Study reports

  • Final Summary Report. Link
  • Final Main Report. Link

Journal articles

  • Broadhurst, K. and Mason, C. (2017). Birth Parents and the Collateral Consequences of Court-ordered Child Removal: Towards a Comprehensive Framework. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family, 31 (1), pp. 41–59. Link
  • Broadhurst, K. and Bedston, S. (2017). Women in recurrent care proceedings in England (2007-2016): Continuity and change in care demand over time. Family Law, 47, pp. 412–415. Link
  • Broadhurst, K., Alrouh, B., Yeend, E., Harwin, J., Shaw, M., Pilling, M., Mason, C. and Kershaw, S. (2015). Connecting Events in Time to Identify a Hidden Population: Birth Mothers and their Children in Recurrent Care Proceedings in England. British Journal of Social Work, 45(8), pp. 2241-2260. Link
  • Broadhurst, K., Shaw, M., Harwin, J., Alrouh, B., Pilling, M., Kershaw, S. and Mason, C. (2015). Vulnerable birth mothers and repeat losses of infants to public care: is targeted reproductive health care ethically defensible? The Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, 37(1), pp. 84-98. Link
  • Shaw, M., Broadhurst, K., Harwin, J., Alrouh, B., Kershaw, S. and Mason, C. (2014). Recurrent care proceedings: Part 1: Progress in research and practice since the Family Justice Council 6th Annual Debate. Family Law, 44(9), pp. 1284-1287. Link
  • Harwin, J., Broadhurst, K., Kershaw, S., Shaw, M., Alrouh, B., and Mason, C. (2014). Recurrent care proceedings: Part 2: young motherhood and the role of the court. Family Law, 44(10), pp. 1439-1443. Link
  • Broadhurst, K. and Mason, C. (2014). Recurrent care proceedings: Part 3 – birth mothers – against the odds – turning points for women who have lost children to public care. Family Law, 44(11), pp. 1572-1576. Link
  • Shaw, M., Kershaw, S., Broadhurst, K., Harwin, J., Alrouh, B. and Mason, C. (2014). Recurrent Care Proceedings: Part 4: the emergence of child protection as a public health issue: how would a more prevention-oriented approach alter the provision of services and the family-professional relationship? Family Law, 44(12), pp. 1705-1708. Link
  • Broadhurst, K., Shaw, M., Harwin, J. and Alrouh, B. (2014). Capturing the scale and pattern of recurrent care proceedings: initial observations from a feasibility study. Family Law. Link
  • Broadhurst, K. and Mason, C. (2013). Maternal outcasts: raising the profile of women who are vulnerable to successive, compulsory removals of their children – a plea for preventative action, Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, 35(3), pp. 291–304. Link

Book chapters

  • Broadhurst, K., Mason C. and Webb S. ‘Birth mothers returning to court – can a developmental trauma lens inform practice with women at risk of repeat removal of infants and children’ in Shaw, M. (ed) Justice for children and families: a developmental approach (2018 forthcoming) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Press Articles


  • Nottingham University: Birth Mothers who Lose Successive Infants and Children to Public Care: What is the scale of the problem? How can we help? Download (PDF, 947 KB)
  • Nottingham University: Birth Mothers and Recurrent  Care Proceedings: Life Course, Persistent Difficulties and Turning Points. Download (PDF, 549 KB)
  • Cardiff University (CASCADE Event): Understanding recurrent care proceedings: Birth mothers, fathers and children, caught in a cycle of repeat public law proceedings. Download (PDF, 621 KB)

Technical Appendices

  • Vulnerable Birth Mothers and Recurrent Care Proceedings
    Estimating Recurrent Care Proceedings using CAFCASS Administrative Data: A Technical Appendix.
    Dr Bachar Alrouh and Professor Karen Broadhurst
    Department of Sociology – Lancaster University  Download (PDF 1.18 MB)