The policy context of leaving care services: A case study of Northern Ireland

Children and Youth Services Review 30 (2008) 1279–1288

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Children and Youth Services Review j o u r n a l h o m e p a g e : w w w. e l s ev i e r. c o m / l o c a t e / c h i l d yo u t h

The policy context of leaving care services: A case study of Northern Ireland Mary Elizabeth Collins a,⁎, John Pinkerton b a b

Boston University School of Social Work, Boston, MA, United States Queen's University, Belfast, Northern Ireland, United Kingdom

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history: Received 19 November 2007 Received in revised form 24 March 2008 Accepted 24 March 2008 Available online 7 April 2008 Keywords: Transition from foster care International child welfare policy Political context

a b s t r a c t The transition of foster youth from state care to independent living has received increased research, practice, and policy attention in the United States and in many other countries. Most contributions to this literature have focused on documenting poor outcomes across various dimensions of need in the young people's lives whereas little attention has been given to the policy context in which the responses to those needs are being developed. In this article, we argue that there is a pressing need for better understanding of how the policy context can both promote and impede the development of appropriate services. To illustrate our argument, we use Northern Ireland as a policy case study both because of recent initiatives underway there in regard to youth transitions from state care and because of the heightened political sensibilities associated with it as a society. We draw attention to the socio-political historical context, a number of intersecting social policies, and the place of social work as a key occupation involved in delivering service improvements. We conclude by suggesting that this case study not only highlights the need to address similar aspects of the policy on youth transition from state care in the United States but also demonstrates the benefits of reflecting on policy development and implementation elsewhere in the world. © 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction After years of inattention, foster youths' transition from state care to independent living is now receiving substantial research, practice, and policy focus in the United States (U.S.). This is also the case in the United Kingdom (U.K.). Where once there was a dearth of information, increasingly studies, articles, books, and conferences are devoted to understanding the needs of these vulnerable youths and the appropriate policy and practice interventions. However, as noted in an early review of the emerging literature on outcomes of youth leaving care and evaluations of independent living programs in the U.S., there has been a lack of attention to theory guiding research and understanding (Collins, 2001). A number of psychological and micro sociological theoretical frameworks, including life course theory, social network theory, and developmental theory, were suggested in order to enhance scholarship in this area. More recent reviews that very comprehensively cover the U.K. literature, along with some American material (Stein, 2004, 2006), draw attention to the continued weakness of the theoretical underpinnings of this now burgeoning field of enquiry. Attachment theory, focal theory and transitions, life course theory and resilience were suggested as potentially relevant theoretical frameworks to guide leaving care research. Transition from care, however, is not solely a process of personal or interpersonal development but rather is socially constructed. Successful or unsuccessful outcomes are dependent on the processes and structures that make up the external environment in which young people have to find a means to cope with their varied life tasks. Youth in care, because they lack the mediating advantages of strong familial connections, may be particularly influenced by the circumstances of the larger socio-political environment. The same applies to many of the client populations with which social work engages. This is reflected in the central place given to ecological

⁎ Corresponding author. Boston University School of Social Work, 264 Bay State Road, Boston, MA 02215, United States. Tel.: +1 617 353 4612. E-mail address: [email protected] (M.E. Collins). 0190-7409/$ – see front matter © 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2008.03.012

1280

M.E. Collins, J. Pinkerton / Children and Youth Services Review 30 (2008) 1279–1288

models within social work analysis as a means to examine the interrelationships of individuals with their social systems, institutions, and cultural contexts (Bronfenbrenner, 1979; Garbarino, 1982; Germain & Gitterman, 1980, 1996; Jack & Jack, 2000). Included in this is an understanding of the impact of policy development, policy choices, and policy effects. Yet despite having these frameworks available, to date the study of foster youth transition to independent living can be criticized for its greater emphasis on intrapsychic and interpersonal systems to the neglect of attending to the effects of the larger systems. Theoretical frameworks which can focus on these larger systems must become a part of thinking about young people's transition from state care. With a view to exploring the implications of taking a wider system perspective on youth transitions from state care, this article examines the “case” of Northern Ireland — a jurisdiction in which the data on poor outcomes (Pinkerton & McCrea,1999) are consistent with those in the U.S. and in which there is a major legally driven initiative underway to improve service provision. In addition to the general benefits of studying policies and programs in other national contexts as a means to reframe what is too easily taken for granted in one's own (Pinkerton, 2006), there are a number of other reasons for analyzing Northern Ireland as a case study. Shared language and similar cultures and institutions facilitate access to material and prevent learning for the U.S. being lost in an overwhelming sense of differences. It is not by chance that most comparative studies undertaken in the U.S. focus on the U.K., Canada, or Australia. Northern Ireland's small size facilitates systemic analysis and more explicit examination than is typically possible when studying larger countries. In addition, the nature of Northern Ireland society and politics usefully brings contextual issues into sharp relief. Within the U.K., Northern Ireland has historically been the jurisdiction with greatest social need as measured by a variety of indicators. For example, a recent review of research on indicators of child poverty suggested that unemployment, low pay, a higher cost of living, larger families, and greater levels of inequality all contribute to higher levels of child poverty in Northern Ireland, compared to the rest of the U.K. (Horgan, 2005). In addition, Northern Ireland has the unenviable international reputation for political violence related to the long-standing and pervasive, albeit improving, sectarian conflict. Politics cannot be ignored in any aspect of life in Northern Ireland and can be anticipated to be a key factor in ‘agenda-setting’ (Kingdon, 1995) for policies regarding care leaving. Moreover, politics can be expected to influence not only the agenda-setting process but also the ongoing background of service delivery. The term ‘politics’ is being used here in a broad sense to include the social/political historical context and core political values as identified in current policy. Furthermore, in the delivery of social services, social workers are key actors in the implementation process (Wright, 2006). In this paper we focus on two aspects: the mechanisms of public administration, which emphasize a participatory process, and the context for social work practice. Our analysis of the policy framework examines the nested relationship of leaving care policy within broader child welfare policy, which itself lies within a larger social welfare policy context.1 The historical timeline is similar to the U.S.; social welfare legislation developed first (during the 1600s), modern public child welfare systems developed in the 20th century, and leaving care legislation has been enacted within the last decade. 2. Social and political history The geographic and political circumstances of Northern Ireland make it a worthwhile case for many topics relevant to social study. Like most long-standing conflicts in the world, the historical background is complex and has developed from several centuries of difficulty, real and perceived injustice, and the interplay of economics, geography, politics, culture, class, and religion (Bew, Gibbon, & Patterson, 2002; Cox, Guelke, & Stephen, 2006). Northern Ireland is part of the United Kingdom, which also consists of England, Scotland, and Wales. It is the smallest of the four jurisdictions in terms of both population (just over a million and a half) and area (13 thousand square kilometres). While England, Scotland, and Wales share a landmass, Northern Ireland, in contrast, is geographically separate sharing an island with the Republic of Ireland, which is a separate country and not part of the United Kingdom, having won national independence from Britain early in the Twentieth Century. As part of the political settlement, the country was partitioned in 1920, with the six northern counties becoming Northern Ireland with a regional assembly within the U.K. The other twenty-six Irish counties of the island became the Republic of Ireland. The partitioning of Ireland was a response to the fact that the majority Protestant population in the northern counties were for the most part strongly in favour of the union with the U.K. However, it did not provide a solution to Britain's ‘Irish Problem’ as it also included a significant proportion of Catholics who were equally strongly opposed to union. As a result, the politics of Northern Ireland came to be defined by the attempts of the Unionist majority to frustrate the ambitions of the Nationalist majority to achieve unification with the Republic of Ireland. This involved systematic exclusion of Catholics not only from political office but also from jobs and housing. The result was to entrench sectarianism into the fabric of both state structures and civil society and promote periodic outbursts of violence both from and against the state – conflict that is locally described as ‘The Troubles’. The most recent bout of the Troubles followed the Unionist Government's intransigence in the face of a civil rights movement that developed during the 1960s along the lines of that in the U.S. at the same time. The conflict that ensued, involving state, communal, and paramilitary violence, led to the British Government suspending the local legislative and administrative structures and imposing Direct Rule from Westminster. Since 1972, there have been attempts to resurrect a local regional government, most notably in the period 1999–2002 after the power sharing agreement was established in the Good Friday accords (in which the Clinton administration played a substantial brokering role). Current efforts to restore a devolved government have received renewed attention with pressure from the British and Irish governments to reinstate a power-sharing regional government, and since Spring 2007 have been stable. 1 “Leaving care” is the prevailing term in Northern Ireland, compared with “aging out of foster care” or “transitioning from foster care” more commonly used in the U.S. “Child care” is the prevailing term in Northern Ireland compared to “child welfare” in the U.S.

M.E. Collins, J. Pinkerton / Children and Youth Services Review 30 (2008) 1279–1288

1281

This brief history is presented to provide some context to issues likely relevant to the formation and implementation of leaving care policy, but that are unique to Northern Ireland. These issues include a history of policy development and implementation occurring within the U.K. that may or may not reflect the needs of the people of Northern Ireland, the background of sectarian conflict that may create specific challenges for the needs of vulnerable youth and the delivery of the social services, and the emergence of new governance structures that may facilitate or impede effective policy responses. These issues are discussed further in the sections below. 3. Policy framework: social welfare, child care, leaving care policy 3.1. Social welfare policy As a part of the U.K. and of the European Union (EU), Northern Ireland social policy is derived from and reinforced by ideological currents within these entities. Two key aspects are particularly relevant: 1) the principle of social inclusion which underlies current social policy debate and action, and 2) explicit attention to youth policy. Although the U.K. has seen intense debate and challenges to the post war welfare state over the last few decades, at its core it maintains a still prevailing ethos of welfare state and social provision. During the Thatcher administration of the 1980s, there was retrenchment of the government role and serious questioning of the values of the welfare state in line with new Right conviction politics of that government. However, during the New Labour Blair administration that followed in 1997, there was an emphasis on finding a “third way” that offered new socially responsive solutions and programs, while retaining much of the Thatcherite attitudes to personal responsibility — not least a decided emphasis on “work” not “welfare”. Work, not welfare, as a central theme, has been particularly challenging in Northern Ireland given the comparatively lower employment options, lower wages and more limited availability of child care (Horgan, 2005). Nonetheless, access to health care, housing, education/training, and income support remain part of the social contract particularly with vulnerable populations. There is widespread expectation that government will play a central role in social provision albeit as part of a mixed economy of provision. Particularly important to young adults, especially to those leaving care, are the entitlements to health care, housing, and financial support when out of work. The concept of social inclusion has a central place in U.K. and Northern Ireland policy discussion as it does throughout the European Union. The term is not utilized in the U.S. where the organizing principle of social policy has been self sufficiency, even in addressing problems of highly vulnerable populations. Hills and Waldfogel (2004), writing about welfare policy in the U.K. and the U.S., note that the concept of social exclusion is “foreign” to the U.S., although prior to New Labour, it was also foreign to U.K. government thinking as well. Comparing the two countries' approaches to welfare reform and the outcomes achieved thus far, Hills and Waldfogel concluded that the U.K. is making progress in reducing child poverty and increasing the employment of lone mothers “without resorting to the more punitive aspects of the U.S. reforms” (p. 782). Additionally, Buchanan (2006) reviewed research on the impact of government policies on social exclusion in England and Wales finding that considerable progress has been made: child poverty fell related to both increases in employment and government benefits. Social inclusion, which is itself a contested concept, involves five principal elements (Room, 1999): concern with a multidimensional notion of inadequate living conditions; concern with dynamic processes not just current consumption; recognition that people's living conditions depend not just on their personal and household resources but also the material and cultural collective resources to which they have access; focus on the relational as much as the distributional dimensions of stratification; attention to those individuals, households, and communities who suffer multi-dimensional disadvantage and the degradation of the collective resources and relational links on which they could draw. Cousins (1997, p. 130) stated that in addition to economic marginalization social exclusion also embraces “political aspects such as political rights and citizenship that outline the relationship between the individual and the state.” Efforts to promote social inclusion are applicable to multiple marginalized groups but youth have been a particular focus. Since 1997 the Labour government gave recognition to the problems facing young people, developed several policies and programs, and has sought “to distinguish and differentiate between different groups of ‘socially excluded’ young people” (p. 13). The New Deal for Young People is the main governmental effort to target social exclusion of young people. The borrowing of this quintessentially American ‘feel good’ social welfare term is worth noting. The policy is designed to offer a “New Deal” which is better funded and organized than previous youth training programs and which aims to be a different strategy via individualized approaches, real jobs, matched placements, market rates of pay, and certificated training (Ferguson, 2002, cited in Kemp, 2005). The program is mandatory for young people ages 18–24 who are unemployed and claiming Job Seeker's Allowance for at least six months, although care leavers and members of other disadvantaged groups can access the program earlier. The New Deal is a U.K.-wide program with some adaptation in devolved administrations. Fleming and Keenan (2000) discuss the situation of youth in Northern Ireland specifically, arguing that despite the disproportionate need of young people (related to general poverty as well as the effects of the conflict), responses and policies toward young people continue to marginalize and exclude. Services continue to lag behind the rest of the U.K., funding initiatives especially for economic regeneration have created more bureaucracy but not innovative programs, and young people are not involved in planning and delivery of programs but continue to be viewed as the problem. Youth unemployment, among care leavers and other vulnerable youth, may be of particular concern in Northern Ireland given the comparatively high levels of poverty in relation to the rest of the U.K. and continuing challenges to the structural economy (Morrissey, 2000). Moreover, in Northern Ireland, as elsewhere, lack of steady employment in the young adult years is frequently related to a life trajectory that includes a host of other social problems. Specific to Northern Ireland, the Targeting Social Need (TSN)

1282

M.E. Collins, J. Pinkerton / Children and Youth Services Review 30 (2008) 1279–1288

initiative, as described by McVicar (2000), has been a public expenditure priority in Northern Ireland since 1991 that skewed resources under existing programmes toward those areas and people most in need. In 1998 the government refocused TSN on more specific objectives, primarily unemployment, and renamed it New TSN. Many of the specific action plans within TSN are particularly relevant to addressing the social exclusion of young people, including improved training schemes and increased flexibility in compulsory education to assist those of lower academic ability. Research on the social exclusion of young people in Northern Ireland is based primarily on a longitudinal cohort survey of 1000 young people as well as some in-depth interviews with marginalized young people and those who work with them (McVicar, 2000). Analyses of these data have found that comparatively low joblessness levels for 16 and 17 year olds in Northern Ireland became comparatively high joblessness levels for young adults (McVicar, Loudon, McCready, Armstrong, & Rees, 2000), leading to conclusions that there is a serious problem with long term unemployment among young people, and this drives higher unemployment rates as the cohort ages. Findings from the in-depth interviews are summarized as follows: social exclusion begins at an early stage in life with school experiences very important; transition from school to work can be difficult and young people often make unsuitable choices; young people can feel exploited by competing education and training providers during transition; most young people want to work in ‘proper jobs’, although a small number seem intent on remaining ‘excluded’; marginalized young people often have low self-esteem, low expectations, and little ambition; the New Deal is not seen by some as being effective for the most marginalized; and, relationships with workers (e.g., New Deal Advisers) are very important (Loudon & McCready, 2000, cited in McVicar, 2000). Complementing this work is a recent study of the employment market for young people in Belfast. Green, Shuttleworth, and Lavery (2005) identified the following three factors that interacted to restrict perceived opportunities: limited mobility, lack of confidence, and religion. The young people in their study discounted training and employment opportunities in areas that were unfamiliar to them resulting in a “structural tendency to follow existing concentrations of where family, friends, and neighbours work (p. 320).” Regarding policy implications, they state, “a policy of provision of suitable training opportunities and jobs close to where socially disadvantaged people live does not encourage residents to extend their travel horizons or raise their aspirations (p. 321).” Linking their findings to a social capital framework (Putnam, 2000), they suggest that although communities in Belfast may exhibit “bonding” social capital, there appears to be a lack of “bridging” social capital, which is particularly needed for linking to employment opportunities. Although the effectiveness of initiatives regarding youth unemployment and social exclusion remain uncertain and key policy limitations (i.e., resources, difficulties tracking youth, inflexible approaches, and eligibility and sanction issues) have been identified, youth policy “is at least firmly positioned on the public policy map” across the U.K. and within the European Union” (Williamson, 2005, p. 22). Osborne (2003) notes, however, that the Promoting Social Inclusion initiative within Northern Ireland is a much lower profile activity “intellectually and practically” than the social exclusion programmes in Britain and that the attention in Northern Ireland has focused on small, identifiable, marginalized groups such as the Traveller community and teenage parents (p. 352). 3.2. Child welfare policy The current foundational legislation for child welfare is the Children (NI) Order, which became law on March 15, 1995, and is modelled after the Children Act of 1989 in England and Wales. The Children (NI) Order of 1995 provides the legislative framework of child care provision in Northern Ireland and outlines duties and responsibilities of the Health and Social Services Boards and Trusts.2 Its main provisions include: the introduction of the principle of parental responsibility that continues even when the children are not living with parents; the restructuring of private law, in relation to divorce and matrimonial provisions, and linking it to the public law which relates to the responsibilities of the Health and Social Services Boards; the introduction of a unified family court system; the introduction of a flexible range of new orders in private law to be used in the child's best interests; the duty of Health and Social Services Boards to safeguard and promote the welfare of children who are in need and to support parents in bringing up children ‘in need’ in their own home; the promotion of partnership with parents if children are in care and specifically to consult parents and children about any decisions made in relation to them; the replacing of existing orders in care proceedings with a single care order; and the creation of three new orders in child protection — the emergency protection order, the child assessment order, and the recovery order (DHSSPS, 2008). Child welfare scholars in Northern Ireland have written extensively about the Children (NI) Order 1995, its implications for practice, and its effects. Shortly after its enactment, Kelly and Pinkerton (1996) provided a detailed discussion of this legislation, including its origins, potential, and limitations. In 2006, scholars from a range of disciplines engaged in reflection about the impact of the Order after 10 years in a special edition of the journal Child Care in Practice (e.g., Duffy, Taylor, & McCall, 2006; Kerr, 2006; O'Kane, 2006). In the decade since its passage, there remain numerous implementation challenges related particularly to efforts to refocus child care practice toward family support and prevention rather than child protection risk management (Hayes, 2006). Other unrealized potential within the legislative mandate of the Children Order has also given cause for concern. This includes the development of family centers, services to disabled children and their families, services to disaffected young people, and services to young people leaving state care.

2 Trusts are the main administrative mechanism for the delivery of social services in Northern Ireland. Social services are organized within the four Health and Social Services Boards established by the Health and Personal Social Services (NI) Order 1972.

M.E. Collins, J. Pinkerton / Children and Youth Services Review 30 (2008) 1279–1288

1283

3.3. Leaving care policy Research in Northern Ireland (Pinkerton & McCrea, 1999) identified that outcomes for youth transition from foster care were poor. This evidence, combined with advocacy efforts and the legislative model provided by leaving care legislation in England, led to the enactment of leaving care legislation in Northern Ireland. The Children (Leaving Care) Act (NI) 2002 and later implementation guidelines in the Children (Leaving Care) Regulations (NI) 2005, set out in greater detail the duties of the Health and Social Services Trusts in supporting young people leaving care. These responsibilities include assessment of eligible children, identification of a personal advisor to assist with transition planning, and preparation of a written pathway plan outlining the transition work to be accomplished. In terms of personal support, care leavers have access to drop in centres, outreach support, mentoring and befriending schemes and programmes of life skills training, or other specialist services. Young people who are eligible for leaving care services are those ages 16–17, who have been looked after for at least 13 weeks since the age of 14. For those leaving care after age 18, the Trusts will continue to provide assistance until the age of 21, with possible extension to age 24 if the young person continues with education and training. Although the Trusts' obligation to cover accommodation and maintenance costs expires at the age of 18, they must continue to provide assistance where required for employment, education, and vacation accommodation for students. Relevant children will be eligible for Education Maintenance Allowances, in the same way as other young people with low incomes. Pathway plans determine the level of leaving care grants available from Trusts. 4. Public administration and service delivery The Good Friday Agreement of 1998 established a framework for power-sharing institutions and the parameters of political party relationships within Northern Ireland, between Northern Ireland and England, and between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. A Northern Ireland Executive was appointed by the Assembly using a method designed to ensure a representative cross-section of political parties in the Assembly. The Executive consists of ten members plus the First and Deputy First Ministers who, together, form a coalition government. The electoral arithmetic ensures that a coalition will always result (Carmichael & Osborne, 2003). Without a functioning national government, legislation for Northern Ireland had been enacted by Orders in Council at Westminster and executive powers were exercised by a team of Northern Ireland Ministers under the Secretary of State. In the years of Direct Rule, these Ministers, who were not from Northern Ireland, exercised a “hands-off” approach and allowed senior civil servants to play a much stronger role in policy formulation (Carmichael & Osborne, 2003). This situation has historically had several implications: no full Parliamentary debate regarding issues of social policy, a lack of democratic representation and accountability, and a concern that English ministers do not know or care enough about issues facing children and families in Northern Ireland. Moreover, in an atmosphere of chronic political stalemate with major parties fighting for legitimacy, issues related to the well-being of children, youth, and families may not receive sufficient attention. Under Direct Rule, there has been recurrent tension between parity and particularity in policy (Carmichael & Osborne, 2003; italics original) or along an “adoption or adaptation” continuum (Connolly & Erridge, 1990). The historical notion of parity suggested that in an effort at fairness, there would be eventual diffusion of relatively similar social policy from England to Northern Ireland. Unfortunately, there was rare attention to the unique context of Northern Ireland. Pinkerton (2003) argues that although traditionally parity was the guiding principle of child welfare policy as well, a more recent apt interpretation under New Labour is that of subsidiarity. He notes that Northern Ireland child care services in the 1980s developed into “effective well managed and resourced, multidisciplinary child protection systems” similar to those throughout the U.K. This occurred despite child care legislation that did not keep pace with legislative developments in England. The potential of the subsidiary relationship is that it allows decisions to be made at the most local level appropriate and avoids inappropriate intervention from higher levels. The concept might also “prove useful in exploring the processes by which neighbourhood, regional, national, transnational and global aspirations become grounded in the specific social circumstances in which individuals live out their lives” (p. 259) and might provide conceptual guidance as to how the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child can apply to children living in widely disparate localities (Pinkerton, 2003). 4.1. Human rights, equality, and participatory processes Aspects of the Good Friday Agreement related to human rights, equality and participatory processes have had some success. During the years of violent conflict, “human rights activists lobbied and campaigned on the basis that state human rights abuses were central to the origins and continuance of the conflict” and thus, “the protection of rights were key to its resolution (McEvoy, 2001, p. 215).” As a result, “the principles of inclusion, equality, human rights, and citizenship have never been far from the political debate and are now seen as key components in any future progress” (Horgan & Rodgers, 2000, p. 113). Harvey, although noting, “[T]his is a beginning only, and the results of all this restructuring must await detailed examination,” also states that human rights and equality considerations “are now structuring the way that institutions are being organised and how they do their business (2001, p. 44).” Within the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister, there is a Community Relations, Human Rights and Victims Division, a Human Rights Unit, and an Equality Unit. The main function of the Human Rights Unit is to provide information to the Government on the Human Rights Act 1998 and in the development of a culture of rights and responsibilities. Under Section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act (1998), public authorities are required to: promote equality of opportunity in carrying out their functions without regard in the areas of religion and political opinion, gender, disability, race and ethnicity, age, sexual orientation, marital

1284

M.E. Collins, J. Pinkerton / Children and Youth Services Review 30 (2008) 1279–1288

status and dependency; and to have “regard” to the desirability of promoting “good relations” between persons of different political opinions and race groups. Osborne (2003), although optimistic, offers some realistic cautions: “If public authorities have been slow to fully respond to the new mainstreaming provisions it may in part be a result of the increasing web of equality-related policy interventions and bodies to which they must respond and promote.… While each of these initiatives … can be supported as seeking to provide for greater equality in Northern Ireland, together they risk providing a maze of separate bureaucratic and audit procedures which could generate policy paralysis (p. 356).” “Consultation” is an important dimension to policy formation and implementation in Northern Ireland at each stage of the process and, if successful, has the potential to transform the relationship between public authorities and citizens (Osborne, 2003). According to the website of the Northern Ireland Office (NIO) (www.nio.gov.uk), “consultations are an opportunity for stakeholders and the wider public to contribute to NIO policies, legislation etc….The aim is to increase the involvement of people and groups in public consultation, minimise the burden it imposes on them and gives time to respond.” The consultation period is normally a minimum of 12 weeks but can be shorter when deemed necessary. Among the tenets of the legislation is “the requirement for the public authority to undertake effective [italics original] consultation with relevant voluntary and community groups at all stages…. For effective consultation to take place, public authorities must recognise the differing needs of those with disabilities, younger/ older people and those whose main language is not English” (Osborne, p. 348). The consultation process represents the main way in which a public authority can be challenged in its decisions and conclusions. Particularly relevant to child care policy, one consultation process that was considered effective in including young people was the selection of a Commissioner for Children and Young People (Pinkerton, 2003) by the Children and Young Person's Unit Office in the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister. As another example, Horgan and Rodgers (2000) report that in 1997 the Department of the Environment for Northern Ireland engaged in an extensive consultation on a planning document (regarding transport, housing, environmental protection, the economy, and employment) and as part of the process organized two consultation days specifically aimed at young people 17–25 years. More than 620 young people took part in the event. 4.2. Children's rights The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Children (UNCRC) was adopted by the UN General Assembly on November 20, 1989. Northern Ireland as part of the U.K., along with 191 other countries (but not the U.S.), have since become parties to the Convention. It consists of 54 articles and the four core principles are the following: 1) all rights apply to all children without exception or discrimination; 2) the best interests of the child must be a primary consideration in all actions concerning children; 3) states have an obligation to ensure every child's survival and development; and, 4) children's views must be taken into account in all matters affecting them. As a whole, the UNCRC provides a statement of global consensus and a basic framework for the construction of humane communities respectful of children and offers a guide for public action (Melton, 2005). Since the 1990s when a Children's Rights Alliance was established in Northern Ireland, a children's rights perspective permeates dialogue about child care policy and practice. Adherence to the UNCRC results in “rights” language used throughout the many government documents related to child welfare policy and programmes for youth in care and professional attention to those rights. The UNCRC articulates the rights of children and young people to family, in the family, on family breakdown, or where alternative care is needed to ensure the child's care and protection. A comprehensive report regarding the application of children's rights in Northern Ireland was conducted by a research team at Queen's University (Kilkelly et al., 2005). While comprehensive in examining a range of children's rights, specific attention to children's rights in alternative care is provided as well. The authors note that the rights perspective is supported in Northern Ireland Law by the Children (NI) Order 1995 and its guidance and regulations; for example, the Order requires that statutory agencies and courts take account of children's views when making decisions about them. A rights perspective is also supported in regional policy with Children's Services Planning in all four Boards explicitly committed to promoting children's rights and family support through integrated planning (McTernan & Godfrey, 2004). Furthermore, as a guiding principle to policy and practice, the rights perspective, the UNCRC specifically, and the interpretation of children's best interests within a rights context are part of social work education in Northern Ireland. The utility of a rights discourse as opposed to a needs discourse “suggests that there is indeed a public obligation, a moral imperative, to act. It puts the social worker, or anyone else advocating for adequate provision of public services, in the position of arguing for them on the basis of human rights, and implicitly accusing a public authority that does not provide them of human rights abuse” (Ife, 2001, p. 96). Thus, issues such as a lack of quality foster homes are interpreted within a children's rights framework; children's best interests cannot be met and children cannot participate in decisions about their care if there are no options regarding placement. Duffy et al. (2006) provide more explicit examination of how a human rights perspective might influence decision-making. Youth participation in leaving care planning and practice provides the core intersection of participatory processes and children's rights. Because of their older age, participation in planning is particularly relevant for youth leaving care. Article 12 of the Convention states that: “State Parties shall assure to the child who is capable of forming his or her own views the right to express those views freely in all matters affecting the child, the views of the child being given due weight in accordance with the age and maturity of the child” (General Assembly of the United Nations, 1989). Organizations in Northern Ireland, such as Voices of Young People in Care (VOYPIC), serve to promote youth voice at both the individual level and through policy. Increasingly, also, researchers are examining the means by which young people are participating in political processes and societal decision-making (Horgan & Rodgers, 2000; Leonard, 2005). Although not unique to Northern Ireland, an emphasis on youth empowerment, decision-making, and participation is in concert with the larger, societal efforts in that country to strengthen civil society in a post-conflict era.

M.E. Collins, J. Pinkerton / Children and Youth Services Review 30 (2008) 1279–1288

1285

4.3. Social work, community practice, and youth work 4.3.1. Social work In many countries, including the U.S. and Northern Ireland, social workers are key implementers of policy, particularly child care policy. Hence, an understanding of professional practice within the social and political context of Northern Ireland enhances understanding of service delivery. Pinkerton and Campbell (2002) review the experience of social work within Northern Ireland over the past 40 years and “explore how the profession might be able to operationalize new ideas of social justice in a post-conflict era (p. 724).” Earlier they identified three periods in the history of Northern Ireland social work (Campbell & Pinkerton, 1997). During the 1970s and 1980s, there was a growth in terms of numbers and prestige of the social work profession, “boosted through the formation of an integrated health and social service” and “developed within a technocratic administrative structure which was part of a British Government strategy to manage the Troubles (p. 724–725).” The second phase in the 1990s was a period of ‘new managerialism’ which “was marked by financial retrenchment, the introduction of new mixes in the economy of welfare, and a reduction in the influence and professional authority of social work (p. 725).” The present, third phase, is characterized by “a sense of struggle for social work in the face of competing demands. Social workers, like other professional groups and the wider society in Northern Ireland are striving to make sense of new challenges and opportunities presented as result of the ongoing process of conflict resolution (p. 725).” Thus, Pinkerton and Campbell (2002) argue, in an emerging post-conflict era there is an opportunity for the social work profession to more fully develop its role in social justice. Earlier attempts to emphasize a technocratic approach to the welfare state allowed social workers, like other professionals, to practice in ways which were detached from the communities they served, a partial explanation as to why social workers in Northern Ireland typically failed to acknowledge and challenge sectarianism3 (Campbell & Pinkerton, 1997). More recently, Houston and Campbell (2001) have suggested that in the last few years there is some evidence that social work practice paradigms have adapted in positive ways to the new social and political processes at the mezzo and macro levels. There has been a realization by agencies “that the safety of the neutral, technocratic position, with its close alignment to the state, is less plausible in a time of relative peace” (p. 70). In particular, statutory health and social welfare agencies have rediscovered community development strategies to solving social problems. As the field of social work is developing in ways reflective and supportive of the post-conflict era, there may be further opportunities for community-oriented youth work which is particularly critical to work with young people leaving care. In Northern Ireland, as in the U.S., social work is the predominant professional group involved in child welfare and, therefore, also in leaving care policy and practice. Good leaving care practice requires attention to both community work and youth work, both areas of practice which include but are not “owned” by social work. Transition-oriented services are inherently community-based; success in leaving care requires the development, maintenance and negotiation of community based services, resources, and networks. Furthermore, while concrete assistance from statutory authorities in the form of housing, education, and employment are central to the well-being of youth after care, access to youth services providing positive developmental experiences can facilitate the intrapersonal and interpersonal competency needed for a full and productive life. 4.3.2. Community practice Community social work was historically quite limited in Northern Ireland but may have room for development and growth in the current environment (Heenan, 2004). Community social work can have different meanings in different settings and for reasons suggested below, it may have particular relevance, but also particular challenges, in Northern Ireland society. Heenan (2004) traces the historical background of community development approaches within social work noting that, unlike other parts of the U.K., the turmoil which Northern Ireland experienced following 1968 prevented social services from advocating a shift toward community development approaches. In Northern Ireland, there were specific challenges to working with communities during the years of violent conflict, as working within and on behalf of certain communities might serve to alienate others. A recent government report defines a community development approach to have the following characteristics: promoting partnerships between social services professionals, other agencies, community groups and local people; empowering communities by their active involvement in decisions about needs and services and by taking steps themselves to address their needs; using local knowledge; targeting resources where they are most needed; bringing about a sense of local ownership and control; maximizing the participation of service users; and strengthening the social fabric and social support systems within disadvantaged communities (DHSS, Community Development Working Group, 1999, cited in Heenan, 2004). According to her research, practitioners remain sceptical regarding the government's commitment to community development approaches. Financial constraints, statutory duties, and procedural requirements were particular challenges, and partnerships were the exception. Heenan and Birrell (2002) describe some of the pitfalls of community development approaches: the infrastructure can be fragmented leading to both duplication and gaps; there can be a geographically narrow spread of groups; sustainability of funds can be an issue; community groups can be amateurish, lacking resources and management skills; there can be questions about the representativeness of the leadership of community groups, and in Northern Ireland, generally, the Protestant community is not as well represented by community groups. Linking more directly to the sectarianism, Williamson, Beattie, and Osborne (2004) comment that in many Nationalist communities (where people identify as Irish) community organizing and community development are well developed and directed by experienced leaders. Conversely, in the Unionist community (where people 3 Social work was not the only profession to take a primarily neutral stance. Livingstone (2001) writes that the legal profession, for the most part, took a neutral position to the conflict. Although this is likely to change with the “advent of the Human Rights Act, 1998, lawyers’ training and legal culture are likely to alter in a way which emphasises the idea of law having a particular normative content and of lawyers as having an obligation to uphold this (p. 140).”

1286

M.E. Collins, J. Pinkerton / Children and Youth Services Review 30 (2008) 1279–1288

identify as British) there has been a long-standing reluctance to engage in community development and, reflecting their attachment to the Northern Ireland state, a tendency to rely instead on state services. The concept of social capital may have particular salience to community-based work in Northern Ireland and, increasingly, this framework is utilized by scholars to examine social problems and interventions (e.g., Leonard, 2004; McGrellis, 2005) Nelson, Kaboolian, and Carver (2003) provide guidance for building social capital in divided communities, using lessons from the experience of Northern Ireland and other divided communities. But Leonard (2004), investigating social capital within a Catholic community of West Belfast, expressed concern that Putnam's (2000) work is too optimistic regarding the power of social capital and fails to recognize its exclusionary capacity. By drawing on a case study of a Catholic community in West Belfast, Leonard concluded “[I]n order to set in motion the framework for bridging social capital to emerge, the conditions that led to the development of bonding social capital need to be undermined (p. 927).” 4.3.3. Youth development While concrete assistance in the form of housing, education, and employment are central to the well-being of youth after care, access to youth services providing positive developmental experiences can enhance the intrapersonal and interpersonal skills needed for a full and productive life. Increasingly, such strategies are being advocated for youth in child welfare systems. Youth services are a more general type of service, less easily defined, and typically delivered through private, voluntary, systems. The purposes of such services tend to be more developmental; they may be partially therapeutic or preventive in nature, but they are not generally targeted at dysfunctional behavior. Such services aimed at youth development encompass a variety of cultural, athletic, recreational, and other normative opportunities offered through community-based agencies. Additionally, these services tend to be relatively universal although they may be targeted to youth considered to be at risk of some negative outcome. Empowerment-oriented youth practice is also a force in Northern Ireland (e.g., Fleming & Keenan, 2000; Harland & Morgan, 2003; Jeffs & Smith, 2002), but like the U.S. has not been directly linked with youth leaving care in any institutionalized or sustained way. Jeffs and Smith (2002) describe the history and contemporary context for youth work in Britain and Northern Ireland, arguing that contemporary youth work practice has lost touch with its heritage and has morphed into individualized case work. They link this directly to contemporary social policy targeting socially excluded youth; the individualized interventions such as mentoring, advice work, and counseling are “designed to bring the ‘socially excluded’ young people into direct contact with the ‘model’ adults they should aspire to emulate. The individual, not the group, according to this analysis, becomes the centre of attention. The group, the gang, the community, the collective are seen as beyond redemption (p. 55).” As social work in Northern Ireland adapts to and influences a more peaceful social environment, the profession might more fully engage in, and reinvigorate, the arena of youth work. 5. Lessons for the U.S. and the international social work community This analysis is designed to identify within one country how the political environment affects policy, services, and, potentially, well-being for former foster youth. There are numerous additional cultural, social, economic, and other factors that are likely to influence both the delivery of services and the outcomes of youth leaving care. The macro economy is of obvious importance to the employment prospects and consequent financial stability for young people; the economy of Northern Ireland has had severe structural weaknesses, and, although improved in recent years, continues to face serious development challenges, including addressing high concentrations of deprivation (Morrissey, 2000). Additionally, demographic factors (small size of the population, age distribution, migration patterns) and geographic factors (primarily rural environment, community size, proximity to Ireland and the U.K.) may be important as well. For example, the generally less mobile population may provide a greater sense of community and a closer connection to family that may be helpful to youth making transitions from care. On the other hand, limited opportunities to move, develop new social networks, and create new beginnings may have the opposite effect. Aiming for depth rather than breadth in our analysis we “hold constant” these and many other relevant factors on policy development, service delivery, and well-being of youth leaving care, and have honed our focus on political factors. Among Western industrialized democracies, the problem of youth leaving care has achieved the policy agenda and policymakers and service providers have developed strategies aimed to improve life chances for this population. Legislation specific to the problem has been enacted and includes elements such as assessment, assistance, provision, and linkage to services. This is in contrast to many other non-Western or non-industrialized countries which may be faced with greater challenges regarding economic development and basic health care and education, and which may lack both social welfare infrastructure and professional social work to address leaving care. Adding to the growing international literature on leaving care, through the case study approach we have identified and articulated several relevant factors: social welfare policy that has explicit youth policy and the core principle of social inclusion; a political environment that articulates both broad human rights and specific children's rights; and the role of social work, community practice, and youth work. A discussion of values inherent in public policy is difficult, in part because policy often supports conflicting values and in part because use of political rhetoric can cloud an assessment of how values translate into action. Nonetheless, the broad use of the term social inclusion in Northern Ireland (as in the rest of the European Union) can be contrasted with that of self-sufficiency, of late the guiding value of much of U.S. social policy. Moreover, a clear focus on the needs of youth specifically and an articulation of a children's rights perspective in policy discourse would suggest a foundational commitment to the well-being of young people. In addition to the values underlying social policy, the more generous commitment to social welfare provision would seem important in two ways. First, a common understanding of child welfare systems is that poverty is a key factor bringing families to

M.E. Collins, J. Pinkerton / Children and Youth Services Review 30 (2008) 1279–1288

1287

the attention of child welfare authorities. Consequently more generous social welfare provision should decrease the need for families to be involved in child welfare systems. Additionally, the supports provided to young adults are particularly relevant for the leaving care population. Even if the concrete supports to young adults are not as generous as they might be, basic social provision as found in the U.K. can be assumed to benefit at least some young people and reduce their chances for severe deprivation. In Northern Ireland, the structure of the government also provides substantial challenges to the implementation of social legislation. In particular, the lack of local political governance has been a serious political challenge to the implementation of social policy. Recent developments to restore a power-sharing local government, if sustained over the long term, should address this problem. There are also challenges to partnerships and collaborations in community based settings. The natural existing geographical communities for youth in Northern Ireland may be quite strong internally, with the advantages this entails, but problematic to the extent that they are segregated along sectarian lines and reinforcing of such cleavages. Social work is important in service delivery, but again, the particular role of social work and its challenges are dependent on the social and political context. In Northern Ireland, there is the opportunity for social work in the post-conflict era to be a key implementer of progressive, participatory policy and practice oriented toward social justice. Further development of the community-orientation of social work may also be in the offing and would be particularly applicable to serving the leaving care population. If successful, this may have a generalized benefit to the wide variety of vulnerable populations, but specifically to youth leaving care via enhancing participation. Although the reason for developing more rights-based, participative, social justice-oriented policy and practice may be linked to the unique historical and political circumstances of Northern Ireland, progress in these areas will be closely watched by social work in other countries and emulated where appropriate. The participatory and consultative processes infused in public policy may be uniquely traced to Northern Ireland's efforts to emerge from years of conflict, but if effective, may provide guidance for the U.S. and elsewhere. Further, explicit attention to human rights and children's rights principles as a guideline for policy and practice in child welfare may provide important lessons if some level of effectiveness in outcomes is identified. This might be an especially relevant lesson for the U.S. where a rights framework does not underlie child welfare policy and practice. Third, more generally, efforts in Northern Ireland to emerge from divisive conflict, if ultimately successful and longlasting, may provide extensive lessons for numerous countries to engage in political processes aimed at rebuilding structures of civil society. This article has not attempted to address the effectiveness of the policy approach in Northern Ireland to the achievement of good outcomes for youth leaving care, nor are there comprehensive evaluations currently being conducted. As with any large scale initiative it is difficult to isolate the effect of one change when multiple changes are occurring. One would expect that participatory process, such as those aiming to be inclusive of youth in policy and programming would result in increased empowerment of youth and consequently better outcomes theoretically related to empowerment (e.g., self esteem, self efficacy). Many social work interventions presume such a link. Thus, efforts to evaluate the success of youth empowerment-oriented approaches and the impact of empowerment on outcomes should be a priority. The strength of the case study approach to analysis is a focus on depth and context, but generalizability is constrained. Efforts to generalize the lessons and approaches are incumbent on potential importers of policy and practice solutions to answer the question: Can this work here? This is, of course, important in the utility of global comparisons but not unique to international work. Those of us in the U.S. are familiar in addressing this question as we chronically look beyond the boundaries of our individual states for better solutions elsewhere. We do so with the recognition that policy, culture, and economics are widely different in Oregon, Missouri, and Florida, for example. Nonetheless, we both tacitly and explicitly compare approaches, share what is learned, and adapt as appropriate to specific settings. 6. Conclusion Increasing demands of globalization will provide numerous opportunities for shared learning among social work researchers and practitioners. Moreover, the global context for social work and social policy will require sustained efforts to compare and understand different structures, concepts, and methods for approaching work with a variety of client populations. In social work we know that context is important, but analysis is often unclear regarding the manner in which context is linked to social service delivery and outcomes for youth. In this article, we have illustrated the conceptual complexity of one country and have argued for the need for greater depth of understanding prior to cross-national comparisons. The nascent comparisons possible in globalized social work may eventually assist in greater theoretical articulation of the ecological model. The empirical question of whether the varying contextual circumstances on outcomes of youth leaving care remains to be answered. References Bew, P., Gibbon, P., & Patterson, H. (2002). Northern Ireland 1921/2001 Political Forces and Social Classes. London: Serif. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The Ecology of Human Development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Buchanan, A. (2006). Children aged 0–13 at risk of social exclusion: Impact of government policy in England and Wales. Children and Youth Services Review, 28(10), 1135−1151. Campbell, J., & Pinkerton, J. (1997). Embracing change as opportunity: Reflections on social work from a Northern Ireland perspective. In B. Lesnik (Ed.), Change in Social Work Aldershot: Arena. Carmichael, P., & Osborne, R. (2003). The Northern Ireland civil service under direct rule and devolution. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 69(2), 205−217.

1288

M.E. Collins, J. Pinkerton / Children and Youth Services Review 30 (2008) 1279–1288

Collins, M. E. (2001). Transition to adulthood for vulnerable youth: A review of research and implications for policy. Social Service Review, 75(2), 271−291. Connolly, M., & Erridge, A. (1990). Central government in Northern Ireland. In M. Connolly, & S. Loughlin (Eds.), Public Policy in Northern Ireland: Adoption or Adaptation Belfast/Coleraine: Queens' University of Belfast/Policy Research Institute, University of Ulster. Cousins, C. (1997). Social exclusion in Europe: Paradigms of social disadvantage in Germany, Spain, Sweden and United Kingdom. Policy and Politics, 26(2), 127−146. Cox, M., Guelke, A., & Stephen, F. (2006). A Farewell to Arms? Beyond the Good Friday Agreement, (Second Edition) Manchester: Manchester University Press. Department of Health and Social Services, Community Development Working Group (1999). Mainstreaming Community Development in the Health and Personal Social Services. Belfast: DHSS. Department of Health, Social Services, and Public Safety (2008). Available online: www.dhsspsni.gov.uk/child_care_guidance. Duffy, J., Taylor, B., & McCall, S. (2006). Human rights and decision-making in children protection through explicit argumentation. Child Care in Practice, 12(2), 81−96. Ferguson, R. (2002). Rethinking youth transitions: Policy transfer and new exclusions in New Labour's New Deal. Policy Studies, 23, 173−190. Fleming, J., & Keenan, E. (2000). Youth on the margins in Northern Ireland, England, and Ukraine. European Journal of Social Work, 3(2), 165−177. Garbarino, J. (1982). Children and Families in the Social Environment. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine. General Assembly of the United Nations (1989). United Nations Convention on the Right of the Child. www.un.org Germain, C. B., & Gitterman, A. (1980). The Life Model of Social Work Practice. New York: Columbia University Press. Germain, C. B., & Gitterman, A. (1996). The Life Model of Social Work Practice: Advances in Theory and Practice. New York: Columbia University Press. Green, A., Shuttleworth, I., & Lavery, S. (2005). Young people, job search and local labour markets: The example of Belfast. Urban Studies, 42(2), 301−324. Harland, K., & Morgan, S. (2003). Youth work with young men in Northern Ireland: An ‘advocacy’ approach. Youth and Policy, 81, 74−85. Harvey, C. J. (2001). The new beginning: Reconstructing constitutional law and democracy in Northern Ireland. In C. J. Harvey (Ed.), Human Rights, Equality, and Democratic Renewal in Northern Ireland (pp. 9−54). Hayes, D. (2006). Rebalanced and refocused social work practice? Child Care in Practice, 12(2), 97−112. Heenan, D. (2004). Learning lessons from the past or re-visiting old mistakes: Social work and community development in Northern Ireland. British Journal of Social Work, 34(6), 793−809. Heenan, D., & Birrell, D. (2002). Re-evaluating the relationship between social work and community development: The Northern Ireland experience. Social Work and Social Sciences Review, 9(2), 42−57. Hills, J., & Waldfogel, J. (2004). A “Third Way” in welfare reform? Evidence from the United Kingdom. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 23(4), 763−788. Horgan, G. (2005). Child poverty in Northern Ireland: The limits of welfare-to-work policies. Social Policy and Administration, 39(1), 49−64. Horgan, G., & Rodgers, P. (2000). Young people's participation in a new Northern Ireland society. Youth and Society, 32(1), 107−137. Houston, S., & Campbell, J. (2001). Using critical social theory to develop a conceptual framework for comparative social work. International Social Welfare, 10, 66−73. Ife, J. (2001). Human rights and social work: Towards rights-based practice. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge. Jack, G., & Jack, D. (2000). Ecological social work: The application of a systems model in context. In P. Stepney, & D. Ford (Eds.), Social Work Models, methods and Theories: A framework for practice (pp. 93−104). Lyme Regis: Russell House. Jeffs, T., & Smith, M. K. (2002). Individualisation and youth work. Youth and Policy, 76, 39−65. Kelly, G., & Pinkerton, J. (1996). The Children (Northern Ireland) Order 1995: Prospects for progress? In M. Hill, & J. Aldgate (Eds.), Child Welfare Services: Developments in law, policy, practice, and research (pp. 40−55). Kemp, P. A. (2005). Young people and unemployment: From welfare to workfare? In M. Barry (Ed.), Youth policy and social inclusion: Critical debates with young people London: Routledge. Kerr, L. (2006). The Children's Order 10 years on. Child Care in Practice, 12(2), 179−184. Kilkelly, U., Kilpatrick, R., Lundy, L., Moore, L., Scraton, P., Davey, C., et al. (2005). Children's Rights in Northern Ireland Belfast: Queen's University. Kingdon, J. W. (1995). Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies. New York: Harper Collins. Leonard, M. (2004). Bonding and bridging social capital: Reflections from Belfast. Sociology, 38(5), 927−944. Leonard, M. (2005). Involving children in social policy: A case study from Northern Ireland. Sociology Studies of Children and Youth, 10, 153−167. Livingstone, S. (2001). And justice for all? The judiciary and the legal profession in transition. In C. J. Harvey (Ed.), Human Rights, Equality and Democratic Renewal in Northern Ireland (pp. 131−162). Oxford: Hart Publishing. Loudon, R., & McCready, S. (2000). The experience of social exclusion. In D. McVicar, R. Loudon, S. McCready, D. Armstrong, & G. Rees (Eds.), Young People and Social Exclusion in Northern Ireland: Status 0 Four Years On Belfast: T & EA. McEvoy, K. (2001). Human rights, humanitarian interventions and paramilitary activities in Northern Ireland. In C. J. Harvey (Ed.), Human Rights, Equality and Democratic Renewal in Northern Ireland (pp. 213−248). Oxford: Hart Publishing. McGrellis, S. (2005). Pushing the boundaries in Northern Ireland: Young people, violence and sectarianism. Contemporary Politics, 11(1), 53−71. McTernan, E., & Godfrey, A. (2004). Children's services planning in Northern Ireland: Developing a planning model to address rights and needs. Child Care in Practice, 12(3), 219−240. McVicar, D. (2000). Marginalized young people and social inclusion policy in Northern Ireland. Regional Studies, 34(9), 883−888. McVicar, D., Loudon, R., McCready, S., Armstrong, D., & Rees, G. (2000). Young People and Social Exclusion in Northern Ireland: Status Four Years On. Belfast: T & EA. Melton, G. B. (2005). Building humane communities respectful of children: The significance of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. American Psychologist, 60 (8), 918−926. Morrissey, M. (2000). Northern Ireland: Developing a post-conflict economy. In M. Cox, A. Guelke, & F. Stephen (Eds.), A Farewell to Arms? From ‘Long War' to Long Peace in Northern Ireland (pp. 136−152). Manchester: Manchester University Press. Nelson, B. J., Kaboolian, L., & Carver, K. A. (2003). The Concord Handbook: How to Build Social Capital across Communities. Los Angeles, CA: UCLA School of Public Policy and Social Research. O'Kane, P. (2006). The developing role of the Guardian ad Litem under the Children (NI) Order 1995. Child Care in Practice, 12(2), 157−168. Osborne, R. D. (2003). Progressing the equality agenda in Northern Ireland. Journal of Social Policy, 32(3), 339−360. Pinkerton, J. (2003). From parity to subsidiarity? Children's policy in Northern Ireland under New Labour: The case of child welfare. Children and Society, 17, 254−260. Pinkerton, J. (2006). Developing a global approach to the theory and practice of young people leaving state care. Child and Family Social Work, 11(3), 191−198. Pinkerton, J., & Campbell, J. (2002). Social work and social justice in Northern Ireland: Towards a new occupational space. British Journal of Social Work, 32, 723−737. Pinkerton, J., & McCrea (1999). Meeting the Challenge? Young People Leaving Care in Northern Ireland. Aldershot: Ashgate. Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling Alone. New York: Simon and Schuster. Room, G. (1999). Social exclusion, solidarity and the challenge of globalization. International Journal of Social Welfare, 8(3), 166−174. Stein, M. (2004). What works for young people leaving care? Barkingside: Barnardo's. Stein, M. (2006). Young people aging out of care: The poverty of theory. Children and Youth Services Review, 28, 422−434. Williamson, A. P., Beattie, R. S., & Osborne, S. P. (2004). Addressing fragmentation and social exclusion through community involvement in rural regeneration partnerships: Evidence from the Northern Ireland experience. Policy and Politics, 32(3), 351−369. Williamson, H. (2005). Young people and social inclusion — An overview of policy and practice. In M. Barry (Ed.), Youth policy and social inclusion: Critical debates with young people London: Routledge. Wright, A. (2006). Implementing family support policy: Empowering practitioners. In P. Dolan, J. Canavan, & J. Pinkerton (Eds.), Family Support as Reflective Practice London: Jessica Kingsley.