The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

SCOTTISH CHILD CONTACT CENTRES: CHARACTERISTICS OF CENTRE USERS AND CENTRE STAFF

CHAPTER THREE: USER CHARACTERISTICS

INTRODUCTION

3.1 This chapter presents the results of the 13-week survey of contact centres and their users. The purpose was to establish basic quantitative demographic information about centre users, based on the centres completing a number of forms. These forms were designed to gather information on both the total number of families using the centres and on individual families. Families were not directly surveyed.

The chapter covers the following topics:

• General characteristics of the children using contact centres
• Allegations of domestic abuse
• Parental history of addiction and/or mental illness
• How families are referred to contact centres
• Court Orders affecting families
• Type of Contact taking place at centres
• Relationship between the Parents
• Parental Gender and Ethnicity
• Relationship between parents and children
• Characteristics of those families who stopped using the centre within a short period of time.

CHILDREN USING THE CONTACT CENTRES

3.2 In the 3-month research period, a total of 228, 202 and 236 children used the centre in the course of each month. These children came from 159, 145 and 165 families respectively. Included in these numbers are the 127 children from 87 families who were new referrals to the centres during that 3-month period.

3.3 Centre returns placed the children into age bands of 0-5, 6-10 and 11+. The dominant age group among total centre users and the new referrals was 0-5 years. Figures 3.1 and 3.2 provide more detail on the age distribution.

Figure 3.1 Age Ranges of Total Number of Children Using Centres

Figure 3.2 Age Ranges of Children of Newly Referred Families

3.4 In the case of new referrals, centres were asked to provide the date of last contact with the contact parent. Data from 97 children showed that the average period since last contact with their other parent was 185 days.

ALLEGATIONS OF DOMESTIC ABUSE

3.5 Of the total number of families using the contact centres over the 3-month period, 37 (23%), 31 (21%) and 32 (19%) families respectively had made an allegation of domestic abuse (to centre workers). The form did not record details of how many children were included in these families, or of the alleged abuser and victim. The figures suggest that approximately a fifth of all families using the centres each month had made an allegation of domestic abuse. Centres were asked to provide details of any civil or criminal remedies in relation to the alleged abuse. The information imparted in this part of the study was patchy. This is likely to be because centres do not actively screen users over these matters, nor seek to substantiate claims where the information is volunteered. The figures should, therefore, be treated with caution.

3.6 A total of 87 new families were referred to centres during the research period. Data on allegations of domestic abuse was available for 57 (66%) of the families. In the remaining 30 cases (34%), the question was left unanswered. Of the 57 families, 24 (28%) had made an allegation of domestic abuse. These 24 families represented just over a quarter of the new referrals (28%). These families included 32 children, accounting for 25% of the children of the newly referred families. For new referrals the centres were asked for details on the alleged abuser and victim. Predominantly the allegations involved the contact father abusing the resident mother (71% of allegations). In 2 cases (8%) the mother allegedly abused the father.

3.7 In addition to these 24 newly referred families, 1 further family (referred by a social worker) alleged that the child was the victim of abuse. The return did not specify who the alleged abuser was. There were no other reported instances of children as alleged victims of domestic abuse.

MENTAL HEALTH AND SUBSTANCE USE PROBLEMS

3.8 As with allegations of domestic abuse, contact centres do not seek to substantiate allegations/self-disclosures of mental health or substance use problems. Nor do they operate a universal screening policy that actively seeks such information or which excludes such families from contact centres. Guidance issued from the Network advises that centres should not admit anyone to an individual session who is under the influence of alcohol or drugs. Due to the lack of routine screening, and substantiation of allegations/self-disclosures, the figures should be treated with caution. Approximately 1% of resident parents and 5% of contact parents were alleged to have mental health problems. Around 1% of resident parents and 12% of contact parents were alleged to have alcohol problems. Finally, 1% of resident parents and 5% of contact parents were alleged to have drug problems. Of course, some individuals will have co-existing substance use and mental health problems

REFERRAL SOURCES

3.9 Families are referred to contact centres by a variety of sources. Most commonly, the referrer will be a solicitor. Around three-quarters of all families using the centres and the new referrals were referred by either a solicitor, by the court, or a combination of the two. Just under a fifth of all centre users self-referred, as did a tenth of the new referrals. The involvement of a social worker in the referral process was identified in a small number of cases for both total centre users and new referrals. Figures 3.3 and 3.4 provide more detail.

Figure 3.3 Total Centre Users: Referral Sources

Figure 3.4 New Referrals: Referral Sources

COURT ORDERS AFFECTING THE FAMILIES

3.10 The contact centre respondents were asked how many of the families had court orders in place. Around half the families had court orders in place in each month examined. Centres were also asked to provide information on the type of orders and the number of each order. The types and numbers were not broken down into the individual families and it was anticipated that the number of orders would be greater than the number of families affected, as one family may have more than one order. However, information was not always supplied and the number of orders detailed was less than the number of families affected.

3.11 The figures give a broad indication of the more common orders among families using contact centres. Predominantly this was for contact (80%) with a small number for residency (10%) and interdict (5%). ⁸ As the centres were not asked for details of the orders, it is not possible to say whether the contact order required contact to take place at the centre. For new referrals, information was sought on the type of order affecting the individual family. Returns for 38 families (44%) indicated that they had a court order in place. This was predominantly for contact (77% of the 38 families).

TYPE OF CONTACT TAKING PLACE

3.12 Under the generic term supported contact, centres provide a range of contact; each type may be seen in terms of progressive steps along the path to the parents making their own future arrangements outwith the centre. At one end of this spectrum, contact takes place solely within the confines of the premises from which the child cannot be removed. Further along this spectrum, the centre acts as a handover point, with contact taking place away from the centre. At the opposite end of the spectrum, the child is returned to the resident parent's home following a supervised exchange at the centre.

3.13 Over the 3-month study period, in total families made a total of 472 (in month 1), 349 (in month 2) and 383 (in month 3) contact visits. The average duration of a contact visit was just over 2 hours. Approximately three-quarters of all visits took place within the confines of the premises, from which the child could not be removed. It should be noted that some centres do not offer the whole range of possible contact. This may skew the figures towards one type of contact taking place. Figure 3.5 provides more information on the distribution of the data.

Figure 3.5 Types of Contact Taking Place

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE PARENTS

3.14 The centres were asked to provide details on the previous relationship between the parents. The results showed that the number of parents who were married and those who were cohabiting were roughly equal. Approximately 46% of all centre users were or had been married to the other parent, whilst 44% had cohabited. Around a tenth of adult centre users had a different relationship with the child; for example, some of these centre users were maintaining contact with a grandchild or extended family member.

Table 3.1 Total Centre Users: Previous Relationship Between the Parents

* Does not add to 100 due to rounding

#165 families used the centres in the 3 ^rd month. Data was only provided on 139

Table 3.2 Newly Referred Families: Previous Relationship Between the Parents

*Does not add to 100 due to rounding

#87 families were newly referred. Data was provided in 79 cases

GENDER AND ETHNICITY OF RESIDENT / NON RESIDENT PARENTS

3.15 Among all centre users and new referrals, the vast majority of resident parents were female (96%) and the majority of contact parents were male (92%). The centres were asked to provide details on ethnic origin of parents. The vast majority of parents were white, both across all the centre users and the new referrals (over 95%).

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN NEWLY REFERRED PARENTS AND CHILDREN

3.16 The resident guardian was usually - in 95% of cases - the child's mother or father. There were 3 instances where the resident guardian was a grandparent and 1 case where an aunt had residency. All contact parents were the child's mother or father. There were 78 contact fathers and 8 contact mothers ⁹. Among contact fathers, over half had cohabited (51%) whilst 46% were or had been married.

NEWLY REFERRED FAMILIES WHO STOPPED USING THE CONTACT CENTRE

3.17 This element of the research was intended to ascertain whether there were any common characteristics among families who stopped using the centres within a very short space of time. It was anticipated that this might give an initial insight into whether contact centres were inappropriate for certain families. Of the 87 newly referred families, 11 (13%) stopped using the centre within the study period. The families had been using 7 different contact centres.

3.18 A range of reasons was given for ceasing to use the contact centre. In more than half of the cases (6, or 55%), the matter had either gone back to court or further court action was pending/contemplated. In one case, the family had made their own arrangements for contact. In another case, the contact parent had assaulted the child. In a third case, the centre had terminated the use of its facilities because of the family's conduct. In the remaining two cases, the reason for ceasing use was unknown.

SUMMARY

• Families were most commonly referred to centres by their solicitors, and just under three-quarters were referred by solicitors and / or by the courts. Just under a fifth of families had self-referred. Approximately one half of families had court orders in place.
• The most common reason for ceasing to use a contact centre among the newly referred families in the study was that the contact dispute had gone, or was about to go back to court.
• Approximately three-quarters of all contact visits took place solely within the confines of the centre from which the child could not be removed.
• On average, the children of newly referred families had not had contact with their other parent for 185 days.
• Approximately a fifth of total centre users and a quarter of new referrals had made an allegation of domestic abuse. These allegations generally involved the contact father abusing the resident mother.
• Most of the children using the contact centre were aged up to 10 years. Resident parents were frequently female, and contact parents were commonly male.
• Parents using the centre were equally as likely to have been married as to have cohabited. There were a small number of adults using the centre who had a non-parental relationship with the child.

« Previous | Contents | Next »