2013-05-24T19:03:02-04:00 Enver Solomon http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/author/index.php?author=enver-solomon Copyright 2008, HuffingtonPost.com, Inc. HuffingtonPost Blogger Feed for Enver Solomon Good old fashioned elbow grease. tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.2725527 2013-02-20T13:38:52-05:00 2013-04-22T05:12:01-04:00

Enver Solomon http://www.huffingtonpost.com/enver-solomon/ child poverty map of the UK published by the Campaign to End Child Poverty reveals the shocking depth and breadth of child poverty that still exists across the country. In England alone, nearly a third of local authorities have at least one in four children living in poverty; where parents have to choose between eating and heating for the family because they are so hard up.

The disparities across the country are vast. Poverty levels in constituencies such as Manchester Central and Poplar and Limehouse reach over 40 per cent; in contrast, the poverty rate in the Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister's constituencies is under 10 per cent.

There's nothing inevitable about high levels of child poverty. As UNICEF showed last year, the UK comes 22nd out of 35 of the wealthiest industrialized countries in terms of its child poverty rates. And this is despite several years of sustained progress in reducing the number of children growing up poor. The Government has committed to the target set out in the Child Poverty Act 2010 to end child poverty in the UK by 2020. But now the chances of sustaining any progress towards achieving this target are very bleak.

The IFS predict that an additional 800,000 children will be in poverty by 2020; the Government's own estimates show that the Welfare Uprating Bill alone will push another 200,000 children below the poverty line. There's an urgent need for the government to set out a strategy to show how it will move towards a consistent fall in the number of children living in poverty, rather than the predicted increases.

But the report published this week also shows that there's much that local authorities can do to help prevent poverty in their area. Although councils are dealing with significant cuts to local budgets, they are increasingly gaining control over local spending on social security; End Child Poverty is calling on them to consider the needs of families with children when they make decisions about local discretionary spending.

From April, councils have responsibility for deciding who will be eligible for help with paying council tax, who receives emergency loans and grants, and who gets additional support to deal with the bedroom tax and the benefit cap. These decisions will have a significant impact on the lives of children and families on the edge of or below the poverty line.

Local authorities are also gaining responsibility for health and wellbeing in their area, with the establishment of new local health and wellbeing boards. These bodies need to recognize that poverty is a key driver of children's health. Their plans and needs analysis must link with the duties under the Child Poverty Act to publish a child poverty strategy. Local authorities must also ensure there is a holistic approach by integrating public health and anti poverty work with their overall approach to implementing welfare reform.

Ultimately child poverty will only be tackled by all levels of Government working together. The report today shows just how urgent the need is for that to happen.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.2716658 2013-02-19T09:46:12-05:00 2013-04-21T05:12:02-04:00

Enver Solomon http://www.huffingtonpost.com/enver-solomon/
The government's response to this, published today, is to sign a pledge to reduce child deaths and demand others with the power to make a difference to join them in doing so. The aspiration is that "for the very first time, everyone across the health and care system is determined to play their part in improving health outcomes for children and young people".

Why, one might ask, when we are talking about a section of society we have all at one stage been a part of, and one that accounts for up to a quarter of the population, have children been an after-thought rather than a priority in health provision for so long?

The problem is, of course, complex, but there are some simple issues which need attention. General Practice primary care is not working as well as it should do for children - death rates for illnesses which rely heavily on primary care services such as asthma and pneumonia, are higher in the UK than other comparable countries. Throughout the system there are too many errors by staff who have inadequate paediatric training or supervision. This is reflected in the fact that the Healthcare Commission reported that nearly a half of acute trusts are weak on outpatient care for children with services designed around acute illness rather than chronic disease. Poor GP provision for children has meant that hospitals have become overwhelmed with acute and minor illnesses whilst services for long term conditions suffer.

The pledge to reduce child deaths is a clear sign the government is committed to radically improving outcomes. It follows a report of the Children and Young People's Outcomes Forum, a panel of independent experts appointed by the then secretary of state for health, Andrew Lansley, to advise on what outcomes matter most to children, young people and their families, and what the reformed health system can do to help improve these. The Forum made a wide range of recommendations to address the current failings: giving children a stronger voice in the health service, improving an 'unacceptable' situation with children's medication, and the old chestnut of health and other services needing to work together more efficiently.

Accompanying today's pledge is a "sector wide response" which, while not offering solutions to every issue raised by the Forum, does contain some very welcome commitments. There is hope of better data on the health challenges children experience and their views on the health services they access, with the piloting of a new health and wellbeing survey. The government is also committed to considering the feasibility of accepting all of the Forum's recommendations on improving outcome indicator measures for children.

An area which will need some more development is ensuring that children and young people get their just portion of attention through the various measures in the new system to promote patient and public involvement, and to empower patients in decisions about their own care. The National Children's Bureau have been calling for a young person's version of the NHS constitution - this is not just about 'easy read' but about explaining patient rights in a way that is relevant to how children and young people access health services.

What is probably most encouraging, however, is the unequivocal recognition by government of the challenge. As the minister, Dan Poulter, stresses in his foreword to the response, many children are not getting the care and support they need. But it will be hard to make progress without key partners acknowledging that there is a problem; hopefully all those agencies working on child health at a local level and across central government will now join in signing up to the pledge. That would be an important first step on the road to making sure we deliver the very best health care for our children.

NCB has issued a press statement on the government plans.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.2695407 2013-02-15T19:00:00-05:00 2013-04-17T05:12:01-04:00

Enver Solomon http://www.huffingtonpost.com/enver-solomon/
A new report published by the National Children's Bureau 'Tackling child poverty and promoting children's well-being: lessons from abroad' looks at how solutions with a proven track record from other countries could be adapted to work in the UK. These include making childcare more affordable to working mothers, offering cash incentives for families that participate in initiatives that promote child health and well-being, and introducing neighbourhood 'anti-poverty zones' to provide community-based solutions to poverty. To oversee these measures requires a central ministerial board to drive forward action across government.

A key component in the mix of measures required to reduce child poverty is to make childcare more affordable to poorer families and thereby encourage more mothers into work. This is central to the approach of countries like Denmark, where 84 per cent of mothers are in employment, compared to just 67 per cent in the UK. To achieve this, the government should consider increasing the number of hours of free early education available to families, raising the proportion of childcare covered by tax credits, and making after-school care more readily available.

Supplementing families' incomes for engaging in activities that promote child health and well-being is another measure which has contributed to tackling child poverty elsewhere. A scheme in New York has shown how by providing families with additional cash on top of existing benefits or tax credits, the government could increase families' financial resources while encouraging the use of health services and regular school attendance.

As well as focusing on increasing the financial resources of individual families, measures are also required that recognize that poverty is concentrated in specific geographical areas and neighbourhoods. By improving economic opportunities, housing, infrastructure, community safety and local services, the government can turn around poverty-stricken communities. To promote this approach, government should create a number of neighbourhood-based Anti-Poverty Innovation Zones, similar to one pioneered in Northern Ireland, as a means of bringing together the range of agencies that promote children's well-being to develop community-based solutions.

To deliver such wide ranging measures requires strong guidance from central government. In Connecticut, the state government has created a special council to bring together the departments that each have a role in reducing child poverty. A similar body is required in the UK and must have the power to call other departments to account in implementing our child poverty strategy. A ministerial board, with support from senior civil servants, is needed to drive forward initiatives across government departments.

The coalition has clearly signaled that tackling child poverty is one of its priorities - in its 2010 programme for government it pledged to "maintain the goal of ending child poverty in the UK by 2020". At present it is examining how it will measure child poverty. Rather than obsessing about this when we already have internationally recognised measures set out in the Child Poverty Act ministers need to give greater consideration to introducing tried and tested measures from other countries. Children in the UK need creative solutions from Whitehall, if their lives are not to be blighted by the corrosive impacts of growing up in poverty.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1201211 2012-01-12T06:20:33-05:00 2012-03-13T05:12:01-04:00

Enver Solomon http://www.huffingtonpost.com/enver-solomon/
Why is this important? It's important because young people with low well-being are deeply unhappy about essential aspects of their lives. They aren't just reacting to the ups and downs of daily life. For some, this can lead to serious long-term complications such as eating disorders and depression, a huge personal cost to them and their families and ultimately to society as a whole.

Our aim is to make sure that every child has a good childhood. Which is why The Children's Society is calling for a radical new approach to childhood. As a society, children's well-being must be placed at the heart of everything we do.

We have identified six key priorities needed for a happy childhood and are calling on government and other decision-makers to make sure these are adopted.

Children need a variety of things to flourish, all of them eminently achievable. The right conditions to learn and develop, a positive view of themselves and a respect for their identity, enough of the items and experiences that matter to them, positive relationships with their family and friends, a safe and suitable home environment and local area and the opportunity to take part in positive activities that help them thrive.

Our report also reveals that choice and family have the biggest impact on children's happiness. It is not the structure, but the relationships within a family that children care about. Loving relationships between a child and their family are 10 times more powerful than family structure in increasing well-being. Put simply, if a child has a loving and secure relationship with his or her family members, whether this is a lone parent and no siblings or both parents and several brothers and sisters, then they are likely to be significantly happier.

Stability is also important. Children who experience a change in family members they are living with are twice as likely to experience low well-being.

Financial issues, of course, have an impact. Children as young as eight are aware of the financial issues their families face, especially if their financial situation changes dramatically, such as a parent losing their job. Children from lower income households are, somewhat inevitably, likely to have lower well-being.

However the report also highlights that children do not want to have lots of money and possessions. One of the key findings is that children like to be similar to their friends; children who have a lot less or even a lot more pocket money than their friends have lower levels of well-being.

It certainly isn't all doom and gloom. Most of our children are happy with their lives. But if at any point in time half a million eight to 16-year-olds are unhappy, then we have to accept that as a society that we are simply not doing enough. We need to "rethink childhood" and make sure that their futures are at the heart of our decisions. ]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2011:/theblog//3.1157439 2011-12-19T07:28:48-05:00 2012-02-18T05:12:02-05:00

Enver Solomon http://www.huffingtonpost.com/enver-solomon/
The Children's Society's survey published today, which questioned over 1,000 adults and more than 1,000 children aged 13 to 17 found that, overall, they both believe the main reason that children and young people became involved in the riots was to get goods and possessions they could not afford to buy. In both groups just over a third identified this as the main reason. It was also commonly raised in a small number of focus groups we carried out. One young person said:"If you had trouble feeding your family, you would also consider stealing and taking advantage of the moment."

This correlates strongly with the Reading the Riots study and The Guardian ICM poll with adults, which found that poverty was thought to be a key factor in the riots. It indicates that material well-being cannot be overlooked as a significant issue affecting young people today. Research published earlier this year by The Children's Society showed a strong link between a child's material deprivation and their overall subjective well-being or life satisfaction. Clearly, tackling poverty and material disadvantage is crucial to avoid further unrest among children and young people.

There was also a widely held view among those surveyed that there is not one single explanation for the events - rather a number of factors were at play. So it would seem that the Home Secretary is rather out of step with public perceptions when she says the riots were about instant gratification and lawlessness. Instead our survey clearly shows that most people believe that the riots were caused by a whole range of factors - and poverty and material disadvantage are at the heart of it.

It is particularly striking that there that there is agreement between adults and children that the government should be providing more support to young people. This sends a clear message to central and local government that the public would like to see more positive activities on offer to children, rather than a reduction in out of school youth provision. It is most timely as the Department for Education has just published its youth strategy which sets out a framework of expectations and principles for supporting young people. But there is no new money to deliver the strategy and many councils are having to cut back or reconfigure youth support provision.

In seeking to understand the August events there is a risk that some voices will be heard and listened to more than others. The communities affected, the victims and those who took part all have valid opinions that must not be overlooked. But it is equally important to listen to our children and young people, so they are valued as active participants in their communities and wider society. Their views must be taken seriously by all those working to make sure that lessons are learned to avoid a repetition of the disturbances over the summer.
]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2011:/theblog//3.1153723 2011-12-18T19:00:00-05:00 2012-02-17T05:12:01-05:00

Enver Solomon http://www.huffingtonpost.com/enver-solomon/
It is positive that the government recognises that families with multiple needs are those who require a far better response to help them over come their difficulties. We know from our own work that it is enormously beneficial for a chaotic family to have intensive support coordinated by a dedicated skilled worker. By developing a trusting relationship, that person can not only challenge but also support and advocate on behalf of parents and children.

But it is important to recognise that there are no quick fixes for those whose problems are often linked with challenging mental health needs, alcohol misuse and poverty. Turning around these families' lives can be a long term process that on the way involves success and failure, and depends a great deal on accessing good quality specialist support as well as achieving financial security.

There are significant lingering questions, particularly around the financing of such an initiative. The prime minister has promised to devote a substantial sum of money to this, through budget reallocations from several government departments. However, as generous as this is, it is not new money, and amounts to just 40% of the total. Individual local authorities, already cash-strapped and cutting services will be forced to contribute the remaining 60%. Where will this money come from? Will it be taken away from other, equally crucial services? For this initiative to work, it has to be within a context of prevention. It is as important that services for the many disadvantaged children and their families who are currently not classed as 'troubled' are sustained as it is to introduce new ones to deal with those who are deemed to be the most problematic.

There are also many families and children that move in and out of crisis following sudden change in their lives who may not be identified as being the most troubled but must be able to access intensive support when they need it. Any new services should work for them as well as being made to work for those currently identified as being in greatest need. It would be a disastrous unintended outcome if support was diminished from one group of families deemed to be less of a priority in order to channel money to those considered to be more deserving.

Will it ultimately deliver the outcome the prime minister is demanding? The four outcomes, of school attendance, 'road back to work', reduce crime and anti-social behaviour and cost savings to public sector, have been generated from a four year evaluation published by the Department for Education today of intensive family intervention programmes which were established by the last Labour government. The evaluation shows no significant improvement on health or family functioning, in other words family relationships and conflict in the home. It demonstrates that tackling complex family problems takes time and delivers mixed results.

Given the wider economic and social pressures in the current era of austerity the task now is even harder than when Labour tried to tackle the same problem. And at the same time there will be more families falling into crisis who have yet to be identified by government. So while the renewed focus on those in greatest need is welcome, it will take far more than a new army of family trouble shooters to address the fundamental causes faced by families with multiple problems.
]]>