The widespread privileging of children’s voices in recent times has triggered expansion of differing forms of qualitative enquiry that aim to “give children a voice.” Engaging children in research and eliciting their voices on matters that affect them is often showcased as being a more “authentic” way to capture children’s lived realities and afford their agency. Yet, the uptake of voice in qualitative enquiry, and how it may contribute to the privileging of particular ways of knowing (some) children’s lives, is rarely interrogated. Drawing on examples from our own research, in this paper we critically reflect on the frequent invoking of the term voice in qualitative health research with children. In doing so, we challenge claims of authenticity by exposing the tricky epistemological tensions and relations of power that are embedded within the production and legitimation of particular voices as being “correct” ways of knowing about health—including the ways our research intentions and methods contribute to these processes. We reflect on the methodological and epistemological value of silences, dissenting voices and other modes of expression to highlight forms of resistance to adult-led health agendas. We conclude by illustrating how dominant relations of power are (re)produced within and across research spaces, and through the mobilizing or pathologizing of particular young voices through research. Possibilities for advancing ways to harness children’s preferred modes of expression in qualitative research are also considered.

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) lay the foundations for supporting global health and international development work for the next 15 years. Thirty years ago, the Ottawa Charter defined health promotion and outlined key principles for global action on health, including the importance of advocating, enabling and mediating for health equity. Advocacy underscores a human right to health and suggests political action to support its attainment. Enabling speaks to health promotion’s focus on the empowerment of people and communities to take control over their health and aspirations. Mediation draws attention to the critical intersectoral partnerships required to address health and social inequities. Underpinned by this approach, the aim of this paper is to consider how key health promotion principles, namely, rights, empowerment and partnership feature (and are framed) within the SDGs and to consider how these framings may shape future directions for health promotion. To that end, a critical frame analysis of the Transforming Our World document was conducted. The analysis interrogated varying uses and meanings of partnerships, empowerment and rights (and their connections) within the SDGs. The analysis here presents three framings from the SDGs: (1) a moral code for global action on (in)equity; (2) a future orientation to address global issues yet devoid of history; and (3) a reductionist framing of health as the absence of disease. These framings raise important questions about the underpinning values of the SDGs and pathways to health equity – offering both challenges and opportunities for defining the nature and scope of health promotion.

Background: The COVID‐19 pandemic has had profound impacts on how we live our lives; yet, the implications for children and the effects on children's everyday lives have been relatively underacknowledged. Understanding children's views on COVID‐19 and related restrictions on their lives provides an important opportunity to understand how children have responded to the pandemic, including the impacts on their social and emotional well‐being.Objective: This study explored the experiences and perspectives of children in relation to the COVID‐19 pandemic and related restrictions on everyday life.Method: A qualitative study using semistructured online interviews with participatory drawings was undertaken between May and July 2020. Eighteen children from England and Wales, aged 7–11 years, participated in interviews.Findings: Themes included children's reflections on (1) COVID‐19 as a deadly contagion; (2) fears and sadness and (3) social responsibility and opportunities to respond positively.Conclusions: Young children offer insightful reflections on their experiences during the first wave of the COVID‐19 pandemic in the United Kingdom. Children and young people's perspectives must be considered in future public health discourse.Patient or Public Contribution: This work was informed by conversations with my own three primary school‐aged children and the children of friends. A formal Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) group was not established due to the speed with which the project was undertaken. Any future research in this area would benefit from formal PPI in the design, methods and questions.

Providing children and adults with opportunities to engage in manageable risk taking may be a stepping stone toward closing the gap in life conditions currently experienced by young people with disabilities. We aim to demonstrate the effectiveness of a simple, innovative program for 1) changing the way parents and teachers view manageable risk-taking for children with disabilities and 2) increasing the level of responsibility that children take for their own actions, as seen on the school playground. We will employ a cluster repeated measures trial with six Sydney-area primary-school-based programs for children with disabilities. The intervention comprises two arms. 1) Risk-reframing- teachers and parents will participate together in small group intervention sessions focusing on the benefits of manageable risk-taking; 2) Introduction of play materials- materials without a defined purpose and facilitative of social cooperation will be introduced to the school playground for children to use at all break times. A control period will be undertaken first for two school terms, followed by two terms of the intervention period. Outcome measures will include playground observations, The Coping Inventory, qualitative field notes, and The Tolerance of Risk in Play Scale. New national programs, such as Australia’s National Disability Insurance Scheme, will place increasing demands on young people with disabilities to assume responsibility for difficult decisions regarding procuring services. Innovative approaches, commencing early in life, are required to prepare young people and their carers for this level of responsibility. This research offers innovative intervention strategies for promoting autonomy in children with disabilities and their carers. Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registration Number ACTRN12614000549628 (registered 22/5/2014).

Objective: Increasing numbers of young people live with a chronic health condition. Much research to date has explored young people’s self-management of their illness and related symptomatology. Relatively less is known about how young people manage their long-term condition in everyday social contexts. This paper reports on findings from a qualitative study examining the perspectives of university students with a chronic health condition, including how they negotiate their health (and experiences of ill health) while at university. Design: A qualitative interview study was conducted with 16 students with a medically diagnosed chronic health condition. Setting: The study was conducted at a major university in Australia. Methods: Data were collected via in-depth semi-structured interviews and analysed thematically and inductively. Results: Findings illustrate how young people sought to position themselves as being ‘healthy’ while simultaneously distancing themselves from labels of ill health and disability. The relative invisibility of their health conditions enabled participants to align with and enact a preferred health identity. Yet, this invisibility presented particular challenges for students when navigating university systems and processes. Indeed, the fluctuating nature of their (ill) health status prompted a felt need continuously to prove their ill health to the university in order to receive academic support. Inevitably, this illness identity was at odds with participants’ own health narratives – triggering additional anxieties and (academic and social) exclusions for these young people. Conclusion: These contradictory (ill) health positions carry a number of implications for how best to support young people living with chronic health conditions while at university.