Exploring inequities in child welfare and child protection services: Explaining the ‘inverse intervention law’
By P. Bywaters, Geraldine Brady, T. Sparks, E. Bos, Lisa Bunting, B. Daniel, B. Featherstone, Kate Morris, J. Scourfield. 2015
126 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Attempts to record, understand and respond to variations in child welfare and protection reporting, service patterns and outcomes are international, numerous and longstanding. Reframing such variations as an issue of inequity between children and between families opens the way to a new approach to explaining the profound difference in intervention rates between and within countries and administrative districts. Recent accounts of variation have frequently been based on the idea that there is a binary division between bias and risk (or need). Here we propose seeing supply (bias) and demand (risk) factors as two aspects of a single system, both framed, in part, by social structures. A recent finding from a study of intervention rates in England, the ‘inverse intervention law’, is used to illustrate the complex ways in which a range of factors interact to produce intervention rates. In turn, this analysis raises profound moral, policy, practice and research questions about current child welfare and child protection services.
Subfields: Clinical Psychology, General Health Professions, Safety Research
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/70c9eb63e1e2595791ad37700b38e3550f7cf2b5
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In General Health Professions
Citations in the corpus
- The relationship between poverty, child abuse and neglect: an evidence review. (2016, background): “27 • class based assumptions about family patterns may be deeply embedded in child protection systems (Bywaters et al., 2015).”