IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/cysrev/v120y2021ics0190740920321848.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Services and support for mothers and newborn babies in vulnerable situations: A study of eight European jurisdictions

Author

Listed:
  • Luhamaa, Katre
  • McEwan-Strand, Amy
  • Ruiken, Barbara
  • Skivenes, Marit
  • Wingens, Florian

Abstract

European countries have a legal obligation to provide services to vulnerable families, and children must not be removed from their parents’ care unless no other viable measures are available. This paper examines whether and how eight jurisdictions provide necessary support and services to families with newborn babies who are considered to be at risk in the child protection system. The data consist of all judgments (n = 216) concerning care orders for 220 newborns for periods ranging from one to several years. The analysis shows that services are provided in an overall majority of the cases but with distinct differences between jurisdictions. These differences are not due to the type of child protection system. Furthermore, we cannot ascertain whether service provision follows parental problems, or identify similarities due to the special case of newborns. We conclude that there are huge knowledge gaps regarding both service provision and the effects of services.

Suggested Citation

  • Luhamaa, Katre & McEwan-Strand, Amy & Ruiken, Barbara & Skivenes, Marit & Wingens, Florian, 2021. "Services and support for mothers and newborn babies in vulnerable situations: A study of eight European jurisdictions," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:cysrev:v:120:y:2021:i:c:s0190740920321848
    DOI: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105762
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0190740920321848
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105762?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bilson, Andy & Bywaters, Paul, 2020. "Born into care: Evidence of a failed state," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    2. Brown, Rebecca & Ward, Harriet, 2014. "Cumulative jeopardy: How professional responses to evidence of abuse and neglect further jeopardise children's life chances by being out of kilter with timeframes for early childhood development," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 47(P3), pages 260-267.
    3. Juhasz, Ida Benedicte, 2020. "Child welfare and future assessments – An analysis of discretionary decision-making in newborn removals in Norway," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    4. Hestbæk, Anne-Dorthe & Höjer, Ingrid & Pösö, Tarja & Skivenes, Marit, 2020. "Child welfare removal of infants: Exploring policies and principles for decision-making in Nordic countries," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    5. Fuller, Tamara & Nieto, Martin, 2014. "Child welfare services and risk of child maltreatment rereports: Do services ameliorate initial risk?," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 47(P1), pages 46-54.
    6. Bedston, Stuart & Philip, Georgia & Youansamouth, Lindsay & Clifton, John & Broadhurst, Karen & Brandon, Marian & Hu, Yang, 2019. "Linked lives: Gender, family relations and recurrent care proceedings in England," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 1-1.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Russell, Jesse Rio & Kerwin, Colleen & Halverson, Julie L., 2018. "Is child protective services effective?," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 185-192.
    2. Helton, Jesse J., 2016. "Food neglect and maltreatment re-report," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 77-83.
    3. Ward, Harriet & Brown, Rebecca, 2016. "Cumulative jeopardy when children are at risk of significant harm: A response to Bywaters," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 222-229.
    4. Jones, Annette Semanchin & LaLiberte, Traci & Piescher, Kristine N., 2015. "Defining and strengthening child well-being in child protection," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 57-70.
    5. Doebler, Stefanie & Broadhurst, Karen & Alrouh, Bachar & Cusworth, Linda & Griffiths, Lucy, 2022. "Born into care: Associations between area-level deprivation and the rates of children entering care proceedings in Wales," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    6. Keddell, Emily & Cleaver, Kerri & Fitzmaurice, Luke, 2021. "The perspectives of community-based practitioners on preventing baby removals : Addressing legitimate and illegitimate factors," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    7. Jenkins, Brian Q. & Tilbury, Clare & Hayes, Hennessey & Mazerolle, Paul, 2019. "Do measures of child protection recurrence obscure the differences between reporting and substantiation?," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 1-1.
    8. Bywaters, Paul, 2015. "Cumulative jeopardy? A response to Brown and Ward," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 68-73.
    9. Janet Boddy & Bella Wheeler, 2020. "Recognition and Justice? Conceptualizing Support for Women Whose Children Are in Care or Adopted," Societies, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-21, December.
    10. Juhasz, Ida Benedicte, 2020. "Child welfare and future assessments – An analysis of discretionary decision-making in newborn removals in Norway," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    11. Georgia Philip & Lindsay Youansamouth & Stuart Bedston & Karen Broadhurst & Yang Hu & John Clifton & Marian Brandon, 2020. "“I Had No Hope, I Had No Help at All” : Insights from a First Study of Fathers and Recurrent Care Proceedings," Societies, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-16, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:cysrev:v:120:y:2021:i:c:s0190740920321848. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/childyouth .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.