CRFR Blog

Walking amongst Canada’s knowledge mobilizers: lessons and comparisons from a visit to York University Toronto

2012-01-12T09:10:00.003Z

Sarah Morton Co-Director (Knowledge Exchange) reflects on a recent visit to Canada

I was fortunate enough for the ESRC to fund me for a visit to York University, Toronto Canada as part of my PhD studentship looking at how we assess the impact of research. The visit also chimed with my role as Co-Director (Knowledge Exchange) at the Centre for Research on Families and Relationships. This blog reflects on some of by observations about the ways we do KE or KMb on opposite sides of the pond.

David Phipps, Director, Research Services & Knowledge Exchange at York was a wonderful host, who set up many meetings and exchanges with like-minded individuals and made me feel very welcome.

So the language is immediately different. No-one in my networks in the UK uses the term Knowledge Mobilization – and the ‘z’ makes it appear very North American to us. I also enjoyed the term ‘transition into lunch’ used at a conference! But overall there was more to unite than divide the respective communities in Scotland (UK) and Toronto. CRFR’s model of doing KE was still an exemplar, and there was lots of interest in my work on increasing and assessing research impact.

Day one I gave a presentation at the Ontario KMb community of practice – a wonderful way to make connections and set up further meetings. What interested me about the CoP was that it was a real mix of university-based and public/community based KE practitioners (in health, housing, schools), who all talked the same language around knowledge use. The CoP is large – over 100 members, so 40 can turn up to a meeting at any time, and a fairly high level, knowledgeable discussion of KE issues is possible in that forum. I struggle to think of an equivalent here, although we hope to set up a new KE network from CRFR in the Spring.

David Phipps’ Knowledge Mobilization Unit at York is part of the KE and Commercialisation department, but with a specific decision to make the KMb in social sciences distinctive, especially in terms of engagement with the local community. There are two main members of staff in the unit: Michael Johnny, and Krista Jonson, assisted by project staff, and graduate students at different times.What I found distinctive about their approach compared to my experience in the UK was:

A university-wide approach to Knowledge Mobilization

Having a help desk at events where community members can ask for assistance from the university – I can’t imagine some universities here offering such a service!

Running plain language training and then producing briefings of peer-reviewed research across the university

KM in the AM – breakfast community meetings

Annual KMb Expo – where community groups engage with the unit

Extensive use of social media: blog and twitter @researchimpact (although some groups in the UK are catching up with this and it has inspired me to do more @crfrtweets)

David and I met with some civil servants in the Ontario Provincial Government from across departments to have a fairly informal chat about KMb and government. They have an emerging KMb network within government with some dedicated resources, not unlike the KE unit within the Scottish Government. Many of the issues of trying to work across departments, timing and accessibility of research, and how to show the importance of research in creating impact resonated with concerns in Scotland and the UK.

Other meetings with students in Ben Levin’s department in OISE, with the Children’s Welfare Organisations and with other KE professionals in local authority, water board (!) and women’s health added to a very rich and rewarding visit. I even had dinner with my colleague from Edinburgh Sandra Nutley – a rare opportunity to catch up outwith work!

David and I have continued our collaboration, with David giving a keynote presentation at our 10th anniversary National Conference 'Influencing Society: the impact of social research'; us presenting some joint work on the role of knowledge brokers at the London Conference ‘Bridging the Gap between research, policy and practice’ in December 2011, and working on a joint paper on the same topic. I hope to return to Toronto in 2012, to present my work on assessing research impact and continue this fruitful collaboration.

Sarah Morton

Tacking Child Poverty in Scotland

2012-01-11T14:48:00.003Z

The Campaign to End Child Poverty has today published new figures that provide a child poverty map of the whole of the UK, which identifies pockets of deprivation in Scotland. CRFR Co-Director, Kay Tisdall reflects on Scotland's record:

Scotland has a lengthy history of child poverty, compared to other parts of the UK and Europe more generally. This is fundamentally about inequality, about government policies, local and global economies, and not individual families' decisions -- the comparative research underlines this time and time again.

Individual decision do matter but too often there is an undue emphasis on supply (i.e. are individuals willing and ready to work) and to little, particularly in these times of recession, on demand (i.e. are there viable jobs to take up?). The welfare reform underway is going to make it even harder to 'make work pay' for many families.

We know the potential negative outcomes associated with children living in poverty, particularly when it is persistent and when associated with other risks. When we talk about individual family decisions, we need to remember that this means adult and parental decisions -- not children making decisions about income and employment. Children are in poverty through no decisions of their own, yet the impact on them is substantial. And I suggest it important to remember that, whether one thinks in terms of 1 in 5 or 1 in 10 children, that these numbers are very troubling.

Numbers may potentially go down for child poverty in Scotland. One hopes that the Scottish Government investment to date will have longer term effects, and that children's services will continue to have some protection despite general cutbacks. It is possible that, with relative measures of poverty, that as relative living standards go down so will poverty statistics -- but that is why one also needs to consider absolute measures of poverty. But with welfare reform and the recession, there are serious concerns about what will happen with child poverty in the short and medium term. One would anticipate that it will be very difficult to get down to one in 10 children without a very concerted effort at all levels of government.

This is where the Rights of Children and Young People Bill may help the Scottish Government, and all of us, keep centered on children's rights - which includes an adequate standard of living. If the Bill goes through, it should mean that we regularly 'proof' government policy to recognise its importance for children's lives - and policy is made with attention to their well-being.

New GUS findings

2011-06-10T12:21:00.000+01:00

New findings from the Growing Up in Scotland study were published this week by the Scottish Government. Four new reports, using data from the first five years of GUS provide further evidence about the importance of children's early experiences in determining later outcomes.

Key findings:

* Parents most in need are those who are least likely to use services.

* Differences in cognitive ability between children from more and less advantaged groups found at age 3 persist at age 5.

* Over two in five children experience key events in their early life which can lead to negative child outcomes.

* Day-to-day parenting can influence child health.

Link to Press Release.

Links to the Research Summaries:

Parental service use and informal networks in the early years

Changes in child cognitive ability in the pre-school years

Parenting and children's health

Change in early childhood and the impact of significant events

Listen to the presentations from our Annual Conference held in Glasgow on

19th May:

http://www.crfr.ac.uk/gus/events.html

Read Paul Bradshaw's blog on the value of longitudinal research for

evidence-based policy:

http://natcenblog.blogspot.com/

For further information about GUS please visit our website:

http://www.growingupinscotland.org.uk

For specific enquiries, please contact Lesley Kelly, GUS Dissemination

Officer on lesley.kelly@ed.ac.uk.

Making work-life balance work for all

2011-05-22T16:42:00.010+01:00

It is inspiring and entertaining to hear men like Nigel Marsh address the issues of work-life balance as he does in his TED talk " How to make work-life balance work" broadcast this February. He points to the importance of day to day relationships and making small changes in how we spend our time with loved ones as the key to changing work-life balance. But the research evidence reminds us that not everybody’s lives allow the degree of power and control he can take for granted. CRFR's work on work-life balance for people on low incomes paints a picture of rather different, probably more difficult and certainly more restricted choices.

I welcome Nigel Marsh’s assertion that commercial companies should not be in charge of addressing work-life balance because they are designed to “get as much out of you as they can”. International comparisons suggests that the statutory requirements set by the state can make significant differences to the likelihood of people taking leave to spend time with their family. In our study of low-waged mothers working in the food retail sector (Working and Caring), work-life balance was achieved through choosing to work part time, accepting the struggle of reduced income, and through mutual support amongst women workers who helped each other out by swapping shifts in times of crisis, like a child being ill. Those with somewhat better paid albeit still low income jobs with supervisory responsibility found these kinds of crises much harder to deal with – they were the ones relying on the company’s work-life balance policies for support.

Nigel emphasises his role as a father but Lynn Jamieson reflected that work-life balance and making time for friends and family is an issue for all workers not just for those with children. In a briefing (Work-Life Balance Across the Lifecourse RB21 2005) based on our 2004 international conference on this topic, she also concluded that inequalities of gender, class, and ethnicity affect ways in which work-life issues will be experienced, and the ability to balance the demands of work with other needs. It is great to hear well-paid men like Nigel Marsh tackle the issues, but his experiences and recommendations may not translate to people in different circumstances.

In the end how we experience work-life balance is dependent on a mixture of state polices, individual circumstances and cultural factors. Our individual place in relation to these will be defined by how we relate to these norms and assumptions particularly in relation to gender roles and how men and women play their part in household, family and friendship responsibilities.

Written by Sarah Morton and Lynn Jamieson based on CRFR research:

Work Life Balance in Scottish Food Retail Companies full report (pdf)

Working and Caring Summary (pdf)

Work Life Balance Across the Lifecourse Research Briefing 21 2005 (pdf)

Caringscapes Research Briefing 13 2004 (pdf)

Image (c) iwishiwillican.com

The politics of happiness

2011-03-24T12:04:00.005Z

As a PhD student seeking to understand subjective wellbeing[1], I am, of course, pleased that British politicians are beginning to take happiness seriously, but I can’t help be a little worried.

We increasingly agree that measuring happiness is a subjective exercise.

We seek more money, education, health, democracy, not as ends in themselves but as means to make people’s experiences of life more positive. Seeking to understand what actually makes people’s experiences of life more positive is therefore a vital aim of social policy.

In the light of this, and within the limits of such a short blog, my concerns with the current initiative in the UK are threefold:

Asking people how happy they are is not enough

The proposal to measure people’s perceptions of their own wellbeing recommends a series of detailed questions, based on 0-10 scales, to be integrated into national ONS surveys (Dolan et al. (2011). Some of these questions are broad, like” overall, how satisfied are you with your life nowadays?”, and some specific, either to a specific concept like, “overall, to what extent do you think that the things that you do in your life are worthwhile?” or to a specific domain for example “how satisfied are you with your financial situation?” However I have a number of concerns about this approach.

Firstly do we know what we are measuring with broad questions? Asking questions using words like happy or satisfied without understanding what people think about when they make these assessments, make it impossible to know what could be done to increase subjective wellbeing.

Are we asking the right questions? How do we know that “worthwhileness” is more important to people in Britain than “meaning” or “control” or “connectedness” - other psychological needs that Dolan et al (ibid) identify?

ONS is currently asking a set of open questions about the meaning of wellbeing on its website and at a variety of events around the country . I would like to think that they will discover what wellbeing means for the Great British public and use this understanding to inform the further questions that they ask. However, the cynic in me suspects that these questions have already been decided as stated in the report above, and the realist suggests that relying on pro-active web responses and attendance at events is not likely to elicit responses truly representative of British society.

Money doesn’t necessarily buy happiness, unless you don’t have any

There is extensive evidence to suggest that, after basic needs are met, money (either personal wealth or GDP) is not always one of the key determinants of happiness (Lane 2000; NEF 2009).

However, the phrase “after basic needs are met” is important in this sentence.

We may disagree about what basic needs are, but being able to satisfy these basic needs is likely to improve your subjective wellbeing. This is possibly why many people feel angry when they see the Westminster Government promoting a happiness agenda with one hand and with the other cutting budgets that deprive people of the resources that they need to meet their basic needs.

Happiness is about more than the individual.

Rarely does happiness exist in isolation. Just as my happiness is related to other aspects of my life, it is also related to other people in my life – other people make me happy and my happiness if affected by the happiness of those around me, particularly people that I care about. Similarly, comparison with other people is known to have an impact upon subjective wellbeing.

The ONS recognises this by looking at individual happiness and national happiness. However, in order to genuinely understand subjective wellbeing we need to take this relational aspect of happiness seriously at other levels such as family, friendship groups and community. We need to know how people think about themselves in relation to the other people in their lives and what impact this has on their wellbeing and the complex ways that these issues interplay with other, sometimes competing, important aspects of our lives.

My PhD seeks to answer some of these questions relating to the meaning of subjective wellbeing, but in a very different culture. Next week I head off to Laos, a country characterised by (among many other things) ethnic diversity, Buddhism and communism, where I’ll being doing ethnographic research for the next 15 months.

I’ll be blogging on my quest to understand happiness in Laos. I would be very happy if you would like to follow my adventures.

Christina McMellon

[1] In this piece I use the terms ‘subjective wellbeing’ and ‘happiness’ interchangeably. This could be, and has been, endlessly debated, the terminology related to fields such as positive psychology, happiness studies and philosophy have been repeatedly problematised and discussed, but there is not enough space to get into that debate in the posts.

Improving access to justice for victims of domestic abuse

2011-01-24T15:40:00.002Z

Rhoda Grant MSP found broad support for the Domestic Abuse (Scotland) Bill[1] introduced earlier this year, and although some areas proved to be contentious last Wednesday as it passed the first stage of parliament scrutiny. The bill aims to increase domestic abuse victims’ access to justice and enable police and prosecutors to provide a better response to breached civil protections orders.

MSPs welcomed the proposed change to shift responsibility from the victim to the police to take action when a violent partner breaches a civil protection order. They also welcomed the proposal that would remove the existing ‘course of conduct’ requirement so that a non-harassment order can be granted when evidence of one incident of harassing behaviour is provided rather than evidence of at least two separate incidents. These provisions certainly seem a step forward in improving victims’ access to justice. It makes sense that it is the police and prosecutors responsibility to respond to perpetrators who breach civil protection orders not the responsibility of victims. It also makes sense that victims should not have to suffer repeated harassment before perpetrators are held accountable of their behaviour. It is even more pertinent when we consider that much of domestic abuse takes place behind closed doors out with the gaze of police or other professionals, meaning it can be difficult for victims to provide evidence of a pattern of harassment.

The more contentious elements of the bill relate to how access to civil protection orders should financed and how domestic abuse is defined in the bill. As it stands, victims are responsible for paying legal costs when applying for civil protection orders unless they qualify for Legal Aid. So some victims have to pay for their own protection against domestic abuse. Provisions in the bill aim to redress this by providing Legal Aid without means testing to victims applying for civil protection orders. Meaning victims would have equal access to justice regardless of their financial background and more fundamentally victims of domestic abuse would no longer have to pay for their own safety and protection – surely a step in the right direction? Unfortunately the debate revealed it is not so straightforward. Concerns were raised about the potential cost to the public purse as well as whether such a provision would contravene a defender’s human rights.[2] Both issues are no doubt important and will receive further scrutiny by the Justice Committee. Let’s hope a solution can be reached that both satisfies these concerns and also remedies the current situation where victims of domestic abuse have to pay for their own safety and protection.

Fiona Morrison, PhD student, CRFR
http://www.crfr.ac.uk/crfrphdstudents.html#fm

[1] http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/s3/bills/45-DomesticAbuse/index.htm

[2] The bill does not seek to extend non-means testing to Legal Aid to defenders. There are concerns that such a provision would contravene Article 6(1) of the ECHR.

Child Poverty - What about welfare benefits and making work pay?

2011-01-18T10:10:00.005Z

The key elements of welfare benefits and making work pay appear to be off the table in the discussion about how to eradicate child poverty in the UK. The Scottish Government in its recent consultation paper Tackling Child Poverty in Scotland: A Discussion Paper stated that these were reserved measures and outwith the scope of the Scottish Government. The UK Coalition Government's consultation to inform its child poverty strategy states that 'tackling poverty is not about moving people above an arbitrary income line'.

While the evidence shows that the causes of poverty and disadvantage for people are complex, we know that money does make a difference. We know that low incomes families in Scotland believe that government has a role in addressing low income but have mixed views over the success of government intervention and those of its agents (1). Parents living in deprived areas were more likely than other parents to report low access to services like childcare, health and leisure facilities. Parents living in deprived areas and/or in social housing were also most likely to be dissatisfied with their local facilities (1,2).

Dealing with debt, issues related to long-term unemployment and ensuring access to good services and advice will have a positive effect on families with children. Mothers on low incomes combining paid work and caring for their families sometimes continue working even though it doesn’t pay, suggesting that work itself is important for them. They identify support for the costs of childcare as important but not always sufficient and also suggest that governments need to tackle the problem of making work pay (3).

It is essential that discussion of social security and income are put back on the table for this debate.

(1) CRFR, McKendrick J, Cunningham-Burley S and Backett-Milburn K (2003) Life in low
income families in Scotland: Research report. Edinburgh: Scottish Executive.
(2)Growing Up in Scotland Topic Research Findings No.3/2009 ‘Parenting in
the Neighbourhood Context’ Edinburgh: Scottish Government.
(3) Backet- Milburn K, S Cunningham-Burley and D Kemmer (2001) Caring and providing: Lone
and partnered working mothers in Scotland. Edinburgh: Family Policy Studies Centre and
Joseph Rowntree Foundation.

To see the full CRFR response to Tackling Child Poverty in Scotland: A Discussion Paper see http://www.crfr.ac.uk/reports/Tackling%20child%20poverty.pdf

Poverty or parenting- where should the money go?

2010-12-21T14:59:00.005Z

In the run-up to Christmas, when many parents are struggling to find the money to fulfil their Santa duties, a plethora of research findings fuelling the ‘poverty versus parenting’ debate have been published. Is this dichotomy missing the point?

Frank Field, former director of the Child Poverty Action Group and Labour MP for Birkenhead since 1979, thinks focusing on supporting parenting will bring the best outcomes for children. In his Coalition Government commissioned report ‘The Foundation Years: Preventing Poor children Becoming Poor Adults’ published on Dec 3 he set out recommendations for a new strategy to meet the Government’s target of abolishing child poverty.

His argument states that raising incomes will not produce the transforming effects needed to counteract child poverty – ‘it is family background, parental education, good parenting and the opportunities for learning and development in the crucial early years that together matter more to children than money, in determining whether their potential is realised in adult life.’

Other studies, published the last week suggest that family income does have significant role to play in determining outcomes for children.

Child inequality data in 24 developed countries show that income poverty has the greatest impact on child inequality in the UK, according to UNICEF’s report card of UK progress .

Children’s progress during their first two years at school is still largely driven by their parents’ social class, according to findings from the Millennium Cohort Study .

Although the total number of children living in poverty has fallen, the number of children living in poverty in working UK households has increased to 2.1 million or 58% of the total, according to the Joseph Rowntree Foundation’s Monitoring Poverty and Social Exclusion’ report .

CRFR research shows that both parenting and income make a difference for children. Life in Low Income Families shows that factors associated with poverty can add up to make it tough for families. The Growing Up in Scotland study shows that, ‘the impact of poverty appears to be evident through the association with other family disadvantages, rather than with low income per se, and the presence and accumulation of these disadvantages can have negative impacts for young children’.

Findings from the Growing Up in Scotland study (GUS) suggest that parenting is important, but cannot fully counteract the impact of low income. Researchers from the Scottish Centre for Social Research have found that activities like reading and singing with children from an early age (the ‘home learning environment’) do have an influence on children’s cognitive development and that they can moderate – though by no means eradicate the effect of socio-demographic disadvantage.

A further report from GUS which considers the impact of ‘persistent poverty’ on children suggests that ‘the effects of living in poverty are complex and not necessarily captured by indicators of low income.’

So it seems that there’s just no escaping the fact that income matters hugely, although it is not the whole story. Summed up by Polly Toynbee in the Guardian she says ‘Of course love and intellectual stimulation matter most, but the overwhelming evidence across countries and over any length of time, is that money is the most reliable predictor of a child’s fate. Measure it how you will, families on low incomes do worse.’

So it parenting or poverty more important? Well both are, and the question misses the point. It is the mix that matters.

Lesley Kelly
GUS Dissemination Officer

(Note-the Scottish Government is currently seeking views to inform the development of its Child Poverty Strategy for Scotland, which will set out its plans for doing all within its powers to tackle child poverty in Scotland in line with the Child Poverty Act 2010. See ‘Tackling Child Poverty in Scotland: A Discussion Paper )

Sources:

The Foundation year: preventing poor children from becoming poor adults The report of the Independent Review on Poverty and Life Chance

Frank Field MP

Institute of Education Press Release 07/12/10

‘Improving parenting does not level playing field’

UNICEF Press Release 06/23/20

UNICEF’s report card of UK progress

JRF Press Release 06/12/10

‘In-work child poverty highest on record’

http://www.jrf.org.uk/media-centre/monitoring-poverty-2010

Growing Up in Scotland (GUS) Research Findings No 5/2009 ‘The impact of children’s early activities on cognitive development.’

Growing Up in Scotland (GUS) Research Findings No 1/2010 ‘The circumstances of persistently poor children.’

New Pack for staff who work with people with learning difficulties and dementia

2010-12-06T09:55:00.002Z

'Supporting Derek' ,launched this week, is based on CRFR research and is published by Joseph Rowntree Foundation. It will be indispensible to care staff and training officers from learning difficulty and dementia settings, as well as community, housing and health care staff. The pack, which includes a DVD and training materials, covers many of the key issues related to diagnosing and responding to dementia in people with learning difficulties.
The short drama included on the DVD (acted by people with a learning difficulty) gives a powerful insight into the reality of dementia and how it might feel to the individual affected.
See excellent blog the topic on JRF website

Marriage and parenting programmes - CRFR contributes to Scottish parliament preventative spending inquiry

2010-11-17T11:11:00.002Z

The Scottish Parliament's Finance Committee is currently conducting an inquiry into preventative spending. During the evidence session last week the merits of parenting programmes and how family structure influences outcomes for children were discussed. CRFR submitted the following evidence to the committee to help them with their deliberations.

"I would like to bring some relevant research to the attention of the Finance Committee in relation to evidence given on 9 Nov to the the Inquiry into Preventative Spending. George Hosking gave evidence about the outcomes for children from different types of families. Our research paints a vastly different picture for families and children in Scotland.

Our research shows that many factors contribute to children's well being. For example, mother's mental health and repeated changes in living arrangements are much more likely to have a detrimental effect on children than the structure of the family. For those on lower incomes, the neighbourhood, employment, support services and absence of debt help ensure good outcomes for children.
The evidence shows that getting on well together is most important. The quality of family relationships is a more fundamental aspect of children and young people's well being than change, family structure or even quantity of time spent together.
We know that it is important to support families who need help. Parenting programmes may work for some families, in some situations, some of the time. Parenting programmes only provides one type of support whereas what families need is a range of services provided in their communities. Living in child friendly communities and having a reasonable level of resources are also very important to outcomes for children.

Please see the short booklet 'Why Relationships Matter: reserach evidence form CRFR with further details about these issues and the research on which this is based. Please feel free to contact us for further information and/or discussion."

New partnership aims to improve services for Scotland’s families

2010-10-28T10:11:00.003+01:00

Families across Scotland can look forward to support services that are more in tune with their needs thanks to a new partnership called About Families launched today at the Scottish Parliament.

About Families is a joint venture between the Centre for Research on Families and Relationships, Capability Scotland and Parenting Across Scotland.

Funded by the National Lottery, through the Big Lottery Fund, the initiative aims to ensure that the needs and aspirations of Scotland's parents, including those with disabled children, are taken into account in the development of new and existing services for families.

About Families works by combining existing academic research and evidence on a range of family related topics with the experiences of parents and the professionals who work with them. The team analyses the information and puts it together into user friendly, accessible report which can then be used by public and voluntary sector agencies to inform their future service development.

At the launch event About Families will unveil the details of its first report: 'Parenting teenagers: relationships and behaviour' which looks at the challenges faced by the parents of teenagers who, according to the information gathered, often struggle and feel isolated particularly around relationship and behaviour issues.

New Publication: Providing Good Care at Night for Older People

2010-10-25T13:01:00.003+01:00

Providing Good Care at Night for Older People
Practical Approaches for Use in Nursing and Care Homes
Diana Kerr and Heather Wilkinson

The experiences and needs of residents and patients in nursing and care homes are very different at night, and this is particularly true for those with dementia. Yet nursing and care homes are not always inspected with the same rigour at night as they are during the day, and night staff do not always receive the same levels of training, resources and supervision as day staff.
This book provides night staff, their managers and anyone else with an interest in care homes during the night with the information, knowledge and practical skills they need to deliver positive and appropriate care at night. The authors look at all of the issues that are particularly pertinent in caring for older people at night, including nutrition and hydration, continence, challenging behaviour, medication, night time checking, pain management and end of life care. They also look at the impact that working at night has on care staff, and offer practical suggestions to help them to safeguard their own health. The final chapter provides a set of night time care guidelines for inspectors that can also be used by managers to evaluate night time practices in their homes.
This book is essential reading for night staff and their managers and employers, as well as inspectors of services, policy makers, and anyone else with an interest in the provision of care for older people.
To order go to http://www.jkp.com/catalogue/book/9781849050647

EHRC ASKS 'HOW FAIR IS BRITAIN'?

2010-10-19T10:25:00.001+01:00

The UK Equality and Human Rights Commission found in their recent report that while many societal changes have made the UK a more equal place than in the past, women still make significantly less than men, ethnic minorities and disabled people are still under represented in civic life, boys and young men are consistently under performing in education, and 25 per cent of women in their 50s take on caring responsibilities.

New Equality Rights

2010-10-04T10:13:00.002+01:00

The 1st October sees the introduction of a range of new Equality rights strengthening provision for women, carers and transsexual people. The key changes are:

Protecting people from discrimination in the recruitment process. The Bill makes it unlawful for employers to ask job applicants questions about disability or health before making a job offer, except in specified circumstances.
Protecting people discriminated against because they are perceived to have, or are associated with someone who has, a protected characteristic, For example protecting carers from discrimination. The Equality Act will protect people who are, for example, caring for a disabled child or relative. They will be protected by virtue of their association to that person.
Protecting pregnant women and mothers from discrimination. The Equality Act makes clear that mothers can breastfeed their children in places like cafes and shops and not be asked to leave. The Act also prohibits schools from discriminating against pupils who are pregnant or new mothers
Extending the equality duty to require the public sector to take into account the needs of all protected groups (except marital and civil partnership status).The new Equality Duty will require public authorities to consider the needs of all the protected groups in, for example, employment and when designing and delivering services. Although timescales for this Duty are to be confirmed with the government.
Changing the definition of gender reassignment, by removing the requirement for medical supervision.
Harmonising the thresholds for the duty to make reasonable adjustments for disabled people.
Extending protection in private clubs to sex, religion or belief, pregnancy and maternity, and gender reassignment.

For a full discussion see the Government Equality website

New study shows young people need clearer information about contraception

2010-09-23T14:34:00.004+01:00

A New Study from Marie Stopes International shows that one in four sexually active young people in the UK does not use any form of contraception with a new partner. Marie Stopes suggest that young people need clearer information, reflecting findings from our own study with ChildLine Scotland showing that children and young people are often confused and mis-informed about sexual health matters and often do not recieve information early enough.

'It's my Body' CRFR Briefing 34

Scotsman article

Poor families should save more, says conservative think tank

2010-09-15T10:20:00.002+01:00

The think tank, ResPublica says the Government should do more to encourage poor families to save. However, saving might be tough for poorer families. The CRFR report Life in low income families found that families in low income households reported not having enough money to meet everyday needs and that families already employ a range of management strategies to make their finances go further.

CRFR report: Life in low income families
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2003/09/18143/26164

ResPublica Report: Asset building for children
http://www.respublica.org.uk/articles/new-respublica-report-calls-radical-measures-boost-equality-reviving-savings-culture-among-

Budget, forced marriages and housing on new Scottish legislative agenda

2010-09-13T10:24:00.001+01:00

The Scottish Government released its legislative agenda for the coming session last week.
Bills include: Budget Bill, Forced Marriage Protection Bill and Private Rented Housing Bill

For the full legislative agenda see http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/...Doc/918/0104278.pdf

Field ‘gobsmacked’ at evidence of inequalities

2010-09-09T09:33:00.001+01:00

The importance of longitudinal studies like Growing up in Scotland and monitoring outcomes in and from the early years was highlighted this week in Labour MP Frank Field’s address about the impact of inequalities to the Institute of Fiscal Studies. Field delivers the report of the government’s Review on Poverty and Life Chances to David Cameron next week.

In the speech to the IFS, Children and Families Now reported Field said:

"The gobsmacking findings were that, as children turned up for their first day at school, they possessed a wide range of abilities and that children from families on the lowest incomes were more likely to be towards the bottom end of the range of these abilities. And there they remained when a second set of tests was taken at 10 years of age."

He added that "even worse" was that high-performing children from deprived backgrounds "lost ground" on those from richer backgrounds between the ages of five and 10.

The report is likely to focus on how children can be better supported during their first five years. He said that "interventions" during school were shown to be less effective in reducing inequality.

Sex ed and young people’s positive sexual experiences

2010-09-07T10:20:00.002+01:00

Findings from new research from the University of Coventry support those of several CRFR research projects. The University of Coventry study showed that the majority of young people has sex because they are in a relationship and want to experience sexual pleasure. It also found that young people want to get information about sex and relationships from formal sex education.

The most recent CRFR Research briefing
How was it for you? The quality of young people’s sexual relationships (http://www.crfr.ac.uk/reports/rb%2050.pdf)
found that

most 15 and 16 year olds were positive about their early sexual relationships
the vast majority currently in relationships indicated that they enjoyed their time spent together, enjoyed their physical contact, and did not find it difficult to show affection

However, the study also found that

Those who delayed sexual intercourse and restricted it to established relationships were most positive about the quality of their sexual relationships
The quality of sexual relationships was most influenced by circumstances of first intercourse and subsequent sexual history, rather than background social factors
The earlier first intercourse occurred the more likely it was that young people would experience pressure and regret, particularly for girls
Targeted interventions are needed for the most vulnerable young people

The importance of sex education was raised in

It's my body: calls to ChildLine Scotland about sexual health & wellbeing

http://www.crfr.ac.uk/reports/rb34.pdf

Children and young people find it difficult to talk to their friends and parents about sex. However, when they do talk about it, peer communication and relationships are most important. This ChildLine/CRFR study that investigated calls to ChildLine about sexual health recommended the following:

• young people have ongoing needs for information, so education must be provided throughout the years in education
• the sexual health curriculum needs to challenge young people’s conceptions of normality
• children and young people must be provided with a clear understanding of their rights
• confidential services that give consideration to children and young people’s expressed needs and wishes are essential
• greater social recognition and education is needed concerning abuse perpetrated by people the children know and love
• services and interventions need to address sexually aggressive behaviour by other young people, particularly partner abuse perpetrated by young men against young women

For information about the University of Coventry research see

http://www.cypnow.co.uk/bulletins/Daily-Bulletin/news/1026377/?DCMP=EMC-DailyBulletin

What Scottish Parents tell us, new research

2010-08-30T11:13:00.003+01:00

Nearly half ( 45%) of families are finding it harder to to pay their bills than a year ago.
Parents rely heavily on informal childcare
Nearly a three quarters (72%) of parents say they don't know where to go for advice and support in bringing up children
Money, work and children's behaviour were the top three sources of stress for Scottish parents

These are just some of the fascinating findings of a Ipsos MORI poll undertaken for Parenting across Scotland entitled What Scottish Parents Tell Us. Parenting across Scotland commissioned the poll to seek parents ' experiences of a range of parenting issues:

How families are being affected by the recession
Childcare and pre-school education
Advice and support in bringing up children
Attitudes to doctors Relationships
Parents' future support needs

You can access the summary and full report at http://www.parentingacrossscotland.org/publications/polls-and-surveys.aspx

New CRFR research - children and young people's mental health indicators

2010-08-26T10:35:00.000+01:00

Checking it out: A consultation with children and young people on a draft framework for children and young people's mental health indicators This report highlights findings from a consultation undertaken with specific groups of children and young people in order to inform the development of the framework for the children and young people's mental health indicators being established by NHS Health Scotland Commissioned as part of a wider consultation on a draft framework, this work included groups of children and young people whose views on what impacts on their mental health appear to be absent or poorly represented in the previous research. The report by Susan Elsley and Christina McMellon, Centre for Research on Families and Relationships, Edinburgh University, is available athttp://www.healthscotland.com/uploads/documents/13567-C&YP%20consultation%20on%20Mental%20Health%20Indicators%20draft%20Framework.pdf

Poor families will be hit the hardest by budget

2010-08-25T10:11:00.001+01:00

Growing concerns that the poor families with children are going to bear the brunt of the changes to the tax and benefit system announced in the by the UK Government in their emergency budget in June were underlined by new research from the Institute of Fiscal Studies released today.

This is problematic as CRFR research has shown that issues associated with poverty can add up to make it difficult for families and young children. A recent report of an analysis of data from the Growing up in Scotland (GUS) study demonstrated that low income cannot be isolated from other disadvantage in terms of negative impact on children’s development.

A further CRFR study, Life in low income families, showed that the effects of living in poverty are complex. Children living in the most deprived areas are more likely to have experienced long term health problems, poor general health, accidents, behavioural problems and language development difficulties.

Life in Low income families
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2003/09/18143/26164

Growing Up in Scotland: The Circumstances of Persistently Poor Children Summary Report
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2010/04/21131609/0

Institute of Fiscal Studies
The distributional effect of tax and benefit reforms to be introduced between June 2010 and April 2014: a revised assessment
http://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/5246

Health visitors help prevent postnatal depression

2010-08-19T10:00:00.001+01:00

Regular contact with health visitors with additional mental health training can significantly reduce depression among new mothers, according to new research form the University of Leicester. This may have important implications for health visitor training as the latest Growing up in Scotland findings show that how mothers feel matters to the development of their children. The Growing up in Scotland report found:
· children whose mothers were emotionally well had better social, behavioural and emotional development than those whose mothers had brief mental health problems.
· children whose mothers had short spells of feeling anxious or depressed had better development than those whose mothers had repeated mental health problems over some time.
· mothers who felt anxious or depressed were more likely to have relationship difficulties and poor social support from family, friends or from the local community The training covers areas such as carrying out mental health assessments and listening techniques.

Links
Universal prevention of depression in women postnatally: cluster randomised trial evidence in primary care
http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=7873832
Growing up in Scotland: Maternal mental health and it impact on child behaviour and development
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2010/04/21131836/0
The Growing up in Scotland project
http://www.crfr.ac.uk/gus/index.html

Children’s concerns over parent’s alcohol use and misuse

2010-08-16T10:12:00.001+01:00

CRFR research supports new ChildLine figures highlighting children’s concerns about their parents alcohol use. Today, Childline reported that more than 4000 children who rang the helpline last year said they were worried about their parent's excessive drinking and that these children were three times more likely to mention physical abuse than other children who phoned. CRFR’s own work with ChildLine also highlighted the same link between parental alcohol misuse and physical abuse. Another CRFR report, Parental drug and alcohol misuse, also discussed these issues.

Links to CRFR reports:
Childrens concerns about the health and wellbeing of parents and significant others
http://www.crfr.ac.uk/reports/rb22.pdf

Parental drug and alcohol misuse
http://www.jrf.org.uk/publications/effect-parental-substance-abuse-young-people

Considering changing families in a changing world

2010-06-30T14:29:00.001+01:00

What happens when 160 people focus their attention on the issues of changing families in a changing world? We found out last week when scholars and others met for our international conference in Edinburgh. During three lovely sunny Edinburgh days we learned, amongst other things, about older people in Taiwan, being adopted in Belgium, childcare in Malaysia and how rich and poor kids mix in the USA.

Thinking about change and families in the context of globalisation gave us all a new take on our work and a clear route for comparison. What became apparent using this lens was that the changes in work patterns and increased mobility put pressure on the existing fractures of work-life balance and gender inequalities wherever families live across the globe. We could see that there are many shared global experiences, like adoption and parenting, which also have strong local shaping factors.

Highlighted in Barrie Thorne’s keynote presentation, as well as a clear thread through many parallel sessions, was the tenacity of the issues of inequalities between the most and least well off - within many countries as well as across the globe. We have been trying to eradicate these inequalities for a long time, at least since Victorian reformers like Charles Booth in the Uk in the late 19^th century wrote his report. What is clear from collecting experiences from around the globe is that we are not succeeding.

We hope that the output from the conference will be available more widely in a variety of forms and are planning some publications. We also hope that everyone who attended will take away new ideas, conversations, colleagues, and continue to develop their knowledge so that we can tackle some of these big challenges facing families in the changing world.

Inquiry into the life and labour of the people in London (1886-1903) (Charles Booth Online Archive)

We will make some of the papers and presentations available via our website in due course

Not working mums, again

2009-09-30T14:32:00.000+01:00

What a week it has been for working mothers. Firstly, two job sharing female police officers from Milton Keynes are in trouble with OFSTED and even threatened with prosecution for making a reciprocal childcare arrangement that works well for them and their children.

Then we hear from the University College London Institute of Child Health that ‘the children of working mums have unhealthier lifestyles’. Their analysis of the Millennium Cohort Study finds that, after taking account of other factors likely to influence the results, such as maternal education and socioeconomic circumstances, children whose mothers work are more likely to consume unhealthy drinks and snacks between meals, more likely to watch 2 or more hours of TV a day and less likely to walk to school. ‘Busy working parents may have less time to provide their children with healthy food and opportunities for physical activity,’ say the authors of the report.

For people who are interested in research on families and relationships the reporting of these stories seems to miss some key issues. First, is the research about the ‘failings’ of working mothers or does it say something about how parents are supported by employers and the state to find their work/life balance?

Second, both of these stories focus on the role of the mother in caring for their children. While fathers or other partners are absent from some households with children, the majority (75%) of children live with two parents, according to the Growing up in Scotland (GUS) study. Fathers and other partners have a very important role to play in parenting that seems to be missed in these claims.

Finally, other data from the GUS study, which has been following the lives of 8,000 children and their families in Scotland from birth up to the age of 5, provide a different perspective to these questions. The lives of children are impacted by a broad range factors. The study reported yesterday focuses on three indicators. While not directly comparable to the Institute of Child Health study, GUS data show:

· highly active children were more likely to be in households in the highest income category with parents in managerial and professional occupations.

· children in higher income groups are more likely to have a healthy diet. These findings do suggest that young children in Scotland whose mothers are working are not generally experiencing ‘unhealthy lifestyles’

· working mothers, AND fathers manage to spend more time playing with children outdoors than those not in work, despite work-commitments

· Around 15% of parents agree with the statement 'professionals like health visitors and social workers do not offer parents enough advice and support about bringing up children'

· In terms of 'work-life' balance, responses from a series of attitudinal statements show that most parents who work believe that their employment is not detrimental to their enjoyment of family life and not to their ability to raise or spend time with their child(ren). However, this does vary according to hours worked and occupational classification (those working full-time and/or in lower supervisory and technical occupations were more likely to think that their employment had a negative impact on family life.)

At the moment, the media is filled with conflicting and confusing information about parenting. This comes from both how research is reported but also from Government policy. Parents, and particularly working mothers, are often ‘blamed’ for many social problems. However, the picture is very complicated and it is important we get a full picture of the experiences of families and how they can best be supported.

Living Alone Does Not Necessarily Mean Being Alone

2009-04-22T17:18:00.002+01:00

Last week the Office for National Statistics reported that people in Britain are more likely than ever before to live alone, with a third of households now consisting of people living alone. The figures for Scotland are even higher, with projections of more than two in five households (42%) being a one-person household by 2024. This trend reflects wider changes in families and relationships in recent decades, with the largest increase in living alone found amongst adults of working age.

Familiar representations in the media and popular culture often associate living alone with loneliness and social isolation. Remember Bridget Jones’ fears of dying alone, and being found three weeks later half-eaten by an Alsatian? In academic research too, living alone may be seen as a self-evident indicator of social disintegration and declining commitment to others. Yet until recently there has been relatively little known about the lives of those living alone, while media depictions of Sex and the City-type singletons ignore the fact that men aged 25-44 are twice as likely to live alone than women of the same age. Why so little attention to these ‘Brad Joneses’?

There is a growing body of research which challenges popular stereotypes about living alone Research on solo living at CRFR shows considerable differences within this population by socio-economic circumstance, gender and locality. Living alone does not necessarily mean being unpartnered or childless: solo-livers may be in committed relationships with partners or with children living elsewhere. The differences between those who do or don’t live alone are not as great as other social differences. In terms of social involvement with family and community, there are greater differences between men and women and by age than between those living alone and with others, suggesting factors other than living arrangement are at play. While adults of working-age living alone are a diverse group, there are still commonalities: solo-livers do not benefit from the economies of scale or sharing of risks such as pension provision found in multi-person households, and the costs of solo-living are therefore higher. It also raises policy implications in terms of social care, pensions and housing provision.

More people are likely to experience a period of solo-living in the future, in part a result of changes such as postponement of and the decline in marriage and increased relationship ‘turnover’. The research to date suggests variations in how solo-living is experienced, and that living alone does not necessarily mean being alone. Whether entered into by choice or circumstance, envisaged as temporary or long-term, living alone is often depicted by solo-livers themselves as a highly valued experience, with many positive dimensions.

Roona Simpson, Research Fellow, Centre for Research on Families and Relationships
Link to CRFR Rural and Urban Solo-Living Project

Relationships still matter to Scotland’s new parents

2009-03-19T13:15:00.011Z

Sarah Morton, CRFR Co-director and Lynn Jamieson, CRFR Co-director

New Registrar General figures released last week show that for the first time in Scotland more than half of babies were born to unmarried parents. Interestingly we are not the first part of the UK to reflect this change, with Wales reaching this point in 1993.

The news has been greeted with the predictable ringing of hands about the state of the family and concern about the plight of children born into these kinds of families. But what does this figure tell us about the root of these concerns - whether or not children are being born into stable, loving, long-term relationships?

Most of the 50.1 % of children in the headlines will be born into couple households where the couple are living together unmarried, rather than being born to solo mothers. The Registrar General’s report shows that the proportion of births registered only in the mothers name is just 6% and has remained fairly constant for over twenty years. Since 1995 a record has been kept of whether an unmarried mother and father registering a birth live at the same address. According to Scottish Government figures, as the proportion of married parents has shrunk so there has been an equivalent increase in births to parents living together. In 2007, 32% of births are jointly registered to parents living at the same address, 11% to parents at separate addresses and 6% by mothers alone.

It is now normal for most couples in Scotland to live together before they get married, and attitude surveys show that only a very small proportion of the population make any moral distinction between living together as couple and marriage. It may be that living together is seen as a sensible ‘testing’ of a relationship before making a fuller commitment. Or developing a sexual relationship and living together may have become ways of getting to know a partner and have become new conventional milestones in the process of constructing a long-term and perhaps life-long partnership.

Some cohabitees will go on to get married, and might indeed have intended to get married before having children. Perhaps the economic downturn will have put marriage plans on hold, especially with some experts claiming that the average cost of a wedding tops £20,000. A study by Jamieson and colleagues of married and cohabiting couples in their twenties living in Fife showed that many were in stable committed relationships but were not very concerned about their marital status. A very small minority were in the category that would have had ‘shotgun’ weddings in the past – their unplanned pregnancy had lead to them cohabiting and seeking to cement their relationship.

As there is no way to officially record co-habitation, it is difficult to research. We can record divorce rates but there is no official recording of cohabitation breakdown rates so there are no figures to compare. The British Household Panel survey asks people about their relationship status and follows them over time, and it is only through this kind of longitudinal data that we can unpick the facts. This type of data has been used to argue that cohabiting relationships are more fragile than married relationships. However, studies by Kamp Dush and Wu comparing relationship breakdown of cohabitees who marry before and after having children has also found no difference. Therefore, there is a continuing debate about whether or not cohabitees with children are more likely to separate than married couples, especially when we take other factors into account.

Looking across the decades since the 1970s, we know that the more well-off have always been more likely to marry and remain married. Less wealthy people may not have the resources for the wedding they would like, and less financial security contributes to relationship breakdown. When marriage was still the most common form of couple relationship, research has shown that the poorer were more likely to experience relationship breakdown and those who were poor and married very young were the most at risk.

If we translate these trends into today’s figures, there is very little change in what matters about the relationship status of Scotland’s new parents. Most babies will be born into as stable families as before, but just over half without the official stamp of marriage. Most new parents will be setting out to nurture and sustain their family unit. Whether or not they are married, a small proportion will separate as the children grow up. The Growing Up in Scotland study, a longitudinal study annually following infants, shows that in the course of their early years, between the first and second years of the study, more children gained a father in their household because of the partnering of a lone mother than experience the loss of a father. In the majority of new partnerships, it is the biological parents who have started to live together. The new figures reflect that marriage is a declining trend, but not that relationships no longer matter.

For further information about the Growing up in Scotland study, see the Growing Up In Scotland website.

For further information about other research cited in this blog please see the reference page.

When soundbites don’t help addicted parents …or their children

2009-03-10T13:00:00.013Z

Sarah Nelson, Author of Care and Support Needs of Male Survivors of Sexual Abuse (February 2009)

The poignantly short life and brutal death of the toddler Brandon Muir, violently killed by his mother’s boyfriend in Dundee, has provoked renewed debate and soul-searching among politicians, media and many of the public. Not just about apparent failings in child protection generally, but in particular about how to safeguard children in the estimated 50,000 Scottish families where one parent at least is addicted to drugs.

As three separate child protection reviews get underway in Dundee, drastic “solutions” have been touted, as they are each time such deaths happen. These range from taking all or most addicts’ children into care - unrealistic without huge resources, given the large numbers of children and the hard-pressed, shrunken fostering and residential sectors – to giving addicts contraception along with their methadone. (A eugenic “solution” familiar to historians, it is unclear exactly what type of contraception is being dreamt of, and how it will be given: as so often happens, the restraint seems to apply only to females).

It’s understandable that concerned people feel despairing at times about the problem, and about the suffering of some addicts’ children, and are therefore tempted by the sound and fury of such drastic solutions. Angry feelings against addicted parents, and renewed blaming of social workers and health visitors, may be merited in individual cases; but when generalised, do they help vulnerable children, or distract attention from measures that will be more constructive for them?

Does it make sense for instance to spend more on the children and less on the adults?
Some recent research suggests that putting more resources into supporting addicted adults may actually make the children benefit from better, safer parenting. One issue which has consistently been neglected in policy, despite much research and practice evidence is the very damaging trauma in the backgrounds of many addicted parents.

Those who have been addicted for a long time, or who have found it impossible to remain “clean” from substance misuse, are often using drugs and alcohol as a kind of self medication- in a sometimes desperate effort to blot out very distressing experiences and memories. That kind of misuse is much harder to stop, because the cost to them, without support, is to resurrect sometimes unbearable flashbacks and memories.

These bad experiences can include childhood beatings and sexual abuse, neglect, emotional cruelty and for adults domestic abuse from violent partners. For example my own Beyond Trauma research, published in 2001, with women who experienced childhood sexual abuse trauma revealed that a high percentage had sought refuge in drink and drugs, even as children or teenagers, and needed skilled support to help them cope with the trauma once this “crutch” was removed.

In my latest study, Care and Support Needs of Male Survivors of Sexual Abuse, a quarter of the interviewees were addicted even before their teens, and half of them by their teenage years. The prisoner and ex-prisoner group were addicted very young to a variety of drugs, after experiencing extreme forms of trauma.

Of course, not all drug addicted parents are victims of abuse. However, many are – for example in 2004, one specialist drugs counsellor in a large and busy Edinburgh health centre found that 85 % of her client group had suffered childhood sexual abuse. In fact a growing number of international studies had already revealed links between substance misusers and a history of child abuse when Dr Jane Wilson of Stirling University carried out her Scottish research , with colleagues Susan Morris and Rowdy Yates, more than ten years ago.

Her research team found even higher figures than existing studies suggested. They used the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire with male and female addicts at three Scottish treatment units. The average age when these had first misused more than one substance was only 15.

Among the women, two-thirds had experienced childhood sexual abuse and more than half childhood physical abuse. Almost half of the men had experienced childhood physical abuse, and more than a third sexual abuse. Wilson and her colleagues called for a wider look at young people and adults with poly-drug use. They warned that in most cases trauma histories may not have been shared with health and social care professionals, and that their needs may have been “unidentified and unmet”. They urged more staff training and recommended “integrated programmes, which address both trauma and substance misuse.”

Those recommendations have made little headway in those ten years, despite further recommendations from major Scottish Executive reports like “Mind the Gaps” in 2003. Specialist, dedicated resources to help addicted adults recover as far as possible from childhood sexual trauma and other violence are still tiny, particularly (and ironically) in major cities like Edinburgh where there have long been serious addiction problems.

Yet research and practice experience indicates that they can actively enable addicted adults to become both more secure and competent as parents, and equally important, to regain the self-esteem which has usually been severely undermined or lost altogether. That loss is one key reason why women in particular often feel they are worth no more than to accept a violent and abusive partner, who is dangerous not only to themselves but to their children.

Obviously, the most basic aim in child protection has to be preventing children being abused in the first place. But creating safer less neglectful home environments for those children, free of possibly dangerous people who may wander in and out to collect or to deal in drugs, will be one part of that primary prevention exercise. Boosting post- trauma services for desperate, addicted parents, and giving staff the training and confidence-building to deliver these services on a wide scale, would prove a small cost in terms of potential benefits to both vulnerable parents and their children.

For more information about the project that led to the report Care and Support Needs of Male Survivors of Sexual Abuse see http://www.crfr.ac.uk/Research/malesurvivors.html

Discrimination against children remains unchallenged

2008-12-18T14:41:00.000Z

Age is one of the six equality strands to be brought together under a single Equality Bill announced in the Queen’s speech on Dec 3. While age discrimination against older people will be included, age discrimination against children will not.

Supporters of excluding children from age discrimination legislation argue that children are a special case. The Government’s Department for Communities and Local Government, Discrimination Law Review (2007) stated: “It is important that services for children are tailored in an age-appropriate way – a child of three is very different from a child of ten, or a teenager. The basic principle of age discrimination legislation, that people should not be treated differently on the basis of their age, is therefore rarely appropriate to the treatment of children….’

However, all other equality strands must deal with differences across groups. The Discrimination Law Review itself discusses how disability discrimination law handles diversity amongst disabled people, how special needs are allowed for under the Race Relations Act, for religion or belief and for men and women.

Harriet Harman, Secretary of State for Equality, subsequently argued in Parliament that “it is right to treat under 18 year olds differently” when it comes to equality and protection from discrimination and there was “little evidence” of harmful age discrimination against children and young people.

Children do not agree: 43% of children and young people think they have been treated unfairly due to their age (Children’s Rights Alliance for England).

If the lens of age discrimination were applied to children’s experiences, we would have very different perspectives to a range of issues. It would highlight children’s exclusion from private and public spaces:
· the use of the sonic “Mosquito” to make young people so uncomfortable they do not want to use a particular store or space;
· store signs that write “no children allowed” or “no more than two children at a time”;
· dispersal orders derived from antisocial behavior legislation that are disproportionately applied to children and young people.
They would show unfair discrepancies in policy, from the lower minimum wage for 16 and 17 year olds (who somehow have to pay less to live than 18 year olds and over) to lack of privacy in schools. It would highlight the legal “chastisement” of children by their parents that would be constituted as assault, except for children’s age. Such discrimination might well be legally prohibited were it on the basis of any of the other five equality strands.

No doubt there would need to be careful drafting of any such age discrimination legislation but the arguments against including children under age discrimination legislation reveal more about the uncritical acceptance of traditional assumptions about childhood then they do about legal possibilities. These assumptions portray children as needy and in need of protection. Childhood studies has pointed out that children may need protection but they are also active contributors and solely taking a needs-based approach can subvert and deny their other rights. Age-discrimination legislation would not solve all issues for children nor ensure all their rights are met. But what a difference it could make if we did apply the lens of age-discrimination to their experiences.

Kay Tisdall, Co-Director, CRFR

Parents, children and discipline - why the environment in which families live is still important

2008-10-22T15:59:00.003+01:00

When CRFR launched a new research briefing this week - focussing on various aspects of parenting amongst families two and four year olds- the part that was picked up particularly by the press concerned smacking. The briefing was based on the Growing Up in Scotland (GUS) study, conducted by the Scottish Centre for Social Research, which involves annual interviews with parents of young children. (see www.growingupinscotland.org) .

The study showed that the majority of parents don’t believe that smacking does much good but by the time their child approached four, a third of them had been smacked. An earlier piece of Scottish government commissioned research explored parents attitudes to smacking in more detail demonstrating parents in Scotland often hold a range of views. (See Disciplining children: Research with parents in Scotland).

Smacking is sometimes seen as a necessary ‘last resort’, and many parents acknowledge that this reflects their weakness and need in the moment of anger, rather than a genuine attempt to discipline their child. Also those who think of smacking as sometimes useful, qualify this by referring to a very narrow age group, typically aged 3 to 8 years old. (See Brownlie and Anderson, writing in the journal Childhood vol 13, 2006, pages 479-498).

So it seems that most parents are either against or ambivalent about smacking. Might this ambivalence actually extend to other forms of disciplining – such as raising your voice and the now popular ‘naughty step’? Do these also sometimes reflect parents’ reactions to their child’s behaviour as much as the actual ‘naughty’ behaviour itself?
If disciplining children becomes simply expressing dominance – ‘do as I say or else’ - then that seems to be a more limited message than many parents would wish to be giving when bringing up their children.

Other research shows clearly that we have to acknowledge differences between families, particularly in terms of relative advantage and disadvantage. Although it seems that all parents say they have the same aim of wanting their children to become responsible for themselves and to behave decently towards others, the ways this might be achieved might differ. Parents’ views about children’s obedience to authority might mean that for some, getting children to ‘do as you’re told’ remains a fact of life – but in a context of disadvantage or even danger, this might be an understandable attempt to keep children safe. For others, particularly parents who are relatively privileged, the resources to help a child to ‘realise their potential’ might obviate the need for immediate obedience to a parental demand. (see Gillies, V. 2005 'Raising the "Meritocracy" Parenting and the Individualization of Social Class'. Sociology 39: 835-853)

Certainly parents will have different views about the need for children’s obedience to authority, with some being more authoritarian than others, but these have to be understood in the context of the very different lives and resources that families have.

Welcome

2007-11-06T12:20:00.000Z

Welcome to the Centre for Research on Families and Relationships Blog.