Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Childhood Studies > CYPLaw studies > Flashcards

CYPLaw studies Flashcards

1
Q

Kilbrandon Report 1964

A

‘the need in every case to have regard for the child’s welfare’
‘child in trouble’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Ministry of Justice 2017

A

Youth offender characteristics:

  • higher proportion FSMs
  • poorer academic performance
  • more likely to have special educational needs
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Flood-Page et al 2000

A

Youth Crime Survey 1998/99

  • most commit petty crimes in teenage years
  • offending falls sharply at 21
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Ministry of Justice 2015

A

73% Youth reoffending rate within 12 months

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Plotnikoff and Woolfson 2009

A

NSPCC, measuring up?
- interviews with 182 young witnesses and their parents

  • significant pre-trial delay common (only 65% went ahead first time, one rescheduled 9 times)
  • average waiting time 3.5 hours in magistrates/youth court, 5.8 hours in crime court (up to 31 hours)
  • 30% saw nothing of court before giving evidence - not offered pre-trial visit/too far away or inconvenient time/no video tour offered
  • 22% able to practice speaking on live link
  • 55% saw pre-recorded evidence for first time at trial, most found upsetting
  • 48% used public entrance with no escort, most saw defendent in court spaces
  • 12% gave evidence in open court with no screen, some because live link broken. 15% did not give evidence in the way they wanted
  • often developmentally inappropriate questioning style, not understanding questions, rudeness, lawyer tried to get them to say things they didn’t mean
  • 11% sexual offence victims asked to demonstrate intimate touching on bodies
  • studies/school attendance affected in pre-trial period, high anxiety

ONLY 50% IDENTIFIED SOMETHING GOOD FOR THEM IN HAVING BEEN A WITNESS

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Fionda 2001

A

Legal concepts of childhood

  • dependent child
  • autonomous child
  • incompetent child
  • undeveloped adult
  • unruly child
  • marginalised child
  • symbolism of ‘good’ vs ‘bad’ child in media
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

McGhee and Waterhouse 2007

A

Study of Scottish youth system vs USA

Classification of children:

  • increasing
  • imprecise
  • overlapping
  • subject to change over time

Bad - variability of judgement? borderline/hard cases? treating children as adults?
- should consider complexity of biography, eg adversity and poverty, or will freeze identity

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Jewkes 2004

A

Media construction of children: ‘evil monsters’ vs ‘tragic victims’

  • contradictory and confused views about youth in society (eg age of consent/age to sexually assault)
  • paradoxes fuel the media need to show binary opposites - individual pathology or vulnerability allows avoidance of responsibility by society
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Allnock and Miller 2013

A

NSPCC, experiences of disclosure of child abuse

  • in-depth interviews and questionnaires with 60 young adults who had experienced sexual, physical or emotional abuse or neglect as children (95% sexual abuse) - mainly by family members
  • mainly female, 92% White British, significantly higher rates disability
  • actual disclosure averaged 7.8 years after onset of abuse (most tried to disclose at the time) - the younger the sexual abuse started, the longer it took to disclose
  • disclose directly, verbally, or indirectly, behaviourally
  • partial/prompted/accidental/assisted disclosures

Reasons for disclosure
- to stop abuse, to get support, to protect others, to seek justice

Disclosures promoted by (only 10% positive disclosure journey)
- intervention by others, developmental changes, emotional needs changes, change in nature of abuse, protecting others, remembering forgotten abuse

Disclosures prevented by

  • no-one to turn to - systematic abuse in family, or fear of response leading to criminal action
  • fears and anxieties manipulated by perpetrator - subtle or forceful
  • developmental barriers - did not recognise it as abuse or lacked vocabulary
  • emotional barriers and anxieties
  • no recognition of abuse by others
  • anxiety over confidentiality of information
  • missed opportunities for intervention in informal disclosure, or linked formal disclosure handled poorly (eg teacher inviting parents in to discuss)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Department for Education 2017 (CPPs)

A

51,000 currently on child protection plans

- on an upward trend - better identification of abuse?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Fitch and Sutton 2007

A

NSPCC

  • Megan’s law in USA not evidence based, purely populist policy
  • makes children less safe - risk ‘going underground’, less likely to reoffend if well integrated in communities, parents’ ‘right to know’ gives false sense of security, risk of vigilante action
  • policy for parents! not in children’s best interests
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Howard League for Penal Reform 2007

A

Pandemic crime, Youth Crime Survey

  • 95% victim of crime in last 12 months - assault, theft, vandalism
  • 1/3 reported to police - fear of not being believed/being blamed
  • consider in context of a ‘child sized world’
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Walke et al 2013

A

Study of victim, bully-victim, and bully groups

  • both victim groups adverse effects into adulthood
  • bully group no adverse effects, but more likely to commit crime later
  • can bullying be a criminal offence? fines? labels?
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Goldson 2006

A

Conditions in child prisons - ‘conditions and treatment routinely violates emotional, psychological and physical integrity’

  • expensive, and spectacularly ineffective (80% reconviction rates)
  • ‘control’ techniques would be child abuse in any other context (strip searching, solitary confinement)
  • HM Chief Inspector of Prisons 2006 - bullying present in most establishments
  • staff:child ratio 4:60 in YOIs, with no professional training on damaged children, 7 days max training on children at all

Violence against children in the justice system facilitated by:

  • ‘tough on crime’ policies (political not criminological logic)
  • negative media (Jamie Bulger 1993 exceptional, yet held up as example of ‘childhood in crisis’)
  • over-use of detention
  • impunity, lack of accountability

Maybe containing a population of children with multiple welfare needs and complex vulnerabilities is in itself abusive? - an abused population in an abusive system

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Offending, Crime and Justice Survey 2003-6

A

Low levels of offending behaviour in children and young people
- ‘violent incidents’ are really non-injury assaults - a slap/punch/grab

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

‘Rush to custody’ statistics

A

Goldson 2006

- between 1993-2006, 800% increase in child prisoners under 14, 90% increase in 15-17 year olds

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Goldson 2002

A

Population of child prisoners

  • 48% living apart from any family before entering prison
  • 12% in local authority care, 12% on the streets
  • 73% describe educational achievement as ‘nil’
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Huxtable 2000

A
  • many contradictions in law vs case law (Lord Donaldson) - Gillick says competent minor’s refusal should be binding, but doesn’t happen
  • override autonomy for beneficence and non-maleficence - need examination of interplay of four principles and decision on priority - any pro-autonomy approach is futile, court would just find evidence of incompetence. Idea that refusal comes from ‘limited understanding’ paternalistic view
  • competence is irrelevant, why bother assessing it
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

BMJ 2008

A

Hannah Jones

  • drugs given for leukaemia as young child damaged heart
  • at age 14, refused recommended heart transplant (supported by parents)
  • argument for incompetence, events overtaken her too fast, she doesn’t understand consequences
  • but child protection officer find her competent and adamant
  • one year later she then consents to transplant, goes well, back to school
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Beauchamp and Childress 1979

A

Four principles of medical ethics

  • non-maleficence
  • beneficence
  • autonomy
  • justice
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Bridgeman 2010

A

Critically ill children and best interests

Best interests principle

  • can never be objective checklist, and depends on value system of decision maker
  • but does recognise value and vulnerability of children, the flexibility can be good, and principle is well understood by parents

Support parents

  • healthcare professionals give as much information and advice as possible
  • let parents do things as feels right to them
  • don’t pressure into making a decision
  • make decision as a couple
  • don’t dwell on decision once made
22
Q

McHaffie et al 2001

A

Parents must be personally persuaded that withdrawal of medical treatment is in their child’s best interests in order to live with the decision

23
Q

GMC 2007

A

Guidance for doctors
- communication essential with child - involve in decisions, allow to speak without parents, be honest and open, encourage questions

Assessing best interests:

  • what is clinically indicated
  • views of child
  • views of parent/those close to child
  • cultural/religious beliefs
  • views of other healthcare professionals
  • views on welfare of other professionals
  • which choice least restricts future options
  • – weight given to each point depends on circumstances
24
Q

Cherney 2010

A

Self-determination rights - child’s rights to exercise control
Nurturance rights - society’s obligations to make decisions in best interests of the child

  • interviews and questionnaires of children and both parents (unusual to include fathers)
  • generally, parents’ understanding of children’s knowledge and perception of rights is accurate - but 25% time, thought child would advocate for rights more strongly than they did (children want protection)
  • adolescents don’t argue indiscriminately for rights, but consider them carefully
  • no differences in age or gender in advocacy
  • older children use reasoning based more on rights and choices, younger children reason based on outcomes and consequences
25
Q

Cherney and Shing 2008

A

US and Swiss children campaign more for self-determination rights than Chinese and Malaysian children

Buddhist children for more SD rights than Christians

  • cultural and religious context influences SD vs nurturance rights
26
Q

Baroness Hale of Richmond 2012

A

Child’s needs in court

  • need a voice
  • need a friend
  • need a champion
27
Q

Lamb et al 2007

A

Children’s testimony - interview technique

1) Establishing and building rapport
2) Initiating and supporting free narrative account
3) Questioning
4) Closure

28
Q

Beckett and Warrington 2015

A

Young people’s experiences of criminal justice system

  • most say initial encounters with police lacked sensitivity and respect, many made to feel culpable for abuse
  • inconsistent implementation of good practice
  • feelings of loss of control, no clear communication
  • limited preparation for court, pre-trial visits, memory refreshing
  • variation in rules for cross-examination and safety in court space, use of special measures
  • post-court period especially hard, but failed to provide appropriate support
29
Q

Moore 2008

A
  • child victims particularly vulnerable to anxiety and trauma in criminal justice proceedings
  • need proper and relevant training for professionals working with child victims
  • don’t need organisational change, just need proper implementation of existing training schemes
30
Q

Office for National Statistics, contact with child after separation

A
  • non-resident parent says see child more than resident parents says they do
  • resident parent more likely to say non-resident parent never sees child

-> desirable response? if (father) walked away, doesn’t want to admit to not seeing children

31
Q

Trinder studies (2005, -07, -10, -13)

A

Around 10% separating parents seek court orders for contact arrangements with children

  • tend to be younger, poorer, have more problems
  • legal process designed to achieve agreement and contact
  • Australian reforms to increase shared parenting orders by courts - but unlikely to be sustained, fathers happier than mothers, no child support in either direction, creates litigation conflict and safety concerns
  • enforcement of orders can be problematic
32
Q

Financial support after separation (child support)

A

13% pay no child support
Those that do pay, pay 88% of what is owed
(only who is registered, many more pay nothing)

  • agreements hard to reach
  • poverty (two houses more expensive than one)
  • use of child maintenance service has fees
33
Q

Department for Education 2004

A

Green paper, parental separation

- both parent’s responsibilities to organise contact

34
Q

Legal aid changes 2013

A
  • massive decrease in MIAMS

- only tend to go if have legal aid and if forced, then don’t go on to further mediation

35
Q

Re A: A Letter to a Young Person 2017

A
  • Justice Peter Jackson to 14yo Sam
  • not allowed to give evidence, instead briefly answer 3 pre-prepared questions per side at the hearing then leave - not questioned directly by either parent and feels satisfied that got point of view across
  • gives judgement as letter to Sam, clear but not patronising
  • careful consideration of best interests
  • recommend continue current contact, don’t move to Scandinavia
  • makes court order so no more applications about Sam can be brought without Designated Family Judge allowing it for another 2+ years
36
Q

Fortin 2006

A

Effect of HRA on domestic practice in children’s cases

  • little attempt to articulate children’s interests as rights
  • language encourages parents to see problems from only adult standpoint, with young children as just objects of litigation not litigators on own behalf
37
Q

Cashmore and Parkinson 2009

A

Child involvement in parental separation

GOOD
- feel listened to, more likely to agree with outcome, children as experts, capacity depends on context (will be fine if supported), no need to take sides (CAFCASS), good for child’s opinion to be heard by parents, children usually want a say

BAD
- traumatic process, views changeable and can be persuaded, detrimental to be pressured by parents, may lack capacity to make reasoned choices

38
Q

Department of Children, Schools and Families (DCSF) 2009

A

Impact of family breakdown on children’s wellbeing

  • significant differences in educational achievement, behaviour, mental health, self-concept, social competence, long-term health
  • rarely enduring problems (sometimes problems into adulthood, but sometimes good to get away from conflict situation)
  • stepfamilies vary hugely - the more complex the harder the adjustment - but family functioning much more important than family type
  • do better when involved in decisions and well prepared

To improve outcomes
- support maternal mental health, facilitate cooperative parenting, facilitate parent-child communication, manage parental conflict, reduce financial hardship

  • need to recognise family breakdown not as a single event, but complex interactions of risk and benefit (relationships, conflict, finances)
39
Q

Harding and Newman 2015

A

Analysis of 197 case files from county court in period in 2011 (legal aid still available, no assumption of parental involvement in child’s care after separation)

  • court plays key role in adjudicating private child law disputes
  • no indications of gender bias in deciding where child should live
  • court actively promotes as much contact as possible, even if proven domestic violence/welfare concerns/strong opposition from older children
  • only 7% tried mediation before court action
  • only 21 court investigations into domestic violence, despite 86 allegations
  • most applications bought by fathers, whilst child living with mother at time of application
40
Q

Pleace et al 2008

A

5 linked surveys on the experiences of homelessness of families and 16-17 year olds

Families

  • generally good, not extremely vulnerable, net improvement in quality of life following assistance under homelessness legislation
  • adults poor health, poor social support, some extremely vulnerable (usually headed by lone mothers, following relationship breakdown)
  • children generally happy at home and in school, in good health
  • usually given self contained temporary accommodation - if in settled housing significantly more satisfied

16-17 year olds

  • extremely vulnerable group, mainly NEET, but improvement in quality of life following assistance under homelessness legislation
  • supported accommodation could be helpful transitional intervention - appreciate company of other young people and help of staff (don’t significantly prefer settled housing)

BOTH
- longest waiting times in London, larger families. Tend to be ethnic minority families, 1/3 were asylum seekers

41
Q

Shelter 2013

A
  • classed as homeless
  • in priority need
  • unintentionally homeless (only given 28 days)
  • with local connection
  • then council must provide longer-term temporary housing until able to move into settled accommodation
42
Q

Department for communities and local government 2010

A
  • in best interests of 16-17 year olds to live in family home, or in family/friends network - LA should work to mediate return home
  • consider that 16-17 year olds may be forming own families, may be appropriate to house with partner (but need back up)
  • particular vulnerabilities of 16-17 year olds - estranged from families and in need of support (B n Bs unsuitable)
  • should be joint assessment of needs by both children’s and housing services
  • essential to be fully consulted, understand the implications of being accommodated and looked after if children’s services
  • accurate information in child-friendly format
43
Q

G v LB Southwark 2009

A

17 yo excluded from family home
- needs assessment found not in need of accommodation under s20 CA, just ‘help with accommodation’ and referral to homeless person’s unit

Ruled that duty under CA is primary, and falls to children’s services not housing authority
- ‘child in need’, so need to support past 18 as was once looked after 16-17 year old

44
Q

Shelter 2009

A

Common problems encountered by young people and homelessness

  • gatekeeping - sent elsewhere
  • incomplete advice
  • inadequate/unsatisfactory accommodation
  • provision of supported accommodation outside the legislation (suitable in short term, but then no assistance past 18)
  • if reject s20 (looked after child) then seen as intentionally homeless, but may just be used to independence
  • delay from defined timescales
45
Q

Barker 2015

A

Ethnographic research of 18 homeless young people in Australia, immersive for one year

  • habitus of instability
  • if given stability, may feel unnerving and -> self-sabotage, feels like taking control of the inevitable to end friendship/support service/accommodation option
  • for most, homelessness is brief episode, but for some they adapt to conditions and adopt culture and insecurity of homelessness
  • used to uncertainty from family (no support), so difficulty trusting, makes it hard to engage in EET
  • sense of autonomy and mobility seen as assets and skills necessary to survive homelessness, but viewed negatively in broader society

No real choices, need to recognise that structural conditions and limitations make practices

46
Q

E v LB Islington 2017

A

9yo E lives with profoundly deaf, illiterate, no speech mother and two younger siblings

  • flee home from domestic violence, homeless
  • moved between three London boroughs
  • three periods of time when out of education - overall 20/39 school weeks absent, no holiday work for 9/13 weeks - impacts especially severe as poverty of stimulus at home
  • E’s right to education denied, Islington’s responsibility
47
Q

Sagar and Hitchings 2007

A

Social workers’ response to target-setting by government

  • semi structured interviews with social workers (few agreed, limited)
  • all disagree with government targets
  • negative consequences of rushing process
  • prospective adopters need time to think within relentless assessments
  • major pressure on social workers, especially family finding team
    (unrealistic and not in best interests of the child)
  • need more training for social workers
  • assessments should be more probing (people say what they think you want to hear)
  • need more training for prospective adopters - only over one week period, too short - can’t use traditional parenting
  • reluctance to involve social services by new family if not working until last minute, fear of judgement and removal of child
48
Q

Verdun 2014

A

Contradictions in adoption law:

- adoptions as last resort vs more adoptions more quickly

49
Q

Lord Justice McFarlane 2017

A

Balance between child protection and right to family life

  • massively important decisions, but no feedback on cases that work/don’t
  • transparency needed, public and press into family court hearings so that accurate media representation of court process. Ignorance of system -> disengagement, distrust in lawyers and judges
  • is adoption really the best option? has changed so much, now adoptive families as therapeutic interventions, need training and long term support
  • – maybe instead long-term foster care with planned rehabilitation into natural family, or some lifelong links to stay in touch with family
  • borderline decisions on neglect, maybe could keep child at home if had resources to support family
  • should prioritise continuing contact between siblings, can make contact order any time after adoption and should use
  • focus on parents to help them break negative cycle and stop putting child at risk
  • special guardianship orders may be solution to keep child in family, but need to still have thorough assessment
  • even in domestic abuse, may be best to keep child at home under protective measures with support
50
Q

A + B and Rotherham 2014

A
  • child removed from prospective adoptive parents (13 month placement) after natural father came forward
  • need to consider child’s welfare throughout life
  • acknowledge extraordinary pain this will cause A + B, but child is paramount consideration

Childhood Studies (6 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions