Why multiples matter: Reconceptualising the population referred to child and family social workers

Building on a body of previous research by the author and colleagues in relation to multiple adverse childhood experiences (MACE), this paper addresses the question of ‘why multiples matter’ in relation to issues of cumulative adversity. Illustrative evidence is drawn from three research domains, epidemiology, multiple services use and child maltreatment to demonstrate the collective weight of evidence to suggest a targeting of those children and families experiencing multiple adversities to diminish the effects of such adversities realised across the life-course. Whilst the history of previous largely unsuccessful attempts to widen the range of children prioritised for intervention by child and family social workers might lead to pessimism in relation to their ability to respond to a MACE informed public health agenda, there are clear possibilities for developing agency structures, assessment tools and social work practices directed toward meeting the needs of those sub populations already prioritised by social workers: namely Children in Need, Children in need of Protection and Looked after Children.

Interbirth interval is associated with childhood type 1 diabetes risk

Short interbirth interval has been associated with maternal complications and childhood autism and leukemia, possibly due to deficiencies in maternal micronutrients at conception or increased exposure to sibling infections. A possible association between interbirth interval and subsequent risk of childhood type 1 diabetes has not been investigated. A secondary analysis of 14 published observational studies of perinatal risk factors for type 1 diabetes was conducted. Risk estimates of diabetes by category of interbirth interval were calculated for each study. Random effects models were used to calculate pooled odds ratios (ORs) and investigate heterogeneity between studies. Overall, 2,787 children with type 1 diabetes were included. There was a reduction in the risk of childhood type 1 diabetes in children born to mothers after interbirth intervals <3 years compared with longer interbirth intervals (OR 0.82 [95% CI 0.72-0.93]). Adjustments for various potential confounders little altered this estimate. In conclusion, there was evidence of a 20% reduction in the risk of childhood diabetes in children born to mothers after interbirth intervals <3 years.