Rethinking child protection strategy: evaluating research findings and numeric data to challenge whether current intervention strategy is justified.

重新思考儿童保护策略：评估研究结果和数字数据，以质疑当前干预策略是否合理。

• 批准号: ES/M000990/1
• 负责人: Lauren Devine
• 金额: $ 20.43万
• 依托单位: University of the West of England
• 依托单位国家: 英国
• 项目类别: Research Grant
• 财政年份: 2014
• 资助国家: 英国
• 起止时间: 2014 至 无数据
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=ES%2FM000990%2F1
• 关键词: Rethinking; child; protection; strategy; evaluating

Conventional thinking in relation to child protection and safeguarding takes as an axiom that child abuse can be detected and treated, and largely eradicated through robust assessment. Conclusions from public inquiries and serious case reviews set up in light of child fatalities are treated as an authoritative statement of what should be done to 'strengthen' the system to prevent further fatalities and eradicate child abuse. The recommendations cascade through practice and affect families who become the subjects of social work assessment. Importantly, the vast majority of these families have not abused their children and many are simply requesting support services. This policy has proved not only ineffective in preventing further fatalities but has caused a flood of data and bureaucracy. It has enmeshed a large number of families into the system who turn to third sector organisations for help in to cope with the adverse consequences of assessment practices. Despite this, increasingly intrusive and prolonged assessment is considered in academic research and government policy to be best practice. This project questions the paradigm that current assessment practice is appropriate or fit for purpose.This project builds on work already completed in a doctorate, a smaller funded project peer reviewed articles (in progress) and a monograph (in progress) to produce analysis that draws offers a creative and novel analysis that challenges accepted thinking. The groundwork for this project has already been completed by the PI including identifying and sourcing sample data. The project considers four, linked under-researched areas of investigation, all of which are transformative in challenging accepted thinking and practice in the area: (1) A meta-analysis of public inquiry and serious case review findings to assess trends in recommendations and their uptake. Analysis of the consequences of uptake will be undertaken together with a critique of the use of hindsight conclusions extrapolated from statistically rare cases as a basis for policy applied to all social work assessment; (2) A trend analysis to ascertain the current state of knowledge in relation to the outcome of social work assessment; (3) An impact assessment of the outcome of assessment; and (4) A statistical evaluation to question the use of risk assessment as a predictive and a diagnostic aid in social work assessment given the high prevalence of false positives and false negatives inherent in this approach.None of these elements have been examined in detail before, and not together. In short this is an important and unconventional critique. This analysis will provide the only comprehensive analysis of the data and will radically and critically question whether the paradigm can objectively be demonstrated to justify the financial and resource cost involved in the industry.The project is transformative as it proposes a unique approach and analysis which could radically change accepted thinking across several areas of social science. The thinking behind the project and its critical approach in questioning aspects of an entrenched policy will create new insights and questions that have the potential to radically alter policy. The project is designed to utilise sound methodologies that are triangulated and are not, in themselves, risky in terms of whether they will be accepted as methodologically valid. The transformative element and risk occurs in the novel research question and challenge to the paradigm. Given the controversial nature of the project and the intention that the results will be ground breaking in relation to thinking and debate in the area the project is designed to use available data, thereby minimising methodological issues (such as negotiating access) that could cause problems for successful completion of the project. This aspect of the project is considered paramount and will ensure the project is achievable.

与儿童保护和保障有关的传统思维认为，虐待儿童是可以发现和处理的，并通过强有力的评估在很大程度上消除。根据儿童死亡事件进行的公共调查和严重案件审查得出的结论被视为一项权威声明，说明应采取何种措施“加强”该系统，以防止进一步的死亡事件和消除虐待儿童行为。这些建议贯穿于实践，影响到成为社会工作评估对象的家庭。重要的是，这些家庭中的绝大多数没有虐待他们的孩子，许多人只是要求支持服务。事实证明，这一政策不仅在防止进一步死亡方面无效，而且还造成了大量数据和官僚主义。它使大量家庭陷入了这一系统，他们向第三部门组织寻求帮助，以科普评估做法的不利后果。尽管如此，学术研究和政府政策认为，越来越多的侵入性和长期评估是最佳做法。该项目质疑目前的评估实践是适当的或适合的目的的范式。该项目建立在博士学位已经完成的工作，一个较小的资助项目同行评审的文章（正在进行中）和一本专著（正在进行中），以产生分析，吸引提供一个创新的和新颖的分析，挑战公认的思维。PI已经完成了该项目的基础工作，包括确定和获取样本数据。该项目考虑了四个相互关联的研究不足的调查领域，所有这些领域都具有变革性，挑战了该领域公认的思维和做法：（1）对公众调查和严重案件审查结果进行元分析，以评估建议的趋势及其采纳情况。将对吸收的后果进行分析，并对使用从统计上罕见的案例中推断出的后见之明结论作为适用于所有社会工作评估的政策基础进行批评;（2）趋势分析，以确定与社会工作评估结果有关的知识现状;（3）评估结果的影响评估;（4）一项统计评估，质疑在社会工作评估中使用风险评估作为预测和诊断的辅助手段，因为这种方法固有的假阳性和假阴性的高发生率。简而言之，这是一个重要的、非传统的批评。该分析将提供唯一的数据综合分析，并将从根本上批判性地质疑该范式是否能够客观地证明该行业所涉及的财务和资源成本的合理性。该项目具有变革性，因为它提出了一种独特的方法和分析，可以从根本上改变社会科学多个领域的公认思维。该项目背后的思考及其对根深蒂固的政策提出质疑的批判性方法将产生新的见解和问题，这些见解和问题有可能从根本上改变政策。该项目旨在利用经过三角分析的健全方法，这些方法本身在是否被接受为方法有效方面没有风险。变革的因素和风险发生在新的研究问题和对范式的挑战中。鉴于该项目的争议性质以及其结果将在该领域的思考和辩论方面具有开创性的意图，该项目旨在使用现有数据，从而最大限度地减少可能对成功完成项目造成问题的方法问题（如谈判准入）。该项目的这一方面被认为是至关重要的，并将确保该项目是可以实现的。

项目成果

Psy expert evidence in the family courts the potential for corpus-assisted analysis

家庭法庭上的心理学专家证据表明语料库辅助分析的潜力

• DOI: 10.21747/21833745/lanlaw/9_1a5
• 发表时间: 2022
• 期刊: Language and Law=Linguagem e Direito
• 作者: Devine L

The role of parents in the Child Death Review Process

父母在儿童死亡审查过程中的作用

• 发表时间: 2015
• 期刊: Argument & Critique
• 作者: Devine, L.

Rethinking child protection strategy: progress and next steps

重新思考儿童保护战略：进展和后续步骤

• 发表时间: 2016
• 期刊: Seen and Heard
• 作者: Devine, L.

The Adequacy of Remedies in Respect of Unsubstantiated Accusations of Child Abuse

针对未经证实的虐待儿童指控的补救措施是否充分

• 发表时间: 2017
• 期刊: Child and Family Law Quarterly
• 作者: Devine, L.

Considering social work assessment of families.

• DOI: 10.1080/09649069.2015.998005
• 发表时间: 2015-01-02
• 期刊: The Journal of social welfare & family law
• 作者: Devine L