A significant body of work examines the making of care orders in England and Wales; much less is known about how care orders are discharged. Focusing on focus group and interview data with forty-one professionals, including lawyers, members of the judiciary, independent reviewing officers, social workers, and children's guardians, this article presents findings from a wider project which examined the characteristics and circumstances that lead to the discharge of care orders. This article explores dimensions of trust and tension between the different stakeholders involved in discharge proceedings, including professionals and families, from the perspective of professionals. Five key themes are discussed: differences in thresholds of 'good enough' care; risk aversion; distrust in fulfilling obligations post discharge; hierarchies of power; and avoiding the re-traumatization of children and families. Acknowledging the difficulties reported in balancing risk aversion with safeguarding, it is argued that a lack of trust and tensions between professionals can unnecessarily delay legitimate discharges and cause harm to the children and families involved. This article concludes by considering recommendations for resolving issues of trust and tension between professionals and families in discharge proceedings to ensure that timely decisions are made in the best interests of children and families. In England and Wales, children may be placed under a 'care order' for reasons of child protection. While a care order is in place, a local authority will share parental responsibility with parents or carers. While there is much research on care orders, little is known about the process of removing care orders. This article examines professionals' views on the application and court process of removing a care order (known as discharge). As part of a larger, mixed-methods study, this article presents findings from a focus group and interviews with forty-one professionals, including lawyers, members of the judiciary, independent reviewing officers, social workers, and children's guardians. Specifically, this article explores issues relating to trust and tension during discharge proceedings. It is argued that tension and lack of trust during the discharge process can lead to unnecessary delays and cause harm to the children and families involved. Findings also highlight the difficulties professionals face in balancing concerns relating to safeguarding with risk aversion. In presenting these findings, this article aims to inform professional decision-making, reduce delay and variation in discharge proceedings, and improve the support provided to children and families at all stages of the discharge process.

This paper explores the involvement of children in discharge of care order proceedings and the tensions children's social workers, guardians and other stakeholders may face when aiming to both uphold children's rights to participate and their right to protection from harm. Using Lundy's [2007. 'Voice' is not enough: Conceptualising Article 12 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. British Educational Research Journal, 33(6), 927-942] model of participation, and drawing on qualitative interviews and a focus group with 41 family justice professionals and data from 209 electronic records relating to 327 children, this paper explores the extent to which children are given space, voice, audience and influence within discharge proceedings. In principle, professionals were supportive of children's participation. The reality was more complex, with only a minority of children consulted about discharge proceedings and professionals inferring their views in many situations, for fear of causing further distress or traumatisation. The findings from the study suggest that a fifth concept, impact, should be included within Lundy's model, whereby the potential impact of participation on children's wellbeing is considered alongside space, voice, audience and influence.

Understanding more about the discharge of care orders is vital-whether a care order remains in place has significant implications for children and their families and for local authorities. While there has been comprehensive research about the process and outcomes of care proceedings, much less is known about the discharge of care orders-particularly how, why and when care orders are ended and the differences between applications that are granted and those that are not. The present study combined data from an anonymized administrative data on discharge applications, a detailed analysis of children's e-records and qualitative interviews with family justice professionals to create the first detailed profile of discharge applications across England and Wales. This paper reports, for the first time, the number of discharge applications and outcomes across England and Wales, highlighting regional as well as between-country variation. Drawing on data from children's e-records and interviews with professionals, highlighting how and why local authorities are more likely to submit discharge applications, and to have applications granted, than parents. Recommendations are made for how to adapt professional practice and policy around discharge applications to better meet the needs of children and families.

A care order represents one of the most significant state interventions in England and Wales. The end of a care order is equally important, often meaning a withdrawal of statutory support and monitoring, and children returning home to birth parent(s), living with kinship carers or living independently. Despite its importance, little is known about the discharge of care orders. This article reports on the findings of the first study of the discharge of care orders in England and Wales. Casefile data from 323 children’s records were analysed using descriptive and bivariate statistical analysis. Qualitative data from the same records were collected and analysed thematically. Interviews and focus groups were also held with forty-one professionals involved in discharge. Based on the findings, this article reports on a new typology of discharge applications. The typology represents six distinctly different types of application varying on: process and application outcome; length of proceedings; applicant motivation and age and views of the child. The typology developed indicates that differentiated legal and social work processes may be needed to better meet the needs of children and families. This article concludes by presenting recommendations for policy, practice and research in this field.

Emerging research suggests autistic people are disproportionately represented in homeless populations. Less is known about how autistic people experience homelessness and what prevents them from exiting homelessness. This article presents findings from a narrative enquiry investigating the link between autism and homelessness. Ten autistic adults consented to participate in narrative interviews which explored their life histories and pathways through homelessness. This article considers how participants experienced rough sleeping and sofa surfing before attempting to access hostels. It then examines how participants navigated support systems, arguing that barriers to accessing services perpetuated homelessness. Because of these barriers, some participants disengaged with services, preferring to sleep rough. The extent to which participants could be said to have ‘chosen’ homelessness is balanced with consideration of the lack of autonomy autistic adults are able to exercise over their lives. This article concludes with discussion of practical implications for services and policy in England. Lay Abstract Recent research suggests many autistic people experience homelessness. However, little is known about the types of homelessness autistic people experience and what barriers autistic people face when trying to exit homelessness. This study involved gathering life stories of autistic people who had experienced homelessness. Ten autistic participants talked about their pathways through homelessness and the difficulties they had in accessing support. After first becoming homeless, participants tended to experience rough sleeping and sofa surfing. When participants approached housing and homelessness services, they were often told they were not eligible for support. This could happen when support workers were not aware of autism, or when autism was not considered ‘severe’ enough. Overcrowding, confrontation and lack of control over routine and environment were particular issues for participants when they entered homelessness hostels. Some participants chose to sleep on the streets rather than stay in environments which increased social anxiety and sensory difficulties. This study discusses ways in which homelessness and housing services can increase accessibility and improve engagement for autistic people. It is important to increase awareness of autism while understanding that autistic people who experience homelessness may have complex needs. In addition, services need to listen to autistic people with lived experience of homelessness to decide what changes will have the most impact.

Researchers investigate the benefits and pitfalls of different ways in which care orders are discharged, asking what needs to change in policy and practice to better meet the needs of children and families

Emerging research in the UK suggests a disproportionate number of autistic adults experience homelessness. This paper reinterprets findings from a narrative study on autism and homelessness through the lens of Critical Disability Studies (CDS). Ten autistic participants who had experienced homelessness took part in narrative interviews focussing on their life history. Throughout their lives, participants experienced repeated social and economic exclusion, which ultimately led to homelessness. This paper uses CDS to examine how normative social expectations may increase risk of homelessness for autistic people. It also considers how some participants renegotiated their autistic identities and became self-advocates. Using dis/human theory, it is argued that the autism label provides a framework from which to challenge social exclusion. To reduce risk of homelessness for autistic adults, structural changes are required that reposition accepted forms of personhood.

Autistic adults may be at increased risk of homelessness due to the association between autism spectrum disorders and poor socio-economic outcomes. In particular, social vulnerability, unemployment, and difficulty interacting with services can be catalysts for homelessness, compounded by lack of diagnosis and appropriate support. This article presents the narratives of two autistic adults, known as 'Max' and 'Peter', who had experienced homelessness. They explain the factors which led them to become homeless and those that aided their rehabilitation. The article argues that whilst Max and Peter were susceptible to the socio-economic disadvantages which affect adults with autism in various ways, the resilience and determination displayed in their narratives countered traditional stereotypes of resistance to change. Furthermore, it is suggested that homelessness is not an outcome of autism, but of the disabling barriers autistic adults face throughout their lives.

This paper reports the findings of a scoping review designed to identify research which has explored the relationship between cognitive impairment and homelessness. A systematic search of databases for articles published between 2007 and 2017 was conducted using keywords relating to cognitive impairments and homelessness. Sources were expanded using manual searches of citations and grey literature. Forty studies represented in 45 papers were selected for review using predefined inclusion criteria. Sources were subject to quality appraisal and data were extracted in line with review questions. Prevalence studies were over-represented in the review, while qualitative data were lacking. Aetiology of impairments was delineated by acquired and developmental causes. A variety of measures were employed by studies which were not validated in homeless populations. Studies did not give sufficient consideration to co-occurring disorders and overlapping symptoms between aetiologies. Because of these factors, it was difficult to conclude that all studies had accurately measured what they set out to; however, the evidence suggested that cognitive impairment was disproportionately over-represented in homeless populations. Cognitive impairment was found to be both a risk factor to and perpetuator of homelessness. Risk factors for homelessness were similar to those of the general population, though exaggerated by sequelae of certain cognitive impairments. The results of this review suggest that more attention needs to be paid to the underlying socioeconomic disadvantages, persons with cognitive impairments face which may lead to homelessness. Further research should prioritise the voice of homeless persons with cognitive impairments, to better understand both causes of homelessness and effective methods of rehabilitation.