Protecting young children at risk of abuse and neglect

Scroll down

All children need protection and nurture to develop and thrive, but those under five require particular support. The love and care provided by parents and caregivers lays the foundations for all future emotional, cognitive, and physical development. Sadly, many children do not receive adequate care and support.

In this review we draw on a large and complex body of evidence, including many Nuffield-funded research studies, to explore changing patterns of abuse and neglect in early childhood, including the latest evidence on the impact of COVID-19. We highlight connections and tensions in the evidence and consider how outcomes for children can be improved through a more holistic and collaborative approach to support for young children and their families.

Authors

Jordan Rehill headshot
Jordan Rehill
Carey Oppenheim headshot
Carey Oppenheim

Overview


Abuse and neglect in the earliest years of a child’s life have been shown to have severe detrimental impacts on a child’s immediate well-being and development, as well as their life chances and outcomes well into adulthood. It is estimated that over half a million children under five (around 17%) in England are living in a household with domestic abuse, parental mental health problems, or parental drug or alcohol abuse.

We are seeing early signs that abuse and neglect may be increasing as a result of the additional pressures caused by the pandemic. Children’s services are already under pressure as a result of increasing rates of child protection interventions over the last decade, particularly for children living in the poorest areas. In the same period, preventative services to support families have been cut, and many young children who are at risk of abuse or neglect are unknown to services and therefore not receiving the help they need.

The independent review of children’s social care services currently underway is recognition that our system of child protection and support needs to be re-evaluated, a conclusion echoed in our review. At the same time, social work and family justice are only one part of the solution. Poverty remains a significant risk factor and preventing harm and promoting positive outcomes for young children at risk requires a holistic and collaborative approach across government and public services.

Increases in children taken into care and reductions in preventative services

  • An increasing proportion of young children have been subject to child welfare interventions over the last 10-15 years.
  • The proportion of babies under one year old subject to care proceedings in England increased from 51 to 81 per 10,000 children between 2008 and 2016. For babies under one week old, the rate more than doubled (from 15 to 35 per 10,000 children).
  • Spending on preventative services to support families who are under pressure and struggling in England has fallen from £3.8 billion in 2010 to £2.1 billion in 2018 (reductions have been less severe in Wales), while spending on statutory and acute services, such as provision for children in care has largely been protected.
  • Reductions in spending on preventative services is at odds with evidence that shows interventions at the right time in early childhood can protect children and support their families to help them thrive, particularly when offered as a holistic, ongoing package of support across different children’s and adult services.

Poverty and child welfare interventions

  • A lack of data makes it impossible to ascertain fully the extent to which the increases in child protection and welfare interventions are because of actual increases in abuse and neglect, more reporting, more risk-averse social work or cuts to preventative services. In all likelihood it is a combination of all these.
  • There is evidence that the chance of experiencing a child welfare intervention is not experienced equally across all families and that poverty is a driving factor. Children living in the poorest neighbourhoods are at least ten times more likely to be in care than children in the richest neighbourhoods, and this relationship is stronger for pre-school children.
  • There are also inequalities between ethnic groups in the proportions of children being looked after in England, although little attention has been paid to these inequalities by policy makers and there is a lack of evidence to sufficiently understand and explain them.

Fragmented and disconnected system of support

  • In the last two decades there have been major attempts to integrate services to support children and families at risk of abuse and neglect, and young children more broadly.
  • When offered as a holistic, ongoing package of support across agencies (e.g. across children’s social care and adult support services), early help has the power to prevent abuse and neglect, or ameliorate its impact. However, the diversification of early help funding and provision around children’s centres has meant that there is significant variation in local offers.
  • To truly support children at risk a holistic cross-governmental framework is needed—social work and family justice are only one part of the solution.

Outcomes for children

  • We know more about outcomes for young children at risk of abuse and neglect than we did 20 years ago, but much is still unknown.
  • Outcomes for children in the child welfare system are generally less favourable than for other children. These outcomes are often shaped by a combination of structural and societal factors (such as exposure to poverty and changing welfare systems) as well as child and family-related issues. However, we still know very little about the early outcomes of children under five in these systems, including early educational progress, and even less about their early social emotional development compared to the wider child population.

Impact of COVID-19

  • Incidents involving death or serious harm to children under five where abuse or neglect is known or suspected increased during the early months of the pandemic (April to September 2020). Compared to the same period in 2019, such incidents increased by 31% for children under one (a total of 102 children) and 50% for children aged one to five (a total of 48 children).
  • The pandemic has disrupted the usual pathways for referring children to services, meaning children at risk of abuse and neglect may be being missed. These issues appear to be even more acute for infants and for babies born in the pandemic, with many children’s centres closing and health and GP check-ups coming via video link or telephone.

 

Points for discussion


There is ongoing debate as to whether too many children are being taken into state protection, or whether too many are being missed. Before any semblance of consensus can be reached on this issue, we need more research on maltreated children in population-representative cohort studies, rather than solely relying on reports about officially registered cases, which are often a highly biased subset, and often only the tip of the iceberg.

But is the question of whether the state is intervening too little or too much the right question to be posing? Should society and services instead be focusing on whether different state agencies are intervening in the right way? Is the current model of protection the best way of preventing harm and promoting children and family outcomes? How do children and families experience the services available – do they help solve the underlying problems?

Are we right as a society to focus on social work interventions as the main or only way to address the increasing challenges to early childhood? Does the child welfare system focus too much on keeping a small cohort of children alive, and not enough on helping them (and a wider group of vulnerable children who do not reach the same thresholds) to be happy, do well in life, and make the transitions to succeeding in adulthood?

Publication references

The changing face of early childhood in Britain

A series that brings together the research evidence on early childhood in the UK and presents recommendations for policy and practice, as well as priorities for research.

View Series

Profile