Developing a universal definition of care experience: consultation analysis

3. Wider language relating to care

This chapter presents the analysis of respondents' views on the wider use of language in care, such as how words and language are currently being used and how language could be further improved. Views often reflected the commentary provided in Section 2 of the consultation paper, noting that language is important in shaping assumptions and attitudes and can have positive or negative impacts depending on the words used and their meanings. It also sets out examples of good practice identified by respondents.

There was some overlap in responses to Q8 and Q9, where respondents suggested improvements across both questions. There was agreement that deficit-based language could be stigmatising, unclear or inconsistent, or create barriers to accessing support or between families. Suggested improvements focused on the need to listen to those with lived experience of care, to frame language in positive ways and the need for awareness raising, especially with staff. Examples of good practice cited by respondents include those noted in the consultation paper, engaging people with lived experience, names of specific organisations, training initiatives and those focused on improving written documents.

Q8: Do you have any comments on the existing language of care?

Existing language can be unclear or inconsistent

Around three quarters of all respondents left open comments at Q8. The existing language of care was considered unclear, inconsistent or over-formalised by many respondents. It was felt to contain jargon and acronyms, was seen as cold or clinical and overly legalistic, and was predominantly used by and for professionals. This was felt to create distance or alienation between families and others or that such language poorly reflected the experiences of children and young people.

It was also felt to result in confusion over the meanings of terms and in various interpretations, with consequences for achieving rights and entitlements. A few reported on research they had undertaken on the topic, which, for instance, found that local authorities had different ways of defining what the terms and language meant to them or that ‘care experience’ meant being cared for by somebody rather than having experiences of the care system.

“There is a level of confusing language when describing children and young people who have been previously looked after. Confusion currently exists between the term ‘Care Experience’ and the legal definition of ‘Looked After’.” - South Lanarkshire Council

“Current use of the term’ care experience’ can be problematic due to the complexity of what it means, and the varied experiences associated with it. Within our research experience, the term has been regularly misunderstood by adult participants to mean caring for someone rather than having experiences of the care system… Outwith our own work, this confusion also raises questions about the validity of external data sets because all quantitative data sets rest on the assumption that demographic categories are understood by those responding to these forms and questionnaires.” - NSPCC Scotland

“The language used in policy and legislative documents can impact funding, service delivery, and the prioritisation of care issues. If the language is vague or lacks clarity, it may lead to inconsistent application of support and resources.” - Individual

These respondents wished for simpler, less complex language, child or family-friendly language and language that reflected key messages of the Promise, such as love and affection. Calls were made for more explanation of terms and to use terms that reflected the language used by families without care experience.

Existing language is stigmatising or deficit-based

Many respondents noted that the language of care could be stigmatising, labelling and ‘othering’ or that it involved deficit-based terms that could lead to stigmatisation. In particular, it was highlighted that ‘being in care’ had become stigmatised, but other terms which were felt could create or compound stigma included ‘looked after’ or ‘LAAC’, ‘contact’, ‘respite’ and ‘corporate parent’.

Describing situations, such as disrupted relationships or moving home, as if they are specific to those with care experience when any young person can experience them, was also felt to result in labelling and ‘othering’ of those with care experience. Respondents felt the impact of such deficit-based language on children and young people could include exacerbating low self-esteem, creating anxiety and a lack of willingness to disclose information.

“At times, language can continue to focus on the deficits of people with care experience and reinforce negative stereotypes about what people with care experience are like or what they can achieve. If there is no way to avoid speaking or writing about the challenges that care experienced people may face, it is important not to lead with these challenges or highlight them without context, being mindful of how these challenges are framed.” – CELCIS

“There can be a stigma around ‘being in care’, and it would be beneficial to try and move away from a certain stereotype. Priority should help support students to thrive and not to feel ashamed or embarrassed if they have been in care, this is usually something that they have not had control over.” - North East Scotland College

Existing language can create barriers

In addition to existing language creating distance as noted above, several respondents felt it could also create barriers. Two main barriers were mentioned - between families and the care system, and between children and young people and their birth parents. Barriers created within the care system included an inability to access personal information, miscommunication, negative perceptions or judgements by staff and a perception that the impact of care experience ‘ends’ upon reaching adulthood.

“Language is a barrier to understanding and raising awareness. Terms like care leaver can feel final or isolating, suggesting a disconnection from the support system or implying that individuals are now “on their own”. The current language is a barrier, which contributes to young people’s sense of feeling different.” - Dumfries & Galloway Council

“Language used and understanding or misuse of legal terms and definitions can create barriers or marginalisation for individuals or groups.” – Adoption UK

A few respondents specifically mentioned that language could create barriers for those who had been adopted. These included an assumption that adoptive parents would have a positive impact on children. Others mentioned barriers for adopted people who were perceived as having lower support needs than others with care experience yet still needed assistance due to their experiences prior to or leading to their adoption.

Comments on the impact of language

Some respondents left comments on the perceived impact of the language of care and that it can shape attitudes and perceptions, for good or bad. While aligned to the theme on stigmatising or deficit-based language above, respondents in this theme were more likely to emphasise ways language – including positive language - could shape opinions. Positive language was felt to be important in normalising the care experience and addressing stigmatising assumptions, attitudes, and behaviours. It was suggested that language should focus on effective support rather than ‘care’ to help emphasise strengths and entitlements. Respondents felt certain language could lead to negative assumptions or lower expectations from professionals, and compound feelings of trauma and detachment among those with care experience.

“The existing language surrounding care, particularly in relation to care experience, often reflects a complex interplay of social, cultural, and institutional influences.” – Individual

“I feel this is a challenging area as the language can either create a sense of alienation for people in different care settings or allow people to identify better with a sense of belonging.” - Individual

Use of outdated language still exists

The existing language of care was considered out of date according to some respondents. Views were often contextualised, with a recognition that language is improving, and that outdated language is not always used. Reasons for why out of date language was considered still in use included slipping into ‘old ways’, written records or practices having not been updated, or that certain terms remained in use. For example, one respondent highlighted that the term’ residential special schools’ was still in use despite the term ‘additional support needs’ now being preferred to ‘special needs’.

“The existing language does not always exemplify love, care and compassion as it always should. There is a culture shift still required to ensure that these core values are embedded in practice by all those with corporate parenting responsibilities.” - Aberlour Children’s Charity

Existing language is overly simplistic

Some respondents commented that the existing language of care is not nuanced enough to be inclusive of all those with care experience. Comments included that it failed to account for intersectionality, did not recognise cultural variations in language, and did not reflect the complexities or realities of people’s individual experiences.

“The existing language often lacks inclusivity, failing to account for the intersectionality of identity factors such as race, gender, sexuality, and socio-economic status. It’s vital that the language surrounding care encompasses the diverse experiences of individuals, recognising how different identities intersect with care experiences. This could enhance understanding and foster a more supportive environment for all individuals.” - Individual

“Current terminology risks grouping all care-experienced individuals together, despite the wide variation in their experiences, needs, and outcomes.” - Dumfries & Galloway Council

Other themes

Multiple themes emerged with suggestions for changing the language of care. These are presented in the analysis of the next question (Q9), which addresses that issue.

Several respondents made positive comments about the existing language of care. These included that existing language is positive and universal, broad and supportive and that the Promise is providing a very clear narrative on the need for change. Respondents felt that language was improving, commenting that there have been ‘several encouraging steps’ and ‘significant progress’ made and that it is ‘going in the right direction’.

“There has been a huge shift in language we use thanks to Champions Boards, the Promise and the work of organisations like Each and Every Child.” - South Ayrshire Council

Q9: Do you have any suggestions on potential ways to change and improve the language of care?

Seven in ten respondents left a comment at Q9, with a wide range of suggestions. Suggested improvements made at Q8 are also included in the analysis below.

Engage those with lived experience

Many respondents at Q9 and some at Q8 felt it important to involve those with lived experience of the care system in initiatives to improve the language of care. Over half of these comments described the need to consult with and listen to those with experience of the care system. Some noted it was best to do this on an individual basis, given that people interpret and experience the impact of words differently. Singular respondents highlighted the need to include the voices of unaccompanied asylum-seeking children or those with sensory loss in these discussions. Suggested ways to encourage people to give their views included using a variety of methods, facilitating focus groups or interviews to gather insights, continual dialogue and animation or other creative methods.

In addition to listening to those with lived experience, some respondents advocated for this group’s views to be amplified or prioritised in decisions around language use. Some others felt that young people should collaborate with or lead initiatives to improve the language of care. According to respondents, the benefits of engaging those with lived experience included breaking down unjust stereotypes and assumptions, enabling language more aligned to experience, and encouraging challenge to the ways things have traditionally been done. One individual felt parents’ views on language and words should also be included.

“Changes to the language of care should be developed with people with lived experience of care, reflecting their experiences and how they feel they could be better written about or spoken about by everyone, including practitioners, the wider public, and the media.” - CELCIS

“We have consulted our Champions Board, and they have told us that there can be too great a focus on terminology and language and whilst it is important to reduce stigma, this should be done in a meaningful way.” - South Lanarkshire Council

Ways to frame, or raise awareness of, language to use

Comments were left by many respondents at Q9 and some at Q8 on how updated language could be positively framed or promoted. In addition, several at Q8 suggested that language should be framed in a person-centred way.

These respondents recommended using more positive language and words perceived as strengths-focused, warm, inclusive, empowering, and accessible. They felt language change should reflect people's circumstances and lived experiences while avoiding being patronising, stigmatising, or dehumanising.

“There are lots of resources being shared which are about language principles, which I think are useful. Moving away from the idea that we have to replace system words that are loaded with stigma to adopt new words, that have the potential to just take that stigma on themselves. There is lots to develop in relation to the tone of language, spoken and written.” - West Dunbartonshire Council

The need to raise awareness of the importance of language was highlighted by some, such as through education, staff training or public awareness campaigns. The usefulness of initiatives such as Each and Every Child was also highlighted by some. Specific suggestions included emphasising strengths e.g. resilience, achievements, skills and talents, using respectful and inclusive language, adopting a similar approach to that applied to Getting it Right for Every Child and challenging negative stereotypes.

Giving preference to the words used by those with care experience and ensuring conversations are age and stage-appropriate was mentioned by some respondents in this theme and raised by several in Q8. In other words, respondents emphasised the importance of person-centred approaches in using language. For instance, one noted that some children may not feel where they live is a ‘home’ and prefer to use the term ‘unit’. It was felt that recognising the preferences of people with care experience would respect their unique value and enable a greater understanding of their situation. Additionally, it could create flexibility in how staff interact with children and young people and result in a more accurate representation of individuals.

“Likewise, what some young people in care like, will not work for others. More generally, we need to be flexible in our use of language whilst encouraging everyone to be respectful, breaking down barriers and the impact of stigma.” – Stirling Council

“We value the continuation of training and awareness raising nationally as this supports our local activity and provides a frame of reference that helps set the direction. We would welcome an ongoing national social media campaign around language that we can pick up and develop locally. We recognise that it’s not only about the language used but the culture around it. If we are supported to all focus on strengths-based framing using language that highlights resilience and have the confidence to challenge each other then, our culture becomes more ready for the language changes that we need.” - South Ayrshire Council

Support and educate people

Enabling language change in support services was recommended by many, with some also recommending learning activities with impacted people, such as adoptees, or members of the public. CELCIS provided a quote made by one of their consultants with lived experience to emphasise the need for cultural change: “A policy definition means nothing without a cultural shift that truly embraces it”.

Views expressed by respondents suggested learning opportunities, as well as other forms of practice development, that should be focused on. Topics for training suggested by respondents included:

• The importance of language
• The impact language has on people’s identities
• How stigma arises
• Positive framing
• Intersectionality
• Examples of best practice to show change is possible and necessary
• Clarification of language to use
• Explanation of how scaffolding can and should support healthy development

Learning delivery mechanisms were also provided by some respondents, with some others calling for the use of case studies and storytelling methods. Suggestions included:

• Placing individual stories in context to show how every child with care experience can thrive.
• Using the navigating waters metaphor (a way of thinking about parenting and life that compares it to sailing) to explain how social and systemic factors can lead to involvement with the care system.
• Embedding terms into the workforce’s existing language.
• Amplify voices through reviewing and disseminating testimonies made as part of the Cross Party Group on Care Leavers.
• Using the value of strengthening community ties to remind people that communities are stronger when every child has what they need.

“More awareness of the proper ways to engage with care-experienced children and young people and how to speak about their experiences is needed across a whole range of organisations, particularly among the workforce who work directly with people. In terms of local authority housing, community and education departments should all have a co-ordinated plan on language, and it should be developed and practiced with sensitivity and in collaboration with those with care experience.” - Aberlour Children’s Charity

Use simple, clear language

Several respondents at Q9 suggested using simple, clear language, with some also raising this at Q8. Views were expressed that language should be less formal and professionalised e.g. use Plain English, avoid acronyms and be accessible to those with care experience. This was felt important to help avoid stigma and discrimination. One respondent called for clarity of legal terms to ensure children’s rights are upheld and protected. Examples of preferred practice were provided by some, such as language guides, sets of prompts to help provide an explanation of terms, use of language suggested by the Promise and care taken by the media around language used.

“Just being able to have a normal conversation without bandying around popular phrases to others when discussing a child’s needs or progress.” – Individual

‘Simplify – instead of saying ‘having contact with my siblings’ – say ‘I am going to see my brother’. Instead of saying ‘My Social Worker is coming to see me’ – say ‘Jane is coming to see me’. Say it as it is.” - Blue Triangle Housing Association

“We have seen a change in some areas (though not all) around the use of acronyms, including ‘LAC’ and ‘LAAC’, but note that we are now hearing the term ‘UASC’ frequently to mean Unaccompanied Asylum-Seeking Children. This must stop.” - The Promise Scotland

Update written materials

The need to update written materials such as policies, guidance, forms and reports was mentioned by several respondents. In terms of legislation and policy, suggestions included integrating person-centred and inclusive language, reducing formal language to ‘soften’ it, and making care experience a protected characteristic.

Some also recommended standardising policies across Scotland. For instance, Promise Scotland called for prioritising the Scottish Government's commitment made in response to the consultation on the redesign of children’s hearings to develop a clear plan for identifying and implementing systemic policy, practice, and legislative change to ensure consistent language use across all local authorities.

“A way in which this could be achieved is making Care Experience a protected characteristic. We know many corporate parents and Local Authorities who have already chosen to treat Care Experience as a protected characteristic ... This would ensure that Care Experienced People will be protected from any discrimination due to their identity throughout their whole life, which in turn a universal definition will provide Care Experienced People an equal choice to identify with this support.” – MCR Pathways

“Following the passing of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (Incorporation) (Scotland) Act 2024, there is a need to recognise the legal status of 16- to 18-year-olds as children, rather than “young people” in relation to their rights under Scots law. This terminology is crucial in understanding where statutory duties need to be strengthened to fully respect, protect, and fulfil children’s rights, particularly as their capacities evolve and they require support to transition to adulthood, and removes the potential for inadvertent adultification of children within our care system.” - Barnardo’s Scotland

Others emphasised the need to use updated language at local level, such as including reminders about the most appropriate language to use at the top of report forms or meeting invitations, narrating case notes, using daily diaries completed by children and young people or co-writing these with professionals, greater transparency in recordings of experiences and access to data, and mirroring language used in ‘Who Am I?’ files and care plans.

Specific language suggestions

Some provided preferred words or phrases they would like to see used. These included:

• Care status terms: Using ‘someone in the care system’ or ‘care supported’ rather ‘looked after’. Alternatively, keep ‘looked after’ but use this term in other settings e.g. ‘looked after at home, looked after in foster care, to help link experiences and policies.
• Terms to refer to children and young people: Rather than ‘care leaver’, use ‘someone who has been in care’.
• Terms for settings: ‘Additional support residential school’ rather than ‘special school’, ‘home’ rather than ‘placement’,
• Practice related terms: ‘Sharing’ rather than ‘disclosure’, ‘visiting family’ rather than ‘contact visit’, removing the phrase ‘has a prior relationship with’ in kinship care.
• Words beyond the care system, for instance, brother and sister instead of siblings.

“As stated above, the need to find an alternative way of describing ‘Looked After’ children. There is a need to consider the use of definitions beyond ‘care experience’ including with respect to ‘siblings’ and ‘exclusion’ (as we noted in our briefing for Scottish Government on the Promise Bill). As we set out in our consultation response on moving on from care into adulthood, the language used to talk about children moving on from care into adulthood must change, including terms such as ‘continuing care’, ‘throughcare’ and ‘aftercare’.” - The Promise Scotland

Regularly review language

The need to keep language use under regular review was noted by some respondents. The rationale for this was to capture constantly evolving language, acknowledge changing trends, ensure flexibility and embed inclusivity.

“The Independent Care Review, and The Promise have highlighted the importance of language, and the work of Each and Every Child on ‘reframing care experience’ highlights the power and impact of subtle changes to language. Language will continually evolve and change, and we need to recognise that this is something that will require continued work.” - Shetland Islands Council

“We need to get better at listening to care experienced young people and understanding that trends change, what works for some young people five years ago might not work now.” - Stirling Council

Avoid simplification

Although only one respondent at Q9 highlighted the need not to oversimplify the debate around language, some also raised this at Q13, and it is addressed here. Points included that a wider focus should involve changing practice and alignment with other areas, such as children with additional support needs, that a variety of local dialects need to be accommodated, and that legal clarity is needed.

Legal aspects were the most mentioned focus of respondents in this theme. Singular views included that:

• Legal status determined eligibility, such as the right to health assessments for the duration of legal orders only.
• Legal terms transcend different service contexts while also having specific connotations.
• A legal framework specific to those impacted by care experience rather than grounded in family law.
• There is a need for legal terms to reflect diverse realities.

“We note that clarity and simplicity are not necessarily the same thing; over-simplification risks losing the legal clarity necessary to justify intervention.” - The Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland

“A term like Care Experienced can be misleading in its simplicity, and may not reflect the complexities of many, including adopted individuals,’ identities. An Adoptees complex identity needs room for multiple past and present experiences and connections: natural families and adopted families including sibling and sibling-like relationships and extended family relationships.” - Scottish Adult Adoptee Movement

Other views

Two individuals called for funding for rebranding initiatives to remove outdated language. General comments on the care system or problems with the current language were raised by some.

Q10: Are you aware of good practice to change and improve the language of care?

Initiatives that engage people with lived experience

Two thirds of respondents provided a comment at Q10. Many respondents identified initiatives that engaged those with care experience that they felt represented good practice in updating the language of care. The involvement of children and young people was commonly mentioned by respondents, such as local Champion Boards, or those involved with organisations that embedded participation by those with care experience such as Who Cares? Scotland, Voices from Care in Wales and Our Hearings Our Voice, an independent children and young person’s board for the Children’s Hearings System.

Specific initiatives mentioned included:

• Language Leaders, a collaborative group of young adults with lived experience and professionals from across the Children’s Hearings system, who have produced ‘Principles of Language’.
• Young People’s Advisory Groups in various local authorities
• ‘Listen and Learn’ sessions run by Who Cares? Scotland Renfrewshire team
• Engaging children, young people and their families when developing services and a child-friendly version of the Children’s Service Plan in West Lothian
• A Language and Communication Group in East Dunbartonshire’s Health and Social Care Partnership that engaged with care experienced people, foster carers and practitioners to understand issues and concerns regarding language used across social work and wider services.

Outputs and outcomes from these initiatives were sometimes mentioned. These included changes to practice, such as embedding life story work as common practice, a shift in how the wider workforce uses language, identification of preferred words and language, and establishing ‘feedback loops’ where care experienced individuals can share their thoughts on language used to help maintain relevance and responsiveness.

“Film created by our Proud2Care young people and shared nationally” - Inverclyde’s Promise Practitioner Forum

“We have undertaken a case study in conversation with care experienced children and young people from Stirling and their experience of working with Social Workers. They identified a number of ways in which staff have got it right, and other areas where more work is needed.” - Stirling Council

“In South Ayrshire we have changed the name of looked after reviews to [name of young person] meeting. We spoke with over 50 children and young people and responded to what they asked of us. Our children and young people from our Champions Board have run events and awareness-raising sessions for practitioners on language.” - South Ayrshire Council

Initiatives focused on raising awareness and training

A range of initiatives focused on changing professional practice or raising awareness were mentioned by several respondents. Over half of these respondents highlighted and commended the work of Each and Every Child and their professional development resources. Comments included that these resources were felt to be ‘very accessible’, that it was ‘great work’ and ‘really powerful’, that reframing discussion around care experience had been valuable and that shared understanding had occurred following work led by Each and Every Child.

Other examples of learning opportunities mentioned by singular respondents included:

• Ongoing discussions on the use of language as part of the Skills Development Scotland Care Experienced Community of Practice.
• Multi-agency Promise awareness sessions across Inverclyde focused on learning from the Independent Care Review and the impact language can have.
• Workshops facilitated by care experienced advocates to provide insights into the impact of language and teach staff how to use person-centred and inclusive terminology in practice.
• Incorporating training on intersectionality into professional development to enhance understanding of how different identities influence care experiences.

“West Lothian`s Promise Informed Persons Network supports multi-agency collaboration to Keep The Promise. This offers training and support to all agencies involved with care experienced people, with focus on shared practice, shared language and shared understanding. Each & Every Child offers direct support and training to local authorities on framing and language in relation to care experienced young people. West Lothian have engaged with Each and Every Child and received multi-agency support.” – West Lothian Council

“Positive Language Campaigns: Campaigns like the “#EndTheStigma” movement in the UK have focused on changing narratives around care experience by promoting positive language and stories. These campaigns often include social media outreach, storytelling events, and community engagement, showcasing the strengths and achievements of care-experienced individuals rather than framing them solely in terms of challenges or deficits.” - Individual

Specific organisations

Several respondents highlighted work undertaken by specific organisations on changing the language of care, notwithstanding those mentioned elsewhere in Q10. In order of prevalence, organisations mentioned were the Promise, various local authorities or NHS partnerships, Who Cares? Scotland, MRC Pathways, CELCIS, and Skills Development Scotland. Singular comments also highlighted work by Children and Young People Centre for Justice, Police Scotland, NSPCC Glasgow Infant and Family Team and Clan Childlaw.

Some took the opportunity to describe practice occurring within their own organisation. For instance, the Care Inspectorate outlined a range of initiatives they had worked on in relation to their guidance, publications and procedures to positively influence their language of care, such as the redesign of their recruitment processes and documentation.

Examples of local authority and/or NHS initiatives included:

• ‘Signs of Safety’ model of practice implemented in North Ayrshire Health and Social Care Partnership.
• Changes within NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde such as increasing the age limit for accepting care experienced mothers and a glossary of terms and abbreviations produced by Specialist Children’s Services.
• Shift in South Lanarkshire Council towards strength-based and trauma-informed practice in child protection processes and language used to describe meetings and care planning.
• Glasgow City Council, amongst others, trialling ‘My Meetings’ when discussing residential care.

“Police Scotland have taken feedback from relevant partners and Care Experienced people and created a poster highlighting words and phrases which are stigmatising and offering alternatives. This poster has been shared across the organisation and is planned to appear in all Police buildings.” - Who Cares? Scotland

Initiatives focused on changing written materials

Several respondents mentioned changes in written materials, such as policies or guidance, note-taking, or report writing. Some highlighted changes to, or the development of, policies or guides, such as Clackmannanshire Council or Renfrewshire Council Language Policy and Children’s Hearings Scotland’s ‘Language in the Hearing Room’ guide. Three highlighted the usefulness of Aberdeen City Council’s ‘Write Right About Me’ project in developing ways of writing about people so their voices are more centred and they can access their rights in records. This service was also highlighted at stakeholder events.

“Several organisations and governments have revised their policy documents to adopt more inclusive and empowering language. The Welsh Government, for example, has been active in integrating person-centred language into its policies around children and young people in care, focusing on the individual’s strengths and potential.” – Individual

“Highland Council has a project called ‘Mind Your P’s and Q’s’ which includes a preferred language academy and a ‘Keep the Promise’ Language Guide. This emerged from a language subgroup which aimed to find out how meaningful difference can be made to children and families in Highland. The Guide provides context and choices to help guide practitioners and organisations to normalise care experienced children and adults’ lives.” - The Promise Scotland

Partnership or collaborative approaches

Initiatives where collaboration was a key component in changing the language of care were highlighted by several respondents. These included three who discussed networks or groups such as West Lothian’s Promised Informed Persons Network and those operating in the tertiary education sector, such as the College Development Network and Hub for Success. Three highlighted ‘Our Hearings Our Voice’ work, a joint initiative with Children’s Hearings Scotland and the Scottish Children’s Reporter Administration. Two mentioned the TACT Fostering ‘Language which cares’ initiative, a collaborative effort led by the Adolescent and Children’s Trust (TACT) with input from 15 local authorities and organisations.

“In May, ‘Our Hearings, Our Voice’ (OHOV) Children’s Hearings Scotland launched the Articulate Animation, co-written, designed and voiced by some of the Board Members. The short film made by Braw Talent brings to life the importance of language in the Children’s Hearings System. A joint initiative with Children’s Hearings Scotland and the Scottish Children’s Reporter Administration (SCRA), the animation stems from the work of the Language Leaders.” – South Lanarkshire Council

“We are currently working with University of the West of Scotland (UWS) to analyse the impact of the language changes we have made to date.” – South Ayrshire Council

“TACT, ‘Language which cares’ is an excellent resource and starting point to change the language used in care.’ - Individual

Themes highlighting the way language is used

Less commonly mentioned themes focused on highlighting work to promote improved language use. Several respondents mentioned language that empowers those with care experience, such as being trauma-informed, and some others raised initiatives aimed at making language more positive, those in line with a rights-based approach and those that consider the context of care. These comments were less likely to mention specific initiatives; instead, they tended to emphasise the principles and approaches that should underpin language development.

“Our work supporting health boards embed The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (Incorporation) (Scotland) Act 2024 has given the opportunity to learn about existing good practice on taking a children’s human’s rights approach and the value and importance of child-friendly publications - to help everyone understand in simple and clear language. Over time, everyday accountability for children’s rights should support further changes and improvements to the language of care, continuously informed by voice and participation, so that all children grow up loved, safe and respected.” - NHS Education for Scotland

Other views

Some respondents, most of whom were individuals, commented that they were not aware of any good practice to improve language, while some others gave suggested changes to language as covered earlier in this chapter. Two mentioned research projects, one being the Care Inspectorate who highlighted from their assurance and quality improvement practice, development and research the following examples of improving practice:

• Children and young people working with staff to improve the way language is recorded in their personal files.
• Staff describe their corporate parenting role as partners in care.
• Staff working with young people to develop language glossaries for staff to use when writing reports relating to children and young people.
• A service provider codesigning a booklet on the language of care and support.

“Research and Advocacy Partnerships: Collaborations between researchers and advocacy groups have resulted in comprehensive reports and resources that address the language of care. These partnerships often include recommendations for using language that is respectful and affirming of individuals' experiences, helping to guide professionals in their practice.” – Individual