Child Neglect In The Uk
Neglect has now been identified as the most common form of child maltreatment within the United Kingdom. It is therefore vital that children’s services are proactive and up to date in their understanding of the issue (NSPCC, 2015). Until recently, available research on child neglect within the UK has been limited (Farmer & Lutman, 2014). While the gap in research is beginning to narrow, there is a pressing need for research evidence on neglect to continue to improve, in order to improve practice around parental neglect (Farmer & Lutman, 2014). First and foremost an exploration of the current definition of neglect is required. On from the identification of a working definition, the following essay will endeavor to explore; the current picture of neglect within the UK; risk factors in neglect; the impact upon children; the ecological, developmental and attachment perspectives with regard to enhancing practice; and finally intervention opportunities, with specific reference to community models, the involvement of fathers, strengths based, resilience focused methods and attachment based work with parents. For purpose of this essay
…show more content…
‘children’ refers to those 0-18 years of age.
Currently the definition of neglect is subject to variation across agencies, disciplines and professional groups. It is recognised within research that a ‘one size fits all’ definition of neglect is greatly difficult to achieve (NSPCC, 2015). The difficulty lies in the number of factors which must be taken into consideration in order to provide a holistic definition (Child Welfare Information Gateway, 2006). For example; the requirements of good enough parenting, the level of action or inaction of parents in meeting their children’s needs, the requirement or not of intentionality in neglect, the impacts upon a child with regard to age and developmental level and the relevance of determining a failure or inability to provide adequate care (Child Welfare Information Gateway, 2006). It is possible that the previous lack of research on neglect is directly linked to the difficulties in achieving a ‘one size fits all’ definition (Horwath, 2013). With regard to each of the considerations above, for the purpose of the essay, neglect will be referred to in line with the most up to date definition, provided within government guidance;
"Neglect may occur during pregnancy as a result of maternal substance abuse. Once a child is born, neglect may involve a parent or carer failing to provide adequate food, clothing and shelter (including exclusion from home or abandonment); protect a child from physical and emotional harm or danger; ensure adequate supervision (including the use of inadequate care-givers); ensure access to appropriate medical care or treatment. It may also include neglect of, or unresponsiveness to, a child's basic emotional needs." (HM Government 2015, Pg 93)
Current picture of neglect within the United Kingdom
At present 1 in 10 children within the UK will experience neglect (NSPCC, 2016).
In the year 2013/14 the police recorded 9,516 cruelty and neglect offences against children within the UK. This statistic is the highest number of neglect offences recorded in a decade. In the year 2015 over 24,300 children came to the attention of children’s services due to needing protection from neglect (NSPCC, 2016). In addition, it is noted that neglect is recognised as a factor within 60% of serious case reviews (NSPCC, 2016). While the figures are clear in representing the rise in the recording of neglect within the UK, the statistics by no means reflect the true number of children suffering from neglect. All police recorded crime statistics are impacted by levels of under-reporting, it is therefore impossible for the statistics to present the full
picture.
Legislation, Policy and Guidance
When attempting to understand the impact of neglect and improve practice, it is imperative to examine recognition of the issue within legislation (Department for Legislation, 2016). It is fair to comment that legislation, policy and guidance around neglect has not been a priority on government agendas, despite the importance in influencing child protection measures (Department for Legislation, 2016). The criminal law on child neglect was not reviewed for a period of eighty years (Williams, 2014). Neglect was first recognised in the Poor Law Amendment 1868 following a child death, which resulted from medical neglect (Williams, 2014). The Act defined ‘willful neglect’ as a criminal offence in cases where the child’s health had been or was likely to be ‘seriously injured’ (Williams, 2014). The Act was eventually replaced by the Children and Young Person’s Act 1933. However, neglect as a criminal offence remained under the requirement that it had been ‘willful’ (Williams, 2014). From this point legislation with regard to neglect remained untouched and unquestioned until the year 2012.
April 2012 saw the charity Action for Children publicise the need for the reform of the 1933 Act (Willams, 2014). Central to the campaign was the message that the legal framework needed to ‘catch up’ with society’s current understanding of acceptable parenting, child protection and neglect as a form of child abuse (Beard, 2014). The charity proposed a new offence of child maltreatment, recognising the emotional and developmental needs of children (Beard, 2014). June 2014 saw Government announce the introduction of a Serious Crime Bill for the protection of the most vulnerable children, by clarifying the 1933 Act (Beard, 2014). The clarification categorised emotional neglect and psychological harm as offences of child cruelty (Beard, 2014).
The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) has provided a benchmark in recognising the need to protect children from neglect. The UNCRC is a legally-binding international agreement which presents the civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights of every child, which must be ensured by the government (Save the Children, 2015). Under the UNCRC a child’s rights include; right to: life, survival and development; protection from violence, abuse or neglect; an education that enables children to fulfil their potential; be raised by, or have a relationship with their parents; express their opinions and be listened to (Save the Children, 2015).
Working together to Safeguard Children (2015) is also key in practice around neglect, in particular due to establishing ‘notifiable incidents’ (HM Government, 2015). However, while there has been some reform within legislation, policy and guidance, it cannot be said that the level of reform reflects the scale of the issue currently (Hoyano, 2013). Even within the most up to date definition provided by Working Together (2015), as seen above, neglect is categorised as a sustained and serious failure to meet a child’s basic needs (Turney & Tanner, 2005). The definition does not give consideration to the potential continuum of parental neglect, from reactive or short-term to chronic or severe (Turney & Tanner, 2005).
While the legislation specific to neglect has been outlined, it is also important to recognise that additional legislation can be drawn upon in neglect cases. The Department of Education is central to the protection of children in England and is responsible for; the Children Act 1989 & 2004, Safeguarding Vulnerable groups Act 2006, Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Children and Families Act 2014, Children and Young Persons Act 2008 and Education Act 2011 (Hoyano, 2013).
Risk Factors The recent research on parental neglect has enabled the identification of the most vulnerable children (Moran, 2009). Those at higher risk of neglect include; children born to mothers facing domestic abuse, substance misuse and mental health issues; low birth weight babies; disabled children; children in care; seeking asylum; low income and unemployed families; isolated families; maternal low self-esteem; young mothers and parents with insecure attachment patterns (Moran, 2009; Cleaver et al, 2011). However, the factors identified to increase a child’s risk of neglect cannot predict the occurrence with any certainty (Moran, 2009; Farmer & Lutman, 2014). A single causal factor for neglect cannot be identified. In fact neglect results from a complex interplay of cumulative factors (Farmer & Lutman, 2014).
In further examining risk there is a need to be able to distinguish between risk indicators and risk mechanisms in neglect (Moran, 2009). For example, while poverty has been widely associated with neglect, research into low income families would suggest that poverty is more likely to be an indicator of other factors, which are more directly involved in the neglect, than to be the causal factor (Moran, 2009). Research is able to indicate that poverty and child neglect are linked most heavily through the difficulty poverty presents in maintaining interpersonal relationships and therefore support networks (Jütte, 2014; Moran, 2009).
It must be noted that many of the factors which contribute to the likelihood of parental neglect, can be understood in relation to difficulties within the attachment process (Daniel & Wassall, 2015). Bowbly (1973) identified that an individuals own experience of parenting forms the basis of all their working models of relationships in the future (Moran, 2009). Experiences of inconsistent, cold, hostile or neglectful parenting are likely to manifest into an insecure attachment style which in turn often affects an individual’s ability to parent successfully (Moran, 2009). Attachment theory will later be explored in relation to theoretical frameworks for intervention (Daniel & Wassall, 2015).
Impact
Numerous standpoints have been put forward in an attempt to identify the causes of neglect as seen above, however there remains little clarity. Although there is lack of clarity upon concrete evidential causes, there is certainty among researchers that neglect can have long lasting negative effects for children (Friedman, 2010). Neglect is linked to a number of physical and emotional impairments and in some cases even death (Friedman, 2010). There has historically been an assumption, that the physical experiences of neglect pose most difficulty for a child. However, research presents that it is in fact the emotional impact of neglect which has lasting implications for the child (Friedman, 2010).
Research has now linked the impact of neglect on brain development, to many of the difficulties faced by neglected children (Brown & Ward, 2013). However, research also identifies that the majority of changes to the brain, observed in connection with neglect, are adaptations to the adverse environment rather than irreparable damage (Brown & Ward, 2013). The emotional development of neglected children has been seen to be significantly hindered (Donellan, 2010; Brown & Ward, 2013). This group of children often exhibit confusion around the emotional reactions of individuals they are interacting with, as well as difficulty in developing coping or problem solving skills (Friedman, 2010). Neglected children also, often have a poor perception of self (Donellan, 2010). The impact of neglectful parenting has been seen to manifest itself in cognitive and academic deficits, internalisation and withdrawal (Friedman, 2010). Low or negative expectations of the social world have been commonly identified (Donellan, 2010). It is also common for neglected children to present with behavioral difficulties (Friedman, 2010). Behavioral difficulties in neglected children has been linked to stress. Severe stress however, has the further ability to impact upon the immune and the nervous system (Friedman, 2010). It is important to note that the majority impacts persist for neglected children into adolescence (Hicks & Stein, 2010).
While the risk factors and impacts associated with parental neglect have begun to rightly receive attention within research, research opposing the view that all neglected children will suffer is largely ignored (Moran, 2009). There is room to recognise that not all children exposed to neglect will suffer from the effects. In recognising the multifaceted nature of neglect in relation to risk and impact, the recognition of factors which can contribute to a child’s resilience must also be considered (Moran, 2009). A small scale study has identified factors which support resilience building in children facing neglect. The first factors are child’s ability to learn coping strategies, to plan ahead, problem solve, to be optimistic, to manage stressful situations and to build positive self-esteem (Moran, 2009). The second factor is the opportunity for meaningful and rewarding roles, linked to an event or an on-going factor, which in turn boosts self-esteem. The final contributing factor in building resilience is support (Moran, 2009). There is clear benefit in knowledge around cumulative risk factors, but in turn there is benefit in the exploration of cumulative protective factors for children when intervening in neglect (Moran, 2009; Farmer & Lutman, 2014).
‘children’ refers to those 0-18 years of age.
Currently the definition of neglect is subject to variation across agencies, disciplines and professional groups. It is recognised within research that a ‘one size fits all’ definition of neglect is greatly difficult to achieve (NSPCC, 2015). The difficulty lies in the number of factors which must be taken into consideration in order to provide a holistic definition (Child Welfare Information Gateway, 2006). For example; the requirements of good enough parenting, the level of action or inaction of parents in meeting their children’s needs, the requirement or not of intentionality in neglect, the impacts upon a child with regard to age and developmental level and the relevance of determining a failure or inability to provide adequate care (Child Welfare Information Gateway, 2006). It is possible that the previous lack of research on neglect is directly linked to the difficulties in achieving a ‘one size fits all’ definition (Horwath, 2013). With regard to each of the considerations above, for the purpose of the essay, neglect will be referred to in line with the most up to date definition, provided within government guidance;
"Neglect may occur during pregnancy as a result of maternal substance abuse. Once a child is born, neglect may involve a parent or carer failing to provide adequate food, clothing and shelter (including exclusion from home or abandonment); protect a child from physical and emotional harm or danger; ensure adequate supervision (including the use of inadequate care-givers); ensure access to appropriate medical care or treatment. It may also include neglect of, or unresponsiveness to, a child's basic emotional needs." (HM Government 2015, Pg 93)
Current picture of neglect within the United Kingdom
At present 1 in 10 children within the UK will experience neglect (NSPCC, 2016).
In the year 2013/14 the police recorded 9,516 cruelty and neglect offences against children within the UK. This statistic is the highest number of neglect offences recorded in a decade. In the year 2015 over 24,300 children came to the attention of children’s services due to needing protection from neglect (NSPCC, 2016). In addition, it is noted that neglect is recognised as a factor within 60% of serious case reviews (NSPCC, 2016). While the figures are clear in representing the rise in the recording of neglect within the UK, the statistics by no means reflect the true number of children suffering from neglect. All police recorded crime statistics are impacted by levels of under-reporting, it is therefore impossible for the statistics to present the full
picture.
Legislation, Policy and Guidance
When attempting to understand the impact of neglect and improve practice, it is imperative to examine recognition of the issue within legislation (Department for Legislation, 2016). It is fair to comment that legislation, policy and guidance around neglect has not been a priority on government agendas, despite the importance in influencing child protection measures (Department for Legislation, 2016). The criminal law on child neglect was not reviewed for a period of eighty years (Williams, 2014). Neglect was first recognised in the Poor Law Amendment 1868 following a child death, which resulted from medical neglect (Williams, 2014). The Act defined ‘willful neglect’ as a criminal offence in cases where the child’s health had been or was likely to be ‘seriously injured’ (Williams, 2014). The Act was eventually replaced by the Children and Young Person’s Act 1933. However, neglect as a criminal offence remained under the requirement that it had been ‘willful’ (Williams, 2014). From this point legislation with regard to neglect remained untouched and unquestioned until the year 2012.
April 2012 saw the charity Action for Children publicise the need for the reform of the 1933 Act (Willams, 2014). Central to the campaign was the message that the legal framework needed to ‘catch up’ with society’s current understanding of acceptable parenting, child protection and neglect as a form of child abuse (Beard, 2014). The charity proposed a new offence of child maltreatment, recognising the emotional and developmental needs of children (Beard, 2014). June 2014 saw Government announce the introduction of a Serious Crime Bill for the protection of the most vulnerable children, by clarifying the 1933 Act (Beard, 2014). The clarification categorised emotional neglect and psychological harm as offences of child cruelty (Beard, 2014).
The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) has provided a benchmark in recognising the need to protect children from neglect. The UNCRC is a legally-binding international agreement which presents the civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights of every child, which must be ensured by the government (Save the Children, 2015). Under the UNCRC a child’s rights include; right to: life, survival and development; protection from violence, abuse or neglect; an education that enables children to fulfil their potential; be raised by, or have a relationship with their parents; express their opinions and be listened to (Save the Children, 2015).
Working together to Safeguard Children (2015) is also key in practice around neglect, in particular due to establishing ‘notifiable incidents’ (HM Government, 2015). However, while there has been some reform within legislation, policy and guidance, it cannot be said that the level of reform reflects the scale of the issue currently (Hoyano, 2013). Even within the most up to date definition provided by Working Together (2015), as seen above, neglect is categorised as a sustained and serious failure to meet a child’s basic needs (Turney & Tanner, 2005). The definition does not give consideration to the potential continuum of parental neglect, from reactive or short-term to chronic or severe (Turney & Tanner, 2005).
While the legislation specific to neglect has been outlined, it is also important to recognise that additional legislation can be drawn upon in neglect cases. The Department of Education is central to the protection of children in England and is responsible for; the Children Act 1989 & 2004, Safeguarding Vulnerable groups Act 2006, Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Children and Families Act 2014, Children and Young Persons Act 2008 and Education Act 2011 (Hoyano, 2013).
Risk Factors The recent research on parental neglect has enabled the identification of the most vulnerable children (Moran, 2009). Those at higher risk of neglect include; children born to mothers facing domestic abuse, substance misuse and mental health issues; low birth weight babies; disabled children; children in care; seeking asylum; low income and unemployed families; isolated families; maternal low self-esteem; young mothers and parents with insecure attachment patterns (Moran, 2009; Cleaver et al, 2011). However, the factors identified to increase a child’s risk of neglect cannot predict the occurrence with any certainty (Moran, 2009; Farmer & Lutman, 2014). A single causal factor for neglect cannot be identified. In fact neglect results from a complex interplay of cumulative factors (Farmer & Lutman, 2014).
In further examining risk there is a need to be able to distinguish between risk indicators and risk mechanisms in neglect (Moran, 2009). For example, while poverty has been widely associated with neglect, research into low income families would suggest that poverty is more likely to be an indicator of other factors, which are more directly involved in the neglect, than to be the causal factor (Moran, 2009). Research is able to indicate that poverty and child neglect are linked most heavily through the difficulty poverty presents in maintaining interpersonal relationships and therefore support networks (Jütte, 2014; Moran, 2009).
It must be noted that many of the factors which contribute to the likelihood of parental neglect, can be understood in relation to difficulties within the attachment process (Daniel & Wassall, 2015). Bowbly (1973) identified that an individuals own experience of parenting forms the basis of all their working models of relationships in the future (Moran, 2009). Experiences of inconsistent, cold, hostile or neglectful parenting are likely to manifest into an insecure attachment style which in turn often affects an individual’s ability to parent successfully (Moran, 2009). Attachment theory will later be explored in relation to theoretical frameworks for intervention (Daniel & Wassall, 2015).
Impact
Numerous standpoints have been put forward in an attempt to identify the causes of neglect as seen above, however there remains little clarity. Although there is lack of clarity upon concrete evidential causes, there is certainty among researchers that neglect can have long lasting negative effects for children (Friedman, 2010). Neglect is linked to a number of physical and emotional impairments and in some cases even death (Friedman, 2010). There has historically been an assumption, that the physical experiences of neglect pose most difficulty for a child. However, research presents that it is in fact the emotional impact of neglect which has lasting implications for the child (Friedman, 2010).
Research has now linked the impact of neglect on brain development, to many of the difficulties faced by neglected children (Brown & Ward, 2013). However, research also identifies that the majority of changes to the brain, observed in connection with neglect, are adaptations to the adverse environment rather than irreparable damage (Brown & Ward, 2013). The emotional development of neglected children has been seen to be significantly hindered (Donellan, 2010; Brown & Ward, 2013). This group of children often exhibit confusion around the emotional reactions of individuals they are interacting with, as well as difficulty in developing coping or problem solving skills (Friedman, 2010). Neglected children also, often have a poor perception of self (Donellan, 2010). The impact of neglectful parenting has been seen to manifest itself in cognitive and academic deficits, internalisation and withdrawal (Friedman, 2010). Low or negative expectations of the social world have been commonly identified (Donellan, 2010). It is also common for neglected children to present with behavioral difficulties (Friedman, 2010). Behavioral difficulties in neglected children has been linked to stress. Severe stress however, has the further ability to impact upon the immune and the nervous system (Friedman, 2010). It is important to note that the majority impacts persist for neglected children into adolescence (Hicks & Stein, 2010).
While the risk factors and impacts associated with parental neglect have begun to rightly receive attention within research, research opposing the view that all neglected children will suffer is largely ignored (Moran, 2009). There is room to recognise that not all children exposed to neglect will suffer from the effects. In recognising the multifaceted nature of neglect in relation to risk and impact, the recognition of factors which can contribute to a child’s resilience must also be considered (Moran, 2009). A small scale study has identified factors which support resilience building in children facing neglect. The first factors are child’s ability to learn coping strategies, to plan ahead, problem solve, to be optimistic, to manage stressful situations and to build positive self-esteem (Moran, 2009). The second factor is the opportunity for meaningful and rewarding roles, linked to an event or an on-going factor, which in turn boosts self-esteem. The final contributing factor in building resilience is support (Moran, 2009). There is clear benefit in knowledge around cumulative risk factors, but in turn there is benefit in the exploration of cumulative protective factors for children when intervening in neglect (Moran, 2009; Farmer & Lutman, 2014).