‘Value pluralism’ is a strand of analytical philosophy that posits the plurality of morally significant values. By enabling systematic mapping of the diversity of moral registers within which social policy concerns might legitimately be considered, we contend that value pluralist-inspired analysis can aid constructive policy dialogue. Our argument is founded on four claims: first, as a matter of normative principle, value pluralism represents a defensible ethical standpoint; second, as a matter of fact, people are attracted to a plurality of moral values; third, as a matter of democratic legitimacy, pluralism offers a means of (partially) reconciling rival moral claims; fourth, as a matter of political strategy, pluralism offers a pragmatic approach that can engage protagonists on their own terms. To demonstrate its efficacy, we apply this pluralist approach to the vexed question of welfare conditionality, which we interrogate via six normative perspectives (rights, utilitarianism, contractualism, communitarianism, paternalism and social justice).

There is intense debate over the legitimacy of interventions which seek behavioural change on the part of street homeless people. ‘Hard’ measures, such as arresting people for begging, are particularly controversial, but ‘softer’ interventions such as motivational interviewing have also prompted objections on grounds that they are paternalistic. At the same time, the ‘non-interventionist’ stance of some service providers has been accused of perpetuating harmful street lifestyles. Inspired by Ruth Grant's philosophically informed interrogation of the ethics of incentives, we propose a normative framework for application in this field. Via systematic exploration of Grant's three ‘legitimacy standards’ (legitimate purpose, voluntary response, effects on character), and an additional outcome-focussed fourth (effectiveness, proportionality and balance), we attempt to unsettle any intuitive assumption that non-interventionist approaches are necessarily more morally defensible than interventionist ones. We also, however, explicate the high ethical and empirical bar required to justify social control measures.

Objectives: This study set out to profile the diagnoses and level of suicidal behaviour of adolescents aged 12-15 years newly referred to a Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS). Information on the nature and range of disorders and level of functional impairment among adolescents attending outpatient CAMHS is important for service planning and development.

Methods: A total of 100 newly referred adolescents were assessed using the KSADS-PL standardised interview. Overall level of functional impairment was measured using The Clinical Global Impressions Scale and The Children's Global Assessment Scale.

Results: Results showed that the majority of adolescents had more than one disorder, with almost one quarter having four or more disorders. Behavioural disorders were the most common diagnostic category, followed by anxiety disorders, and affective disorders. Although relatively uncommon, levels of functional impairment were highest in those with psychotic disorders, followed by substance abuse disorders. The most common pattern of comorbid disorders were depressive disorders plus anxiety disorders, followed by anxiety disorders plus behavioural disorders and depressive disorders plus behavioural disorders. One quarter of the young people had engaged in suicidal acts in the six months prior to attendance, while this had been the case in over one half of those with a depressive disorder.

Conclusion: This study showed that adolescents attending CAMHS tend to have multiple disorders, high levels of suicidality, and are significantly functionally impaired. These factors need to be taken into account in the development of effective treatments.

This article presents preliminary results from a multi-stage quantitative study of ‘multiple exclusion homelessness’ (MEH) in seven urban locations across the UK. It demonstrates a very high degree of overlap between a range of experiences associated with ‘deep social exclusion’ – namely, homelessness, substance misuse, institutional care and ‘street culture’ activities (such as begging and street drinking). It also provides evidence to support the contention that homelessness is a particularly prevalent form of exclusion, with its experience reported as widespread by those accessing low threshold support services targeted at other dimensions of deep exclusion, such as drug misuse. Further, the analysis presented indicates that the nature of MEH varies geographically, with the profile of the population affected looking quite different in Westminster (London) than in the other urban locations. The main explanation for this appears to be the exceptionally high proportion of migrants in the MEH population in Westminster, who tend to report lower overall levels of personal trauma and vulnerability than the indigenous MEH population.

This article contends that the New Labour government's current policies on street homelessness in England prioritise ‘social cohesion’ over ‘social justice’ objectives. While the government has implemented substantial improvements in services for street homeless people in recent years, and has achieved a significant reduction in the numbers sleeping rough, a strong ‘social control’ emphasis has now emerged in this policy agenda, as those remaining on the streets are increasingly viewed as an ‘anti-social behaviour’ problem. The article argues that coercive or forceful measures aimed at street homeless people cannot be justified from a social justice perspective, unless it can be demonstrated that they have a positive impact on the welfare of this marginalised group. The evidence presently available, although not definitive, indicates that such measures are more likely to undermine than promote the well-being of street homeless people.

Objectives: This study examined the prevalence of depressive symptoms, including suicidal ideation/behaviour, among bullied and non-bullied young people.

Methods: Participants were 209 students, 97 male and 112 female, attending eight urban post-primary schools and aged between 12 and 15 years. Participants were interviewed using the Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia for School Aged Children – Present and Lifetime Version, the Hopelessness Scale for Children, the Scale for Suicide Ideation, and the Suicide Intent Scale.

Results: Data were analysed using a series of non-parametric comparison tests. Being a victim of bullying was found to be significantly associated with depression (χ2 = 10.986; df = 1; p = 0.001) and suicidal ideation (χ2 = 5.811; df = 1; p = 0.022). Results also indicated that victims were more likely to have reported a suicide attempt (χ2 = 5.995; df = 1; p = 0.022). Finally, those bullied were significantly more likely to have been referred to psychiatric services (χ2 = 6.661; df = 1;p = 0.011).

Conclusions: These findings suggest that the issue of bullying needs to be re-addressed within Irish schools, with particular emphasis placed on further investigation into the psychological consequences thereof.