Tuesday, 19 December 2017

How resilient do we want our children and young people to be?

In a follow-up post, CRFR Associate PhD student Ariane Critchley provides her thoughts on resilience in response to the recent CRFR Seminar ‘The Troubling Concept of Resilience’ given by Eric Carlin and Emma Davidson.

As a social worker I was fortunate to meet a number of children and young people who I would describe as ‘resilient’. The work of Gilligan (2001) was highly influential on my practice and I considered ways in which I might foster resilience in the children I worked with, particularly those children to whom we owed corporate parenting responsibilities, by virtue of their status as ‘looked after’. In my view, it makes sense to talk of ‘resilience’ in the context of frontline social work, where practitioners encounter young people who have suffered 'extraordinary vulnerability’ (Brownlie, 2014: 195) through their experiences of early trauma, their separation from family of origin, and experiences of an imperfect care system with multiple moves of home and school. Should young people flourish through such extremes of early adversity, aren’t we right to think of them as resilient?

I would argue that in this context, ‘resilient’ is exactly how we should describe the ongoing achievement that individual children make by not only surviving serious challenges, but somehow finding a way to grow and to thrive. And the ‘somehow’ here is crucial. Acknowledging Carlin & Davidson’s challenge, that resilience risks that we ‘prioritise external and normative judgements about individuals’ characteristics and behaviours and the adversities they are deemed to have overcome’ (Ungar, 2005), I wish to suggest that resilience as properly understood is an ecological and ‘relational’ quality (Bondi et al. 2007). We can only be resilient to the challenges we face through interaction with the internal and external factors that make up our life world. For example, our health, the people who surround us, the socio-economic context we live in, and the resources to which we have access. Resilience then, is not a ‘characteristic’ so much as a process.

Which is why, as social workers, we feel we can contribute to an individual child or young person’s overall ‘resilience’. However, this does not translate into a policy aspiration that all children and young people should be resilient. Listening to the seminar last week, what struck me was the way that the universal application of concepts such as ‘resilience’ can be dangerous. When youth policy suggests through GIRFEC that all Scottish children should be encouraged to be resilient we risk a backwards misapplication, which seems to demand that children and young people do their best with the cards they are dealt rather than our society finding them a better hand.

In their study of the operationalisation of resilience in practice, Daniel et al. cautioned that, ‘policy documents are increasingly referring to the promotion of resilience as an aim – it is important that such documents set out their operational definitions (Daniel et al., 2009)’. Viewing resilience ‘as an aim’ introduces the great danger that this seminar warned of; we might expect that children and young people encountering significant difficulty should simply become more resilient, flipping resilience on its head in a way that demands individual overcoming, not structural equalising. If resilience is understood as a dynamic process that occurs in conditions of adversity, the aim of public policy should surely be to challenge and reduce the social and material conditions in which children can truly be described as ‘resilient’, to decrease the very circumstances in which resilience can flourish.

Ariane Critchley is a qualified social worker and researcher with a range of interests across social work and public health. Ariane is based at the University of Edinburgh where she is writing up her ESRC funded PhD on pre-birth child protection, examining the complexities of applying child protection processes to unborn children and the experiences of practitioners and of expectant families. Ariane has contributed to Scottish Government publications on maternity care and is currently working with Social Work Scotland on finding evidence of good practice in the implementation of self-directed support in Scotland.


Bondi, L., Davidson, J. and Smith, M. (2007), ‘Geography’s ‘Emotional Turn’’, Chapter 1 in Davidson, J. Bondi, L. and Smith, M. (2007), Emotional Geographies, Aldershot, Hampshire: Ashgate.

Brownlie, J. (2014), Ordinary Relationships. A Sociological Study of Emotions, Reflexivity and Culture, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.

 Daniel, B, Vincent, S, Farrell, E & Amey, F (2009), 'How is the concept of resilience operationalised in practice with vulnerable children?' International Journal of Child and Family Welfare, vol. 12 (1): 2-21.

Gilligan, R. (2001), Promoting resilience : a resource guide on working with children in the care system, London: British Agencies for Adoption & Fostering (BAAF).

Ungar, M. (2005) ‘Introduction: Resilience across cultures and contexts’, in Handbook for working with children and youth. London: Sage.

Monday, 18 December 2017

Resilience – continuing the conversation

Emma Davidson and Eric Carlin reflect on their recent CRFR Informal Seminar

It’s not a surprise that our seminar, ‘The Troubling Concept of Resilience’, received such interest. In recent years, fostering resilience has become a central dimension not only of early years, education and youth policy, but wider social policy and practice. The concept has, arguably, come from a sensible place: research that has sought to understand why, and in what circumstances, some individuals respond positively to adversity, and others do not. Our wariness, possibly scepticism, is about how resilience has been endorsed and appropriated by the state, distorting the policy focus away from the need for structural changes to reduce entrenched long-term and complex inequalities across populations and instead focussing on ‘steeling’ young people to bounce back from adversities that are assumed to be unavoidable.

 As we highlighted at the seminar, criticism of resilience projects has focused on their prioritisation of understanding and influencing individual behaviours, reducing risk factors for individuals and, in turn, neglecting social and structural explanations failure. Resilience based interventions are evolving, and a body of work is adopting a socio-ecological model which takes account of cultural contexts (see Hart et al 2016 or Ungar, M 2008). However, the psychoanalytical tradition from which resilience has developed dominates, with its focus on psychological dispositions and personality traits of individuals as ‘protective factors’. We are also troubled that our understandings of resilience are, to a great extent, being ‘imported’ from other social and cultural contexts, and we note the growth of a commercial industry of facilitators, consultants and trainers to support the policy drift towards resilience.

Of course, we are not suggesting that work on young people’s self-esteem, confidence and mental well-being is not important. However, we would argue that there is a need to stop and reflect – to think critically about how we are defining and operationalising resilience; to examine the evidence on resilience within our local contexts; to consider whether resilience is the outcome desired for your project; and to campaign for effective policies that can reduce unnecessary disadvantages.

Our final question is a bigger one – and that is whether the resilience framework is actually fit for purpose? Can a resilience framework transform fundamental inequalities marginalising young people, such as inequity in the education system, access to housing and welfare and precarious employment? Is this focus on ‘steeling’ young people - making them stronger and more resistant to adversity, and personally responsible for ‘success’ or ‘failure’ - socially just? This question is all the more potent in a climate of austerity, where many adversities facing young people cannot be considered a consequence of their own deficits.

These are questions, and conversations, we would like to continue. Follow this blog for ongoing debate and an announcement about a future seminar to continue the discussions.

Dr Emma Davidson is a Leverhulme Early Career Fellow in Sociology, based at the Centre for Research on Families and Relationships. Her ongoing research is exploring the social and community role of public libraries in Scotland (https://anewpage.org).

Dr Eric Carlin is a Teaching Fellow in the
Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics and is the Director of Scottish Health Action on Alcohol Problems (SHAAP) based at the Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh.

Hart, A. et al. (2016) ‘Uniting Resilience Research and Practice With an Inequalities Approach’ SAGE Open, 6(4): 1-13.

Ungar, M. (2008) ‘Resilience across Cultures’, The British Journal of Social Work, 38(2):218–235.

Thursday, 14 December 2017

Evaluating the Bookbug programme in Scotland

CRFR Research Fellow Dr Emma Davidson writes about some of the key findings from the recent Evaluation of Bookbug Bags and Bookbug Sessions, carried out by CRFR for the Scottish Book Trust.

A little yellow bug in red dungarees has become a familiar part of Scottish family life. It’s name - and you will likely know this if you have young children - is Bookbug, and it’s the mascot of Scottish Book Trust’s Early Years programme.

The Bookbug programme has been running in its current form since 2010. It entitles all babies and children in Scotland to four free Bookbug Bags as babies, toddlers, at nursery and in Primary 1. Bookbug Sessions - free song and rhyme groups where parents, carers and children can meet, cuddle, read, talk and sing together – are also available in libraries and increasingly other community settings … parent and toddler groups, shopping centres, and even high rise flats!

In the last five years the programme has grown considerably. In 2016-17 Scottish Book Trust and its local and national partners gifted 178,045 Bookbug Bags, delivered 23,670 Bookbug Sessions, and trained 3,543 practitioners. This is a programme that has considerable reach and continues to grow. But what impact has it had on families and on early years professionals in Scotland? Over the last two years, the Centre for Research on Families and Relationships has been evaluating the Bookbug programme to answer these questions.

The evaluation findings can be read in full here, however, in this blog we focus on our survey and interviews with the professionals gifting bags and delivering sessions. Below, we share some of their views on how Bookbug is contributing to early years development across Scotland.

The key message? Bookbug is a model that works.

Overwhelmingly, professionals participating in the evaluation described Bookbug as a high quality, easy to understand programme that had a positive impact on their role, and the people they worked with. Almost all (99%) agreed that Bookbug was beneficial to their organisation, and 73% told us it helped them reach disadvantaged families.

Why were professionals so supportive of Bookbug? One of the main reasons was Bookbug’s model of delivery. Its flexible approach goes at a family’s own pace to support them to develop their own reading practices. As this nursery practitioner told us:

“You don’t want to be in a position where you are treating parents as stupid or telling them what they don’t know. Role modelling means I’m not saying it directly, ‘this is how you read to your child’” (nursery, case study)

Professionals repeatedly referred to Bookbug Bags as a ‘tool’ that helped to enable and nurture quality family reading practices. So rather than focusing on the frequency of reading, or reading a book from start to finish, Bookbug allows practitioners to model dialogic reading practices, which acknowledge the importance of talk surrounding the book sharing experience.

Bookbug Sessions were also praised by professionals for offering multiple benefits to parents and children, including increased knowledge of songs and rhymes; improved speech and language; understanding of social cooperation; supporting social networks and friendship. Perhaps most important was the way in which Bookbug Sessions can build on the benefits provided by Bookbug Bags, by incorporating creativity, physical movement and play into families’ experiences of sharing books, songs and rhymes:

“Those who access the Bookbug Sessions gain huge benefits, but those who just receive the bags but do not attend any song and rhyme sessions have a much diminished benefit.” (early years, professional survey)

Quality gifting experiences and Bookbug sessions not only support high quality early literacy experiences, but by making book sharing active, lively and fun they can support the development of intrinsic reading motivation (that is seeing reading as satisfying and rewarding in itself).

But Bookbug is being delivered in a challenging context …

Our evaluation found that families are more likely to use the books and resources in the Bookbug Bags if those gifting the Bag spend time talking to them about the benefits of sharing books, looking at the contents and sharing a story. We also found that collaborations between sectors (health visitors, libraries, nurseries and third sector organisations) created opportunities for increasing the impact that Bookbug had. Wider role activities (for example, where library staff visited nurseries or community groups on a regular basis) were seen as positive, motivating ways of overcoming the barriers for families seen to be more vulnerable, or less able to access the benefits of Bookbug.

However, the evaluation also found that lack of capacity and resources was placing increasing pressure on staff, and their ability to prioritise Bookbug activities, and consequently on the amount of time they can allocate to quality and consistent gifting and session delivery. We also found that the Bookbug Programme is most effective at a local level where there is strong strategic commitment; visible and adequately resourced leadership through the Bookbug co-ordinator; and a supported, trained and motivated community of Bookbug professionals. Risks occur when the capacity of the Bookbug co-ordinator is under-resourced, or where Bookbug becomes overly dependent on individuals championing the programme.

The greatest issue therefore is not whether the Bookbug programme is capable of supporting Scotland’s families to read, talk, sing and cuddle more, but rather the impact that diminishing resources will have on councils’ ability to deliver the programme at a local level. The key issue moving forward is ensuring all local authorities recognise that Bookbug is making an important contribution to achieving their strategic priorities – and encouraging them to support practitioners in delivering quality gifting and sessions in their area.

Want to find out more?

The full evaluation report (and executive summary) is available from the Scottish Book Trust here.

If you are a practitioner and want to get involved in Bookbug training, email bookbug@scottishbooktrust.com

 Queries about the evaluation can be directed to the study manager, Dr Emma Davidson on 0131 651 1651 (e.c.davidson@ed.ac.uk).

Tuesday, 5 December 2017

‘Trust me, I know exactly how you feel’: Undisclosed thoughts on researching single mums when you are one

Amy Andrada, CRFR Associate PhD student, provides her thoughts on reflexivity[i] during fieldwork

 “Yup. Uh huh. Ok… Could you tell me more about that?” This is my side of the interview. I listen intensely, nod my head along, and utter some phrase along these lines. It seems rather monotonous, but it’s necessary. This does several things for me and the other person: it ensures active listening, encourages the conversation to continue, and keeps a flow and rhythm to our interaction. For a moment it builds a sense of trust between us, which is vital in my research. But it also serves as a much needed crutch, for me.

You see, there are times during the interview when I’m divided, between being the interviewer and talking to the other person as if they’re just that, another person. If I were to ask them about how many children they have and why, there’d be some dialogue, that would go smoothly. But I don’t ask these types of questions. I ask these mothers why they’re alone. I ask them how they manage being alone with their children. I ask them to tell me when being a single parent doesn’t work for them and how they deal with it.

Most of these interviews start the same - parents express an extreme amount of shame. And I know that all too well, because I’m a single parent. Though single parenthood is the focus of my research, being a single parent myself doesn’t remove how sensitive the subject matter is, or relieve any discomfort when asking people to describe how their children were abandoned by their other parent, their fears of failing as the parent present, and the incidents that lead to choosing their current lifestyle. Now, I didn’t know any of these women previously, but during the interviews I find that I know every one because I know myself. I know what it’s like to tell my child their other parent chose to leave, that we will manage as just us two, and that somehow I’ll make what was wrong into something right.

During these interviews, there’s tears, hand holding, pats on the back and tissues given. I do what any decent researcher would do, I ask if they want to stop. But I’m met with their determination and told discussing these things is helping. Although I’m asking for them, a part of me is asking for me too. Though I don’t live with shame anymore, it doesn’t mean I don’t relive it when asking these mothers to disclose their own. But there is hope as well. Women speak of agency, love, and choice. There are tears of joy among the pain. Though they’re telling me their stories, they’re actively living them. And I am honored to be the one sitting across from them, listening. Which is why I continue.

The more I spend time interviewing these women, the more I see reflections of myself: as I once was, as I am, and as I hope to be. To be on the peripheral, is something academic research doesn’t really pinpoint, but it’s there. It’s just undiscussed, hidden between the “uh huh’s” and “tell me more’s”. But trust me, I know exactly how you feel. I’m just not saying it. It’s your turn to talk. And it’s my job to listen.

Amy Andrada is a CRFR Associate PhD student, based in the Department of Sociology at the University of Edinburgh. Amy is researching the dynamics and developments of identity among mothers, in the context of in-group and out-group relations. Her research aims to explore the ways in which identity is shaped by parental, gender, and relationships statuses.

[i] Reflexivity is the process by which the researcher reflects upon the data collection and interpretation process

Thursday, 23 November 2017

Making rights real for children. What a welcome strapline for Scottish Government’s children’s policy and service reform.

As recognised in the recent seminar series on the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) in Scotland, Scotland has made considerable progress in realising children’s rights. But we still have much further to go: for example, in comprehensively recognising all of children’s human rights and in ensuring children and young people’s participation is meaningful, effective and sustainable. With the further commitments to recognising chidlren’s rights in September’s Programme of Government, it is timely to learn from elsewhere and particularly in ways that can offer new perspectives and opportunities for Scotland.

Professor Irene Rizzini has provided a seminar series in locations across Scotland, with the title Making Rights Real: Lessons from South America. The idea was to share the experiences from Latin and South America, in contexts of substantial child poverty (about two in five of every children, according to CEPAL 2013) and the highest rate of homicides for children and young people in the world (UNICEF 2014). The region is known for its world-leading examples of realising children’s rights – such as child budgeting and constitutional commitments to children’s rights. What can be learned from the social movements and innovative practices, and the ideas that underlie them?

In her seminars, Irene has described how Brazil’s early legal acceptance of the CRC in domestic law not only helped provide a legal framework for children’s rights but, more broadly, was part of a human rights discussion about inequalities and social justice for all. What opportunities would a serious consideration of full CRC incorporation bring to Scottish policy and practice? What challenges would a children’s rights approach have, to examples of discrimination against children such as their limited access to legal aid or barriers to sibling contact?

Through the seminars, Irene has shared the concepts of participatión ciudadana and protagonismo. The first emphasises young people’s social participation and engagement as citizens. The second emphasises young people’s place and role in society as proactive actors, having autonomy and a sense of agency. As Scotland increases in its commitment to children and young people’s participation, it is timely to challenge our own practices. For example, participation in Scotland can often be restricted to adults’ agendas – which can be normative, limited and unwelcoming of resistance and substantial challenge. We often separate out children and young people’s participation from other civic engagement and social movements, so that their engagement as citizens is limited.

Children in action as part of the project Children and the City; Methodologies for Listening to Children
Children in action as part of the project Children and the City; Methodologies for Listening to Children
Irene has shared her experiences with creative and participatory methodologies for listening to children. Over 400 children have been involved in such initiatives in school settings this year in Rio de Janeiro, generating reflections based on an ongoing project designed to exploring and understanding processes of participation, allowing the expression of a diversity of childhoods. In this study the children can choose a variety of ways of expressing themselves, from drawing, telling stories, poetry and so forth to talk about the contexts and the city they live in.

Children’s drawings inspired by the study about methodologies to listen to children (CIESPI/PUC-Rio University, Brasil, 2017)

Irene is returning to Brazil at the end of November, with collaborations continuing on children and young people’s participation with CRFR and collaborating institutions.

Professor Irene Rizzini is Professor at the Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (PUC-Rio) and Director of the International Center for Research and Policy on Childhood (CIESPI) at PUC-Rio. She is visiting Scotland thanks to the Leverhulme Trust Visiting Professorship.

Monday, 6 November 2017

Strength and power: autistic pupils and their parents’ experiences of support in secondary school

CRFR Associate PhD student Elizabeth Graham writes about her research exploring children with autism and their experiences of social and educational support in school.

In recent years there has been a significant driving force to teach and include autistic pupils in mainstream schools (Humphrey, 2008). Beardon (2017) asserts that it is autism and the environment that equates to the outcome. For example, surroundings can impact on the level of difficulties experienced. Therefore, the focus should be on adapting environments to better fit those with differences as opposed to encouraging autistic individuals to fit. What follows is a brief insight into autistic pupils and their parents’ experiences and expressions of strength and power when navigating an educational system that does not fit.

Strength can be defined as the emotional or mental qualities necessary in dealing with difficult or distressing situations. The young people in the study displayed great strength when dealing with distressing day to day experiences at school. Most described having no friends, being bullied and isolated, feeling anxious, unsupported, ‘horrible’, unwanted, ashamed and having their confidence knocked. Some also conveyed how they struggled with sensory issues such as noisy classrooms and how they felt claustrophobic in narrow busy corridors. Parents shared how their children would have to recover from the school day in various ways when home: crying, shutting down, and sitting under their covers to recharge. Despite this, some young people are still able to walk through the school doors most days and some even manage to uphold an excellent attendance record.

Parents also demonstrated much tenacity in fighting for their child’s experiences and intelligence to be understood and recognised, to take failing grades seriously, prompting for support to be put in place and some feeling like they have had to fight ‘every step of the way’. This includes requesting meetings with numerous people such as head teachers, deputy head teachers, pastoral heads, head of learning support. This is no mean feat when coupled with the impact of their child’s diagnosis, the level of care some provide at home, worrying about their child when at work, the heartache of hearing their children express suicidal thoughts and subsequent feelings of guilt and being a ‘failure as a parent’. They also have additional challenges of dealing with family members who don’t understand, feeling alone and unsure and sourcing external support for themselves and their children.

Power is usually thought of as the exercise of will of one social actor over others. The young people in this study exercised a degree of control by withholding information from their parents about some of their experiences at school (e.g. bullying) with the intention of stopping their parents intervening. They were also able to regulate their surroundings when home from school by shutting down and not interacting with their parents. In contrast, parents had the authority to make their children go to school, do homework, limit Xbox and Wi-Fi or reading time. Parents also had a limited ability to effect changes at school, for example, meetings, reversing changes that were implemented (e.g. having their child moved back to a seat they were comfortable with in a classroom) and ensuring their child sits exams that they know they are capable of. Whilst parents acknowledge the efforts of some teaching staff and that support for their children is restricted due to limited resources and budgets, they feel that in the education system as a whole, they and their children hold very little power. 

Elizabeth-Anne Graham is studying for her PhD at the Faculty of Social Science, University of Stirling.


Beardon, L. (2017) Autism and Asperger Syndrome in Adults, London: Sheldon Press.

Humphrey, N. (2008) ‘What Does ‘Inclusion’ Mean for Pupils on the Autistic Spectrum in Mainstream Schools?’ Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 12(1): 23-46.


Wednesday, 25 October 2017

Challenging settings where child sexual abuse can thrive

CRFR Associate Researcher Dr Sarah Nelson comments on the high-profile sexual abuse scandals being reported in the media and outlines what needs to change.

Sexual abuse scandals involving the leading American film producer Harvey Weinstein, British music colleges such as Chetham’s and Royal Northern College, and football clubs throughout the UK might seem to have little in common.

However a strong common thread runs through them all, giving us valuable clues to the types of settings and professional ethos where children and young people are especially vulnerable, where abuse can continue unchecked for many years. This, in turn, reveals where young people require especially active targeting for protection and prevention in future.

The film industry, the classical music industry and the football industry all share five common characteristics.

  • While they hold out the promise of fame and wealth, only a tiny percentage of their eager young students ever make it to the top of their profession.
  • In these cut-throat worlds, individual tutors, mentors and coaches have considerable power to determine or damage young people’s careers, and to select favoured protégés. Their special talents, mystique and alleged eccentricities have been used to ignore or excuse their behaviour.
  • The dream of success, nurtured and driven from early childhood, is so strong in the young people that there is great pressure for them and their hopeful parents to keep quiet, not to ‘rock the boat’ nor demand action when they suffer sadistic bullying or sexual crimes.
  • Since students are pitted against each other in a highly competitive, hierarchical atmosphere for the few top prizes, solidarity and common action against mistreatment are further discouraged.
  • The organisations, professions and clubs have kudos, and there is strong impetus to close ranks to maintain their reputations.

Outspoken critic

Dr Ian Pace, music lecturer at London’s City University and himself a former pupil of Chetham’s, has written and spoken widely in identifying all these dangers in the classical music industry, and in demanding a public inquiry into their practice along with future reforms. His insights are valuable for academics and practitioners alike in the effort to reduce childhood sexual abuse – not just in that profession, but in others with a similar ethos.

Pace has said: “It is well known within the music world that there are many other such stories involving a variety of individuals in positions of power at various music schools….many (victims) are extremely afraid to come forward with their stories, in a close-knit world of classical music in which careers are dependent upon the whims of a few powerful individuals.

“Musical institutions are often found to have dismissed allegations (and sometimes dismissed or threatened allegers) prioritising their own reputations, a pattern which continues following convictions. These institutions rarely reach out to the victims, who are as much a part of their legacy as the successful musicians who adorn their publicity materials.

“The perpetrators are also frequently found to be arrogant, narcissistic and bullying individuals convinced of their own superiority to other human beings… I believe that in this context, sexual abuse is often an extension of more widespread mistreatment and psychological abuse used as a strategy for domination. But all of this is frequently excused on account of the mystical aura of these musicians' artistry.”

Sexism also common factor

Rampant sexism and misogyny have been powerful elements in the unfolding picture of a tarnished film industry, as allegations against Weinstein and other stars continue to grow. That this scandal and the music college scandals have chiefly involved female victims, in contrast to football clubs’ mainly male victims, might appear to undermine their commonalities. However, they have actually shared much in terms of sexual attitudes and ethos. These have also increased the risks of abuse and silencing.

Research with male survivors (see for example Lisak, 1995, Nelson, 2016) reveals that their perpetrators often displayed similar traditional, aggressive ‘macho’ attitudes and beliefs to the abusers of women. They promoted these values to victims, belittled them as weak and less than “real men”; and silenced them through fear of humiliation by other men if they spoke out: most of all in traditionalist male environments, such as professional football.

What needs to change?

While none of the three professions discussed can avoid a competitive element to their work, nor can they enable substantially more young people to reach top positions, their experience and vulnerability suggests an urgent need to make some significant changes. These would recognise the special difficulties inherent in ‘dream of success professions’ about speaking out, and in challenging powerful individual mentors. Do changes need to be enforced, rather than voluntary?

Amongst possibilities which require consideration are

  • Collaborative discussion, heart-searching and joint planning for improvement among such professions, through mutual recognition of the common factors which make them dangerous.
  • Creation of a caring and protective environment for all young people in each institution or club, where child protection, bystander education and an ethos which challenges sexist attitudes and behaviour is taken seriously in the training and career development of all staff. This will include safe practice in one-to-one teaching and mentoring.
  • The provision of genuinely confidential and protected whistleblowing arrangements for staff and volunteers who witness abuse and ill-treatment, along with mandatory reporting for the most senior levels of staff and administrators.
  • The provision of genuinely confidential and protected means of reporting abuse and ill-treatment for all children and young people, which is clearly re-advertised to them and their parents at all stages of their training.


https://www.city.ac.uk/people/academics/ian-pace; https://ianpace.wordpress.com/: Both contain many examples of his writings against abuse in music, including cases of convicted abusers in these settings.

Lisak, D. (1995) ‘Integrating a critique of gender in the treatment of male survivors of childhood abuse’, Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 32(2), 258-269.

Nelson, S. (2016) Tackling Child Sexual Abuse: Radical approaches to prevention, protection and support, Bristol: Policy Press: especially chs. 8&9.