Explicit argumentation as a supervisory tool for decision making in child protection cases involving human rights issues

This paper addresses the problems often faced by social workers and their supervisors in decision making where human rights considerations and child protection concerns collide. High profile court cases in the United Kingdom and Europe have consistently called for social workers to convey more clarity when justifying their reasons for interfering with human rights in child protection cases. The themes emerging from these case law decisions imply that social workers need to be better at giving reasons and evidence in more explicit ways to support any actions they propose which cause interference with Convention Rights. Toulmin (1958, 1985) offers a structured approach to argumentation which may have relevance to the supervision of child protection cases when social workers and managers are required to balance these human rights considerations. One of the key challenges in this balancing act is the need for decision makers to feel confident that any interventions resulting in the interference of human rights are both justified and proportionate. Toulmin’s work has already been shown to have relevance for assisting social workers navigate pathways through cases involving competing ethical and moral demands (Osmo and Landau, 2001) and more recently to human rights and decision making in child protection (Duffy et al, 2006). Toulmin’s model takes the practitioner through a series of stages where any argument or proposed recommendation (claim) is subjected to intense critical analysis involving exposition of its strengths and weaknesses. The author therefore proposes that explicit argumentation (Osmo and Landau, 2001) may help supervisors and practitioners towards safer and more confident decision making in child protection cases involving the interference of the human rights of children and parents. In addition to highlighting the broader context of human rights currently permeating child protection decision making, the paper will include case material to practically demonstrate the application of Toulmin’s model of argumentation to the supervision context. In this way the paper adopts a strong practice approach in helping to assist practitioners with the problems and dilemmas they may come up against in decision making in complex cases.

Decision Making by Credal Nets

Credal nets are probabilistic graphical models which extend Bayesian nets to cope with sets of distributions. This feature makes the model particularly suited for the implementation of classifiers and knowledge-based systems. When working with sets of (instead of single) probability distributions, the identification of the optimal option can be based on different criteria, some of them eventually leading to multiple choices. Yet, most of the inference algorithms for credal nets are designed to compute only the bounds of the posterior probabilities. This prevents some of the existing criteria from being used. To overcome this limitation, we present two simple transformations for credal nets which make it possible to compute decisions based on the maximality and E-admissibility criteria without any modification in the inference algorithms. We also prove that these decision problems have the same complexity of standard inference, being NP^PP-hard for general credal nets and NP-hard for polytrees.

Decision making in child protection: An international comparative study on maltreatment substantiation, risk assessment and interventions recommendations, and the role of professionals’ child welfare attitudes

Child welfare professionals regularly make crucial decisions that have a significant impact on children and their families. The present study presents the Judgments and Decision Processes in Context model (JUDPIC) and uses it to examine the relationships between three indepndent domains: case characteristic (mother’s wish with regard to removal), practitioner characteristic (child welfare attitudes), and protective system context (four countries: Israel, the Netherlands, Northern Ireland and Spain); and three dependent factors: substantiation of maltreatment, risk assessment, and intervention recommendation.
The sample consisted of 828 practitioners from four countries. Participants were presented with a vignette of a case of alleged child maltreatment and were asked to determine whether maltreatment was substantiated, assess risk and recommend an intervention using structured instruments. Participants’ child welfare attitudes were assessed.
The case characteristic of mother’s wish with regard to removal had no impact on judgments and decisions. In contrast, practitioners’ child welfare attitudes were associated with substantiation, risk assessments and recommendations. There were significant country differences on most measures.
The findings support most of the predictions derived from the JUDPIC model. The significant differences between practitioners from different countries underscore the importance of context in child protection decision making. Training should enhance practitioners’ awareness of the impact that their attitudes and the context in which they are embedded have on their judgments and decisions.

Recovery of Sleep or Recovery of Self? A Grounded Theory Study of Residents’ Decision Making Regarding How to Spend Their Nonclinical Postcall Time

Purpose: As resident work hours policies evolve, residents’ off-duty time remains poorly understood. Despite assumptions about how residents should be using their postcall, off-duty time, there is little research on how residents actually use this time and the reasoning underpinning their activities. This study sought to understand residents’ nonclinical postcall activities when they leave the hospital, their decision-making processes, and their perspectives on the relationship between these activities and their well-being or recovery.

Method: The study took place at a Liaison Committee on Medical Education–accredited Canadian medical school from 2012 to 2014. The authors recruited a purposive and convenience sample of postgraduate year 1–5 residents from six surgical and nonsurgical specialties at three hospitals affiliated with the medical school. Using a constructivist grounded theory approach, semistructured interviews were conducted, audio-taped, transcribed, anonymized, and combined with field notes. The authors analyzed interview transcripts using constant comparative analysis and performed post hoc member checking.

Results: Twenty-four residents participated. Residents characterized their predominant approach to postcall decision making as one of making trade-offs between multiple, competing, seemingly incompatible, but equally valuable, activities. Participants exhibited two different trade-off orientations: being oriented toward maintaining a normal life or toward mitigating fatigue.

Conclusions: The authors’ findings on residents’ trade-off orientations suggest a dual recovery model with postcall trade-offs motivated by the recovery of sleep or of self. This model challenges the dominant viewpoint in the current duty hours literature and suggests that the duty hours discussion must be broadened to include other recovery processes.

Genomic markers for decision making:What is preventing us from using markers?

The advent of novel genomic technologies that enable the evaluation of genomic alterations on a genome-wide scale has significantly altered the field of genomic marker research in solid tumors. Researchers have moved away from the traditional model of identifying a particular genomic alteration and evaluating the association between this finding and a clinical outcome measure to a new approach involving the identification and measurement of multiple genomic markers simultaneously within clinical studies. This in turn has presented additional challenges in considering the use of genomic markers in oncology, such as clinical study design, reproducibility and interpretation and reporting of results. This Review will explore these challenges, focusing on microarray-based gene-expression profiling, and highlights some common failings in study design that have impacted on the use of putative genomic markers in the clinic. Despite these rapid technological advances there is still a paucity of genomic markers in routine clinical use at present. A rational and focused approach to the evaluation and validation of genomic markers is needed, whereby analytically validated markers are investigated in clinical studies that are adequately powered and have pre-defined patient populations and study endpoints. Furthermore, novel adaptive clinical trial designs, incorporating putative genomic markers into prospective clinical trials, will enable the evaluation of these markers in a rigorous and timely fashion. Such approaches have the potential to facilitate the implementation of such markers into routine clinical practice and consequently enable the rational and tailored use of cancer therapies for individual patients. © 2010 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved.

Rapid tryptophan depletion improves decision-making cognition in healthy humans without affecting reversal learning or set shifting

Rapid tryptophan (Trp) depletion (RTD) has been reported to cause deterioration in the quality of decision making and impaired reversal learning, while leaving attentional set shifting relatively unimpaired. These findings have been attributed to a more powerful neuromodulatory effect of reduced 5-HT on ventral prefrontal cortex (PFC) than on dorsolateral PFC. In view of the limited number of reports, the aim of this study was to independently replicate these findings using the same test paradigms. Healthy human subjects without a personal or family history of affective disorder were assessed using a computerized decision making/gambling task and the CANTAB ID/ED attentional set-shifting task under Trp-depleted (n=17; nine males and eight females) or control (n=15; seven males and eight females) conditions, in a double-blind, randomized, parallel-group design. There was no significant effect of RTD on set shifting, reversal learning, risk taking, impulsivity, or subjective mood. However, RTD significantly altered decision making such that depleted subjects chose the more likely of two possible outcomes significantly more often than controls. This is in direct contrast to the previous report that subjects chose the more likely outcome significantly less often following RTD. In the terminology of that report, our result may be interpreted as improvement in the quality of decision making following RTD. This contrast between studies highlights the variability in the cognitive effects of RTD between apparently similar groups of healthy subjects, and suggests the need for future RTD studies to control for a range of personality, family history, and genetic factors that may be associated with 5-HT function.