This paper will report on the findings of a study which investigated the influence of a befriending (parent-to-parent peer support) scheme on parents whose children have a disability or additional need. The scheme operated from an acute children's tertiary setting in the UK. A prospective concurrent mixed method design collected interview (n=70) and questionnaire (n=68) data at two time-points from befrienders (n=13) and befriendees (n=26). The main qualitative findings of the study relate to the different degrees parents (befriendees and befrienders) moved from being lost, to finding and being a guide and getting to a better place. The quantitative findings demonstrate that parent-to-parent peer support has a positive influence on parents' levels of psychological distress and their ability to cope with being a parent of a child with a disability. The befriending scheme acted as a catalyst for many parents to move towards a place where they could grow and begin to flourish and thrive. Professionals should inform parents who have a child with a disability that peer-to-peer parenting support schemes are a valuable and appropriate source of support and help.

Against a backdrop of increasing debate regarding children's voice and position within health care and the struggle to effectively implement Family-Centred Care (FCC) in practice, the concept of Child-Centred Care (CCC) has emerged. The purpose of this paper is to explore the concept of CCC and its potential theoretical alignment with an ecological approach to health care. The paper will draw on practice-based research, highlighting the differences and similarities of CC against the more established FCC. Arguments will be presented to show that rather than competing with FCC, CCC has the potential to complement or extend traditional FCC, by placing children in a more prominent and central position than that which they currently hold within health care.

Children continue to experience harm when undergoing clinical procedures despite increased evidence of the need to improve the provision of child-centred care. The international ISupport collaboration aimed to develop standards to outline and explain good procedural practice and the rights of children within the context of a clinical procedure. The rights-based standards for children undergoing tests, treatments, investigations, examinations and interventions were developed using an iterative, multi-phased, multi-method and multi-stakeholder consensus building approach. This consensus approach used a range of online and face to face methods across three phases to ensure ongoing engagement with multiple stakeholders. The views and perspectives of 203 children and young people, 78 parents and 418 multi-disciplinary professionals gathered over a two year period (2020–2022) informed the development of international rights-based standards for the care of children having tests, treatments, examinations and interventions. The standards are the first to reach international multi-stakeholder consensus on definitions of supportive and restraining holds. Conclusion: This is the first study of its kind which outlines international rights-based procedural care standards from multi-stakeholder perspectives. The standards offer health professionals and educators clear evidence-based tools to support discussions and practice changes to challenge prevailing assumptions about holding or restraining children and instead encourage a focus on the interests and rights of the child. What is Known:• Children continue to experience short and long-term harm when undergoing clinical procedures despite increased evidence of the need to improve the provision of child-centred care.• Professionals report uncertainty and tensions in applying evidence-based practice to children’s procedural care. What is New:• This is the first study of its kind which has developed international rights-based procedural care standards from multi-stakeholder perspectives.• The standards are the first to reach international multi-stakeholder consensus on definitions of supportive and restraining holds.

Children in acute care often need procedures and interventions, and they are frequently held, often against their wishes, to enable these procedures to be completed. This report is from a qualitative investigation in which we sought to explore what happens when children undergo clinical procedures within an acute hospital, with a focus on the use of holding for procedures. Qualitative data were generated through non‐participant observation of clinical procedures (n = 31) and semi‐structured interviews with health professionals (n = 22), parents (n = 21), and children (n = 4) to explore the event from the participants’ perspective. Data were analyzed using constant comparison. Through the central theoretical concept of perseverance, we examined the actions, inactions and interactions of health professionals, parents and children during a clinical procedure. Two broad trajectories were noted: “perseverance in spite of,” when the procedure was completed despite a child's upset and lack of co‐operation; and “perseverance to be child‐centered,” which was characterized by a purposeful plan of action focused on a child who had been prepared and informed, and which was facilitated by a “window of opportunity” at the start of the procedure when the child was calm and engaged. Our findings highlight that professionals need to be clear about their boundaries when starting or continuing with a procedure when a child is distressed, and support preparation and engagement activities with children and parents before, during, and after clinical procedures.