Vulnerable Family Meetings
A Way of Promoting Team Working in GPs’ Everyday Responses to Child Maltreatment
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 13025893 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Justin Woodman (0000-0002-9403-4177, University College London, corresponding author), Ruth Gilbert (0000-0001-9347-2709, University College London), Danya Glaser (0000-0002-8786-1377, Great Ormond Street Hospital), Janice Allister (Royal College of General Practitioners), Marian Brandon (University of East Anglia) |
| Year | 2014 |
| Volume | 3 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 341-358 |
| Publication date | 2014-08-04 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Social Sciences (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 2076-0760 • E-ISSN: 2076-0760 |
| Publisher | MDPI AG (PUBLISHER • IT) |
| DOI | 10.3390/socsci3030341 |
| OpenAlex | W1984578480 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 32 |
This study uses observations of team meetings and interviews with 17 primary care professionals in four GP practices in England to generate hypotheses about how “vulnerable family” team meetings might support responses by GPs to maltreatment-related concerns and joint working with other professionals. These meetings are also called “safeguarding meetings”. The study found that vulnerable family meetings were used as a way of monitoring children or young people and their families and supporting risk assessment by information gathering. Four factors facilitated the meetings: meaningful information flow into the meetings from other agencies, systematic ways of identifying cases for discussion, limiting attendance to core members of the primary care team and locating the meeting as part of routine clinical practice. Our results generate hypotheses about a model of care that can be tested for effectiveness in terms of service measures, child and family outcomes, and as a potential mechanism for other professionals to engage and support GPs in their everyday responses to vulnerable and maltreated children. The potential for adverse as well as beneficial effects should be considered from involving professionals outside the core primary care team (e.g., police, children’s social care, education and mental health services)
Attendance · Child protection · Medical education · Mental health · Psychiatry · Safeguarding · Child Abuse and Trauma · Homelessness and Social Issues · Medicine · Migration, Health and Trauma · Nursing · Psychology
‘Like a fish in a bowl’
Recognising and responding to child maltreatment
Promoting and safeguarding the welfare of children
Like walking on eggshells’
Evidence-Based Practice at a Crossroads
Can I risk using public services? Perceived consequences of seeking help and health care among households living in poverty
Performing 'Initial Assessment
Reflective Practice in Contemporary Child-care Social Work
Complexity and Integrated Working in Children's Services
Professional Categorization, Risk Management and Inter-Agency Communication in Public Inquiries into Disastrous Outcomes
Child Protection and Safeguarding in England
From Menzies Lyth to Munro
Using thematic analysis in psychology
| Highly cited | No |
|---|