Policy of the Care of ‘Looked After’ Children in UK Critique

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Understanding of Responsibility and Educational Achievements
HealthCare Needs and Experience with Foster Families
Bibliography

Introduction

“Looked after” children is one of the categories supported and protected by the UK government. In the case of “looked after” children, caring has a particular resonance. Because of parents’ failure to care sufficiently for children, children are “looked after”, that is, they are entrusted to the care of the state. In spite of great benefits and advantages of the proposed programs and initiatives, there is a critique of policy and practice provided by the state. The main targets are to provide children with education practices and good health care, help children to achieve economic well-being and create a safe environment.

Understanding of Responsibility and Educational Achievements

The main problem is that according to British social policy, the everyday care of foster children is carried out by those who are not invested with general responsibility for the children; this responsibility remains with the state (social services) and with their birth parents. Children’s childhoods are also shaped by processes of institutionalisation (Broad 1998). The target is to “narrow the gap in educational achievement between looked-after children and their peers, and improve their educational support and the stability of their lives” (Looked After Children 2007), In spite of great achievements and benefits of the state interventions, these policies are ineffective and unproductive. According to statistical results, the majority of ‘looked-after’ children have low grades and poor educational achievements. For instance, “10 % reach school leaving age without having sat a GCSE equivalent exam” (Wills 2007). The move to secondary school gives children a little more responsibility for the self. Inside school, children are expected to have increased responsibility: for example, for managing their mobility between classrooms, for interpreting a differentiated school curriculum, and for negotiating new peer relationships. For most of them, these changes create additional problems they cannot cope with (Mcneish 2002). Central to the concept of care are notions of relationship and connectedness and a desire to create a sense of well-being in others. Children ‘cared for’ are typically constructed as dependents since they are the recipients of others’ care and are deemed to rely upon others taking care of them (Quality Protects n.d.).

HealthCare Needs and Experience with Foster Families

According to the state policies: “most children become looked after because of adverse experiences in their families” (Looked After Children 2007). Thus, local authorities and the state pay no attention to psychological and emotional impact of their involvement. In reality, these standards of ‘care’ are nit met. Critics admit that “looked after” children suggested being abruptly and traumatically removed from their homes with no forewarning and no prior discussion with them. They did not attempt to ‘explain’ why they were taken into care nor did they set the context in which social workers became involved before their removal (Children leaving care act 2000, n.d.). Underlying these accounts is a sense of betrayal and strong feelings of powerlessness. Most children offer spirited resistance both to the social workers and their parents. The state stipulates that “looked after” children “receive effective healthcare, assessment, treatment and support” (Looked After Children 2007). Reality, lack of financial resources and funding deprive many children good healthcare services and medical treatment. Also, the state promises “continued improvements in provision in residential care and foster care” but many families are deprived this financial and social support. Also, the state neglects the psychological state of children in foster families (Patterns and outcomes in child placement 1991). Crucial to understanding children’s relations is their relationship to their birth parents about whom children felt considerable ambivalence – loving them on the one hand, while feeling disappointed and rejected by them on the other (Goddard 1999).

In sum, in spite of great benefits proposed by the state policies and practices many of them lack financial support and inadequately introduced into practice. The main problems are low academic achievements and poor healthcare service provided to “looked after” children. Also, they report responding to foster care differently and varied in their desire to be part of a foster family.

Bibliography

Broad, B. 1998, Young people leaving care: Life after the children act 1989, Jessica Kingsley.

Children leaving care act 2000. Web.

Goddard, J. et al 1999, State Child Care: Looking After Children?. Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

Looked After Children. 2007. Web.

Mcneish. 2002. What Works for Children?: Effective Services for Children and Families. Open University Press; 1 edition.

Patterns and outcomes in child placement, H.M.S.O. 1991, Dept of Health. Web.

Quality Protects. Dept of Health. N.d. Web.

Wills, M. 2007, MP for North Swindon. Web.

Click Here To Order Now!

Policy of the Care of ‘Looked After’ Children in UK Critique

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We have qualified writers to help you.

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)