Paradoxical evidence on ethnic inequities in child welfare

towards a research agenda

Paul Bywaters, Jonathan Scourfield, Calum Webb, Kate Morris, Brigid Featherstone, Geraldine Brady, Chantel Jones, Tim Sparks

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

This paper aims to compare developments in theory and evidence about ethnic disparities in the USA with findings from the Child Welfare Inequalities Project in England with a view to identifying key issues for a future research agenda. It has a particular focus on the relevance of the concept of the Hispanic Paradox for disparate intervention rates between ethnic populations in England. Three key theoretical dimensions for explaining such disparities are identified and outlined: artefactual, demand and supply factors. Findings from the study in England are then introduced to explore the relevance of these dimensions in a data set of over 14,000 individual children who were either on child protection plans (with substantiated child abuse or neglect) or who were ‘looked after children: in out-of-home care, at the 31st March 2015. While some ethnic populations were experiencing much more difficult average socio-economic circumstances (SEC) than others (using deprivation scores for small neighbourhoods as a proxy measure of family SEC), such factors were only a partial explanation for differential intervention rates between ethnic groups. Overall, large differences in intervention rates were found between ethnic categories and sub-categories which also confounded simply attributing disparities to either cultural differences, such as family patterns, or to individual or institutionalised discrimination. The potential for cost saving if intervention rates could match those ethnic groups with the lowest levels of service use would be considerable. More research is needed to ensure that data is comprehensive, reliable and valid, that there is better understanding of how socio-economic factors affect service demand and what characteristics of different ethnic populations and different approaches to service provision contribute to differential intervention rates. Key elements of such a research agenda are identified.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)145-154
Number of pages10
JournalChildren and Youth Services Review
Volume96
Early online date22 Nov 2018
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jan 2019

Fingerprint

Child Welfare
child welfare
England
Child Abuse
Economics
Ethnic Groups
Research
Population
evidence
Proxy
Home Care Services
ethnic group
Hispanic Americans
demand
child protection
Costs and Cost Analysis
home care
deprivation
cultural difference
economic factors

Cite this

Bywaters, Paul ; Scourfield, Jonathan ; Webb, Calum ; Morris, Kate ; Featherstone, Brigid ; Brady, Geraldine ; Jones, Chantel ; Sparks, Tim. / Paradoxical evidence on ethnic inequities in child welfare : towards a research agenda. In: Children and Youth Services Review. 2019 ; Vol. 96. pp. 145-154.
@article{5bb6437f4d4f4172b947efc7c0218c59,
title = "Paradoxical evidence on ethnic inequities in child welfare: towards a research agenda",
abstract = "This paper aims to compare developments in theory and evidence about ethnic disparities in the USA with findings from the Child Welfare Inequalities Project in England with a view to identifying key issues for a future research agenda. It has a particular focus on the relevance of the concept of the Hispanic Paradox for disparate intervention rates between ethnic populations in England. Three key theoretical dimensions for explaining such disparities are identified and outlined: artefactual, demand and supply factors. Findings from the study in England are then introduced to explore the relevance of these dimensions in a data set of over 14,000 individual children who were either on child protection plans (with substantiated child abuse or neglect) or who were ‘looked after children: in out-of-home care, at the 31st March 2015. While some ethnic populations were experiencing much more difficult average socio-economic circumstances (SEC) than others (using deprivation scores for small neighbourhoods as a proxy measure of family SEC), such factors were only a partial explanation for differential intervention rates between ethnic groups. Overall, large differences in intervention rates were found between ethnic categories and sub-categories which also confounded simply attributing disparities to either cultural differences, such as family patterns, or to individual or institutionalised discrimination. The potential for cost saving if intervention rates could match those ethnic groups with the lowest levels of service use would be considerable. More research is needed to ensure that data is comprehensive, reliable and valid, that there is better understanding of how socio-economic factors affect service demand and what characteristics of different ethnic populations and different approaches to service provision contribute to differential intervention rates. Key elements of such a research agenda are identified.",
keywords = "child protection, ethnicity, Looked after children, inequality, disparities, out of home care, Inequity, Ethnicity, Out-of-home care, Disparity, Child abuse and neglect",
author = "Paul Bywaters and Jonathan Scourfield and Calum Webb and Kate Morris and Brigid Featherstone and Geraldine Brady and Chantel Jones and Tim Sparks",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.childyouth.2018.11.042",
language = "English",
volume = "96",
pages = "145--154",
journal = "Children and Youth Services Review",
issn = "0190-7409",
publisher = "Elsevier Limited",

}

Paradoxical evidence on ethnic inequities in child welfare : towards a research agenda. / Bywaters, Paul; Scourfield, Jonathan; Webb, Calum; Morris, Kate; Featherstone, Brigid; Brady, Geraldine; Jones, Chantel; Sparks, Tim.

In: Children and Youth Services Review, Vol. 96, 01.01.2019, p. 145-154.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Paradoxical evidence on ethnic inequities in child welfare

T2 - towards a research agenda

AU - Bywaters, Paul

AU - Scourfield, Jonathan

AU - Webb, Calum

AU - Morris, Kate

AU - Featherstone, Brigid

AU - Brady, Geraldine

AU - Jones, Chantel

AU - Sparks, Tim

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - This paper aims to compare developments in theory and evidence about ethnic disparities in the USA with findings from the Child Welfare Inequalities Project in England with a view to identifying key issues for a future research agenda. It has a particular focus on the relevance of the concept of the Hispanic Paradox for disparate intervention rates between ethnic populations in England. Three key theoretical dimensions for explaining such disparities are identified and outlined: artefactual, demand and supply factors. Findings from the study in England are then introduced to explore the relevance of these dimensions in a data set of over 14,000 individual children who were either on child protection plans (with substantiated child abuse or neglect) or who were ‘looked after children: in out-of-home care, at the 31st March 2015. While some ethnic populations were experiencing much more difficult average socio-economic circumstances (SEC) than others (using deprivation scores for small neighbourhoods as a proxy measure of family SEC), such factors were only a partial explanation for differential intervention rates between ethnic groups. Overall, large differences in intervention rates were found between ethnic categories and sub-categories which also confounded simply attributing disparities to either cultural differences, such as family patterns, or to individual or institutionalised discrimination. The potential for cost saving if intervention rates could match those ethnic groups with the lowest levels of service use would be considerable. More research is needed to ensure that data is comprehensive, reliable and valid, that there is better understanding of how socio-economic factors affect service demand and what characteristics of different ethnic populations and different approaches to service provision contribute to differential intervention rates. Key elements of such a research agenda are identified.

AB - This paper aims to compare developments in theory and evidence about ethnic disparities in the USA with findings from the Child Welfare Inequalities Project in England with a view to identifying key issues for a future research agenda. It has a particular focus on the relevance of the concept of the Hispanic Paradox for disparate intervention rates between ethnic populations in England. Three key theoretical dimensions for explaining such disparities are identified and outlined: artefactual, demand and supply factors. Findings from the study in England are then introduced to explore the relevance of these dimensions in a data set of over 14,000 individual children who were either on child protection plans (with substantiated child abuse or neglect) or who were ‘looked after children: in out-of-home care, at the 31st March 2015. While some ethnic populations were experiencing much more difficult average socio-economic circumstances (SEC) than others (using deprivation scores for small neighbourhoods as a proxy measure of family SEC), such factors were only a partial explanation for differential intervention rates between ethnic groups. Overall, large differences in intervention rates were found between ethnic categories and sub-categories which also confounded simply attributing disparities to either cultural differences, such as family patterns, or to individual or institutionalised discrimination. The potential for cost saving if intervention rates could match those ethnic groups with the lowest levels of service use would be considerable. More research is needed to ensure that data is comprehensive, reliable and valid, that there is better understanding of how socio-economic factors affect service demand and what characteristics of different ethnic populations and different approaches to service provision contribute to differential intervention rates. Key elements of such a research agenda are identified.

KW - child protection

KW - ethnicity

KW - Looked after children

KW - inequality

KW - disparities

KW - out of home care

KW - Inequity

KW - Ethnicity

KW - Out-of-home care

KW - Disparity

KW - Child abuse and neglect

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85057490777&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.childyouth.2018.11.042

DO - 10.1016/j.childyouth.2018.11.042

M3 - Article

VL - 96

SP - 145

EP - 154

JO - Children and Youth Services Review

JF - Children and Youth Services Review

SN - 0190-7409

ER -