Jeremy Kearney

Perceptions of non-accidental child deaths as preventable events: the impact of probability heuristics and biases on child protection work

Anxiety about the possibility of non-accidental child deaths has had a major influence on childcare policy and practice over the last 40 years in the UK and elsewhere. Formal inquiries into, and media coverage of, these rare events have served to maintain the perception that such incidents happen far too often and could have been prevented. This focus on individual events tends to distort a clear view of the actual probability of non-accidental child deaths. It reinforces the notions that potentially all childcare cases are risky, and that social workers face a high probability of being involved with a fatal incident. In consequence, work with children has become highly risk averse. However, in statistical terms, the probability of non-accidental child deaths is very low, and far less than that of a child being killed on the roads. This article examines the way in which perceptions of the ‘high’ probability of child deaths are sustained despite their very low statistical probability. The analysis draws on thinking from behavioural psychology, particularly the work of Kahneman and Tversky, to consider some of the biases in probabilistic reasoning which affect risk perceptions in a child protection context. The article explores the way in which inquiry reports into single past events reconfirm risk perceptions. It will be argued that recognition of the essentially unpredictable nature of future individual non-accidental child deaths would free up childcare professionals to work in a more positive and less risk-averse manner.

Introduction: Identities, Individuals and Theories of Risk

Risk is now a well-established and critical area of debate in modern society and one that impinges on people both at the political and cultural level, and also at the level of how they live their own day-to-day lives (Lupton, 1999; Mythen and Walklate, 2006; Zinn, 2008). Whether it is, on the one hand, hearing experts debate the dangers posed by environmental disasters, violent conflicts between nations or economic meltdown, or on the other, making decisions about managing their own lifestyle, health and personal relationships, individuals are faced with multiple anxieties and uncertainties about how they should and could live their lives in safety, health and economic independence. In fact Denney argues that ‘risk has come to dominate individual and collective consciousness in the 21st century’ (2005, p. 1).

Risky Populations and Risky Identities: The Regulation of Trust and Relationships between Adults and Children

While risk is now a key focus of attention in modern society and one that influences most aspects of people’s day-to-day lives, in the area of child welfare it has had a particular impact on the development of policy and practice in the UK over the last few decades. Concern about risks to children have been greatly influenced by the overarching anxieties of the ‘risk society’ and its preoccupation with the many uncertain future risks generated by modernisation. The Internet, the economic situation and future employment prospects are just some of the factors that are seen to be making the lives of children and young people more risky now than in the past. Much of this concern focuses on the possible risks involved in children’s relationships with adults. These include the public anxiety about the dangers to children of abuse, neglect or, in extreme cases, even death, within the family setting, or the more general fear of male predators preying on children in the wider community. Although figures show that the probability of non-accidental child deaths is very small (Kearney, 2013) and that the threat from paedophiles is even less likely (Kitzinger, 1999; Corby, 2000) anxiety about risks to children have increased, rather than diminished. In this field, as with so many other aspects of modern society, the concern is now with the ‘distribution of bads rather than goods’ (Beck, 1992, p. 48).

Conclusion: Reflections on Risk, Identity and the State

The chapters in this volume have demonstrated the range and diversity of sites where risk discourses now dominate both policymaking and practice interventions across social welfare services. Whether examining the construction of risky individuals or populations, the processes of identifying, categorising and regulating people’s private and public lives are well established and, to a large extent, ubiquitous. At the same time, a number of the authors have shown how the risk discourses can also be beneficial in creating spaces where discriminated groups can create a positive identity and access support and resources.