19/11/2024 by noslib

Trends in child separation

Video exploring the increases in children separated from their parents in care, adoption and special guardianship

This video shows the rapidly increasing numbers of children separated from parents and living in care, adoption or special guardianship. It updates this community care article https://www.communitycare.co.uk/2017/02/09/the-governments-adoption-drive-isnt-doing-what-it-set-out-to-do/ showing that higher rates of children leaving care to adoption and special guardianship were associated with increasing trends in care – the figures presented here are in Adoption trends.

My more recent research showed how higher adoption rates were a postcode lottery and the twenty local authorities with the biggest increases in adoption decisions had a 96% increase in the number of children adopted or on placement orders in five years. Across these authorities all aspects of children’s services activity had increased more than in the other 50 local authorities with child protection investigations changing most. Postcode lottery in child protection and adoption

19/11/2024 by noslib

Social Development

Extract from UNICEF presentation to policy makers in South America proposing social development as an alternative paradigm for social work

The Social Development paradigm is discussed in this article about gatekeeping in Bulgaria but is equally relevant to countries with an Anglo-American child protection system
Bilson A. and Larkins C (2013) “Providing Alternatives to Infant Institutionalisation in Bulgaria: Can Gatekeeping Benefit from a Social Development Orientation?” Children and Youth Services Review 35 (9). pp. 1566-1575 Download here
It is also briefly discussed in this web resource on the PFAN site https://www.pfan.uk/we-can t -afford-child-protection/

19/11/2024 by noslib

Does Child Protection Reduce Harm?

Video looking at research into ability of child protection to reduce harm to children

A summary of the research in the video can be found on the PFAN website at https://www.pfan.uk/reduce-harm/

My research on trends in Western Australia is at Western Australia and the source of the graph is Differential response which also found that introducing a “differential response” reduced child protection investigations over a 10 year period

19/11/2024 by noslib

Child Protection & Deprivation

Video showing rate of children experiencing child protection services in England

For more details of this research see:
Bilson, A., Featherstone, B., Martin, K., (2017) How child protection’s ‘investigative turn’ impacts on poor and deprived communities. Family Law 47: 316-319 Prepublication version here

19/11/2024 by noslib

We Can’t afford Child protection

A video putting an international slant on why we can’t afford child protection as it currently operates

For more detailed information see my web resource with Taliah Drayak on the PFAN website https://www.pfan.uk/we-cant-afford-child-protection/

09/06/2021 by noslib

The Times: Justice for Families

I am proud to have played a part in the excellent Times campaign which has covered:

exaggeration of risk in bruised babies
misdiagnosis of fractures
babies unnecessarily taken into care
high use of care orders in Wales
rapid increase in investigations

rapid increase in parents falsely accused of harming their children
administrative delays harming children
trauma of groundless investigations
oppressive family court privacy
the importance of maintaining breastfeeding

The campaign has already been instrumental in changing local authority policies and being the stimulus for a national review of policies on bruising

Shortage-of-infant-x-ray-experts-‘causing-babies-to-be-taken-into-care-_-News-_-The-Sunday-Times

Social-workers-too-quick-to-wade-in-review-finds-_-News-_-The-Sunday-Times

Too-many-children-wrongly-taken-into-care-admits-chief-social-worker-Isabelle-Trowler-_-News-_-The-Sunday-Times

Exposed_-Broken-system-that-took-away-my-baby-_-News-_-The-Sunday-Times

The-Welsh-towns-where-1-in-44-children-are-cared-for-by-the-state-_-News-_-The-Sunday-Times-25-04-21-1

Policewomans-baby-taken-into-care-after-NHS-error-_-News-_-The-Sunday-Times-1

Family-court-privacy-laws-put-judges-needs-first-_-News-_-The-Sunday-Times-23-05-21-1

‘My-baby-was-taken-away-for-months-over-tiny-bruises-and-a-fracture-that-didnt-exist-_-News-_-The-Sunday-Times-may-16-1

I-found-one-bruise-—-and-they-took-my-baby-away-_-News-_-The-Sunday-Times-1

06/06/2021 by noslib

Born into care data

Here’s the basic data used in the born into care study. An excel spreadsheet is available here

Local Authority	Number BIC 07-08	Number BIC 17-18	%BIC 07-08	%BIC 17	Live births 17-18	Live birth 07-08	IMD score 07-08	IMD score 17	change in rate BIC	Rank BIC 07-08	Rank BIC 17-18	Most recent Ofsted at 17-18
Blackpool	12	36	0.71%	2.19%	1643	1694	37.66	45.04	1.48%	1	1	Inadequate
Hartlepool	x	17	0.26%	1.69%	1006	1173	34.10	35.04	1.43%	66	2	Good
Sunderland	13	44	0.40%	1.52%	2903	3251	31.79	30.59	1.12%	29	3	Inadequate
Torbay	8	18	0.57%	1.34%	1339	1410	26.42	28.10	0.78%	12	4	Inadequate
North East Lincolnshire	x	22	0.15%	1.23%	1791	1980	29.73	31.34	1.08%	112	5	Good
Middlesbrough	8	22	0.40%	1.13%	1939	1983	38.94	40.46	0.73%	28	6	Requires improvement
Rotherham	19	34	0.59%	1.10%	3084	3212	26.71	29.55	0.51%	11	7	Good
Stockton-On-Tees	8	23	0.35%	1.07%	2144	2276	23.80	25.79	0.72%	42	8	Good
Newcastle Upon Tyne	16	34	0.49%	1.04%	3266	3238	31.36	29.79	0.55%	17	9	Requires improvement
Kirklees	19	53	0.34%	1.02%	5202	5654	25.23	25.15	0.68%	45	10	Inadequate
Durham	25	50	0.44%	0.99%	5033	5631	27.13	26.79	0.55%	20	11	Requires improvement
Wakefield	8	39	0.21%	0.97%	4026	3889	27.07	27.31	0.76%	85	12	Inadequate
Telford and Wrekin	x	20	0.13%	0.96%	2079	2232	22.35	24.99	0.83%	119	13	Requires improvement
Stoke-On-Trent	16	30	0.44%	0.91%	3293	3601	36.03	34.50	0.47%	19	14	Inadequate
Redcar and Cleveland	x	13	0.20%	0.91%	1436	1527	29.69	29.79	0.71%	88	15	Requires improvement
Northumberland	x	25	0.10%	0.90%	2768	3039	20.82	22.08	0.80%	134	16	Requires improvement
Bolton	21	33	0.56%	0.89%	3703	3737	29.67	30.69	0.33%	13	17	Good
Walsall	22	34	0.62%	0.88%	3876	3524	30.14	31.56	0.25%	8	18	Requires improvement
Kingston Upon Hull, City of	24	29	0.69%	0.85%	3430	3471	38.31	40.56	0.15%	2	19	Requires improvement
Doncaster	14	29	0.38%	0.84%	3444	3678	30.84	30.29	0.46%	35	20	Good
Barnsley	10	23	0.36%	0.84%	2752	2751	30.48	29.93	0.47%	40	21	Good
Norfolk	15	72	0.17%	0.83%	8670	8708	18.55	21.18	0.66%	99	22	Requires improvement
Liverpool	26	49	0.48%	0.83%	5906	5370	46.97	42.41	0.35%	18	23	Requires improvement
South Tyneside	11	13	0.65%	0.83%	1568	1698	31.16	31.51	0.18%	7	24	Good
Derby	22	26	0.66%	0.82%	3184	3337	26.64	26.32	0.16%	5	25	Good
Blackburn with Darwen	6	16	0.26%	0.80%	2008	2338	35.83	36.01	0.54%	65	26	Good
Darlington	x	9	0.24%	0.79%	1137	1257	24.10	25.66	0.55%	74	27	Requires improvement
Portsmouth	11	19	0.44%	0.79%	2414	2479	24.21	26.90	0.34%	21	28	Good
Gateshead	15	16	0.67%	0.78%	2061	2241	29.52	28.22	0.11%	4	29	Good
Thurrock	x	19	0.13%	0.77%	2479	2400	21.31	20.93	0.64%	124	30	Requires improvement
Southampton	12	24	0.39%	0.76%	3152	3078	24.31	26.88	0.37%	32	31	Requires improvement
Dudley	14	28	0.39%	0.75%	3713	3592	23.68	24.10	0.36%	33	32	Requires improvement
Oldham	10	25	0.30%	0.75%	3326	3376	30.82	33.16	0.46%	58	33	Requires improvement
Peterborough	15	23	0.54%	0.75%	3072	2770	24.49	27.82	0.21%	14	34	Good
Warrington	x	16	0.13%	0.75%	2143	2396	17.89	18.94	0.62%	123	35	Requires improvement
Wirral	11	25	0.30%	0.74%	3366	3688	27.90	29.59	0.44%	54	36	Inadequate
Wolverhampton	10	26	0.30%	0.74%	3537	3364	33.02	32.10	0.44%	57	37	Good
Bedford	Z	16	Z	0.73%	2190	1928	Z	18.93	Z		38	XXX
Southend-on-Sea	8	16	0.37%	0.72%	2220	2189	22.47	22.38	0.36%	38	39	Requires improvement
Sandwell	11	33	0.25%	0.70%	4696	4410	37.03	34.88	0.45%	70	40	Inadequate
Cheshire East	Z	26	Z	0.68%	3833	XXX	Z	14.48	Z		41	Requires improvement
Halton	7	10	0.43%	0.67%	1482	1637	32.61	32.33	0.25%	24	42	Requires improvement
Bradford	28	50	0.34%	0.65%	7639	8288	32.00	34.67	0.32%	44	43	Inadequate
Nottingham	28	27	0.68%	0.65%	4178	4105	37.46	34.89	-0.04%	3	44	Requires improvement
Bracknell Forest	0	9	0.00%	0.64%	1413	1497	8.75	10.24	0.64%	146	45	Good
Lancashire	29	80	0.21%	0.63%	12757	13503	22.29	23.44	0.41%	82	46	Requires improvement
Bournemouth	6	13	0.30%	0.61%	2130	1975	22.99	XXX	0.31%	51	47	XXX
Leeds	33	58	0.36%	0.58%	9967	9273	25.07	27.30	0.23%	41	48	Outstanding
Wiltshire	12	28	0.24%	0.58%	4838	5061	10.39	13.45	0.34%	76	49	Requires improvement
Herefordshire	x	10	0.17%	0.58%	1738	1816	17.58	18.89	0.41%	103	50	Requires improvement
Coventry	13	25	0.30%	0.56%	4443	4373	27.85	25.61	0.27%	56	51	Requires improvement
Somerset	12	30	0.22%	0.56%	5367	5390	15.90	18.55	0.34%	79	52	Requires improvement
Tameside	17	16	0.60%	0.56%	2875	2843	28.78	31.37	-0.04%	10	53	Inadequate
Derbyshire	14	42	0.17%	0.56%	7563	8109	18.74	18.39	0.38%	98	54	Good
Brighton and Hove	21	15	0.65%	0.55%	2704	3209	25.56	20.76	-0.10%	6	55	Good
Warwickshire	13	33	0.22%	0.55%	5970	5973	14.57	15.64	0.34%	81	56	Requires improvement
Cornwall	21	28	0.41%	0.54%	5162	5141	23.98	23.07	0.13%	27	57	Good
Salford	13	19	0.41%	0.53%	3560	3135	36.51	34.21	0.12%	26	58	Good
Bury	9	12	0.37%	0.53%	2249	2417	21.42	23.68	0.16%	37	59	Requires improvement
Cheshire West & Chester	Z	19	Z	0.53%	3566	XXX	Z	18.08	Z		60	Good
Plymouth	10	15	0.31%	0.53%	2832	3198	26.11	26.62	0.22%	49	61	Requires improvement
Leicester	19	26	0.38%	0.53%	4916	5033	34.68	30.88	0.15%	36	62	Requires improvement
East Sussex	13	26	0.25%	0.53%	4937	5120	18.78	19.77	0.27%	67	63	Outstanding
Wigan	9	19	0.25%	0.52%	3641	3669	26.91	25.71	0.28%	71	64	Good
Staffordshire	14	44	0.16%	0.52%	8491	8996	16.23	16.57	0.36%	108	65	Good
Sefton	12	14	0.44%	0.51%	2727	2755	25.13	27.04	0.08%	22	66	Requires improvement
Devon	12	35	0.17%	0.50%	6940	7067	17.44	16.61	0.33%	101	67	Requires improvement
Northamptonshire	16	44	0.18%	0.49%	8897	8990	16.05	18.61	0.32%	96	68	Requires improvement
Lincolnshire	20	37	0.28%	0.49%	7485	7150	18.08	20.29	0.21%	62	69	Good
Leicestershire	x	34	0.04%	0.49%	6947	6834	10.79	12.33	0.45%	142	70	Requires improvement
Manchester	30	36	0.40%	0.48%	7467	7522	44.50	40.01	0.08%	30	71	Requires improvement
Solihull	x	11	0.14%	0.48%	2299	2155	16.16	17.37	0.34%	115	72	Requires improvement
West Sussex	19	41	0.22%	0.48%	8630	8588	13.11	14.43	0.25%	80	73	Requires improvement
Rochdale	10	14	0.32%	0.47%	2966	3113	33.89	34.42	0.15%	47	74	Requires improvement
Suffolk	31	35	0.39%	0.46%	7674	7924	15.26	18.46	0.06%	31	75	Good
Poole	x	7	0.18%	0.46%	1538	1648	14.93	Z	0.27%	94	76	XXX
Bristol, City of	17	27	0.29%	0.45%	5960	5931	27.76	26.36	0.17%	60	77	Requires improvement
Croydon	7	26	0.13%	0.45%	5761	5315	21.31	22.48	0.32%	120	78	Inadequate
North Tyneside	14	10	0.62%	0.45%	2227	2268	23.51	22.28	-0.17%	9	79	Good
Trafford	x	12	0.11%	0.45%	2674	2822	17.33	16.09	0.34%	129	80	Good
East Riding of Yorkshire	8	13	0.25%	0.45%	2901	3151	14.17	15.61	0.19%	68	81	Good
Nottinghamshire	16	38	0.19%	0.45%	8536	8566	19.52	19.00	0.26%	91	82	Good
Barking and Dagenham	6	17	0.18%	0.44%	3870	3384	34.49	32.77	0.26%	97	83	Requires improvement
St. Helens	11	9	0.53%	0.44%	2050	2075	29.82	31.52	-0.09%	15	84	Requires improvement
Cumbria	21	20	0.42%	0.44%	4563	4998	21.19	21.26	0.02%	25	85	Requires improvement
Haringey	13	17	0.30%	0.44%	3881	4325	35.73	27.96	0.14%	53	86	Requires improvement
Dorset	x	15	0.08%	0.44%	3445	3679	14.19	15.74	0.35%	138	87	Requires improvement
Central Bedfordshire	Z	14	Z	0.43%	3230	XXX	Z	12.15	Z		88	Good
Swindon	x	12	0.11%	0.42%	2840	2835	16.94	18.62	0.32%	130	89	Requires improvement
Lewisham	20	20	0.43%	0.42%	4751	4671	31.04	26.66	-0.01%	23	90	Requires improvement
Calderdale	10	10	0.39%	0.42%	2395	2573	23.01	26.35	0.03%	34	91	Good
Stockport	10	13	0.30%	0.39%	3299	3305	18.06	20.83	0.09%	52	92	Good
Shropshire	x	11	0.10%	0.39%	2793	2864	16.24	17.15	0.29%	131	93	Good
Worcestershire	8	23	0.13%	0.39%	5897	6223	15.50	18.09	0.26%	122	94	Inadequate
Medway Towns	x	14	0.09%	0.39%	3601	3345	19.55	23.94	0.30%	137	95	Requires improvement
Greenwich	8	17	0.18%	0.38%	4453	4471	33.94	24.46	0.20%	95	96	Good
Bromley	x	16	0.08%	0.38%	4238	3956	14.36	14.16	0.30%	139	97	Good
York	6	7	0.30%	0.38%	1858	2013	13.40	11.73	0.08%	55	98	Good
Oxfordshire	13	27	0.16%	0.37%	7352	8148	10.85	11.66	0.21%	107	99	Good
Bath and North East Somerset	x	6	0.17%	0.35%	1704	1802	11.47	11.75	0.19%	102	100	Good
North Yorkshire	8	19	0.14%	0.35%	5441	5780	13.36	14.76	0.21%	116	101	Outstanding
North Somerset	x	7	0.13%	0.34%	2060	2300	15.01	15.83	0.21%	121	102	Requires improvement
Hampshire	34	46	0.24%	0.33%	13818	14468	10.41	12.69	0.10%	77	103	Good
Reading	x	8	0.12%	0.33%	2411	2439	19.30	19.62	0.21%	125	104	Inadequate
Bexley	7	10	0.24%	0.32%	3095	2947	16.21	16.27	0.09%	75	105	Outstanding
Westminster	9	8	0.31%	0.32%	2481	2929	26.30	20.34	0.02%	50	106	Outstanding
Cambridgeshire	10	22	0.14%	0.32%	6894	7015	11.49	13.86	0.18%	114	107	Requires improvement
Islington	9	9	0.32%	0.31%	2946	2792	38.96	27.54	-0.02%	46	108	Good
Kent	27	53	0.16%	0.30%	17467	16563	16.99	19.54	0.14%	104	109	Good
Gloucestershire	10	19	0.15%	0.29%	6537	6562	14.68	14.93	0.14%	111	110	Inadequate
Milton Keynes	6	10	0.17%	0.29%	3504	3501	15.32	17.98	0.11%	100	111	Requires improvement
Essex	32	46	0.20%	0.28%	16563	15769	14.69	17.02	0.07%	86	112	Outstanding
Hackney	9	12	0.20%	0.28%	4336	4500	46.10	32.53	0.08%	87	113	Good
Birmingham	62	45	0.37%	0.27%	16506	16975	38.67	38.07	-0.09%	39	114	Requires improvement
Enfield	7	13	0.14%	0.27%	4778	4856	26.19	25.78	0.13%	113	115	Good
Luton	8	9	0.23%	0.26%	3432	3488	24.73	25.91	0.03%	78	116	Requires improvement
Lambeth	10	11	0.21%	0.26%	4265	4822	34.94	25.42	0.05%	83	117	Requires improvement
Ealing	10	13	0.19%	0.25%	5116	5346	25.10	22.71	0.07%	90	118	Good
Southwark	13	11	0.26%	0.25%	4381	4966	33.33	25.81	-0.01%	64	119	Good
Hammersmith and Fulham	x	6	0.11%	0.25%	2392	2695	28.07	22.27	0.14%	128	120	Good
Sheffield	16	16	0.24%	0.25%	6491	6601	27.84	27.06	0.00%	72	121	Requires improvement
Isle Of Wight	x	x	0.25%	0.24%	1230	1202	20.67	23.29	-0.01%	69	122	Good
Slough	x	6	0.12%	0.24%	2529	2460	22.31	22.97	0.12%	126	123	Requires improvement
Buckinghamshire	6	14	0.10%	0.24%	5912	5853	9.01	10.05	0.13%	132	124	Inadequate
Hertfordshire	19	32	0.14%	0.22%	14301	14012	11.89	12.73	0.09%	117	125	Good
Brent	10	11	0.21%	0.21%	5208	4839	29.22	25.56	0.00%	84	126	Good
Havering	9	7	0.35%	0.21%	3395	2575	16.07	16.79	-0.14%	43	127	Good
Newham	16	12	0.26%	0.20%	5966	6053	42.95	29.58	-0.06%	63	128	Inadequate
Tower Hamlets	10	9	0.24%	0.20%	4604	4144	44.64	27.91	-0.05%	73	129	Inadequate
Wandsworth	9	9	0.18%	0.19%	4721	4936	20.34	16.61	0.01%	92	130	Requires improvement
Hillingdon	7	8	0.18%	0.18%	4408	3845	18.56	18.22	0.00%	93	131	Good
Windsor and Maidenhead	x	x	0.16%	0.18%	1657	1858	8.51	8.38	0.02%	105	132	Requires improvement
North Lincolnshire	6	x	0.32%	0.18%	1667	1877	20.88	22.10	-0.14%	48	133	Outstanding
Kensington and Chelsea	x	x	0.14%	0.18%	1699	2218	23.51	21.53	0.04%	118	134	Outstanding
West Berkshire	x	x	0.16%	0.18%	1708	1928	8.19	9.95	0.02%	109	135	Good
Barnet	x	9	0.06%	0.17%	5190	5120	21.16	16.15	0.11%	141	136	Inadequate
Wokingham	x	x	0.16%	0.17%	1788	1874	5.36	5.85	0.01%	106	137	Requires improvement
Harrow	x	6	0.10%	0.16%	3695	3088	15.59	15.03	0.07%	135	138	Good
Knowsley	10	x	0.52%	0.15%	2018	1922	43.20	43.01	-0.37%	16	139	Requires improvement
Surrey	21	19	0.15%	0.15%	12881	13628	8.07	10.09	-0.01%	110	140	Inadequate
Kingston Upon Thames	0	x	0.00%	0.14%	2185	2197	13.10	11.38	0.14%	144	141	Good
Waltham Forest	13	6	0.29%	0.13%	4684	4449	33.19	25.21	-0.16%	59	142	Good
Redbridge	x	6	0.07%	0.13%	4707	4085	20.36	17.20	0.05%	140	143	Good
Richmond Upon Thames	0	x	0.00%	0.12%	2441	2884	9.55	9.43	0.12%	143	144	Good
Camden	9	x	0.29%	0.12%	2607	3147	28.62	20.13	-0.17%	61	145	Good
Sutton	x	x	0.12%	0.11%	2642	2568	13.98	13.99	0.00%	127	146	Good
Merton	x	x	0.09%	0.09%	3172	3300	14.62	14.65	0.00%	136	147	Good
South Gloucestershire	x	x	0.10%	0.09%	3191	3004	9.58	11.66	-0.01%	133	148	Inadequate
Hounslow	8	x	0.20%	0.07%	4166	4082	23.20	21.49	-0.12%	89	149	Good
Rutland	x	0	0.84%	0.00%	335	358	7.49	8.38	-0.84%		151	Requires improvement
City Of London	0	0	0.00%	0.00%	74	58	12.84	14.72	0.00%	145	150	Good

10/03/2020 by noslib

BBC: From Cradle to Care

Broadcast: Wed 13 Nov 2019.

Over the past decade, the number of newborns being taken into care has more than doubled. In some cases, this separation happens within hours of childbirth. While these children may be at risk of serious harm, can the number of parents unable to look after their child have risen so dramatically? Or are other factors at play?

From Cradle to Care exposes inconsistencies in standards, numbers, and thresholds. In the North East and North West, rates have tripled. In North Wales, the increase is even starker. It’s easy to place the blame on austerity, but at a second glance the evidence suggests more intangible factors. Austerity becomes one piece of a very complex puzzle.

This well put together BBC program uses my new research showing that 2.1% of live births in Blackpool in 2017-18 were taken into care within a week of their birth. My figures show 40% higher rates of children ‘born into care’ than Karen Broadhurst’s foundational study because it included children who initially enter care by agreement with parents.

10/02/2020 by noslib

Building an economic case for investing in support for parents and children

This chapter lays out a strategy for investing in support for parents and children as an alternative to entry to care.

Click >> to download or read full screen. The full book is available here

06/06/2016 by noslib

Publications

A synopsis of recent publications many of which are accessible through the links below

Bilson A., Talia A., Drayak T., Margaret M., Smith S., Spence M., (2025) Fabricated or Induced Illness: The controversial history, missing evidence-base and iatrogenic harm. In L. Clements and A. Aiello (eds) Understanding Parent Blame: Institutional Failure and Complex Trauma. [Forthcoming] Bristol, Policy Press

Bilson A., Talia A., (2025) Assessing the Evidence-base of Fabricated or Induced Illness and the Claims of High Mortality and Morbidity [Manuscript submitted for publication]

Bilson A. on Behalf of PFAN (2025) Evidence to the Law Commission: Parents, Families and Allies Network Available from https://www.pfan.uk/law-commission-review/

Jay, M. A., Troncoso, P., Bilson, A., Thomson, D., Dorsett, R., Pearson, R., De Stavola, B. & Gilbert, R. (2025). Estimated cumulative incidence of intervention by children’s social care services to age 18: a whole-of-England administrative data cohort study using the child in need census. International Journal of Population Data Science, 10(1). https://ijpds.org/article/download/2454/6147

Coughlan, B., Woolgar, M., Hood, R., Hutchinson, D., Denford, E., Hillier, A., Clements, K., Geraghty, T., Berry, A., Bywaters, P. and Bilson, A., (2024). Risk rates and profiles at intake in child and adolescent mental health services: A cohort and latent class analyses of 21,688 young people in South London. JCPP Advances, p.e12246.https://acamh.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdfdirect/10.1002/jcv2.12246

Bilson, A., & Image-Flower, C. (2023). Bruising in non-mobile infants: Challenging assumptions and reassessing the evidence. Family Law pp. 1194-1201 https://www.familylaw.co.uk/news_and_comment/bruising-in-non-mobile-infants-challenging-assumptions-reassessing-the-evidence Prepublication

Bilson, A., & Macleod, M. (2023). Social Work Interventions with Children under 5 in Scotland: Over a Quarter Referred and One in Seventeen Investigated with Wide Variations between Local Authorities. The British Journal of Social Work, bcad079 open access

Bilson A. (2022) Why the evidence does not support multi-agency child protection units. Community Care June 10 https://www.communitycare.co.uk/2022/06/10/why-the-evidence-does-not-support-multi-agency-child-protection-units/

Bilson A & Talia A. (2022) Bruises in Premobile Infants: A Contested Area of Research, Policy and Practice. Practice, 1-16. DOI: 10.1080/09503153.2022.2140132

Bilson A. (2022) Why child protection policies on bruising to babies need to change Community Care November 16, 2022 https://www.communitycare.co.uk/2022/11/16/why-child-protection-policies-on-bruising-to-babies-need-to-change/

Haworth, S., Bilson, A., Drayak, T., Mayes, T., & Saar-Heiman, Y. (2022). Parental Partnership, Advocacy and Engagement: The Way Forward. Social Sciences, 11(8), 353. https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/11/8/353

Bilson A with Long, C., Eaton, J., Russell, S., Gullon-Scott, F., (2022) Fabricated or Induced Illness and Perplexing Presentations: Abbreviated Practice Guide for Social Work Practitioners British Association of Social Workers https://www.basw.co.uk/resources/fabricated-and-induced-illness-practice-guide

Bilson A. & Mayes T. (2022) Children’s social care: The way forward. Research in Practice https://www.researchinpractice.org.uk/children/news-views/2022/june/childrens-social-care-the-way-forward/

Bilson A. prepared with Parent Families and Allies Network; Love Barrow Families; New Beginnings; Parent and Carer Alliance; and Southwark Family Council and Parent to Parent Peer Advocacy (2022) Children’s Social Care: The Way Forward PFAN https://www.pfan.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Childrens-social-care-the-way-forward.pdf

Bilson, A. (2021). Child Protection Investigations in Scotland: A 33 Per Cent Increase in Two Years. Child Abuse Review. https://doi.org/10.1002/car.2729

Skinner, G. C., Bywaters, P. W., Bilson, A., Duschinsky, R., Clements, K., & Hutchinson, D. (2021). The ‘toxic trio’(domestic violence, substance misuse and mental ill-health): How good is the evidence base?. Children and Youth Services Review, 105678. Accepted Manuscript https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105678

Bilson, A., & Bywaters, P. W. B. (2020). Born into care: evidence of a failed state. Children and Youth Services Review, 105164. Accepted Manuscript
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105164

Bilson, A. & Drayak, T. (2020) We Can’t Afford Child Protection. Social Work 2020 under Covid-19, https://sw2020covid19.group.shef.ac.uk/category/5th-edition-july-14th-2020/andy-bilson-taliah-drayak/

Tobis D, Bilson, a. & Katugampala I. (2020) International Review of Parent Advocacy in Child Welfare: Strengthening Children’s Care and Protection Through Parent Participation. Better Care Network and IPAN. Available here

Bilson, A., (2019) Building an economic case for investing in support for parents and children. in Moran, L. and Canavan, J. (Eds.) (2019) Realising Children’s Rights Through Supporting Parents. Galway: UNESCO Child and Family Research Centre Available here

Stevens, C., Proctor, F., Rishworth, B., Boorman, A., Unwin, A., Featherstone, B. and Bilson, A. (2019) Rethinking child protection and adoption: achieving social justice in practice, Critical and Radical Social Work, vol xx no xx, 1–8, DOI: 10.1332/204986019X15663821773868 and on line version on SWAN website

Bilson A., Hunter Munro E. (2019) Adoption and Child Protection Trends for children aged under five in England: Increasing investigations and hidden separation of children from their parents, Children and Youth Services Review 96, January 2019, Pages 204-211 Accepted Manuscript Published version (free until Jan 24 2019)

Bilson, A., (2018) Policies on bruises in premobile children: Why we need improved standards for policymaking. Child & Family Social Work 23:676–683 https://doi.org/10.1111/cfs.12463 also Prepublication version

Bilson, A., Featherstone, B., Martin, K., (2017) How child protection’s ‘investigative turn’ impacts on poor and deprived communities. Family Law 47: 316-319 Prepublication version here

Bilson A., Herczog M., Kennedy J.A., Kuzminskyi V., and Rogers J. (2017) CHILDONOMICS: A Conceptual Framework Eurochild View here

Bilson A., (2017) The government’s adoption drive isn’t achieving its aims. Community Care February 9th View Here

Bilson, A., Cant, R. L., Harries, M., & Thorpe, D. H. (2017). Accounting for the increase of children in care in Western Australia: What can a client information system tell us?. Child abuse & neglect, 72, 291-300. Prepublication version

Bilson, A., & Martin, K. E. (2016). Referrals and Child Protection in England: One in Five Children Referred to Children’s Services and One in Nineteen Investigated before the Age of Five. British Journal of Social Work 47(3), 793-811. Download Here

Larkins, C. and Bilson, A.(2016) The Magic 6: Participatory Action and Learning Experiences with Roma Youth Training Manual, Cluj-Napocca, Romania: Babes-Boylai University available in 8 languages ISBN978-606-37-0087-3 Download

Harries, M., Cant, R. L., Bilson, A., & Thorpe, D. (2015). Responding to information about children in adversity: ten years of a differential response model in Western Australia. Child Abuse & Neglect. 39, p. 61-72 Download Here

Bilson A., Cant R., Harries M., & Thrope D.H. (2015) “A Longitudinal Study of Children Reported to the Child Protection Department in Western Australia.” British Journal of Social Work 45(3) 771–791Download Here

Bilson A. and Larkins C (2013) “Providing Alternatives to Infant Institutionalisation in Bulgaria: Can Gatekeeping Benefit from a Social Development Orientation?” Children and Youth Services Review 35 (9). pp. 1566-1575 Download here

Bilson A., Nyeko J., Baskott J., Rayment C. (2013) Developing Social Care and Support Services in Uganda: A literature review of international experience in implementing social care and support services: considerations for the Ugandan context. OPM, Oxford Download here

Bilson A., Nyeko J., Baskott J., Rayment C. (2013) Developing Social Care and Support Services in Uganda: Situational Analysis and Policy Recommendations. OPM, Oxford

Bilson A., Nyeko J., Baskott J., Rayment C. (2013) Developing Social Care And Support Services In Uganda: Proposed Policy Statement. OPM, Oxford

Hussein, S., Manthorpe, J., Ridley, J., Austerberry, H., Farrelly, N., Larkins, C., Bilson A. & Stanley, N. (2013). Independent Children’s Social Work Practice Pilots: Evaluating Practitioners’ Job Control and Burnout. Research on Social Work Practice.

Larkins, C., Ridley, J., Farrelly, N., Austerberry, H., Bilson, A., Hussein, S., Manthorpe, J., & Stanley, N. (2013) “Children’s, Young People’s and Parents’ Perspectives on Contact: Findings from the Evaluation of Social Work Practices”. British Journal of Social Work, bct135.

Austerberry, H., Bilson, A., Farrelly, N., Hussein, S., Larkins, C., Manthorpe, J., Ridley, J. and Stanley, N. (2013) ‘Foster carers and family contact: Foster carers’ views of social work support’, Adoption and Fostering, 37(2): 116 – 29.

Stanley N., Austerberry H., Bilson A., Farrelly N., Hussein S., Larkins C., Manthorpe J., Ridley J. (2013) “Turning away from the public sector in children’s out-of-home care: An English experiment,” Children and Youth Services Review, Volume 35(1): 33-39

Stanley, N., Austerberry H., Bilson A. Farrelly N., Hargreaves K., Hussein S., Ingold A., Manthorpe J., Ridley J., Strange V. (2012) “Establishing Social Work Practices in England: The Early Evidence” British Journal of Social Work doi: 10.1093/bjsw/bcs101 Download Here

Bilson A. and Westwood J.L. (2012) Making Social Work Work: Improving social work for vulnerable families and children without parental care around the world: A literature review. EveryChild, London Download Here

Stanley, Nicky, Helen Austerberry, Andy Bilson, Nicola Farrelly, Katrina Hargreaves, Katie Hollingworth, Shereen Hussein et al. (2012) “Social work practices: Report of the national evaluation.” Download Here

Thomson G., Bilson A., and Dykes F.C., (2011) “Implementing the WHO/UNICEF Baby Friendly Initiative in the community: a ‘hearts and minds’ approach.” Midwifery, doi:10.1016/j.midw.2011.03.003

Bilson A. (2010) The Development of Gate-Keeping functions in Central and Eastern Europe and the CIS: Lessons from Bulgaria, Kazakhstan and Ukraine. UNICEF, Geneva Download Here

Bilson A. and Lawler J. (2010) Social Work Management and Leadership: Managing Complexity with Creativity Routledge, Abingdon

Bilson A., Price, J. and Stanley, N. (2010) “Developing Employment Opportunities for Care Leavers.” Children and Society 25(5): 345–418

Thomson G., Dykes F, Bilson A, Putsey J, Whitmore M, Dickens S (2010) “Tackling the infant formula industries” Public Health Nutrition: 13(1): 149–150

Bilson A. (2009) “Use of Residential Care in Europe for Children Aged Under Three: Some Lessons from Neurobiology” British Journal of Social Work 39(7) pp.1381-1392 doi:10.1093/bjsw/bcp076

Bilson A. and Carter R. (2008) Strategy development for the reform of the state care system for children deprived of parental care living in state care institutions UNICEF Ukraine published on internet Download here

Bilson A. and Markova G. (2007) “But you should see their families: Preventing child abandonment and promoting social inclusion in countries in transition” Social Work and Social Science Review 12(3):57-78 Download Here

Bilson A. (2007) “International issues in children’s participation and protection” Guest Editorial: Child Abuse Review Vol. 16: 349–352 Download Here

Bilson A. and Thorpe D.H. (2007) Towards Aesthetic Seduction Using Emotional Engagement and Stories” Kybernetes 36:7/8:936-945

Bilson A. and Cox P. (2007) “Caring About Poverty: Alternatives to institutional care for children in poverty” Journal of Children & Poverty, Vol. 13, No 1 pp. 37-55 Download Here

Bilson A. (2006) “Promoting Compassionate Concern in Social Work: Reflections on Ethics, Biology and Love” British Journal of Social Work 37(8), 1371-1386 doi:10.1093/bjsw/bcl060

Bilson A (2006) “Rationality, Reflection and Research” in S White, J Fook, F Gardener Critical Reflection And Professional Development: State of the Art OUP

Bilson A. editor (2005) Evidence Based Practice in Social Work Whiting and Birch, London

Bilson A. and Cox P.(2005) Home Truths: Children’s Rights in Institutional Care in Sri Lanka Save the Children in Sri Lanka

Bilson A. White S. (2005) “Vulnerable Children and the Courts: An International Taxonomy” Child Abuse Review 14:4 pp 220-239

Lawler J. and Bilson A (2004) “Towards a More Reflexive Research Aware Practice: The Influence and Potential of Professional and Team Culture” Social Work and Social Science Review 11(1) 52-69 Download Here

Bilson A and White S (2004) The Limits of Governance: Interrogating the Tacit Dimension in A Gray and S Harrison (ed.) Governing Medicine OUP Madenhead

Bilson A., Harwin J. (2003) Gatekeeping Services for Vulnerable Children and Families in the Changing Minds, Policies And Lives UNICEF/World Bank series, UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre, Florence Download Here

Bilson A., Gotestam R. (2003) Improving Standards of Child Protection Services in the Changing Minds, Policies And Lives UNICEF/World Bank series, UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre, Florence Download Here

Professor Andy Bilson

My research and activities

Author: noslib

Trends in child separation

Social Development

Does Child Protection Reduce Harm?

Child Protection & Deprivation

We Can’t afford Child protection

The Times: Justice for Families

Born into care data

BBC: From Cradle to Care

Broadcast: Wed 13 Nov 2019.

Building an economic case for investing in support for parents and children

Publications