A scheme already used in America that provides intensive support to deprived first-time young mothers and their babies to try to prevent future problems linked to social exclusion.
Why is it different from other schemes to help poor parents?
The partnership starts very early - ideally about 16 weeks into a pregnancy. It is based around the idea that pregnancy and the birth of a child represent a "magic moment" of opportunity when parents are particularly open to receiving support and help, even if they normally shun state services.
What does the partnership involve?
Mothers who agree to join are assigned a health visitor who sees them regularly - weekly at first, then fortnightly - and supports them to boost their health in pregnancy, and then to encourage their attachment to their new baby and help with parenting skills. It draws on neurological research showing how pregnancy and the very early years are vital to a child's development, with early bonding affecting the way the brain is wired.
Does it really work?
Research suggests it does, though some say the lack of decent universal health and social services in the US means offering poor women intense support is bound to mean they do far better than others not on the scheme. Three trials in the US in 1977, 1987 and 1994 have produced strong evidence consistently showing the scheme led to improved prenatal health of mother and baby, fewer childhood injuries, fewer subsequent pregnancies and longer breaks between births, increased maternal employment and greater readiness for school. Researchers returned to children in the first trial when they reached 15 and found a 48% reduction in child abuse and neglect, a 59% reduction in arrests and a 90% cut in numbers receiving supervision orders.
Will it work here?
Ministers believe it will, although the scheme's pioneer, Professor David Olds, thinks English trials could produce less dramatic results because the UK's basic services to families are better than those in the US.
What are the downsides?
Some will see this targeting of at-risk unborn babies as dangerous because it could label infants as potential future criminals. There are also worries that with health visitor numbers falling, targeting such intense help on the very needy could lead to a poorer service for everyone else. Child abuse and postnatal depression, for example, cut across families in all social groups.
Labels: NURSE
0 yorum:
Yorum Gönder