Community Care Community Care Social Work News & Social Care Jobs
Menu
  • Jobs/Careers
    • Jobs
    • Employer Profiles
    • Workforce Insights
    • Podcasts
    • Careers Zone
    ▼
  • Learning
    • Community Care Inform Adults
    • Community Care Inform Children
    ▼
  • Events
    • Masterclasses
    • Webinars
    • Community Care Live
    ▼
  • E-newsletters
  • News
    • Adults
    • Children
    • Social work leaders
    • Workforce
    • Choose Social Work
    • Write for Community Care
    ▼
  • Network
    • The Social Work Community
    ▼
  • Search
  • ID
    Community Care
    • Menu
    • Jobs/Careers
      • Jobs
      • Employer Profiles
      • Workforce Insights
      • Podcasts
      • Careers Zone
    • Learning
      • Community Care Inform Adults
      • Community Care Inform Children
    • Events
      • Masterclasses
      • Webinars
      • Community Care Live
    • E-newsletters
    • News
      • Adults
      • Children
      • Social work leaders
      • Workforce
      • Choose Social Work
      • Write for Community Care
    • Network
      • The Social Work Community
    • Search
      • Register
      • Login
      Jobs Live Inform

      ‘We can respect rights while finding out what works in social care’

      While there is a debate about using randomised controlled trials in social care, recent examples show they can be done ethically and are valuable for informing policy, argues David Westlake

      July 17, 2023 in Children
      Image depicting randomised controlled trial
      Photo: Piscine26/Adobe Stock

      By David Westlake, Cardiff University

      Two of the largest randomised controlled trials (RCTs) ever conducted in social work have been published recently by Foundations*.

      Last month, Sarah Taylor and her team from Coram reported that children whose families were referred for family group conferences (FGCs) were significantly less likely to be in care 12 months after entering pre-proceedings than those whose families were not so referred.

      Earlier this year, my colleagues and I found that a scheme placing social workers in schools did not make any difference to the child protection and care outcomes we assessed, such as the likelihood of a section 47 investigation.

      Policy impact of research

      Whereas policymakers are not investing in social workers in schools, there is now a stronger case for rolling out FGCs for families in pre-proceedings.

      If nothing else, these studies put to bed the idea that RCTs are practically, financially, or ethically impossible in children’s services.

      Both these studies weathered the storm of the pandemic, stuck closely to their original plans and collected enough data to present strong conclusions. Neither cost more than one would anticipate for studies of their size, and both were well within the standard rule of thumb for evaluation costing (5-10% of the budget for the intervention).

      Ethical objections to randomised controlled trial

      Ethics building blocks

      Photo: tumsasedgars/Adobe Stock

      In relation to ethics, some academics opposed the FGC project’s design, raising  objections that have been mounted throughout the history of social work RCTs.

      The central critique against randomising families to receive either an FGC or a normal case conference was that proponents believed families had a right to an FGC.

      Realising that right was an end in itself, and withholding it from some families through randomisation, in order to test effectiveness, was wrong.

      The study has received a broadly positive reception since its findings were published, and it is now likely FGCs will be offered to more families than ever before in a wider roll-out.

      That said, some commentators are still concerned about the idea of basing access to this service on the grounds of efficacy and cost-effectiveness rather than rights.

      An alternative viewpoint on FGC trial

      Robin Sen, lecturer in social work at the University of Edinburgh, has argued that FGCs should be introduced on the basis of families’ rights to devise a plan in response to child protection concerns, not on the basis that they save money.

      He has also been critical of the fact that the FGC study did not report any significant difference in outcomes between families referred for a conference, and those who were not, after 18 months, the longest data point examined. The positive impact of FGCs was reported after six or 12 months.

      To read his critique of the research, see his comment posted on Community Care’s news story on the study.

      I’d like to think part of the reason for the generally positive reception is that Taylor and colleagues showed it is possible to conduct such a trial ethically. The study meant more families, not fewer, had access to an FGC as a result of the project, and many spoke to the researchers about their views and experiences.

      Indeed, both these recent RCTs used qualitative methods to give a rounded picture not just of whether it was a success but also how and why. Those who participated in interviews and focus groups would not have had the same opportunity to give their views and shape our understanding of the interventions had the studies not taken place.

      Of course, evidence about how effective something is should never be the only thing that determines whether or not we do it.

      The inclusion of qualitative and theory-based analysis is important because some interventions – such as problem solving courts, and indeed FGCs – are as much about being procedurally fair as they are about outcomes.

      Need to test outcomes

      Research results post-it note on mouse

      Photo: Artur/Adobe Stock

      But even these approaches make claims about outcomes that we should test.

      Sometimes these claims are extraordinary – such as the suggestion of effect sizes for FGCs that are several times greater than what Taylor and colleagues found.

      Their RCT gives us more precision about effects that can be weighed up against any moral justifications for using that approach.

      And, if – contrary to expectations – these interventions are detrimental, or detrimental to some groups, then that also needs to be part of the equation.

      Earlier research on FGCs, for instance, found some (albeit limited) evidence that minoritised groups may have worse outcomes as a result of the intervention.

      Even the strongest proponents of FGCs would surely accept that a large enough effect in that direction would make it unjustifiable. And without studies like the recent trial, we would be blind to it.

      Rights versus outcomes ‘a false choice’

      False choices between rights and outcomes create an unhelpful parody of what an RCT in social work can be.

      Outcomes are complex but so are rights, especially when the rights of parents and those of children are in tension. On its own, a rights perspective is not usually enough of a basis for overhauling services.

      Rather than relegating outcomes in the name of rights, we need a more balanced and well-informed appreciation of the evidence to make decisions about how to help children and families. RCTs like these can make a valuable contribution.

      David Westlake is senior research fellow at the Cardiff University’s Children’s Social Care Research and Development Centre (CASCADE) 

      *Formerly What Works for Children’s Social Care

      family group conferences, Foundations, social work research, What Works for Children's Social Care

      More from Community Care

      Related articles:

      Age assessment demands on social workers must be reduced, says ADCS president
      Assistant Manager
      Comments are closed.

      Job of the week

      Bournemouth Christchurch and Poole Council logo

      Children’s Social Workers – Level 2/3 – Children & Families First

      Employer Profiles

      • Bournemouth beach Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole
      • Hampshire County Council
      • A picture of an Oxford college quad Oxfordshire County Council
      • Two colleagues talking South Gloucestershire Council
      • Wokingham town centre image Wokingham Borough Council

      Workforce Insights

      • Would you move from the city to work in a more rural setting?
      • Webinar: building a practice framework with the influence of practitioner voice
      • Photo: Microgen/ Adobe ‘They don’t have to retell their story’: building long-lasting relationships with children and young people
      • Podcast: returning to social work after becoming a first-time parent
      • How managers are inspiring social workers to progress in their careers
      • Hand putting wooden cube block on blue background with word CAREER and copy space for your text. Business career planning growth to success concept Workforce Insights – showcasing a selection of the sector’s top recruiters

      Featured jobs

      Sign up for our social work emails

      More from Community Care

      • Network

        The networking platform for social workers


        Connect with peers
      • Jobs

        The latest job opportunities within the social work sector

        Search for jobs
      • Events

        The largest free to attend event for the social work sector

        Register now
      • Learn

        The online learning and practice resource for social workers

        Find out more

      Connect with us

      • facebookFacebook
      • XX
      • LinkedInLinkedIn
      • InstagramInstagram

      Topics

      • Adults
      • Children
      • Workforce
      • Social work leadership

      More information

      • About us
      • Contact us
      • Write for Community Care
      • Accessibility
      • Advertise with us
      • Privacy
      • Terms & conditions
      • Cookies
      Mark Allen Group
      © MA Education 2025. St Jude's Church, Dulwich Road, Herne Hill, London SE24 0PB, a company registered in England and Wales no. 04002826. MA Education is part of the Mark Allen Group. All Rights Reserved