Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of Figures
- List of Abbreviations
- Notes on the Authors
- Acknowledgements
- Foreword
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Children’s and Parents’ Participation: Current Thinking Lorna Stabler
- 3 How Parents and Children View the System
- 4 Young People’s Perspectives
- 5 Young People’s Participation: Views from Social Workers and Independent Reviewing Officers
- 6 Senior Managers’ Perspectives
- 7 When it Goes Wrong
- 8 Summary and Conclusions
- References
- Index
8 - Summary and Conclusions
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 10 March 2021
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of Figures
- List of Abbreviations
- Notes on the Authors
- Acknowledgements
- Foreword
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Children’s and Parents’ Participation: Current Thinking Lorna Stabler
- 3 How Parents and Children View the System
- 4 Young People’s Perspectives
- 5 Young People’s Participation: Views from Social Workers and Independent Reviewing Officers
- 6 Senior Managers’ Perspectives
- 7 When it Goes Wrong
- 8 Summary and Conclusions
- References
- Index
Summary
Summary of key findings
Children's participation in meetings
It appears that the extent to which children and young people participate in their review meetings and decision making more widely has not changed or improved in the last 25 years, despite the introduction of the IRO role in 2002 and the ratification of the UNCRC in 1991. The right to participation is one of the three cornerstones of the Convention, alongside the right to protection and the right to provision. The findings from this research are strikingly similar to the research carried out by Nigel Thomas in 2002.
This research suggests that the CiC reviews and Child Protection Conferences do not encourage meaningful participation by young people or parents. The young participants in this study reported that they had experienced numerous changes of SWs and that this had impacted their ability to trust and develop a meaningful relationship with them. In turn, this impacted on how they engaged with SWs generally, including in key meetings. The relationship with the SW was seen as very important; when young people reported having a poor relationship with their SW, they also felt more negatively about meetings. The young participants said that their relationship with their IRO was much more stable and that this benefited them – although none of the young people had ever met with their IRO between the reviews. Overall, the young participants showed an acute awareness of the time pressures faced by the SWs who worked with them, and some showed a frustration with ‘the system’.
Most SWs and SMs demonstrated only a limited understanding of the concept of participation. On the whole, IROs showed a better understanding but were vocal about the lack of suitable training they could attend. Additionally, professionals were only able to give limited examples of how participation was being encouraged, such as through children and young people chairing their own reviews and the use of new technologies, such as mobile phone apps. Most of the SMs – all of whom had had lengthy careers in the sector – said that as far as they were aware, there had been no real improvements in practice in the last 25 years in relation to how effectively CiC reviews engage young people. This is a disappointing finding but one that aligns with previous research.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Decision Making in Child and Family Social WorkPerspectives on Children's Participation, pp. 155 - 170Publisher: Bristol University PressPrint publication year: 2020