What next for children's services? Can policy at a local or national level have any significant impact on the outcomes for children and their families?

In England at both strategic and operational levels, policy-makers in the public sector have undertaken considerable work on implementing the findings of the Every Child Matters report and subsequently through the Children's Act 2004. Legislation has resulted in many local authorities seeking to implement more holistic approaches to the delivery of children's services. At a strategic level this is demonstrated by the creation of integrated directorate structures providing for a range of services, from education to children's social care. Such services were generally under the management of the Director of Children's Services, holding statutory responsibilities for the delivery of services formally divided into the three sectors of education, health and social services. At a national level, more fundamental policy developments have sought to establish a framework through which policy-makers can address the underlying causes of deprivation, vulnerability and inequality. The Child Poverty Act, 2010, which gained Royal Assent in 2010, provides for a clear intention to reduce the number of children in poverty, acknowledging that ‘the best way to eradicate child poverty is to address the causes of poverty, rather than only treat the symptoms’. However, whilst the policy objectives of both pieces of legislation hold positive aspirations for children and young people, a change of policy direction through a change of government in May 2010 seems to be in direct contrast to the intended focus of these aims. This paper explores the impact of new government policy on the future direction of children's services both at the national and local levels. At the national level, we question the ability of the government to deliver the aspirations of the Child Poverty Act, 2010, given the broad range of influences and factors that can determine the circumstances in which a child may experience poverty. We argue that poverty is not simply an issue of the pressure of financial deprivation, but that economic recession and cuts in government spending will further increase the number of children living in poverty.

Operational active fire mapping and burnt area identification applicable to Mexican Nature Protection Areas using MODIS and NOAA-AVHRR direct readout data

Since 1999, the National Commission for the Knowledge and Use of the Biodiversity (CONABIO) in Mexico has been developing and managing the “Operational program for the detection of hot-spots using remote sensing techniques”. This program uses images from the MODerate resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) onboard the Terra and Aqua satellites and from the Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA-AVHRR), which are operationally received through the Direct Readout station (DR) at CONABIO. This allows the near-real time monitoring of fire events in Mexico and Central America. In addition to the detection of active fires, the location of hot spots are classified with respect to vegetation types, accessibility, and risk to Nature Protection Areas (NPA). Besides the fast detection of fires, further analysis is necessary due to the considerable effects of forest fires on biodiversity and human life. This fire impact assessment is crucial to support the needs of resource managers and policy makers for adequate fire recovery and restoration actions. CONABIO attempts to meet these requirements, providing post-fire assessment products as part of the management system in particular for satellite-based burnt area mapping. This paper provides an overview of the main components of the operational system and will present an outlook to future activities and system improvements, especially the development of a burnt area product. A special focus will also be placed on the fire occurrence within NPAs of Mexico

Faith and protection: the construction of hope by parents of children with leukemia and their oncologists

Background. Oncologists are criticized for fostering unrealistic hope in patients and families, but criticisms reflect a perspective that is oversimplified and “expert” guidance that is ambiguous or impractical. Our aim was to understand how pediatric oncologists manage parents' hope in practice and to evaluate how they address parents' needs. Methods. Participants were 53 parents and 12 oncologists whom they consulted across six U.K. centers. We audio recorded consultations approximately 1–2, 6, and 12 months after diagnosis. Parents were interviewed after each consultation to elicit their perspectives on the consultation and clinical relationship. Transcripts of consultations and interviews were analyzed qualitatively. Results. Parents needed hope in order to function effectively in the face of despair, and all wanted the oncologists to help them be hopeful. Most parents focused hope on the short term. They therefore needed oncologists to be authoritative in taking responsibility for the child's long-term survival while cushioning parents from information about longer-term uncertainties and being positive in providing information about short-term progress. A few parents who could not fully trust their oncologist were unable to hope. Conclusion. Oncologists' pivotal role in sustaining hope was one that parents gave them. Most parents' “faith” in the oncologist allowed them to set aside, rather than deny, their fears about survival while investing their hopes in short-term milestones. Oncologists' behavior generally matched parents' needs, contradicting common criticisms of oncologists. Nevertheless, oncologists need to identify and address the difficulty that some parents have in fully trusting the oncologist and, consequently, being hopeful.