3. The socio-political context3.1. Child well-being in the UKUNICEF data indicates that UK child well-being is the lowest in the industrialised world(Bradshaw et al., 2007), with behaviour and mental health comparing unfavourably withlevels 30 years ago (Collishaw et al., 2004; Maughan et al., 2008).This situation is likely to worsen as the current economic crisis continues. As it does,financial distress will increasingly affect family functioning adversely. This situation isespecially detrimental to socially excluded families. High stress levels and social isolationare known to lead to increased levels of child abuse and serious neglect (DePanfilis, 2006).In times of economic crisis, therefore, there is a heightened need for society to implementuniversal parenting programmes (Layard & Dunn, 2009).Intervention is essential as these problems have serious immediate and long-term costs forfamilies and society. Children with early-onset conduct disorders typically develop low selfesteem(Scott, 1998) and poor social competences (Webster-Stratton & Lindsay, 1999)which may result in difficulties in social interaction (Coie, 1990). In the long-term, they areat heightened risk of drug abuse and depression in their adolescence and adulthood(Kazdin, 1995; Loeber, 1991). Early-onset aggressive behaviour in boys is one of the bestpredictors of anti-social and criminal behaviour in adolescence and adulthood, includingviolent offending (Farrington, 2008; Broidy et al., 2003).Significant costs to society are then accrued from children’s subsequent utilisation ofhealth, education, social, legal and prison services. The average cost per family of antisocialbehaviour by young children in the UK is £15,382 per year (Knapp, 1997). This addsup to to £1m during a person’s lifetime (Scott et al., 2001). Much of the cost is borne bypublic services; particularly in areas of high social exclusion (Van Der Linden et al., 2003)where families are more likely to rely on state-provided services (Scott et al., 2001).Much is now known about how child well-being problems develop and how economicfactors affect family and home life. The social ecology theory of child development(Bronfenbrenner, 1979) suggests that children’s development is affected by multiplefactors operating systemically at the individual, interpersonal and community levels. Theseinclude the genetic predisposition of the infant, the relationship between the child and itsprimary carer, the family’s relationship with the school, the child’s relationship with itscommunity, the family’s position in the local community and the status of the communityin the larger social structure.Using standardised checklists of child stressors it has been identified that 70 per cent aredue to family problems (Linville et al., 2010). A classic study by Crnic and Greenberg (1990)showed that high levels of parental stress impact negatively on child well-being. Conflict inthe parental relationship is highly correlated with child conduct disorder (Stormshak et al.,2011). Parental stress and social isolation increase domestic violence, child abuse andneglect. These factors negatively affect child mental health. Behavioural difficulties inchildren are affected by how parents interact with them and many children developproblem behaviours because their parents lack key parenting skills (Hutchings et al., 2004).16 Professional Practice Board
The losses that a recession can bring to family life can have a huge impact where familiesare living in pre-existing stressful circumstances. These include marginalisation, socialisolation, poverty, being from a minority racial or religious background, not being a nativelocal language speaker or having legal immigrant status. The way in which these losses areunderstood within families can also be an important factor in determining the degree oftheir impact because the interpretation of the causes of economic loss are mediated throughindividual’s responses to their pre-existing social circumstances (Hill, 1958; Boss, 2002).This is important because research also indicates that it is family functioning that mediatesthe impact of external stressors on children. Families serve as the primary protective factorfor child functioning in adverse circumstances (Dunst et al., 1988). To protect children wemust protect families. According to socio-ecological theory the same argument that appliesto the mediation of child stress through their experience of their family life also applies totheir experience of their school (Bronfenbrenner, 1979; Cicchetti & Lynch, 1993).Experience at school can also be mediated through family life. Depending on issues arisingin the family, children can find school to be a negative or a positive experience; forexample, some children become victims of bullying whereas others thrive in a competitiveethos.Social learning theory tells us that under ordinary circumstances what adults learn in onesetting can fail to transfer to other settings (Bandura, 1977). Therefore both home andschool must be taken into consideration when offering universal support to parents.Hence, promoting a positive overlap between school and home settings can be a significantpsychological factor mediating parenting programme success.To measure the impact of these factors in such complex environments the assessmentmethods and interventions used in parenting programme research must be able to addressthe complexity of the systemic structures that families face in today’s social world.3.2. Evidence-based parenting and family skills training programmesA broad understanding of how children’s problems develop provides insights into boththeir prevention and how to manage later ameliorating interventions. Psychologists havedeveloped parenting programmes which are rigorously scientifically tested. These areknown as ‘evidence-based programmes’. There is an emerging political consensus aboutthe value of these programmes (Welshman, 2010).Several evidence-based parenting programmes now appear in government and researchdatabases. They do so because they have been assessed as meeting an agreed standard ofevidence. Although the debate about the meaning of ‘evidence’ and the validity of‘hierarchies’ of evidence shows no signs of abating (Sheldon & Macdonald, 2009; Gray etal., 2009) there is an emerging consensus in some circles that evidence-based programmesare those that have been shown to be effective when researched rigorously in high-qualityrandomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-experimental studies (Flay et al., 2005;Elliott, 2010). The UNODC recommended list (2010), which is ranked on the number ofRCTs in which a programme has been found to be effective, is shown in Box 1. This is byno means the only or best list of evidence-based programmes, and by using it in this paperwe do not necessarily endorse it, but it has the advantage of being produced by the UN.<strong>Technique</strong> <strong>Is</strong> <strong>Not</strong> <strong>Enough</strong> 17
- Page 1 and 2: Professional Practice BoardTechniqu
- Page 3: ContentsAcknowledgements ..........
- Page 6 and 7: We also wish to thank Sarah Fitzroy
- Page 8 and 9: alienation and sense of isolation f
- Page 10 and 11: A range of these programmes are rec
- Page 12 and 13: 2. Vision and purpose2.1. The brief
- Page 14 and 15: From this conference a commitment t
- Page 16 and 17: development strategies have been us
- Page 20 and 21: Box 1: UNODC compilation of evidenc
- Page 22 and 23: cost-effective and it has caused so
- Page 24 and 25: Positive ActionPositive Action was
- Page 26 and 27: ■Programmes must have robust evid
- Page 28 and 29: These principles are based on our a
- Page 30 and 31: families who might benefit. This pr
- Page 32 and 33: providers and partner agencies were
- Page 34 and 35: Positive Parenting Programme (Tripl
- Page 36 and 37: multiple approaches that also inclu
- Page 38 and 39: need to learn English in their pare
- Page 40 and 41: Parenting programmes that work in m
- Page 42 and 43: 5. Principle 2. Cultural sensitivit
- Page 44 and 45: Positive ActionPositive Action faci
- Page 46 and 47: attitudes. Such attitudes can surfa
- Page 48 and 49: developed purely from a theory-driv
- Page 50 and 51: cultural heritages lecture at them.
- Page 52 and 53: having reciprocal relationships to
- Page 54 and 55: first started delivering the progra
- Page 56 and 57: Strengthening Families ProgramWhen
- Page 58 and 59: 7. Principle 4. Sustainability: Cre
- Page 60 and 61: operate at different levels. Some a
- Page 62 and 63: Incredible YearsAnother component o
- Page 64 and 65: commissioners can have more confide
- Page 66 and 67: Incentives for achieving model fide
- Page 68 and 69:
8. A framework for ensuring that ev
- Page 70 and 71:
9. Next stepsEvidence-based parenti
- Page 72 and 73:
70 Professional Practice Board
- Page 74 and 75:
72 Professional Practice Board
- Page 76 and 77:
ReferencesAlinsky, S.D. (1971). Rul
- Page 78 and 79:
Davidson, G. & Campbell, J. (2007).
- Page 80 and 81:
Heindrichs, N., Bertram, H., Kusche
- Page 82 and 83:
McDonald, L., FitzRoy, S., Fuchs, I
- Page 84 and 85:
Spoth, R., Redmond, C., Hockaday, C
- Page 86:
The British Psychological SocietySt