Children with poor mental health less likely to work as adults
One in five children in England are currently having a probable mental health issue, while Government figures suggest the number of workers aged 16 to 34 who say mental ill health limits the work they can do has increased more than fourfold over the past decade.
Poor mental health is now the leading work-limiting health condition among people aged 44 and younger.
For its research, the IPPR calculated that children with severe mental or behavioural issues are much more likely to be depressed adults and suffer a physical or mental condition which impacts their chances of working.
The think tank drew on a new analysis of the 1970 British Cohort Study, which is following the lives of around 17,000 people born in England, Scotland and Wales in a single week of 1970.
The latest findings show that mental health problems at age 10 have significant implications 40 years on.
Children with severe mental and behavioural problems are 85% more likely to have symptoms of depression at age 51 and 68% more likely to have a long-term condition that impacts their ability to work, the report showed.
A long-term condition is defined as any physical or mental condition that people are expecting to last 12 months or more.
The correlation also extended to poor physical health, with children with a physical health problem being 38% more likely to have limited capacity for work later in life.
Furthermore, for every four children developing a long-term health condition, one of their mothers is likely to leave the workforce altogether, the IPPR said.
With rising rates of poor mental health impacting the NHS, council services and social security system, action is needed now, the think tank added.
'Improving children's health is not just morally right – it is a social and economic necessity,' the study said.
'A healthier generation of children is essential to delivering this government's core missions: improving the nation's health, spreading opportunity, and securing sustainable economic growth…
'Poor childhood health casts a 'long shadow'. Children who grow up in poor health are likely to experience worse health outcomes in adulthood, achieve less at school, earn less and rely more heavily on public services throughout their lives.'
The team called for targeted investment on 'high-impact, cost-saving interventions that can deliver early wins', such as mental health support for 14 to 19-year-olds soon to enter the labour market.
Spending on children's mental health needs to be ringfenced, it suggested, while preventative spending should be 'hardwired' in the NHS and other public services.
Dr Jamie O'Halloran, senior research fellow at IPPR, said: 'The earlier we address both physical and mental health challenges children, the more likely we can prevent costly health conditions and worklessness later in life.
'This is not just a matter of improving individual lives, but also of alleviating long-term pressures on the state.'
Amy Gandon, IPPR associate fellow and former senior Department of Health official on children's health, said: 'Successive governments have failed to face up to the long-term consequences of poor child health.
'If this Government is serious about building a preventative state, it must act decisively to improve the prospects of our children and young people.
'What's more, the dividends from doing so need not be decades away; the right action now, for example, for those joining the workforce within a few years, can deliver better health, opportunity and growth within this Parliament.'
Figures show that the number of working-age adults in England claiming disability benefits has risen 41%, from 1.9 million in November 2019 to 2.7 million in May 2024.
Meanwhile, the number of people claiming incapacity benefits increased 40% over the same period, from two million to 2.9 million.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
26 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Doctors of my generation support this strike – you don't need a medical degree to see why
So there was no last-minute intervention by Wes Streeting and his team at Whitehall. Resident doctors in England (formerly known as junior doctors) are on the picket line from 7am today until 7am on 30 July, a full five-day walkout. And I'll be joining them, in solidarity. Though I'm a resident doctor by grade, I currently work for NHS England on a freelance (locum) basis, so I'll be supporting my colleagues by electing not to work on the aforementioned days, despite the sauteed carrot of 'enhanced strike rates'. Whenever doctors are engaged in a public pay dispute, our status as 'heroes' is lost to accusations of shirking and self-interest. These attitudes even play out within different generations of doctors. Discussing money in the sector has historically been taboo. When I was in medical school between 2011 and 2016, I can remember students being reprimanded by established doctors for any suggestion that they were pursuing medicine 'to make money'. Those with 'pound signs in their eyes' were advised to seek a career in the City instead. There was no need to discuss finances, as the understanding was that being a doctor was a challenging and noble vocation that, while it may never make you rich, would leave you more than financially secure. You could look to consultants as examples of such financial security. After years of arduous training, they've arguably reached the top of their profession, the pinnacle. Many of them are covering for resident doctor colleagues over the weekend so residents can strike safely, reportedly advised to demand up to £6,000 a shift. Some may balk at such fees, but how much would a top lawyer charge to work out of hours? With becoming a consultant no means a guarantee, debts of more than £100,000 and a rota that can be unforgiving, conditions for resident doctors are challenging. Then you throw in pay – 20% less in real terms compared with a doctor in 2008. Then, potentially, you can understand why morale is low among resident doctors. Last year, a study found that at least half of the British public thought new junior doctors, as they were still known then, were paid too little. Yet public support is now slumping, with 49% opposing the walkout, and a slew of tabloid headlines since the strikes were announced have painted us as wilfully hampering the NHS just to add more money to our bank accounts. Such concerns wouldn't be high on the British Medical Association's agenda, as it is its job to deliver the best deal for its members, and 90% of the resident doctors who cast their ballot voted in favour of industrial action. Not even the current government received such support at the last general election. A friend of mine coined the term 'gen Z BMA'. While I have no data on the generational makeup of BMA resident members, I would argue they're gen Z in their approach – they're fearless and resolute in their aims, and taboos around discussing money are a thing of the past. This current iteration of the BMA will probably shout: 'We are paid X and we definitely aren't worth less than colleagues of yesteryear who were paid Y.' This attitude is at odds with some older members'. We have had retired doctors publicly relinquish their BMA memberships, as they disagree with the approach of resident doctors. Of course, there are consultant and senior colleagues who do support their resident colleagues, but I do feel these generational disagreements are in line with wider societal disputes. Gen Zs and, to an extent, millennials, are often called workshy, and accused of not being willing to sacrifice or put in the graft their colleagues of yesteryear put in. But it could be argued that these younger generations know their worth and aren't willing to merely 'get on with it'. They are prepared to take a stand for what they believe in. Shouldn't that be commended? Some members of the public certainly don't think so. A cursory look online reveals a lot of criticism: what about other public servants? What about nurses, teachers or firefighters? Do they not deserve a pay rise? That, I would say respectfully, is a concern for those professions and their respective unions. Unions exist to represent their members and act in their best interests. Why would the BMA consider the interests of nurses, teachers or firefighters? That said, there should be solidarity among public servants – not a race to the bottom. Strike action is meant to be disruptive. However, studies have found no evidence that strike action has any significant impact on in-hospital patient mortality. Patients are no more at harm than on non-strike days. Some argue that doctors shouldn't be allowed to strike due to our vital role. So we are too valuable to strike, but not valuable enough to be paid appropriately? How does that make sense? Michael Akadiri is an award-winning standup comedian and resident doctor
Times
an hour ago
- Times
Doctors' strikes live: thousands start five-day walkout over pay
The leader of the British Medical Association previously claimed that Britain was becoming a fascist state where dissidents were labelled 'traitors and enemies of the people'. Dr Tom Dolphin, 46, chairman of the union behind the latest round of strikes, has made controversial comments including likening Luigi Mangione, the alleged murderer of a healthcare boss, to Jesus, and criticising Brexit. Dolphin, a former Labour Party activist, was elected to the post in June after developing a reputation as a hardliner over his two decades in the BMA. • Read in full: The leaders behind the 29 per cent pay demands Doctors already earn a 'good wage', Peter Kyle, the science, innovation and technology minister, has told Times Radio as the BMA strike action begins today. He said: 'I can't speak for the leadership of the British Medical Association sadly, but I do urge them to put the patient's interests at heart but also the interests of our entire country. 'People do not support this strike. A 28.9 per cent offer, which was agreed last year, is an astonishing achievement for those doctors. They should bank it, they should get to work … we need to fix the NHS and get it fit for the future.' Sir Keir Starmer made a last-minute appeal to resident doctors, saying the strikes would 'cause real damage'. 'The route the BMA resident doctors' committee have chosen will mean everyone loses. My appeal to resident doctors is this: do not follow the BMA leadership down this damaging road. Our NHS and your patients need you,' he wrote in The Times. • Read in full: Junior doctors should break ranks with the BMA leadership Thousands of resident doctors have begun a five-day strike after talks with the government collapsed over pay, with picket lines at Guy's Hospital in London, Royal Victoria Hospital in Newcastle, Addenbrooke's Hospital in Cambridge and Leeds General Infirmary. Members of the public have been urged to come forward for NHS care during the walkout, and are being asked to attend appointments unless told they are cancelled. GP surgeries will open as usual and urgent care and A&E will continue to be available, alongside NHS 111, NHS England said.
Press and Journal
2 hours ago
- Press and Journal
Euan McColm: Is there any hope for future of Woolmanhill Hospital?
The ongoing dereliction of Woolmanhill Hospital is grim to witness. From the outside, the building maintains its majesty but – as online film clips have shown – its interiors are crumbling. Like a metaphor for the city of Aberdeen, itself, the Woolmanhill maintains a brave face during difficult times but, behind that facade, all is not well. When the NHS moved out of the building – home to the original Aberdeen Royal Infirmary – a decade ago, there were exciting plans for its redevelopment. The A-listed building – which has been in the hands of CAF Properties since the NHS moved out – was going to become a 102-bedroom luxury resort but those proposals were ditched in 2021. Since then, according to the city council, the building's owners have been looking for new ways of bringing the building back to life. Delay in finding new purpose for Woolmanhill site The future of the Woolmanhill Hospital site has had several false dawns. Image: Kenny Elrick/DC Thomson. Fighting the instinct to be unreasonable, I can understand the reasons behind the delay. First – and nobody living in Aberdeen needs to be reminded of this – the city has changed dramatically over the past decade. As recently as 2014, Aberdeen was to be considered the jewel in the Scottish crown. During the independence referendum, then SNP leader Alex Salmond promised that North Sea oil would create a strong foundation for economic good times. A Yes vote would mean a glorious future. Now, the oil and gas industry is treated as an embarrassment by the Scottish Government, as something to be run down and forgotten. The second perfectly acceptable explanation for the delay in developing the site is the disruption caused by the Coronavirus pandemic. Life may have returned to normality since the vaccination roll out four years ago but the financial hangover of months of lockdowns lingers. Development can't be 'wished into existence' Across Scotland's cities are examples of architecture so grand, so downright spectacular, that nobody (unless they were, say, a member of the Saudi royal family) could fund their construction today. To build something comparable – in terms of materials and sheer craftsmanship – to the Woolmanhill hospital, today, would be prohibitively expensive. This being so, it's doubly sad to see the place slowly fall apart. Windows are smashed and boarded up on the derelict property. Image: Kenny Elrick/DC Thomson. Of course, reality doesn't care about the desire to see the building brought to life. If there is no viable project, then one cannot simply be wished into existence. But nor should the building remain abandoned and unloved, left to decay. If developers cannot find a solution then the government should step in. There have been calls for the place to be turned into a medical museum which certainly makes a certain kind sense. Where better to display the marvels of medicine, to tell the stories of pioneers in the field, than a grand hospital building. But, realistically, would such a museum prove to be such a smash that it justified the spending of tens of millions in its development? I have my doubts. Perhaps the answer to the question of what to do with Woolmanhill is rather less glamorous and exciting than a swanky resort. Perhaps it – and other empty buildings – hold part of the solution to our ongoing housing crisis. Is there a creative partnership to be struck between public and private sectors to bring Woolmanhill back to life? Could housing be the answer for derelict Woolmanhill Hospital? With young people priced out of the housing market in the city and across Aberdeenshire, pressure on existing housing association stock is reaching intolerable levels. Could the city council, the Scottish Government, and the developers work together to redevelop the site, turning it into flats and townhouses, ensuring a proportion fall into the category of 'affordable' and are made available to first-time buyers? Given the drop in footfall across Scotland's cities, it's difficult to see how a place the size of Woolmanhill could easily be converted into a commercial venue. What would it contain? Shops and concessions that nobody will use? Pop-up restaurants that don't last a week and bring little to the local economy? People, however, will always need somewhere to live… Graffiti adorns the outside of Woolmanhill Hospital. Image: Kenny Elrick/DC Thomson. Last week, a spokeswoman for Aberdeen City Council said that talks with CAF, headed up by property tycoon Charlie Ferrari, were 'ongoing' However, both the local authority and Mr Ferrari remain tight-lipped as to what these talks actually involve. Time truly is of the essence, here. With each passing month, the unused building falls further into disrepair. The longer the delay in taking action, the less viable redevelopment of the building will become. There is no simple answer to the question of what to do with Woolmanhill but unless one is found, and quickly, the building will end up past saving.
