Search

Purpose– Poor mental health and well-being disproportionately affects vulnerable and disadvantaged children and young people. The paper aims to discuss this issue.Design/methodology/approach– The focus of this paper is socioeconomic inequalities in perinatal, child and adolescent mental health.Findings– Children and young people in the poorest British households are up to three times more likely to develop mental health problems than their more advantaged peers (Greenet al., 2005). The pattern can also be observed in the opposite direction, with poor mental health known to contribute to socioeconomic and other health problems (McCulloch and Goldie, 2010, Parckar, 2008). At a larger scale, the higher the level of inequality within developed countries, the higher the rate of child and adolescent mental health problems (Pickettet al., 2006).Social implications– Mechanisms posited as underlying such inequalities include family investment and stress processes. These factors have been taken into account when developing the economic case for investing in perinatal, child and adolescent mental health.Originality/value– Illustrative examples of progressive universal strategies and policies to help reduce socioeconomic inequalities in mental health, include: action to address the inequality gap in the UK; early intervention to improve mental health; investing in sustainable and evidence-based mental health services; ensuring parity of esteem, and; using appropriately designed social media and online sources to support children’s mental health.

Purpose – This paper was written as part of a suite to inform the Big Lottery Better Start programme and as such has focused on the outcomes that are of interest to that programme. The authors have also focused on outcomes for younger children and the zero to three years age group where data are available. There is a social gradient such that the lower a family's socio-economic status (SES) the greater the likelihood that they have children who are obese, have impaired social and emotional skills, or have impaired language acquisition. These statistics are clear and undisputed. The purpose of this paper is to explore some of the reasons for the social gradient in these outcomes. The paper provides some suggestions for actions that might be taken to redress the inequalities. It follows broader work presented in, for example, the Marmot (2010) review, Fair Society Healthy Lives. Design/methodology/approach – Rapid review of the literature building on the work of the Marmot (2010) review. Findings – Poor SES is linked with increased stress and a higher likelihood of being unable to afford to live a healthy life. These factors can have a negative impact on children's outcomes. The paper presents some examples of what can be done. Originality/value – This should be a useful paper for local authorities trying to reduce inequalities and improve outcomes.