Exploring inequities in child welfare and child protection services: Explaining the 'inverse intervention law'
Exploring inequities in child welfare and child protection services: Explaining the 'inverse intervention law'
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.childyouth.2015.07.017
复制
发表时间：
2015-10-01
影响因子：
3.3
通讯作者：
Scourfield, Jonathan
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Bywaters, Paul;Brady, Geraldine;Scourfield, Jonathan
记录、理解和应对儿童福利和保护报告、服务模式和结果方面的各种变化的努力是国际性的、众多的和长期的。将这种差异重新界定为儿童之间和家庭之间的不平等问题，为解释国家和行政区之间以及国家和行政区内部干预率的巨大差异开辟了新的途径。最近关于变异的解释经常基于偏见和风险（或需求）之间存在二元划分的想法。在这里，我们建议将供给（偏见）和需求（风险）因素视为单一系统的两个方面，两者都部分地受到社会结构的影响。最近的一项调查结果的干预率在英国，“逆干预法”，是用来说明复杂的方式，一系列因素相互作用，以产生干预率。反过来，这种分析提出了深刻的道德，政策，实践和研究问题，目前的儿童福利和儿童保护服务。(C)2015爱思唯尔有限公司版权所有。
Attempts to record, understand and respond to variations in child welfare and protection reporting, service patterns and outcomes are international, numerous and longstanding. Reframing such variations as an issue of inequity between children and between families opens the way to a new approach to explaining the profound difference in intervention rates between and within countries and administrative districts. Recent accounts of variation have frequently been based on the idea that there is a binary division between bias and risk (or need). Here we propose seeing supply (bias) and demand (risk) factors as two aspects of a single system, both framed, in part, by social structures. A recent finding from a study of intervention rates in England, the 'inverse intervention law', is used to illustrate the complex ways in which a range of factors interact to produce intervention rates. In turn, this analysis raises profound moral, policy, practice and research questions about current child welfare and child protection services. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.