Care leavers are dying at a disproportionate rate – evidence and leadership are needed to support them

Source: The Conversation – UK

A new government-commissioned report has laid bare the tragedy of care leaver deaths.

The review was conducted by social work leader Clare Chamberlain and journalist Ashley John-Baptiste, who grew up in care himself. It found that isolation and a drop-off in support contributed to the early deaths of 112 care leavers aged 18 to 24 in England in 2025.

This is a staggering death rate of 130 per 100,000 care leavers, a figure at least three times higher than the general population. It is hard to overstate the magnitude of the failure that has led to this point. There are a range of causes of death, but the single largest cause is suicide. I have written elsewhere about how the rise of suicide in young people, and young men in particular, is the result of policy choices. For example, funding cuts to and rising demand for child and adolescent mental health services.

This counts double for care leavers. These young people have grown up at least in part in the care of the state. The state, and their local authority in particular, has acted as their “corporate parent”. Arguably, the emphasis should be much more on “parent” than “corporate”. We as a society should expect and hope for the same outcomes for these young people as we do for our own children, which certainly would not include a substantially heightened risk of death.

The review steers away from making specific policy recommendations, which are beyond its scope, although the authors do call for a care system to run from age 0 to 25, as well as improved support in the workforce and for young people in custody. Nonetheless, officials in government will doubtless be asking themselves what can be done to prevent some of these deaths.

What does the evidence tell us?

In my work as founding executive director of What Works for Children’s Social Care, and now at King’s College London, my colleagues and I have been evaluating how evidence-based policy interventions can improve outcomes for young people in care.

There is a direct relationship between poverty and poor mental health. This emerges through insecure housing, homelessness, reduced ability to socialise, worse physical health and involvement in the criminal justice system.

Quantitative research into suicide prevention is hard to conduct, because thankfully, fairly few people will experience this. But it is clear that targeted clinical support for those people at risk of suicide is necessary. Closer working between healthcare providers and the local authorities who often know these young people best, to help target support where it is most needed, would seem sensible.

Twenty-four care leavers covered by the review died of drug overdoses. Efforts to act earlier to prevent, and later manage and reduce addiction, should be a focus of any policy response. Some of the work that needs to be done should start while young people are still in care.

The data on deaths shows that the likelihood of dying is skewed slightly towards the first year after a young person leaves care. This points to the continued existence of a “care cliff”, despite the government extending the age to which local authorities maintain responsibility for care leavers to 25, in 2018.

This early, transitional age is therefore a sensible place to focus. Existing government programmes like Staying Put, which allows young people to remain with their foster carers after they turn 18, have been shown to significantly reduce the likelihood that young people leaving care go on to experience homelessness. Lifelong Links, an intervention that supports young people to stay in contact with their birth families, has done similarly.

The review makes clear that isolation is a leading contributor to young care leavers’ deaths. Preventing homelessness, and allowing them to build and maintain more social connections, is likely to help. The government’s Staying Close policy, which allows young people who have been living in residential care settings to remain nearby, has yet to be evaluated on these outcomes.

The evidence can only show us so much – what is needed is leadership. Some of this must take place at an institutional level. Of the 112 deaths, six were in prison, and another six were in mental health institutions. One in ten were failed while residing inside institutions tasked with keeping them safe.

At a national level, Josh MacAlister, the minister for children and families who commissioned this review after receiving the fortnightly declarations of the deaths of care leavers, seems unafraid to stare the situation in the face. What he does next will define the future of the lives of thousands of young people leaving care.

Michael Sanders receives funding from MHCLG, Cabinet Office, and the Centre for Homelessness Impact. He is affiliated with King’s College London and the Centre for Homelessness Impact.

Original source: https://analysis1.mil-osi.com/2026/08/27/care-leavers-are-dying-at-a-disproportionate-rate-evidence-and-leadership-are-needed-to-support-them/