Launch of the film – Putting UK Drug Policy into Focus
And discussion with:
Professor David Nutt – Imperial College London
Ann Fordham – International Drug Policy Consortium
Dr Magdalena Harris – London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine
Neil Woods – Law Enforcement Action Partnership
Dr Nuno Capaz – Lisbon Dissuasion Commission
Dr Prun Bijral – Change Grow Live
Followed by a Q&A
Chaired by Dr Adam Holland and Dr Emily Crick (University of Bristol)
5th November 2020
15:00 – 16:30 GMT
(16:00 – 17:30 CET)
Register for the free webinar here, along with the other online events of the European Harm Reduction conference
With the majority of children returning to schools this week, referrals to Children’s Services are expected to substantially rise. As Peter Walker reported in the Guardian, schools will play ‘a pivotal role in spotting neglect and abuse’.
After nearly six months away from the classroom, children who would have previously been identified as needing help and support have been invisible to staff in schools. According to the Department for Education, the number of referrals received by Children’s Services since schools closed due to the Covid19 outbreak, has seen a dramatic reduction of 18% (compared to the last three years).
The NSPCC states that schools are vital partners in the safeguarding and protection of our children. Staff in schools have the opportunity to observe children in a range of settings, inside and outside of the classroom. Teachers and other school staff can monitor children’s behaviour daily, over an extended period of schooling, whilst observing their interactions with peers and members of their families. They are uniquely positioned to detect concerns at an early point and share information which ensures children receive the support they need at the right time.
It is therefore essential that school staff are fully supported to recognise children who are in need of additional support, and be ready to respond to those who have been living with abuse or neglect, and are in need of protection.
A new policy report by Dr Vicky Sharley (University of Bristol) highlights findings from a recent study funded by Welsh Government through Health and Care Research Wales. The report looks at how school staff identify and respond to children they suspect are living with neglect (the most common reason for a child to be on a child protection plan in England). The report sets out key recommendations for best practice across schools and child protection services, and calls for policymakers to support schools and social workers in their unique but closely related roles within the safeguarding system.
The report also outlines a new approach for the development of effective inter-agency relationships to improve safeguarding outcomes. It is essential for children’s welfare that any concerns are raised at the earliest point possible. This requires more support for school staff and social workers to develop close working relationships and excellent communication channels. Recommendations are particularly pertinent at a time when children are returning to the classroom, having been ‘hidden’ from services for more than five months and referrals are expected to soar.
You can read the full report here. The key recommendations include the following:
- Head Teachers should be supported to establish effective learning communities within their schools so staff develop context-specific knowledge and expertise on how to respond to child neglect effectively within a school setting.
- Schools should recruit strategic staff who demonstrate commitment to developing expertise in child neglect to promote children’s wellbeing within the school setting.
- School staff who know the local community well should have opportunities to provide insights into the lives of children who are suspected of living with neglect.
- Social workers should routinely provide feedback to schools on the outcome of referrals made to child protection services and the rationale for their decision not to intervene.
- Social workers should ensure that Child Protection Conferences are not planned during school holidays, and that information is shared with new schools where children are transitioning to secondary education.
- Informal and formal opportunities should be made available to all staff to spend time in partner agencies to support development of knowledge and expertise about service provision.
- The local authority’s threshold guidance document should be used as a tool for reflective discussion across services, to inform professional decision making and foster a ‘shared language’, so school staff can more effectively articulate concerns in their referrals.
- The role of the School Social Worker responds to many interprofessional barriers between schools and child protection services, and should be established in all local authorities.
This study forms the basis of Dr Sharley’s ongoing research investigating interprofessional safeguarding practices across the United Kingdom. She would be happy to answer any questions about this study or discuss her ongoing and future work in this area.
“Challenging. The Brazilian Educational System is Huge”
This is written on the website of Todos Pela Educação (All for Education), an NGO that provides information about the Brazilian educational scenario in order to help boost quality and access to basic education.
Brazil has a history of elitism and oppression. Education was used as an evangelisation tool by the Jesuits to convert Indigenous Brazilians in the early colonial years, between the 16th and the 19th centuries. Till this day, many schools are run by religious institutions. In the 19th century, the elite either had the luxury of private tutors or sent their children abroad, particularly Portugal, for their studies while slaves traded in from Africa were not allowed any type of education at all. Black people are still marginalised as a consequence of structural racism.
Many people like to say that the coronavirus is teaching us a lesson, as if the pandemic were a kind of morality play that should lead to a change in our behaviour. It shows us that we can make big shifts quickly if we want to. That we can build back better. That social inequality is starkly revealed at times of crisis. That there is a “magic money tree”. The idea that crisis leads to change was also common during the financial crunch over a decade ago, but that didn’t produce any lasting transformations. So will post-COVID life be any different?
At the start of lockdown, in the middle of the anxiety and confusion, I started to notice that I was enjoying myself. I was cooking and gardening more; the air was cleaner, my city was quieter and I was spending more time with my partner. Lots of people started to write about the idea that there should be #NoGoingBack. It seemed that we had taken a deep collective breath, and then started to think about coronavirus as a stimulus to encourage us to think how we might address other big issues – climate, inequality, racism and so on.
The manufacturing or importing of packs of cigarettes with fewer than 20 cigarettes per pack was prohibited in the UK when the EU Tobacco Products Directive and standardised packaging legislation were fully implemented in May 2017. This change was aimed at reducing the affordability of cigarettes and thereby discouraging young people from smoking. This directive also required the removal of branding and established a standard shape and dark green colour for packaging, including pictorial health warnings, which prevented the use of packaging for promotion and reduced its appeal.
This blog post was written by Dr Saffron Karlsen, (Senior Lecturer in Social Research, University of Bristol)
On the last weekend of May 2020, much of the world watched with horror scenes of US urban disturbances in response to the death of George Floyd – another Black person killed in police custody. On the other side of the pond, many in the UK also awaited the release of an official report into the higher rates of infection and death of Black and other ethnic minority people from COVID-19.
Delays and disappointment
This Public Health England (PHE) report was heralded as an opportunity to finally provide answers to questions we’d had since evidence of these inequalities first emerged. The inquiry’s lead, Professor Kevin Fenton, described the pressing need for open discussion, to listen to the views of people from Black communities and those who worked with them to find out what was producing these inequalities.
Unfortunately, the report which was finally released is very far from fulfilling these ambitions. It does not provide a detailed investigation of the drivers of these ethnic inequalities and includes very little new information from which to make sense of these patterns.
This blog post was written by Anthea Terry, Interim Head of PolicyBristol and was originally published Universities Policy Engagement Network (UPEN) blog. Read the original article.
Michael Gove famously said in 2016 that ‘people in this country have had enough of experts’, and with social media ‘bubbles’, fake news, and the media desire to present opposing viewpoints – however marginal – it can often feel this way.
But the actual public perception of experts and their work is more nuanced. A 2018 survey by the Wellcome Trust found that 82% of people said they were fairly or very interested in health research, up from 77% in 2015, and 75% in 2012.
The value placed on experts by policymakers has always been variable and hard to measure, ‘evidence-based policymaking’ has been around for decades, and for almost as long, the perhaps inevitable cynicism about ‘policy-based evidence making’. We have incredible success stories about research influencing policy (my favourite being the research on CFCs that led directly to the Montreal protocol and recovery of the ozone layer), yet the combined weight of almost all the world’s climate scientists fails to enact sufficient policy change.
One of the many unique features of this time is the level of public discussion about research and the role of experts in policy making. I can’t remember another time when the membership of expert advisory groups such as SAGE was mainstream news. Similarly, a call for participants in a Covid-19 vaccine trial in Bristol was shared on neighbourhood WhatsApp and Facebook groups, and I’m talking to my family about R-numbers and logarithmic growth curves whilst lamenting the lack of supermarket delivery slots.
Many thousands of children of foreign Islamic State fighters travelled with them to conflict areas such as Syria and Iraq, or were born there. Now these children and their families face considerable legal and logistical challenges. They are unable to access basic services, or return to their countries of origin, especially if an adult in the family has been deprived of citizenship.
With many countries refusing or delaying efforts to repatriate, these children are in a particularly precarious situation.
An ongoing Dutch case, brought on behalf of 23 women and 56 children by a team of lawyers, shines a probing light on these issues. The central question of whether or not the decision to repatriate is a political choice will be watched closely by other countries.
Written by Lindsey Pike
These are uncertain times. Both research and policymaking has been thrown into unknown territory, and anxiety is running high. The coronavirus situation is dynamic and is likely to change how we live and work for the foreseeable future. At PolicyBristol we are looking at how we can reprioritise how we work and what we do, to ensure we’re making the most of the resources we have within the team.
The team are working from home, but are available to discuss policy engagement and related issues – related to COVID, or any other topic – over the phone or videoconferencing.
We understand that both researchers and policy colleagues that we work with are under pressure to adapt to working from home, often while coordinating and managing childcare and other responsibilities. However, we’ll continue to signpost you to relevant opportunities and information to make sure that, especially in times such as these, policy decisions are informed by a robust evidence base.
We’re also aware that other policy priorities, while currently overshadowed, have not gone away. We’d like to reiterate that regardless of your area of research or policy, we’re here to support you.
Many colleagues in our research community are already forging links with public health, clinical, social and third sector services to offer the resources we have. If you are a researcher whose work is relevant to Covid-19, we have listed some relevant engagement opportunities below: please get in touch with one of the team (emails below) if we can support you in any way; for example with support to edit or structure scientific summaries into policy/ lay friendly ones, horizon scanning, or any other task related to getting findings out there and used.
Contact your faculty’s PolicyBristol Associate
Meet the team and contact us here.
We hope you stay safe and well during this time.
Resources from the University of Bristol
Guidance for researchers during the COVID-19 outbreak (internal).
The University is keen to hear about the circumstances our partners and communities are facing, how they are responding and how we might work together to meet these unparalleled new challenges. Please contact us if you have suggestions for how the University, our staff and students can support your organisational or community activities in response to COVID-19.
The University of Bristol’s researchers, staff and students are working together and with partners from across society to understand coronavirus (COVID-19) and its far-reaching impact on our lives. Find out more here.
National consultations and inquiries related to COVID19
Online harms (Home Affairs Committee) The inquiry seeks evidence on Online Harms arising from the Covid-19 lockdown period and the adequacy of the Government’s proposals to counter them. Deadline 21 May 2020
Covid-19 and the food supply (Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee)
This inquiry examines issues related to the food supply chain and access to healthy foods. Deadline: 22 May 2020
Economic impact of coronavirus (Treasury Committee) In this stage, the Committee will examine the operational effectiveness, cost and sustainability of the Government’s and Bank of England’s support packages. The Committee will also examine the impact on the economy and different sectors, the implications for public finances, and how the Government can work towards a sustained recovery. Deadline 27 May 2020
The impact of coronavirus on business and workers (Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Committee)
The BEIS Select Committee has launched an inquiry into the impact of coronavirus on businesses and workers. Deadline: 29 May 2020
The impact of Covid-19 on education and children’s services (Education Committee) The inquiry will examine both short term impacts, such as the effects of school closures and exam cancellations, as well as longer-term implications particularly for the most vulnerable children.
Deadline: 31 May 2020
Left behind white pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds (Education Committee) This inquiry will investigate the issues faced by disadvantaged groups, with an initial inquiry into the educational underachievement of white pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds including white working class pupils. This inquiry will examine the extent of the achievement gap between this group and their peers and how it is measured, alongside a consideration of the effects of the COVID-19 outbreak. It will also look at what the priorities should be for tackling this issue. Deadline 5 June 2020
Defence contribution to the UK’s pandemic response (Defence Committee) This inquiry will focus on the Ministry of Defence’s and the Armed Forces’ contribution to the United Kingdom’s response to the Covid-19 pandemic. The scope will include: assessing the MoD’s planning and preparedness for a pandemic; understanding how the Armed Forces have supported the civilian authorities during the pandemic; evaluating the effectiveness of the specific actions and activities undertaken by military and civilian personnel, and; exploring how the MoD has ensured that potential adversaries have not taken advantage of the need to focus on the pandemic response. Deadline: 15 June 2020
Impact of COVID-19 on DCMS sectors: (Digital Culture Media and Sport Committee) The DCMS Committee has launched an inquiry into the ‘Impact of Covid-19 on DCMS sectors’. It will consider both the immediate and long-term impact that Covid-19 and the related social and financial measures are having on the wide range of industries and organisations under the Committee’s remit. The Committee expects to hold a number of evidence sessions from late April onwards to hear directly from stakeholders, arms-length bodies and Government about what is being done and what further support is needed. Deadline 19 June 2020
Coronavirus and Scotland (Scottish Affairs Committee). Deadline 23 June 2020
Coronavirus: implications for transport: (Transport committee). The Transport Committee is asking transport workers, stakeholders and members of the public to write to them about the transport issues they face during the coronavirus outbreak. MPs will explore the impact felt by the industry, its workers and passengers in a rolling programme of work to monitor the impact of coronavirus on UK transport, sector by sector. Deadline: 29 June 2020
The science of COVID-19: (Science and Technology Committee (Lords) This inquiry will investigate the scientific and technological aspects of the COVID-19 pandemic, including the nature of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, its transmission and spread, the development of vaccines and treatments, and how digital technologies can be used for tracking and modelling. The inquiry aims to help Government and society learn from the pandemic and better prepare for future epidemics.Deadline: 30 June 2020
The Government’s response to Covid-19: human rights implications
(Human Rights Joint Committee)
The Committee is seeking evidence on how the Government is ensuring measures are human-rights compliant, the impact of these measures on human rights in the UK, and the groups who will be disproportionately affected. Deadline: 22 July 2020
UK Science, Research and Technology Capability and Influence in Global Disease Outbreaks (Science and Technology Committee)
Once the COVID-19 pandemic has passed its peak, the Committee will inquire formally into the place of UK research, science and technology in the national and global response, and what lessons should be learned for the future. Deadline: 31 July 2020
Past COVID inquiries
Impact of Covid-19 on the charity sector
(Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee)
Deadline: 16th April 2020
- This is a short inquiry into the impact on the charity sector. Find out more here.
Home Office preparedness for Covid-19
(Home Affairs Committee)
Deadline: 21 April 2020
- The Home Affairs Committee is undertaking a short inquiry into the Home Office’s preparations for and response to Covid-19 (Coronavirus). Find out more here.
The Covid-19 pandemic and international trade
(International Trade Committee)
Deadline: 24th April 2020
- This wide-ranging inquiry seeks views on impact on UK businesses, supply chains, and access to essential goods. Find out more here
Unequal impact: Covid-19 & people with protected characteristics
(Women and Equalities Committee)
Deadline: 30th April 2020
- The committee wants to hear about the different and disproportionate impact that the Coronavirus – and measures to tackle it – is having on people with protected characteristics under the Equality Act. Find out more here.
Humanitarian crises monitoring: impact of coronavirus
(International Development Committee)
Deadline: 17 April/ 8th May 2020
- This inquiry is seeking evidence in two waves; current situation and immediate risks (17 April) and longer-term issues and implications (8 May). Find out more here.
Editor Note: COVID-19, with its wide ranging impacts, has opened up an opportunity to demonstrate the value of scholarly analysis from a wide range of perspectives. The use of an Arts and Humanities lens helps reveal unexamined areas of interest and importance that would otherwise remain blindspots in our understanding of the health, disease and societal impacts. This piece not only highlights beneficial arts and science collaborations (Singing for Lung Health) but also shows the power of reframing concepts in new ways, which can affect how we approach them.
For the last five years (2015-2020) we have been leading a Wellcome-funded project, the Life of Breath https://lifeofbreath.org/. Our aim has been to explore the experience of breathing and breathlessness from an interdisciplinary medical humanities perspective, including insights and knowledge from the humanities, social science and the arts. It is astonishing that just as we submitted our end of project report, the whole world has been taken over by the COVID-19 pandemic and, with it, the fear of breathlessness. This is all the more strange because a major theme of our project was the invisibility of breath: how as healthy individuals we take breathing for granted; how hidden are those who live with the daily fear of death that accompanies severe breathlessness; and how trustingly we rely on the air around us.
Although breathlessness is central to the diagnosis of COVID-19, and also a sign of disease progression, it is still not highly visible in the media, despite being a pervasive symptom of severe disease. Many of our pressing current concerns are more tangential: we are concerned about the curbs on personal freedom, about accessing food, and most of all about the health and wellbeing of our loved ones. Why are we not trying to understand the experience of breathlessness better?
Our research sheds light on this strange avoidance. Breath is essential to life and any threat to it is too frightening to be able to comprehend, let alone express. Our deepest and most atavistic fears relate to suffocation, drowning, or being unable to breathe. Breathlessness itself, we have found, is a complex experience that is difficult to articulate, and clinical language can obstruct understanding and prevent the update of suitable management. https://lifeofbreath.org/2019/07/the-meaning-of-the-name-pulmonary-rehabilitation-oxley-et-al-2019/
Much of our work explored how arts and humanities approaches can be used to support and alleviate the suffering associated with chronic breathlessness. Our research showed that encouraging expression of what breathlessness feels like can be aided by involvement with the arts, for example, through the ‘letter to my breath’ workshops our project designed and ran (https://lifeofbreath.org/2019/01/dear-breath-using-story-structure-to-understand-the-value-of-letter-writing-for-those-living-with-breathlessness-penny-malpass-2019/)
Outreach work from our Catch your Breath exhibition showed that poetry unleashes ideas and metaphors that enable the experience of breathlessness to be not only expressed to others but also understood by the breathless person themselves. Our ‘Singing for Lung Health’ groups provided important evidence that learning basic diaphragm control and simple singing exercises can increase confidence and sense of control.
Philosophy has also been used in our work to develop a framework for understanding breathlessness more broadly, as a lived experience, rather than as a medical symptom.
We have also published policy recommendations on how breathlessness could be better managed, especially in end of life care:
Approaches to management can be enhanced if we take a step away from clinical contexts and instead step onto the dance floor to improve exercise capacity.
The Life of Breath website provides resources based on our research to support people with breathlessness or who are feeling anxious during this difficult time. We hope you find them useful.
This post was originally published by the International Science Council. You can read the original article here.