Background: Research indicates that there is a strong association between childhood adversity and youth suicide and self-harm. However, there is currently a lack of understanding about the patterns of adversity most frequently experienced by youth across social settings, and whether these typologies differently predict youth engagement in suicide and self-harm. This study examines the dominant patterns of adversity experienced by adolescents across home, peer, and school contexts, and explores the relationship between youth's adversity profiles and their suicide and self-harm outcomes, across a two year period (2020-2022). Methods: Secondary analyses were performed on data collected from 10,281 (50 % male) adolescents who participated in the Irish Planet Youth questionnaire in 2020 (n = 5004) or 2022 (n = 5277). Results: Findings from clustered latent class analyses indicated that there are four dominant profiles of adversity experienced by adolescents. Class 1 (Multiple Adversity) was characterised by a high probability of experiencing adversity across multiple social settings. Class 2 (Parent Adversity) had a strong likelihood of experiencing adversity with parents. Class 3 (Peer Adversity) were likely to experience adversity within the peer/friend domain. Class 4 was characterised by a low probability of experiencing adversity. Findings from logistic regression models with BCH training weights indicated that there were significant differences in self-harm and suicidality across the adversity classes. In comparison to the low adversity group, adolescents in the multiple adversity group were more likely to self-harm and attempt suicide. Limitations: These findings are based on cross-sectional data and rely on the use of single-item measurements, which may limit the generalisability of findings. Discussion: Results indicate that youth who experience adversity across home, peer and school contexts are at the greatest risk of engaging in suicide and self-harm. These findings have important implications for policy and practice, and suggest that youth experiencing adversity across multiple settings should be priority targets for intervention.

Family members across Europe are currently experiencing a range of socio-economic adversities, as well as health and welfare risks. These issues are particularly challenging in the context of recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic, war in Ukraine, increasing poverty, socio-economic disadvantages, and societal and technological transformation. Consequently, there is an ongoing and pressing need to provide effective support for families in response to their diverse needs and circumstances. However, European governments have diverse political persuasions regarding social and family policies and operate in differentiated and complex contexts. Such factors influence their approaches to, and configurations of, family support policies and provisions. This article investigates the conceptualisation and development of family support policies and provisions, and proposes a multi-dimensional, multi-modal, and multi-level conception of formal family support. It also provides a framework for analysing and developing family support and highlights challenges that arise within and across the relevant ‘policy, provision and practice’ domains while promoting a participatory ethos.

While it is now widely acknowledged that child-rearing practices vary culturally, there has been little research or consideration on how cultural difference is experienced by Polish immigrant parents in Ireland. This paper reflects on how culture is experienced by migrant parents and shapes Polish migrant parenting in the Irish context. It draws on findings from a qualitative study which elicited Polish migrant parents' perspectives on the norms that shape parenting and their parental experiences, while residing in a culturally diverse neighbourhood in Ireland. Findings highlight that no single theoretical framework accurately captures Polish migrant parenting, which is a complex, multidimensional and dynamic phenomenon. Instead, insight is required into migration experiences, the influence of childhood, family relationships and obligations, as well as employment and parenting styles, all of which are underpinned by specific cultural norms and values, to better understand parental challenges in the adaptation to their post migration environment.

This article is based on research about language, terminology and representation in relation to institutions in Ireland formerly known as 'Mother and Baby Homes'. Learning from this research informs tangible and conceptual steps towards greater epistemic justice practices for social work. The concept of epistemic justice is used to explore how critical attention to language, terminology and testimony can contribute to promoting rights, countering stigma, recognising diversity and actively challenging misrepresentation, mis-framing and misrecognition. Based on a sample of research findings that demonstrate epistemic injustice, the main themes discussed are identity (motherhood, childhood), places (institutions) and processes (adoption). In the discussion, we draw from participant's recommendations to outline how social work can provide enhanced leadership in relation to the use of language, terminology and representation and consider this in the context of current research relating to epistemic justice. Given the centrality of language, terminology and representation to social work, there is a significant opportunity within an international context to build on existing knowledge within the profession as well as amongst other professionals, organisations and wider society. To inform this improved 'knowing and doing', a number of conceptual and tangible steps to encourage epistemically just practices within social work are identified. This article reflects on findings from a research study with participants who gave birth in, or who were born in special institutions run by the State and/or contracted to religious orders between approximately 1950 and 1980 in Ireland. The study asked participants about the words, language or references to their personal situation and experiences that they found offensive, or thought should no longer be used. A total of forty-three participants gave rich and detailed accounts of offensive and hurtful language, terms and accounts of their circumstances that were used at that time and that continue to be used. This article focuses on the thematic areas of Identities (mother, child/children), Places (home, institution) and Processes (adoption), and who was using this language. It also highlights how the learning from this research can be used to inform future social work practice using a theory known as epistemic justice. This theory refers to how the concept of epistemic justice is used to explore how critical attention to language, terminology and testimony can help challenge stigma and misrepresentation, recognise diversity and promote rights. This article suggests that social workers can provide leadership within an international context in this regard.

Internationally, there has been a significant focus in policy and practice on the participation of children and young people in decisions that affect them, underpinned by respect for their rights under Article 12 of the UNCRC. While children's participation has become a core focus for practice improvement in child welfare services, there is a dearth of practical examples of how participation is implemented in organisations. In this paper, we provide a reflective case study of participation in practice in the Youth Advocate Programme (YAP) in Ireland, a large non-profit child welfare organisation. YAP Ireland works with young people who are considered 'high risk' using a strength-based approach in a wraparound service that is family-driven and youth-guided. Drawing on qualitative interviews and focus groups with young people, parents, advocates, and staff and management, we describe and critically analyse YAP's approach to participation. Critical factors in practice include a commitment to participation in policy, practice and culture at all levels of the organisation and scaffolding of participation by staff. Challenges include ensuring that participation principles are upheld consistently across the organisation and resourcing participation.

Family support as an approach to working with children, youth, parents, and families is widely practiced across Europe albeit with a range of diverse meanings and interpretations. This paper responds to this ambiguity and provides a conceptual understanding of the delivery of family support in Europe. In doing so it applies a social justice approach critically examining the extent to which Family Support reflects the right of families, children, youth, and parents to be supported. It identifies and critically examines similarities and differences in the meaning and application of family support as a key concept in the European context. It is based on a comprehensive review of literature, mapping multi-disciplinary approaches to the provision of support, based on academic material from 2015 to 2020 and adopting a broad and inclusive definition of family. The paper considers the complexities in developing a universally accepted understanding of family support that: has value for practitioners and managers; is selected as a focus by policy makers; is open to evaluation and research; is compatible with academic research; and most importantly provides responsive and effective support to children, youth, parents and families.

This paper compares children’s participation in child protection (CP) legislative and policy frameworks and how this is then reflected in practice among five European countries namely Bulgaria, Ireland, Malta, Norway and Serbia. Literature suggests that whereas many countries have adapted their legislative and policy frameworks, there exists a gap between these frameworks and what happens in practice (Wilson et al., 2020, Jensen et al., 2020). This paper will address this gap by considering the contextual forces that facilitate the participation of children in formal CP services, where listening to their voices and involving them in decision-making processes is important. The authors draw on the Eurofamnet national reports (Abela and Dudova, 2021) to provide an overview of the history of child protection, and other important indicators such as poverty. A case study approach is adopted. The comparative analysis of the five countries suggests that whereas all five countries have adapted their legislation to achieve child participation and CP policies are increasingly becoming child-centered, there exists a gap between the legislative and policy frameworks and what is on offer in practice. The participation and protection of children is interdependent on a child protection service with the necessary infrastructure in terms of legislation and policy but also necessitates contextually framed resources, knowledge and awareness about the benefits of such a policy for the wellbeing of children and their families. The exchange of good practices, knowledge and experiences in terms of child participation between countries with more developed CP systems and those with a shorter history of CP practices could create long-term collaborations and innovation in the area for those countries who most need it. The influential role of international institutions is also an important driving force, especially for those countries who may not have a welfare regime context that is supportive of entering into a conversation with children when they most need protection and support.

Children's well-being is inextricably connected to parents' well-being. Children are best supported and protected if we support their parents and family unit. The needs and rights of children and parents do not have to be conflicting or in competition. Although there are challenges involved in providing a support service which has a dual focus on the rights and needs of children, while also paying attention to the rights and needs of their parents it is possible. It is also well established that participation with parents and with children is a key aspect of effective practice in the provision of support services. Reflecting the breadth of contributors, this book provides a multi-disciplinary perspective on a range of approaches to supporting parents in an involved and inclusive manner using participatory approaches in universally available services and in targeted services charged with providing focussed intensive support and protection. The collection focusses on the challenges in providing parenting support services and in promoting parental participation within those services. In this concluding chapter, we highlight a number of important considerations which have been raised with regard to best practice in both these areas.

Attention is increasingly being paid to the provision of support to parents to assist them in the rearing of their children. Parenting is viewed as a functional role concerned with a myriad of processes and tasks associated with ensuring positive child development and well-being. Recent policy orientations globally have concentrated on supporting parents as a specific focus in formal children and family services. Parenting support refers to the wide range of initiatives and services that work to inform, develop and enhance parents' knowledge, skills and confidence to help them in their parenting role and to ultimately achieve better outcomes for their children. Examples of parenting supports include home visiting, parenting programmes, one-to-one advice and support, support groups and helplines. Despite the challenges involved, the inclusion of parents in the design and delivery of these supportive initiatives is advocated as best practice and promoted as a means of achieving positive outcomes for children and parents themselves. In recent years, there has been increasing research and evaluation activity in the area of parenting support to determine an evidence base for effective approaches and the significance of participatory processes in achieving positive outcomes. This chapter introduces this edited collection on parenting support and parental participation in formal children and family services.