The official version of this document can be found via the PDF button.
The below content has been automatically generated from the original PDF and some formatting may have been lost, therefore it should not be relied upon to extract citations or propose amendments.
The following questions were raised by the Panel's advisers to the Jersey Child Care Trust in relation to their initial submission to the Panel's review.
Question 1. Have you any further data from this study in addition to the graphs provided? Our data does suggest that some of the cohort have indeed experienced an increased wellbeing as a result of their experiences during lockdown and we found the panel adviser's questions interesting and thought provoking as a team. All the children in the dataset have developmental delays, are living in lower income families and could not afford the 12 hours of nursery access themselves. Whilst the size of the dataset is restrictive in establishing the more fine-grained data, we are able to explore the query around the connections between parental health and the children's wellbeing and involvement scores. We will revert once we have this.
Question 2. Can you signpost the 'national and international evidence' you cite highlighting the divide between those that thrive and those who 'clearly have not.
Yes. We have read a broad range of sources of evidence about the impacts of Covid and the pandemic restrictions, the key theme of exacerbating inequalities was clear. So, as a brief snapshot to provide the panel with some of this evidence, we can share the following:
Combatting Covid-19's effect on children - OECD - https://read.oecd- ilibrary.org/view/?ref=132_132643-m91j2scsyh&title=Combatting-COVID-19-s-effect-on-children - "The COVID-19 pandemic is harming health, social and material well-being of children worldwide, with the poorest children, including homeless children and children in detention, hit hardest. School closures, social distancing and confinement increase the risk of poor nutrition among children, their exposure to domestic violence, increase their anxiety and stress, and reduce access to vital family and care services. Widespread digitalisation mitigates the education loss caused by school-closures, but the poorest children are least likely to live in good home-learning environments with internet connection. Furthermore, increased unsupervised on-line internet use has magnified issues around sexual exploitation and cyber-bullying".
Inequalities in education, skills, and incomes in the UK: The implications of the COVID-19 pandemic https://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/15380 - "The immediate effects of the pandemic are particularly likely to increase three types of inequalities: income inequality, socio-economic inequalities in education and skills, and intergenerational inequalities. Income inequality is likely to be pushed up by higher rates of unemployment and underemployment, which will leave more families reliant on benefits. The huge disruption to schooling has affected all children, particularly those from poorer families, with long-term effects on their educational progression and labour market performance. Younger generations have experienced disrupted education and they face a tougher labour market than that seen prior to the pandemic. The effects on inequalities between the genders, regions, and people of different ethnicities are more mixed".
Mental health and the COVID-19 pandemic - https://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/15368 - "In keeping with other consequences of COVID-19, the pandemic has also appeared to increase inequalities in mental health, both within the population as a whole and between demographic groups"
The return to school and catch-up policies - https://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/15302 - "Inequalities. 1. School re-openings supported overall learning time. But the reluctance of some poorer families to send their children to school led to increased inequalities between poorer and richer children. Pupils from less well-off families were just as likely as their more advantaged peers to be offered the chance to return to school. However, they were substantially less likely to take up this
offer. 2. Even among those who returned to the classroom, richer children increased their learning time by more than their more disadvantaged peers. Since pupils from disadvantaged families were also less likely to have the home and school resources to make home learning effective, there is a real risk that an optional return to school would widen inequalities within a school year. 3. By contrast, richer pupils who were not prioritised to return to school saw their learning time fall to levels similar to those of their poorer peers – reducing overall inequalities, but at the considerable cost of a worse learning experience for all".
#LeftinLockdown: Parent Carers' experiences of lockdown by the Disabled Children's Partnership - https://disabledchildrenspartnership.org.uk/wp- content/uploads/2020/06/LeftInLockdown-Parent-carers%E2%80%99-experiences-of-lockdown- June-2020.pdf - Parents reporting an increased caring load, both for themselves and for their disabled children's siblings. Parents feel exhausted, stressed, anxious and abandoned by society. In many cases, the support families previously received has now stopped. Many families are seeing declines in both mental and physical health with lockdown increasing financial pressures on families.
Forgotten Lockdown Babies - https://www.home-start.org.uk/News/600000-babies-born-in- lockdown-are-overlooked
In the year since we first locked down, over 600,000 babies living in England have been born and have lived their whole lives in lockdown. Many have been exposed to high levels of stress, particularly when parents are overloaded with financial worries, or have experienced domestic abuse or mental health problems. Many families with young children are missing out on vital support as their struggles have gone under the radar of professionals due to shortages in services, exacerbated by lockdown restrictions. It is these, often invisible, babies in families with multiple risk factors that are most at risk.
Question 3. Where is your source for the claims that 'The evidence shows that our brain development is 80% fully developed by the age of 3 years.
The specific reference to the rapid rate at which a young child's brain develops is from the work of James Heckmann at the Center on the Developing Child. https://developingchild.harvard.edu/ . This document from the Center outlines the "scientific evidence tells us that emotional development begins early in life, that it is a critical aspect of the development of the overall brain architecture and that it has enormous consequences over the course of a lifetime" https://46y5eh11fhgw3ve3ytpwxt9r-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp- content/uploads/2004/04/Childrens-Emotional-Development-Is-Built-into-the-Architecture-of-Their- Brains.pdf
The diagram below illustrates the peak in brain development at around 3 years of age, supporting our reference to 80% of brain development occurs by the age of 3 years and 90% by age 4 years.
Additionally, this UNICEF document further supports the rapid brain growth:
"Early Moments Matter for every child, UNICEF's new global report on early childhood development, shows that the period from conception to the start of school opens a critical and singular window of opportunity to shape the development of a child's brain. The rapid brain growth that happens during this period of life is astounding. At this time, brain connections form at an unrepeated speed, giving shape and depth to children's cognitive, emotional and social development – influencing their capacity to learn, to solve problems and to relate to others. This, in turn, has a significant impact on their adult lives, affecting their ability to earn a living and contribute to their societies . . . even their future happiness". https://www.unicef.org/media/files/UNICEF_Early_Moments_Matter_for_Every_Child_report.pdf