcohol use was a feature for one or both of the parents in 6/14 cases (5 of which DV too). Current alcohol use was more of a concern than current drug use (only in 1 case) Other characteristics were: learning difficulties, parents with mental and physical health problems For children: no physical disabilities, some learning difficulties (2) and mental health (2), and offending behaviour (2), but was a large number of babies

What information is shared in conferences? Analysis methods Purpose and structure of conference Time spent on agenda items Developmental needs 40 - 60% (1hr of long meetings) Parenting 7 - 38% 27% average for 1 child meetings 12% multiple child meetings Planning 9 of 14 meetings <12% of meeting time discussing threshold / planning So I began my data analysis exploring the type of data discussed in conference. My approach for doing this was drawing on the ethnomethodological perspective which seeks to uncover the way social actors produce events. Thus by looking at what actually happens, and what is said, rather than why they think they do what they do, which you get in interview. So to do this I fully transcribed the conferences and put transcripts into Nvivo for thematic, grounded theory type coding but also in Nvivo I could do a qualitative content analysis informed by the research questions looking at things such as - counts of timings in Nvivo - coded up content by who was speaking and what discussing - including what element of the assessment framework talking about For the reports – read through and did a basic thematic content analysis of what was provided, and to what extent this information focused on and was about the child’s daily lived experience Child protection meetings are very structured looking at the child’s life and drawing on the Framework for the Assessment of Children in Need and their families. With the purpose being to decide if the child should be made subject to a child protection plan or not. However, when I looked at the time spent on these items I found that the content of the meeting was more weighted towards discussion fo the child than anything else; SEE TABLE

So, I’ll tell you a bit about the type of information shared in conferences by the different ‘sides’ of the assessment framework triangle, which as I’m sure you’re aware, looks like this. What I found was that on Child’s developmental needs A lot on and education, health and emotional/behavioural development and family relationships. Set agenda item. Less on identity, social presentation, self-care skills Parenting capacity Less explicit discussion of the different elements as agenda items. Least discussion of guidance & boundaries Family & Environmental Factors There was some discussion of family functioning & wider family in every conference but did vary Very limited discussion of mention of employment, income, community resources

Least discussion of the Child’s Daily Lived Experience Baby only conferences Historical concerns I’ve got no concerns over the care that’s being provided to {Child 1} at the moment. Routines are all in place he’s feeding well. (Social Worker, Conference Two) Resistant parents …when I’ve visited her I’ve not picked up that there’s been any smell of alcohol or she’s not appeared intoxicated or anything but I’m only seeing her for a fraction of the time and what she’s doing outside of that time is quite difficult to really get a true picture (Social Worker, Conference Three) Baby only conferences, and of babies There were 8 baby under 12 months (including 1 pre-birth) and 6 baby only. Conferences which were ‘baby only’ had less discussion of the day to day life of the child. Comments would typically be that the baby was in a “good routine” perhaps noting their feeding and sleeping pattern but not going into specifics. Historical concerns Where child/family being monitored due to mother’s previous parenting Resistant parents Most notably lack of attendance at conferences- but in Conference 3 neither attended nor had been engaging with services Conference 3 moving around, no real information about where they were, what they were doing, Conference 7 dad not engaging, did not attend meeting and had not been involved in the assessments and there were concerns about the care provided to the child in his care.

Most discussion of the Child’s Daily Lived Experience Older children Education workers (with good knowledge of family ….that but there are points where {Child 2} has come into school and he’s not taken his tablet for whatever reason and there was the issue where the tablets had run out, and I’d rang up and spoke to {father} and said that that really needed, they needed a back-up plan, we need {child 2} to have his medication in the morning because that can then impact in school (Teacher, Conference Four) Greatest discussion of daily lived experience when   Older children Education workers attended with good knowledge of the family, not only about the school day but about what the children say to them, and what they observe,including at about pick up and drop off of younger children.

Most discussion of the Child’s Daily Lived Experience Intensive work with the family … he is engaged in sort of positive activities when he’s at home, he’s not sort of left to his own devices or anything like that and I think that might encourage his motor skills (FIP Worker, Conference Four) Parents attending the conference well I’m not being funny, the food’s there for the children to eat, they have their dinner and to me if they want, they can have something in between, I’m not going to stop them I mean apparently in the report they complain of being hungry and that. Well they’re allowed to help themselves if they want, but I’m not being funny, it’s not like the cupboards are full of biscuits or sweets. (Mother, Conference Nine) Intensive work with the family, eg FIP worker in C4, or social worker C8 Parents attending the conference they could provide more details about what daily life was like like this mother on the dietary habits of the children…

Most discussion of the Child’s Daily Lived Experience Concerns about anti-social behaviour Concerns about safety So he spends most of the time with you then by the sound of things, if he’s there in the morning, takes them to school collects them from school afterwards , brings them back and he visits three or four times to see {Child 1} in addition to that, or you go out together (Chair, Conference 11) Concerns about anti-social behaviour However, it wasn’t always the case that this detail was available – could be flagging up that don’t know what they were getting up to and needed this information. Concerns about safety – specific risks such as domestic violence, safe sleep, sexual abuse

Thank you for your time. Any questions? H.Richardson-foster@sheffield.ac.uk That’s where I’m at now, next steps are to explore how this information informs the decision making at conference, and the plans created. How the information is drawn on in reports.