Introducing a randomized controlled trial into Family Proceedings : describing the 'how?' and defending the 'why?'

Atkinson, Carol and Forde, Matt and Crawford, Karen and Henderson, Marion and Wilson, Philip and Ougrin, Dennis and Minnis, Helen (2023) Introducing a randomized controlled trial into Family Proceedings : describing the 'how?' and defending the 'why?'. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family, 37 (1). ebad024. ISSN 1360-9939 (https://doi.org/10.1093/lawfam/ebad024)

[thumbnail of Atkinson-etal-IJLPF-2023-Introducing-a-randomised-controlled-trial-into-Family-Proceedings]
Preview
 Text. Filename: Atkinson-etal-IJLPF-2023-Introducing-a-randomised-controlled-trial-into-Family-Proceedings.pdf
Final Published Version
License: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 logo
Download (663kB)| Preview

Abstract

In 2011, a randomized controlled trial (RCT) of a mental health intervention for families with children under the age of 5 years coming into the Scottish care system was launched, called the Best Services Trial (BeST). When attempts were made to expand the study to English sites, the local leadership Judge objected, concerned that randomization in family proceedings was unfair, potentially discriminatory, and unlawful. Considerations about parental consent, fairness of randomization, and an understanding that the new intervention might be no better, or even harmful, compared to current best practices were crucial in addressing these concerns. In 2017, BeST was launched in England utilizing a randomized methodology. Significant input into the design of BeST came from the leadership Judge who had previously considered randomization unlawful. In July 2021, 383 families with 488 children had been recruited across both Scottish and English sites. Follow-up continues and 76 per cent of families continue to participate at 2.5 years after entering the study. Although there were undoubted challenges in designing and implementing BeST, with hindsight, the objections raised to the testing of interventions randomly were demonstrably resolvable and the process of randomization encountered no legal challenges. This is the first time an RCT has been accommodated within live proceedings in the family justice arena in England and Wales and one of a relatively few such RCTs conducted internationally.

CORE (COnnecting REpositories)