Child protection plans in the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany: Maintained, adjusted, or suspended?

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 infection prevention measures have enhanced risks of abuse and neglect for children and youth. Simultaneously, they have affected the practice of child protection, especially impacting the social infrastructure on which child protection work tends to rely, as well as the ability of practitioners to meet with family members face-to-face and in their homes. OBJECTIVES: This article focuses on the ways in which infection prevention measures have shaped child protection plans in Germany, i.e. family support and counselling, which is accompanied by monitoring and scrutiny. METHODS: The article is based on a qualitative study, in which 40 semi-structured interviews were held with first-line management representatives of German Youth Welfare Agencies between July and October 2020. RESULTS: The study's results show that protection plans have either been maintained, modified or (temporarily) suspended. Several influencing factors were identified. First, the extent to which the social infrastructure relevant for child protection could be maintained, or emerging gaps be filled in a timely fashion by child and youth welfare organisations. Second, the degree of effectiveness of the working relationship between practitioners and parents under the new conditions, including practitioners' ability to resort to flexible, digital or hybrid communication methods with families proved important. Moreover, everyday practical help from Youth Welfare Agencies and family service providers could often change the parental perception of these professionals for the better, thereby strengthening the relationship between practitioners and parents. LIMITATIONS: A key limitation of the study comprises the fact that the study findings are limited to the earlier phase of the pandemic.

Child welfare in the midst of the coronavirus pandemic-Emerging evidence from Germany.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus pandemic has had a major impact on the situation and well-being of children and their families, while simultaneously affecting the ability of welfare services for children and youth to support vulnerable families. As measures of contact restrictions were introduced to contain the virus, and schools and childcare facilities closed, the potential risk to child welfare could hardly be overlooked. OBJECTIVES: Focusing on Germany, this article aims to explore some of the effects of the COVID-19 measures on children and families. Furthermore, it examines a number of key challenges for child protection practitioners. These include identifying potential cases of child maltreatment without the support normally provided by teachers and child carers; and establishing and maintaining contact with clients under physical distancing rules. METHODS: The article is based on a review of German and English language scientific and journalistic articles, position papers from professional associations and other gray literature. It benefits from recently published (interim) results of empirical studies conducted in Germany, which explore child welfare issues in the pandemic. CONCLUSION: Under COVID-19, the child welfare system faces unprecedented challenges and uncertainty (e.g. (partial) loss of cooperation opportunities with key partners) whilst showing signs of remarkable resilience (e.g. child protection workers' ability to adjust to new conditions). While the potential of digitalising work processes in child protection has become apparent in the pandemic, the proven continuous face-to-face contact between practitioners and their clients is neither dispensable nor replaceable.

Research relationships between the South and the North: Cinderella and the ugly sisters?

There has been an increase in the size and range of North-South health research partnerships since the 1990s. Current literature tends to stress the need for partnership and associated principles, but recognises the difficult context of structural inequality and historical legacies. Critics point to continuing neo-colonialist attitudes to research, which are unhelpful for the development of mutually beneficial collaborations. Such dynamics have parallels with the European folktale of Cinderella and the Ugly Sisters, the latter using their advantage of wealth and position to exploit their step-sister. Little literature is available on how to address this situation for the principles of partnership to be integrated into project design, implementation and dissemination. This article examines processes and dynamics within North-South collaborations in health research through two different case studies presented from Northern perspectives. Each case study focuses on distinct aspects of research collaborations. The first, a North-South partnership project in Bangladesh, highlights issues of capacity building, use of data and publications. The second case, a Doctoral study in Thailand, examines the reliance on contributions by Southern partners, responsibility to the local setting and the practice of reciprocity. The article then turns to Southern researchers' reflections, explored in semi-structured interviews, on themes identified by Northern researchers as important concerns in research collaborations. The authors conclude that advantage should be taken of the fact that Southern and Northern colleagues often share similar values regarding research collaborations, but difficulties exist in implementation partly due to historically rooted and current inequalities. Practical arrangements are suggested which may help to address the commonly assumed roles of the North as 'provider' of funding and ideas, and of the South as 'receiver' in an environment with little scope for action.

Improving skilled attendance at delivery: a preliminary report of the SAFE strategy development tool.

BACKGROUND: Increasing the proportion of births with skilled attendance is advocated by international agencies as a key factor in reducing maternal and perinatal mortality and morbidity. The SAFE Strategy Development Tool is designed to enable policy makers and planners to gather and interpret information systematically to develop strategies for improving skilled attendance at birth. METHOD: Five modules were developed with partners in Bangladesh, Ghana, Jamaica, Malawi, and Mexico to guide the identification of problems related to skilled attendance, the collection of primary and secondary evidence, and the synthesis of this evidence to formulate strategies. The involvement of key players, including policy makers, is emphasized throughout the application of the tool and is vital to its success. RESULTS: The SAFE Strategy Development Tool was field tested in five collaborating countries. The methods employed by this tool were found to be feasible and produced evidence that will be useful in the formulation of strategies. Application of the tool can be completed in 3 to 5 months, and was estimated to cost between US$12,938 and US$15,627 for applications at district or subdistrict level. The final strategy options developed from the findings were presented at an international workshop in Aberdeen, Scotland, in February 2003. CONCLUSION: The SAFE Strategy Development Tool is now available to governments, organizations, and institutions involved in the implementation of maternal health programs.