An analysis of Child Care Policy and Practice in Barnardo’s Macedon and Sharonmore residential homes in Northern Ireland during the period 1952 – 1990, the period under investigation by the Inquiry.

Report to examine the nature and extent of any abuse in Barnardo’s Macedon and Sharonmore residential homes in Northern Ireland and to determine whether that abuse was caused or facilitated by failings on the part of Barnardo’s, and whether they were systemic in nature. Abuse and systemic failings as defined in the document published by the Inquiry in June 2013 “Definition of Abuse and Systemic Failings”.

Care home managers’ knowledge of palliative care: a Northern Irish study

First steps: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial of the effectiveness of the Group Family Nurse Partnership (gFNP) program compared to routine care in improving outcomes for high-risk mothers and their children and preventing abuse

Background: Evidence from the USA suggests that the home-based Family Nurse Partnership program (FNP), extending from early pregnancy until infants are 24 months, can reduce the risk of child abuse and neglect throughout childhood. FNP is now widely available in the UK. A new variant, Group Family Nurse Partnership (gFNP) offers similar content but in a group context and for a shorter time, until infants are 12 months old. Each group comprises 8 to 12 women with similar expected delivery dates and their partners. Its implementation has been established but there is no evidence of its effectiveness.

Methods/Design: The study comprises a multi-site randomized controlled trial designed to identify the benefits of gFNP compared to standard care. Participants (not eligible for FNP) must be either aged <20 years at their last menstrual period (LMP) with one or more previous live births, or aged 20 to 24 at LMP with low educational qualifications and no previous live births. 'Low educational qualifications' is defined as not having both Maths and English Language GCSE at grade C or higher or, if they have both, no more than four in total at grade C or higher. Exclusions are: under 20 years and previously received home-based FNP and, in either age group, severe psychotic mental illness or not able to communicate in English. Consenting women are randomly allocated (minimized by site and maternal age group) when between 10 and 16 weeks pregnant to either to the 44 session gFNP program or to standard care after the collection of baseline information. Researchers are blind to group assignment. The primary outcomes at 12 months are child abuse potential based on the revised Adult-Adolescent Parenting Inventory and parent/infant interaction coded using the CARE Index based on a video-taped interaction. Secondary outcomes are maternal depression, parenting stress, health related quality of life, social support, and use of services.

Discussion: This is the first study of the effectiveness of gFNP in the UK. Results should inform decision-making about its delivery alongside universal services, potentially enabling a wider range of families to benefit from the FNP curriculum and approach to supporting parenting.

Child Protection Work and Family Support Practice in Five Family Centres

Academic interest in the work of family centres in the United Kingdom has largely been concerned with categorising the work of such centres in terms of issues of childcare ideology, working practices and degree of service user control. Meanwhile, the re-focusing of child protection services in order to develop child welfare services has largely dominated childcare social work in recent years, with scant attention paid to the role of family centres in relation to this debate. This study is concerned with examining the perspectives of staff and service users in five 'client focussed' family centres in Northern Ireland in relation to how child protection issues are understood and dealt with. It was found that staff enter into negotiations with both referrers and service users to conceptually reframe child protection work as family support practice. This leads to the development of partnership relationships between staff and service users based upon mutual high regard. The work of such centres leaves them well placed to provide integrated services to children in need in line with current government priorities, but could leave some children vulnerable where child protection issues are not amenable to conceptual reframing along family support lines.

Home-based support for palliative care families:challenges and recommendations

Providing adequate supportive services for the families of palliative care patients is a core principle of palliative care. Caring for a patient with terminal illness at home involves a considerable commitment on the part of family caregivers, and attention must be given to the caregiver's needs as well as those of the patient. Although a home death may be preferred by patients and promoted by healthcare agencies as a cost-effective option, it may be an ideal that is not often realised. Enhanced supportive care strategies can ameliorate the challenges facing families of palliative care patients cared for at home. All health professionals need to improve the standard of family-centred palliative care, and more evidence-based approaches are required.

Home-based child development interventions for preschool children from socially disadvantaged families

BACKGROUND
Social disadvantage can have a significant impact on early child development, health and wellbeing. What happens during this critical period is important for all aspects of development. Caregiving competence and the quality of the environment play an important role in supporting development in young children and parents have an important role to play in optimising child development and mitigating the negative effects of social disadvantage. Home-based child development programmes aim to optimise children's developmental outcomes through educating, training and supporting parents in their own home to provide a more nurturing and stimulating environment for their child.

OBJECTIVES
To determine the effects of home-based programmes aimed specifically at improving developmental outcomes for preschool children from socially disadvantaged families.

SEARCH STRATEGY
We searched the following databases between 7 October and 12 October 2010: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2010, Issue 4), MEDLINE (1950 to week 4, September 2010), EMBASE (1980 to Week 39, 2010), CINAHL (1937 to current), PsycINFO (1887 to current), ERIC (1966 to current), ASSIA (1987 to current), Sociological Abstracts (1952 to current), Social Science Citation Index (1970 to current). We also searched reference lists of articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials comparing home-based preschool child development interventions with a 'standard care' control. Participants were parents with children up to the age of school entry who were socially disadvantaged in respect of poverty, lone parenthood or ethnic minority status.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently selected studies, assessed the trials' risk of bias and extracted data.

RESULTS
We included seven studies, which involved 723 participants. We assessed four of the seven studies as being at high risk of bias and three had an unclear risk of bias; the quality of the evidence was difficult to assess as there was often insufficient detail reported to enable any conclusions to be drawn about the methodological rigour of the studies. Four trials involving 285 participants measured cognitive development and we synthesised these data in a meta-analysis. Compared to the control group, there was no statistically significant impact of the intervention on cognitive development (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.30; 95% confidence interval -0.18 to 0.78). Only three studies reported socioemotional outcomes and there was insufficient data to combine into a meta-analysis. No study reported on adverse effects.

AUTHORS’ CONCLUSIONS
This review does not provide evidence of the effectiveness of home-based interventions that are specifically targeted at improving developmental outcomes for preschool children from socially disadvantaged families. Future studies should endeavour to better document and report their methodological processes.

Substance Use among Young People Living in Residential State Care

Existing empirical evidence on substance use among young people living in residential state care during adolescence is comparatively limited. This paper reports on substance use trends of young people living in residential state care during three annual data-sweeps when aged 14, 15 and 16 years. A repeated cross-sectional research design was utilised in the research. The findings suggest some similarities for lifetime prevalence rates for tobacco and alcohol use for those living in residential state care with a group of same-age young people not living in residential state care who participated in the research. However, solvent abuse and cannabis use was higher among those living in care. More frequent substance use was reported by the residential care sample for all substances at each stage of the study. These findings suggest that young people living in state care continue to merit higher levels of vigilance from researchers and policy-makers in order to fully understand this behaviour and develop appropriate prevention initiatives to meet their needs regarding potential drug problems.

‘Care just changes your life’: Factors impacting on the mental health of children and young people in care in Northern Ireland.

This paper represents one element of a research project carried out into the mental health needs of children and young people with experiences of care in Northern Ireland. Focusing exclusively on qualitative data collected from 51 young people in care and aftercare, it discusses in the first instance how the challenges and difficulties faced by young people can manifest themselves in feelings and behaviours that may exemplify poor mental well-being. In doing so it provides an understanding of mental health in the context of these young people’s lives. Through offering a more detailed account of some of the specific issues that put these young people at increased risk, it highlights areas for further work and consideration as a means of protecting them against these risks. These include: dealing with experiences prior to care; easing and ‘‘normalising’’ the experience of living in care; and enhancing ‘‘safety nets’’ after care. A key objective of the research is to inform policy and practice through the accounts of children and young people. It is argued that more work needs to be done to find creative ways of enhancing the day-to-day experiences of young people while in care and when leaving care.