MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Young People’s Transitions from Care to Adulthood: International Research and Practice

2009· article· en· W1991470642 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueChildren & Society · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRetirement, Disability, and Employment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)SociologyPsychologyPolitical sciencePublic relationsGerontologyMedicineGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Young People’s Transitions from Care to Adulthood: International Research and Practice By Mike Stein, Emily R. Munro ( eds ) London : Jessica Kingsley Publishers , 2008 ISBN 9781843106104 , 320 pp, £39.99 (hb ) This useful volume will be of interest both to the student, who is new to the topic of transitions from care to adulthood, and to the ‘leaving care expert’, already familiar with the subject. Bringing together information from 16 countries as diverse as Jordan, Canada, Romania and a cross section from Northern Europe, ‘Young People’s Transitions from Care to Adulthood’ provides an insight into the similarities and differences across these vastly different territories and jurisdictions. As well as outlining the systems in place to support youth leaving care, each country specific chapter places the approach in a sociopolitical context and reviews the evidence base and secondary research data for the country. Contributors follow a similar format in describing the type and approach of services, making the chapters easy to digest and cross reference. Two ‘case studies’ are included to give an illustration of ‘typical’ journeys through care. Whilst significant differences in approach are described in the 16 states under review, the recommendations made by the contributors are familiar. The gap between outcomes for care leavers and their peers needs to be reduced; care leavers are at high risk of social exclusion in all of its many manifestations; educational and employment prospects are limited. Joined-up services, good preparation and the ability to maintain key relationships with significant adults are pre-requisites for improved transitions from care, alongside stability within care placements and the opportunity to forge a sense of identity. Surprisingly, innovative measures show up in countries where we might least expect to find them, e.g. employment subsidies and support to purchase housing in two of the economically poorest countries in the study. The opportunity to reflect that similar difficulties face young people in transition to adulthood who have been raised in public care wherever they are might give the reader pause to reflect that our own care leaving services are not quite as bad as we often think. The UK is shown to lead in respect of having a specific set of policies and legislative requirements around the area of leaving care; many of the other countries do not even have a legal definition as to who is entitled to receive such services. However, there is much to make us think and to question the assumptions we have about the social policy context for children leaving care in the UK. The chapter on France reminds us of the multiple disadvantage and pre-care experiences, which contribute to poor outcomes; in Sweden, we learn that there is a much higher public legitimacy given to expenditure on services for children in need; and in Switzerland, we find that those placed in care under criminal jurisdiction are entitled to receive care and support up until the age of 25, as compared to 21 for peers who enter care via a welfare route. Thematic chapters draw together information from the countries including overall messages from research and the impact and duties that come with increasing globalisation. Harriet Ward looks at the wider social policy framework in which the varying approaches sit and considers how the sometimes competing agendas of a rights-based approach, and the need a country has to derive economic benefit from its citizens often lead to the same answers. Social exclusion is shown to be that which renders poor transitions from care so life limiting for individuals, as well as being the facet, which makes improving the experiences of care leavers an imperative for individual countries wishing to reduce the cost burden of the socially excluded. One of the most powerful messages of the book is that, in a global age, there are lessons to be learned across country boundaries. The case is made for the need for more international and comparative research in this area. This is an essential addition to the library of anyone interested in transitions to adulthood and leaving care policy. It contains an enormous amount of information presented in a digestible format. The book includes a glossary of terms as well as an author and topic index, making it easy to read both in one sitting or to come back to as a reference book to support other study. Comprehensive reading lists for each country offer plenty of scope for the interested reader to further their knowledge. In respect of how we close the gap and improve outcomes for care leavers across the globe, this book does not have all the answers, but it certainly asks the right questions.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.590
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.144
GPT teacher head0.467
Teacher spread0.323 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it