Thinking Outside the Box

I am really excited about the BASPCAN 10th International Congress which we will be hosting at the University of Warwick in April 2018. It may be 2 years away, but I think it promises to be one of the most inspiring and creative conferences on child protection ever!

Have a look at this brief video which introduces the congress (photos courtesy of Motionhouse, one of our congress partners)

Thinking Outside the Box

We will be continually updating this information over the next few months: to register your interest and receive the latest updates as they become available, please email conferences@baspcan.org.uk with your email address and the header ‘Congress 2018 Updates’.

August 16, 2016

Good news for parents with young babies

The number of unexplained infant deaths in England has fallen to its lowest ever level with just 212 babies dying of SIDS/unascertained causes in England in 2014 compared to 252 the year before[1].

This continues a steady downward trend in the SIDS death rates since the dramatic falls in the early 1990s. To lose a baby suddenly and unexpectedly is one of the worst possible fears of many parents, so the fact that the numbers are continuing to decline is really positive news.

Preventable Infant Deaths

However, for over 200 families to go through this experience each year is still a real tragedy, particularly as many of these deaths are preventable. The data from the Office for National Statistics show that the risks remain particularly high for young mothers, for those without a stable partner, and for those in manual or routine occupations. These are some of the most vulnerable families in our society.

We know what is needed to prevent most of these deaths. Perhaps the biggest impact on the declining SIDS rates has been the continued decline in the number of women smoking during pregnancy, now (2015-16) running at just over 10%, compared to 15.1% in 2006-7.[2]

Data from our 2003-6 study in SW England showed that 57% of mothers whose babies died in infancy smoked during pregnancy compared to just 14% of the random controls.[3] If we can continue to reduce both smoking during pregnancy and postnatal exposure of infants to parental smoking, we could reduce the rates even further.

Spreading the messages about safe sleeping, and helping parents, particularly those in the most vulnerable groups, to follow those messages will also help.

Little Lullaby

To help these parents, the Lullaby Trust launched Little Lullaby earlier this year – a tremendous resource for young parents. I’d encourage you to have a look and pass the link on to any young parents you know.

Little Lullaby is a social network for young parents providing them with a space where they can learn about safer sleep, while also gaining support from their peers through the ups and downs of pregnancy and parenthood

References

[1] https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/unexplaineddeathsininfancyenglandandwales/2014

[2] http://digital.nhs.uk/article/2021/Website-Search?productid=21116&q=number+of+mothers+smoking+during+pregnancy&sort=Relevance&size=10&page=1&area=both#top

[3] Blair PS, Sidebotham P, Evason-Coombe C, Edmonds M, Heckstall-Smith EM, Fleming P. Hazardous cosleeping environments and risk factors amenable to change: case-control study of SIDS in south west England. BMJ 2009; 339: b3666. doi:10.1136/bmj.b3666

August 8, 2016

Time to call for a maximum wage?

A report from the High Pay Centre this morning told us that the bosses of Britain’s biggest companies take home an average of £5.5 million, having seen their incomes rise by 10% during 2015.

This is a travesty that should have us all shouting for justice every bit as much as the travesty of people sleeping on our streets, queuing at food banks or struggling to live on a minimum wage that doesn’t even cover the basics of life.

The median pay of the chief executives of London’s FTSE index 100 firms rose to £4 million, 144 times the median wage of the average British worker (£27,600).

It is obscene, and as George Monbiot put it, ‘high pay is both counterproductive and unnecessary.’[1] To be earning 7 figure salaries cannot count as anything other than greed.

‘The successful bank robber no longer covers his face and leaps over the counter with a sawn-off shotgun. He arrives in a chauffeur-driven car, glides into the lift then saunters into an office at the top of the building. No one stops him.’ – George Monbiot, Guardian 23.1.12

But does it really matter?

The answer to this has to be a resounding yes.

Last week I reviewed a paper for a journal which, once again, pointed out the links between income inequality and child mortality. This is not just an issue for developing countries – it is a reality in our own, Western bloc.

The impact of income inequality (as measured by the GINI coefficient) on infant mortality in high income countries, has been highlighted in many scientific papers, and is neatly summarised in this figure from The spirit level[2]: those Western countries with the highest income inequality (USA, Portugal, UK, New Zealand) have the highest infant mortality rates, while the Nordic countries and Japan, with far more egalitarian societies have the lowest infant mortality rates. The only exception to this rule seems to be Singapore.

‘a 43 per cent increase in income inequality, which was observed in the UK over the period 1975–2006, would correspond to a 10.6 per cent increase in child mortality for boys and a 12.6 per cent increase for girls.’[3]

And the effects are not just in life expectancy. Income inequalities have been shown to be correlated with measures of child wellbeing, mental illness, drug use, obesity, teenage pregnancy, and much more.

So perhaps the time has come to speak out and make it clear that we don’t want to live in this kind of society. The idea of a maximum wage is not new, but perhaps it is starting to gain momentum and to be seen as a credible policy that could, perhaps, do as much for restoring justice as the minimum and living wages.

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/jan/23/george-monbiot-executive-pay-robbery

[2] Wilkinson R, Pickett K. The spirit level. London: Allen Lane; 2009.

[3] Roberta Torre & Mikko Myrskylä (2014) Income inequality and population health: An analysis of panel data for 21 developed countries, 1975–2006, Population Studies,68:1, 1-13, DOI: 10.1080/00324728.2013.856457

[4] http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/11/bernie-sanders-used-to-think-there-should-be-a-maximum-wage/416790/

August 5, 2016

Parental mental health problems and child protection

Our recent triennial review of Serious Case Reviews found a high proportion (53%) of parents whose children died or were seriously harmed through abuse and neglect had mental health problems. This finding is in keeping with other research from the UK and elsewhere which has shown links between parental mental ill-health and child maltreatment.

This, however, presents us with a dilemma: while the prevalence of parental mental ill-health in this population (parents of children seriously or fatally harmed through abuse and neglect) is high, and undoubtedly higher than in the general population, the numbers are small (31 per year) in comparison to the overall numbers of adults with mental illnesses. So, for example, the UK Biobank study, which assessed 172,751 adults from 2009-10, found that 27% met criteria for a mood disorder (major depression or bipolar disorder)[1]; extrapolating this to the 13,887,000 parents with dependent children living in the UK[2], suggests that there will be at least 3.7 million parents with a current or previous mood disorder. If you extend that to include lower levels of anxiety, depression, and other mental health problems, the numbers are likely to be even higher.

So while it may be true to say that children who suffer severe or fatal child maltreatment have a high likelihood of having a parent with a mental health problem, it does not follow that any parent with a mental health problem is likely to abuse his or her child.

Hence the dilemma. Parents with mental health problems need care and support, including support around managing their mental ill-health and support in their parenting. This will not be helped by taking a stigmatising approach, nor by assuming they are not able to effectively parent their children. The vast majority of parents with mental health parents are undoubtedly good parents who love and care for their children. Nevertheless, there will be some for whom the nature or severity of their mental health problems, or the interaction between their mental health problems and other factors, do affect their ability to care for their children.

Our research identified the co-existence of parental mental ill-health with domestic violence, with substance misuse, with social isolation, or with criminal activity all as contributing to presenting risks to children. In particular, the presence of domestic violence, when combined with mental health problems in either parent, may increase the risk to the child, even (and perhaps especially) after separation. Likewise, there may be indicators in the nature or severity of the mental illness itself. So, those parents with a history of attempted suicide, or with delusional thoughts, or who had expressed some intent to harm the child may pose a distinct risk.

So the message of these Serious Case Reviews is not to label all parents with mental health problems as potential child abusers, but rather to consider what impact their mental health may be having on the child, to work with the parent to fully explore any additional risks, and to offer respectful, supportive care for the parent and the child.

Learning to respond appropriately to parents with mental health problems is a challenge for professionals. In our research report we consider some of the implications of this and how we can facilitate better quality child- and family-oriented care. In our journal, Child Abuse Review, we have recently compiled a virtual issue bringing together a number of papers from 1999-2014 which explore some of these issues in greater depth. All of these papers are freely available online for a limited period on the journal website: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1002/(ISSN)1099-0852

Contents The articles below are freely available online until 31 August 2016.

The mental health problems of mothers experiencing the child protection system: identifying needs and appropriate responses (Volume 8, Issue 1, 1999) Nicky Stanley and Bridget Penhale

Parental mental health as a child protection issue: data from the NSPCC national child protection helpline (Volume 8, Issue 3, 1999) Vanessa Lewis and Susan J. Creighton

Building bridges: the interface between adult mental health and child protection (Volume 8, Issue 3, 1999) Charmian Tye and Gretchen Precey

Parental mental health and child protection — making the links through training (Volume 12, Issue 2, 2003) Jennifer Pearce

The experiences of children living with and caring for parents with mental illness (Volume 15, Issue 2, 2006) Jo Aldridge

The mental health of mothers of physically abused children: the relationship with children’s behavioural problems — report from Japan (Volume 15, Issue 3, 2006) Tsuneo Takei, Hiroshi Yamashita and Keiko Yoshida

Maternal mental health and faltering growth in infants (Volume 16, Issue 5, 2007) Laura Dunne, Helga Sneddon, Dorota Iwaniec and Moira C. Stewart

Championing the interface between mental health and child protection: evaluation of a service initiative to improve joint working in Northern Ireland (Volume 21, Issue 3, 2012 Gavin Davidson, Joe Duffy, Liz Barry, Patsy Curry, Eithne Darragh and Judith Lees

Making Decisions about Parental Mental Health: An Exploratory Study of Community Mental Health Team Staff (Volume 21, Issue 3, 2012) Khadj Rouf, Michael Larkin and Geoff Lowe

[1] Smith DJ, Nicholl BI, Cullen B, Martin D, Ul-Haq Z, Evans J, et al. (2013) Prevalence and Characteristics of Probable Major Depression and Bipolar Disorder within UK Biobank: Cross-Sectional Study of 172,751 Participants. PLoS ONE 8(11): e75362. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0075362

[2] http://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/families/bulletins/familiesandhouseholds/2015-11-05#families

July 31, 2016July 31, 2016

Can a person change?

John 3: 1-21 – Jesus and Nicodemus

God so loved the world

This passage is both inspiring and perplexing. It has been used as a wonderful promise and reminder of God’s love. It has also often been misinterpreted and used in a way that I think cheapens the gospel.

The promise: ‘God so loved the world’ (v16); ‘God didn’t send the son into the world to condemn the world, but so that the world could be saved by him.’ (v17) This, surely, means all people, everywhere[1].

The misinterpretation: ‘If you profess to believe a particular set of beliefs and pray a particular form of words, then you are a “born-again” Christian and you will go to heaven when you die, where you will live forever in eternal bliss. If you are not a born-again Christian, then you will be condemned to everlasting torment.’[2]

It is perhaps easy to see how this arises: ‘everyone who believes in him may not perish but have eternal life’ (v18); ‘Those who believe in him are not condemned; but those who do not believe are condemned already’. (v18)

I want to turn that round, reclaim the wonder of this passage, what it meant for Nicodemus in his encounter with Jesus, and what it can mean for us today; to focus on the heart of that encounter, and Nicodemus’ unspoken question: ‘can a person change?’[3]

Jesus and Nicodemus

John places this encounter between Nicodemus and Jesus near the beginning of his gospel and just after Jesus had cleared the temple in Jerusalem. The Jewish religious leaders will have heard about Jesus’ teaching and the miracles he had performed. They would have recognised that many people were starting to follow him. They recognised that Jesus’ action in clearing the temple was potentially threatening, and they wanted to know on what authority he was acting[4].

Nicodemus was a leading figure among the Pharisees, the religious leaders. He may have been sent by them to question Jesus further, or he may have gone on his own accord, wanting to know more. His greeting may have been as much a challenge as a statement of respect: ‘Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher who has come from God’ (v2) – ‘Are you really?’ ‘Can you prove it?’

I can imagine Nicodemus as someone who was genuinely seeking to follow God, and to lead his people in following God. Perhaps he was longing for his people to turn back to God, follow God’s ways, and so be set free from their oppression by the Romans. The Pharisees believed that such liberation would come by the nation of Israel turning back to God:

‘If you fully obey the Lord your God and carefully follow all his commands… the Lord your God will set you high above all the nations on earth… The Lord will establish you as his holy people as he promised you on oath, if you keep the commands of the Lord your God and walk in his ways. Then all the peoples on earth will see that you are called by the name of the Lord, and they will fear you. The Lord will grant you abundant prosperity… in the land he swore to your forefathers to give you.’ (Deut 28: 1-11)[5]

Nicodemus may have been frustrated by the lack of piety in the people of Israel. Maybe he wanted people to change, to be holy, but just didn’t see that. Maybe he was even frustrated with some of his fellow religious leaders, compromising their purity. He may have been seeking something more from Jesus – ‘can people change?’ ‘Are you the messiah, the one who will bring about this change?’ ‘Are you going to bring God’s kingdom?’

Can other people change?

We can all probably identify people we want to see changed. Maybe our partner, our children, our mother in law; our boss or a difficult colleague at work; or maybe those who are different from us – immigrants, young people, those with mental health problems or addictions; maybe even the person sitting in the pew in front of you.

Pause.

A friend of mine, Dave Andrews, has amended the familiar serenity prayer, recognizing that this isn’t about changing other people…

God, grant me the serenity to accept the people I cannot change,

the courage to change the one I can,

and the wisdom to know that it is me.

Dave Andrews

Can I change?

In his response to Nicodemus, Jesus seems to cut through Nicodemus’ polite greeting with a profound challenge: ‘You want to see the kingdom of God? You want to be part of that kingdom? Well unless you undergo a change as radical as being born afresh[6], you can’t.’[7]

This brings us to the heart of Jesus’ conversation with Nicodemus, and the heart of the good news that Jesus was proclaiming.

Nicodemus was an intelligent man, a leader, and someone who knew the scriptures. So, his question wasn’t a silly question. He knew that Jesus wasn’t talking about a person going back into their mother’s womb. I think he was pressing Jesus on a much deeper question: ‘Can a person really change? Can someone be given a second chance? How can someone start again and get it right this time?’ Perhaps even, ‘How can I change?’

And that, perhaps, is a question all of us ask at some point.

Isn’t this desire to be born again in many of us?

Don’t we often want to start anew,

to leave behind past hurts, habits and old ways

that imprison us in the values of our society

and prevent us from growing towards greater freedom?

Jean Vanier, Entering into the mystery of Jesus through the gospel of John

Spend a minute in silence, reflecting on that. Are there things in my life that I would like to change? Do I want a second chance? It may be that I have made mistakes, messed things up and want to start again. It may be that my own life experiences have left me hurt and bruised, or shaped me in a way that leaves me feeling frustrated or imprisoned. It may be that I have tried hard, lived a good life, tried to do the right thing, all the while feeling a sense of condemnation that I am never quite good enough. It may be that I feel trapped by my own anxieties or responsibilities.

Pause

A resounding YES

Jesus’ answer to the question, ‘can a person change?’ is a resounding YES.

Jesus’ response to each one of us, if we are asking, ‘Can I change?’ ‘Can I have a fresh start?’ is a very clear, yes. ‘Yes, you can have a fresh start; you can be born from above; you can be healed, forgiven, made clean, set free. You can be part of my kingdom.’

If we can accept that, then we will be set free from the condemnation that comes, not from God, but from ourselves and other people; from being trapped in a life dominated by greed and violence, that ultimately stifles the freedom, joy and peace that would otherwise be ours. As one of my friends has expressed it:

‘For God loved this world so much he gave humanity one of their own so that whoever could see His kingdom through the eyes of faith and hear with the ears of faith would not waste life on what leads to death but have unimaginable life that defies human ability to understand.’ – Emma Griffiths

Later in John’s gospel[8], when the Pharisees bring before Jesus a woman who had been caught in adultery, condemning her for her lifestyle, for cheating on her husband, Jesus turned their condemnation back on them, and said to the woman, ‘I don’t condemn you. You are forgiven. Now you are free to start afresh. Go, and live a new life.’

How can I change?

Which brings us, finally, to Nicodemus’ question of ‘how?’

And the answer Jesus gives seems to be, ‘believe in me’.

I want to briefly explore that a bit further.

It seems to me that the crucial thing here is that Jesus is inviting us to trust him as a person. He isn’t asking us to blindly believe some abstract theological proposition, or to follow a particular formula for being ‘born again’. Rather he is inviting us to recognise that he came to this earth as the embodiment of God’s love, and through his life, his teaching and ultimately his death, to provide a way for people to come into God’s kingdom and live the way God intended us to live.[9]

This gospel is about growing in trust,

growing in a relationship of love with Jesus.

Belief is not trusting and adhering to an abstract doctrine,

it is believing and trusting in the person of Jesus and in his words.

Jean Vanier

Jesus offers two illustrations of how this might happen:

Healing

‘Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the desert, in the same way the son of man must be lifted up, so that everyone who believes in him may share in the life of God’s new age.’ (v14-15)[10] This refers to an episode from the early history of the Jews, after they had come out of Egypt and were wandering in the desert, when they were afflicted by poisonous snakes.[11] God instructed Moses to make a bronze snake which he put up on a pole, and anyone who was bitten by a snake, if they looked at the bronze snake, would not die. I’m not too worried about the how, why, or even whether this miracle happened. What is important, I think, is to see the implications of the story: that the Israelites were suffering and dying; that there was nothing they could do to save themselves; but that when they looked towards God’s solution, they were saved.[12] Each one of us needs to accept that we cannot change ourselves – it isn’t a matter of just trying to be a better person; we need to look beyond ourselves to God’s solution:

God, grant me the serenity to accept the people I can’t change;

The courage to change the one I can;

And the humility to admit that I cannot do this in my own strength

2. The wind

‘No-one can enter the kingdom of God without being born of water and Spirit [Greek, pneuma]… The wind [pneuma] blows where it chooses, and you hear the sound of it, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit.’

There is a vulnerability in trusting/following Jesus:

To open ourselves up to this new life

is like making a journey or going on a pilgrimage.

There may be times when we do not understand Jesus,

perhaps times of doubt, anger and rebellion.

Little by little, however, trust grows

until it becomes an unconditional trust in Jesus,

Son of Man and Son of God.

We become more open to him and to his love and friendship,

whatever happens, whatever the cost or pain.

Whatever the apparent silence or absence of Jesus,

we give him our trust and believe in him.

This is the gift of God, the gift of new life,

given to us as a tiny seed when we are baptized,

cleansed by water and the Spirit.

This seed needs to be nourished in order to grow gradually,

often through pain,

into an unconditional surrender to God.

It can take time for our protective walls to weaken

and for the journey to openness to begin.

Born from above by water and the Spirit

we are called to gradually grow in love.

The seed of the Spirit has been planted in us.

We must learn how to nourish this seed

so that it can grow and bear much fruit.

This journey, our pilgrimage of love, begins and deepens

as we hear God murmur within our hearts:

“I love you just as you are.

I so love you that I come to heal you and to give you life.

Do not be afraid. Open your hearts.

It is all right to be yourself.

You do not have to be perfect or clever.

You are loved just as you are.

As you become more conscious that you are loved,

you will want to respond to that love with love, and grow in love.

Jean Vanier

[1] Perhaps ‘so that the world could be saved by him’ can be interpreted on an even wider level, and could apply to our world in terms of environment, society, culture.

[2] I might go as far as to say that this is actually a heresy or blasphemy. Since the very next verse states categorically that ‘God didn’t send his son into the world to condemn the world’ to use the previous verse in a condemnatory way to judge and exclude others is perhaps a heresy.

[3] John’s gospel suggests that Nicodemus was, indeed, changed, and became a follower of Jesus: John 7: 47-52; John 19: 38-42

[4] John 2:18: ‘what sign are you going to show us to explain why you’re doing this?’

[5] This was also emphasised in much of the teaching of the prophets, such as Ezekiel 36: 24-28 which Jesus alludes to in his emphasis on being born from above, of water and the spirit: ‘For I will take you out of the nations; I will gather you from all the countries and bring you back into your own land. I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you will be clean; I will cleanse you from all your impurities and from all your idols. I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will remove from you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit in you and move you to follow my decrees and be careful to keep my laws. You will live in the land I gave your forefathers; you will be my people, and I will be your God.’

[6] v3 ‘Unless someone has been born from above…’ Greek anōthen has a double meaning, ‘anew’ and ‘from above’.

[7] This ties in with Jesus’ equally profound challenges in Matthew 18:3 and Mark 10:15: ‘unless you change and become like little children you will never enter the kingdom of heaven’. I explore both of these in depth in my book, Growing up to be a child

[8] John 8: 3-11

[9] However, we need to recognise that Jesus’ invitation is an invitation. He does not compel us to accept it. And that may help to explain verses 18-21. To accept Jesus’ invitation is to make ourselves vulnerable, to come into the light and be seen for who we are. Many people will not accept that, and will remain, in a state of darkness. That, perhaps is what is meant by ‘those who do not believe are condemned already’: we are all in darkness, it is only by accepting the light that we can make a fresh start, born from above.

[10] ‘eternal life’ in verses 16 and 18: the Greek aiōnios signifies the age to come (aiōnes = ages). So Tom Wright translates as ‘This, you see, is how much God loved the world: enough to give his only, special son, so that everyone who believes in him should not be lost but should share in the life of God’s new age.’

[11] Numbers 21: 1-9

[12] This is reflected in the first 2 steps of the AA 12-step programme:

We admitted that we were powerless over alcohol – that our lives had become unmanageable;

We came to believe that a power greater than ourselves could restore us to sanity.

July 19, 2016July 19, 2016

How not to be a (step) Grandfather

7pm and Lois, James and Julie has gone off to Stratford to see Paapa Essiedu as Hamlet, leaving me alone in the house with four little grandchildren to look after, blithely thinking that would be a doddle for an experienced paediatrician like myself.

As I took the pants that Phoebe had just wet out to the laundry, and sent her up to get a clean pair, Maya came wandering down the garden telling me that Toby had got his head caught in the hammock. True enough, he had managed to poke his head through a hole in the aging hammock at the end of the garden, and was quietly turning blue.

Toby rescued and the hammock consigned to the dustbin, I started to tidy up the chaos in the kitchen, leaving the girls to play quietly outside on the trampoline – only to be interrupted by two cheerful Pentecostals, wanting to know if I’d been saved, and to invite me to a Salvation Mission at Nexus college down the road. I politely thanked them for their concern and assured them that I didn’t need saving (except perhaps from four demanding grandchildren!)

Phoebe appeared with her second pair of wet pants, then joined the other two on the trampoline, and I got on with tidying the kitchen.

My tasks complete, I went out to tell Phoebe that it was time for her to go to bed, only to be greeted by Talia telling me that Phoebe had now done a wee and a poo in her pants. Still, she seemed content enough to go up to the bathroom, clean herself down with a flannel and get herself off to bed with a fourth clean pair of pants.

I thought I would do the decent grandfatherly thing and read Maya and Talia a bedtime story. With fond reminiscing about Christopher Robin, or Swallows and Amazons, I was horrified to find myself confronted with one of the Secret Kingdom series:

As the three girls spun closer and closer to the ground, Summer caught her breath. The land of the Secret Kingdom was normally so beautiful, with lush meadows, tall mountains, sandy beaches and glittering seas, but now it all looked dark and desolate. Instead of the wonderful creatures who lived there, all they could see were big, ugly trolls marching across the land with heavy clubs swinging in their hands…

As I read through first one chapter then another, I found my eyelids drooping, my mind wandering and my words getting more and more muddled.

The girls looked across the lake, and there they saw the ugly Queen May-lice being carried on a chair by two ugly trolls. They looked horrible. Their bodies were big and lumpy and their arms hung down so their knuckles nearly rested on the floor. Their names were Boris and Nigel and their heads were huge, with bristly, green hair…

Finally, honour served, without too much adulteration of the scintillating story, I packed the remaining two girls off to bed, poured myself a glass of wine, and settled down to write a blog…

July 17, 2016July 17, 2016

Investment, divestment, and the myths of personal and national security

In the course of my working life I must have contributed tens of thousands of pounds to savings plans, insurance schemes, and other financial investments designed to fool me into thinking that I and my family would somehow be happier, healthier, and immune from personal economic tragedy.

Only a fraction of that cumulative investment ever has benefited me, my family, or the countless other needy people in our world who could potentially benefit from the security, health and wellbeing those thousands could provide.

As far as I am aware, none of that money has gone directly to finance arms dealers, drug dealers, people traffickers or corrupt governments. However, I cannot with absolute certainty rule that out. What I do know is that at least some of the money I have handed over to these banks, building societies, pension and insurance funds has been invested in tobacco, fossil fuels, and big corporations who apparently care little about the conditions or welfare of the people who work for them. And I am sure the rewards of those investments have gone, almost exclusively, into the pockets of the rich.

I am not, in principle, opposed to all savings and investments, nor to all insurance programmes. I have, after all, benefited from them, not just through the ease of mind they have brought, but also, in kind, when things have gone wrong. However, it does trouble me that so much money, which could do so much good, is channelled away from where it is most needed, and all driven – or so it would appear – by irrational fears and anxieties. And that, it seems to me, gets escalated at a national scale.

Tomorrow the British Parliament will vote on whether to go ahead with the renewal of the trident nuclear programme at an estimated cost of at least £41 billion (or a total lifetime cost of up to £205 billion). I struggle to understand why we are even contemplating this as a country. As Caroline Lucas, Nicola Sturgeon and others pointed out in a letter to the Guardian yesterday, the Government’s national security strategy has identified terrorism, climate change, pandemics and cyber warfare as the tier-one threats we face today. Nuclear weapons can do nothing to tackle any of those threats.

“This government’s national security strategy has identified terrorism, climate change, pandemics and cyber warfare as the tier-one threats we face today. Not only does Trident have nothing to offer in countering those threats, it sucks vast amounts of money away from dealing with them. Expert evidence indicates that the huge submarines that carry the nuclear weapons can be rendered redundant by cyber-attack and detected and targeted via new underwater drone technology.”

Caroline Lucas, Diane Abbott, Leanne Wood, Nicola Sturgeon, Mark Serwotka, Major General Patrick Cordingley

So what can I, or anyone else do about this pointless squandering of resources in chasing a myth of improved personal and national security?

As I reflect on how I have used my own resources, I feel ashamed that I, too, am a part of the problem. Over the past few years, I have worked hard to divest of my insurance policies and savings plans, particularly those I know to invest in areas that are damaging to health, welfare or our environment. I have striven to give more away and to live more simply, and have shifted my savings to ethical savings schemes. At the same time, I have written to my MP, my pension scheme and to some of the beneficiaries of the money I have invested. But I confess I haven’t found that easy. Perhaps I could do more.

We will find out tomorrow how our MPs vote on Trident. I fear that they, like me, may succumb to the irrationality of investing our money in a fear-based policy that really seems to miss the point.

July 11, 2016

Adolescent harm from abuse and neglect

New research from the University of Warwick reveals an increase in the number of adolescents who died or were seriously harmed as a result of abuse or neglect.

The research was commissioned by the Department for Education and is based on an analysis of 293 serious case reviews (SCRs) carried out in England between 2011-2014.

Serious Case Reviews

The research was led by Dr Peter Sidebotham, Associate Professor of Child Health of Warwick Medical School and Professor Marian Brandon, Professor of Social Work and Director of the University of East Anglia’s Centre for Research on Children and Families of the University of East Anglia.

The study Pathways to Harm, Pathways to Protection: A Triennial Analysis of Serious Case Reviews 2011-2014 is the fifth consecutive analysis of serious case reviews in England undertaken by the same research team dating back to reviews from 2003-2005. A serious case review (SCR) takes place after a child dies or is seriously injured and abuse or neglect is thought to be involved. It looks at lessons that can help prevent similar incidents from happening in the future

Adolescents

Their research showed a small but significant increase in fatalities and non-fatalities among two age groups 11-15 year olds and 16-17 year olds. In the current review 28% of SCRs were within the two older age groups compared to previous years when the figure was 22-25%.

Dr Sidebotham said: “Often people don’t associate abuse and neglect with adolescents and most cases involve infants and younger children, but people don’t recognise that there is a second peak in risk during adolescence.

“The increase in SCRs involving adolescents is a worrying trend. By adolescence the impact of long-standing abuse or neglect may be present in behaviours which place the young person at increased risk of harm.”

Professor Marian Brandon commented: “We found that the vulnerability of adolescents was often overlooked because they were considered to be already adult or thought to be resilient when taking time to listen to them or to understand their behaviour would have revealed the extent of their difficulties. This was often the case with the young people who were sexually exploited and also of many of the young people who took their own lives”

Drug and alcohol misuse

The research highlighted that almost two thirds of the young people aged 11-15 and 88% of the older adolescents had mental health problems. Some responded to adversity by engaging in risk-taking behaviour including drug and alcohol misuse and offending. Others were placed at risk of sexual exploitation.

Dr Sidebotham added: “This group of adolescents may find themselves particularly vulnerable to online grooming. On a positive note we found that being at school can promote good overall development and a buffer against adversities. Children not regularly in school due to poor attendance, home schooling or exclusion can be vulnerable due to their ‘invisibility’ and social isolation.”

The research has been reported in Science Daily and other online news sources.

The full report and other resources are available on the Research in Practice Serious Case Review website