News | Home News| N.Ireland

The outsourcing of children scribed in an article A decade of outsourcing in health and social care in England: What was it meant to achieve? – Bach‐Mortensen – Social Policy & Administration – Wiley Online Library by Anders Bach-Mortensen, Benjamin Goodair, Christine Corlet Walker First published: 21 May 2024 https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.13036

The linked article, “A decade of outsourcing in health and social care in England: What was it meant to achieve?” by Anders Bach-Mortensen, Benjamin Goodair, and Christine Corlet Walker, delves into the effects of outsourcing within the health and social care sectors in England over the past decade. It examines the intended goals of outsourcing and evaluates whether these objectives have been met. The study particularly focuses on the privatization of children’s homes and foster care, shedding light on the impact of profit-driven motives on the welfare of children. It highlights concerns regarding the prioritization of financial gain over the well-being of vulnerable individuals, emphasizing the need for a shift towards community-centered and cooperative models of care.

Cite Image Rights @Paul_B_Tovey

This has highlighted Excoriating study of the impact on children of privatization of children’s homes and foster care, when it is clear Private providers are nonsense-talk – it’s always profit as the bottom line with them. Better to buy into localized children’s homes again and community hubs to aid parenting under stresses. Co-ops though? Yes .. Any surpluses to go back to “the community of benefit” more parents to come out of the dark and into the light and start “this conversation” process that was started by Jeremy Hunt in his March Budget 2024 in which he described our cohort of many. Which Paul you are now at the center of as in survey here Empowerment through Participation: Shedding Light on Family Law Challenges – thestealingofemily.co.uk

The study’s findings shed a harsh light on the detrimental effects of privatization in children’s homes and foster care, revealing a stark reality: private providers prioritize profit above all else, neglecting the well-being of the children under their care. In response, a return to localized children’s homes and the establishment of community hubs emerges as a more humane alternative, offering vital support to parents facing overwhelming stresses. Furthermore, cooperative models present a promising solution, with any generated surpluses reinvested back into the community for the benefit of all. This shift aims to empower parents, inviting them out of isolation and into constructive dialogue—a process catalyzed by Jeremy Hunt’s acknowledgment in the March Budget 2024. This conversation, epitomized by the survey detailed in ‘Empowerment through Participation: Shedding Light on Family Law Challenges,’ signals a collective effort to address systemic issues and prioritize the well-being of our most vulnerable

“It’s appalling how children are discussed in market terms. This was glaringly evident on the Coram website, where they initially referred to children as ‘stock’ in their minutes before correcting the language.”

The discussion surrounding the outsourcing of children’s care, as detailed in the article “A decade of outsourcing in health and social care in England: What was it meant to achieve?” by Anders Bach-Mortensen, Benjamin Goodair, and Christine Corlet Walker, brings to light a crucial examination of the repercussions of privatization on children’s homes and foster care. The study illuminates the stark reality that private providers often prioritize profit over the well-being of children. This mercenary approach is inherently flawed, as it neglects the fundamental needs of vulnerable children in favor of financial gain.

Instead of perpetuating a system driven solely by profit motives, a more holistic and community-centered approach is warranted. Redirecting resources towards localized children’s homes and establishing community hubs to support struggling parents would foster a nurturing environment conducive to the healthy development of children. Moreover, the implementation of cooperative models offers a promising alternative, wherein any surplus generated is reinvested back into the community for the collective benefit of its members. This approach not only addresses the immediate needs of children but also empowers parents to actively engage in the upbringing of their children.

It is deeply concerning that discussions surrounding children’s welfare are couched in market terms, reducing them to mere commodities. Instances such as Coram’s reference to children as “stock” in their minutes underscore the pervasive commodification of vulnerable individuals within institutional frameworks. Such dehumanizing language underscores the urgent need for a paradigm shift in how we conceptualize and approach children’s welfare.

In light of these observations, it is imperative to reclaim the narrative surrounding children’s care from the confines of profit-driven agendas. By prioritizing the well-being and dignity of children above all else, we can foster a society that truly values and safeguards the rights of its youngest members.

Based on the information provided in the summary of the article, it suggests that the discussion around care homes and children has been framed in market terms, wherein vulnerable individuals are treated as commodities rather than as individuals with inherent dignity and rights. This is evidenced by references to children as “stock” in institutional discussions, which underscores a concerning trend of commodification within the care sector. Such language reflects a profit-driven approach that prioritizes financial gain over the well-being and welfare of children. This highlights the need for a paradigm shift in how we conceptualize and approach care for vulnerable populations, placing greater emphasis on the humanistic and ethical dimensions of caregiving rather than purely economic considerations.

---

In stark conclusion, “A decade of outsourcing in health and social care in England: What was it meant to achieve?” paints a distressing picture of the consequences of outsourcing within these vital sectors. The study’s examination of the privatization of children’s homes and foster care reveals deeply troubling patterns where vulnerable individuals are callously treated as mere commodities, disregarding their fundamental rights and dignity.

The findings sound a piercing alarm, signaling an urgent need for immediate action to counteract the prevailing profit-driven ethos. It is evident that the current trajectory is not just flawed but morally reprehensible, as it prioritizes financial gains over the well-being of society’s most defenseless members.

This alarming state of affairs has inflicted profound harm on both parents and children alike. Parents, burdened by the immense pressures of caregiving, find themselves stripped of meaningful communication with their children in a system that prioritizes profit over familial bonds. Children, robbed of the nurturing presence of their parents, are subjected to the cold machinery of profit-driven enterprises, exacerbating their vulnerability and isolation.

It is critical to note that communication with children is not just a moral imperative but a legal one as well. Section 40 of the Children Act mandates that in cases involving the placement of a child into care, parents retain the right to communicate with their children. This legal safeguard underscores the importance of preserving familial relationships, even in the face of bureaucratic processes and profit-driven agendas.

The dire situation demands a radical reorientation towards community-centered and cooperative models of care. It is imperative to redirect resources towards localized children’s homes and establish robust support systems, such as community hubs, to restore the vital connection between parents and children that has been severed by profit-driven agendas.

Furthermore, the adoption of cooperative models, with a mandate to reinvest any surplus back into the community, offers a glimmer of hope in an otherwise bleak landscape. This is a clarion call to policymakers and stakeholders alike to prioritize the sanctity of familial relationships over profit margins, lest we continue down a path of moral bankruptcy and societal decay.

In addition to the urgent need to uphold communication between parents and children, it is crucial to recognize the broader societal implications of the current state of affairs. The erosion of familial bonds and the prioritization of profit over human welfare not only perpetuate cycles of neglect and vulnerability but also corrode the very fabric of our society.

By relegating vulnerable individuals, particularly children, to the status of commodities, we risk compromising the values of empathy, compassion, and solidarity upon which a just and equitable society is built. The ramifications extend far beyond the immediate concerns of the care sector, seeping into the collective consciousness and shaping our collective identity as a society.

In the face of such profound challenges, it is incumbent upon all members of society to stand in solidarity with the most marginalized and voiceless among us. It is only through collective action, grounded in principles of social justice and human rights, that we can begin to dismantle the entrenched systems of exploitation and neglect that perpetuate the suffering of vulnerable individuals.

Ultimately, the path forward demands a reimagining of our priorities and a reaffirmation of our shared humanity. It is a call to action to forge a society where the well-being and dignity of every individual are upheld as non-negotiable values, where profit is never allowed to take precedence over human life, and where the bonds of family and community are cherished and protected above all else.

---

This revised conclusion emphasizes not only the devastating impact of outsourcing on communication between parents and children but also highlights the legal obligation to uphold such communication under the Children Act.