When it comes to protecting children, the family plays a central role, particularly during the child’s earliest days. Children are also part of a broader community where their relationships, engagement, and roles deepen over time and take on increased significance. For this reason, protecting children is both a private and a public responsibility. It is by looking at the history of childhood that we make our judgements about child abuse today. History is used as a means of casting light on present issues. Some people feel that whatever is happening today is an improvement on the past, while others look at past centuries through rose- coloured spectacles. (Walker, P. 2005)
Understanding how abuse and neglect should be defined is not simply an academic issue. Child abuse is a culturally defined phenomenon. Sullivan, P. (2006) commented on ‘the rights of a child to be protected from parents unable to cope at a level assumed to be reasonable by the society in which they reside’. Child protection system aims to prevent situations that can result in a child or young person aged sixteen and under experience abuse that puts them in danger of not developing appropriately or losing their life (Save the Children UK, 2008). The abuse can fall under the category of child abuse which could be in form of neglect, emotional, physicals and sexual, (Woolfson et al 2009).
Severe child maltreatment is conventionally defined within child protection practice to include severe physical and emotional abuse by any adults, severe neglect by parents or guardians and contact sexual abuse by any adult or peer. Child maltreatment is unfortunately all too common in most cultures and countries. Within the UK, Ofsted estimates that three children per week die as a result of child abuse and neglect (Ofsted, 2009) and research suggests at least 16 per cent of the population will experience some form of serious maltreatment during their childhood (May-Chahal and Cawson, 2005). Research also tells us that a history of maltreatment is related to negative impacts throughout the lifespan, as victimised children are more vulnerable to repeated abuse and are more likely to experience poor physical and mental health in adulthood. (Knutson, J. 2006)
Child abuse, now more commonly called child maltreatment, was “discovered” as a social problem and became a matter of intense public concern in Western industrialised countries in the 1870s, although children had been hurt, killed, injured and exploited by others well before this date. The brutal physical abuse and neglect of babies and children by their parents or carers has since been a feature of the many public inquiries into child killings over the last forty years, from the inquiry into the murder of Maria Colwell in 1973 (DHSS, 1974) to the murder of Victoria Climbié in 2000 (Laming, 2003), and more recently, Lord Laming’s review following baby Peter Connelly’s death in Haringey, in August 2007 (Laming, 2009) and Khyra Ishaq’s death in 2008.
Neglect is the persistent failure to meet a child’s basic physical and/or psychological needs in a manner that is likely to seriously impair his or her health or development. There are many ways in which children can be neglected, including: failure to provide adequate food, clothing or shelter, failure to protect children from potential harm or danger, inadequate supervision, inadequate medical attention and inadequate emotional support and attention. NSPCC (2011)
After reviewing the three cases of children Victoria Climbie, Baby P and K. Ishaq, whose death from physical abuse and neglect resulted in an inquiry. There are many important similarities in all three cases, not least of which were the terrible circumstances in which all three children died and the horrendous injuries inflicted upon them, together with the neglect which they had experienced. While all of them were living at home with their primary carers and had been in frequent contact with a range of professionals in different agencies for a period of time, no professional was able to intervene appropriately. More particularly, all three inquiry reports identified numerous opportunities when professionals had failed to intervene; these individual failures, it is argued, need to be understood in their wider context. All reports argue that these failures were not simply a consequence of individual incompetence but were a reflection of fundamental inadequacies in their respective systems.
The names of Baby P, Victoria Climbie and K. Ishaq have become synonymous with the most horrific child abuse, but also with attempts to reform the system so fewer tragedies happen in the future. In all three cases children have been physically, sexually abused and neglected. In the Victoria Climbie case, aged 8 years, died in 2000 from hyperthermia after suffering months of abuse and neglect. The public inquiry heard that there were at least 12 chances for the agencies involved in her protection to have saved her. The outcry about her death led to the Laming Report and yet more reform of child protection services.
In August 2007, 17-month- old ‘Baby P’ was registered for physical abuse and neglect and died in North London while on the child protection register. He had suffered over fifty injuries in his short life, and in an eight month period he had received sixty visits from social workers, police and doctors. In May 2008, the death of the 7 year old Khyra Ishaq was entirely preventable and accused social workers of losing sight that a child may be at risk. She could have been saved from starving to death and months of brutal abuse if social workers had acted on a series of warnings and not been intimidated by her aggressive mother, a serious case review has concluded.
Emotional abuse and neglect are chronic conditions that can persist over months and years. Professionals can become accustomed to their manifestations and accepting of the lack of positive change: the serious case review into the death of Peter Connelly, for instance, found that professionals were too accepting of low parenting standards. These can include
poor supervision resulting in numerous ‘falls’ and bruises; poor cleanliness of the house and poorly cared-for animals; persistent and recurrent infestations such as head lice; loss of weight and failure to thrive; poor dentition; skin problems; delayed motor and speech development; and self-harm and running away in teenagers. NSPCC (2011)
The revised EYFS (2012) includes examples of adult’s behaviour which might be signs of abuse and neglect. If they become aware of any such signs, staff should respond appropriately in order to safeguard children. The EYFS now requires that safeguarding policies and procedures must cover the use of mobile phones and cameras in the setting. (DfE 2012)
The murder of Victoria Climbie in Feb 2000 was a terrible tragedy that highlighted the serious failings of a system that struggled to co-ordinate and share information amongst agencies. There were twelve separate occasions when the opportunity to intervene and, perhaps save Victoria’s life, had been missed. Victoria’s death led to a public inquiry by Lord Laming which would eventually lead to the Green paper Every Child Matters and the Children’s Act 2004. However Victoria’s tragic and untimely death was not the only case where the murder of a child could find a path leading back to the inadequacies of the child protection system where the NHS, social services and the police failed to work together to protect a vulnerable child; Lauren Wrights death in 2001 and Peter Connelly (‘Baby P’) in 2007 – Peter even died in the same borough (Haringey) that had failed Victoria 7 years earlier.
Despite much progress, it is still the case that the emotional and psychological aspects of children’s lives are the least well understood and the most challenging. They still remain neglected areas of enquiry whenever more tangible abuses are suspected. The three most infamous cases of the last decade illustrate this point. Victoria Climbié and Baby P in Haringey and Khyra Ishaq in Birmingham, all suffered unimaginable suffering and death at the hands of brutal and sadistic “carers”. But we can be almost certain (as the evidence starkly shows in the Climbié case [Laming, 2003]) that Victoria, Peter and Khyra were also subjected to sustained emotional and psychological abuse which was never recognised by any of the professionals involved. If numerous professionals from health, social services and education were not able to see self-evident physical abuse, they were hardly likely to be able to identify the sustained and repetitive emotional and psychological abuse to which all three children were undoubtedly subjected.
Working together in partnership with all agencies involved in the care of a child is vital to safeguarding, from government legislation to local guidelines on safeguarding. It is crucial that all agencies communicate and cooperate together to promote the safety and well being of children.( DfE 2011)
The death of Peter Connelly in 2007 led to inquiries into the role of all agencies involved in his case and death, including the health authority, police and Haringey Council. The General Social Care Council were to conduct an internal review into potential breaches of its code of practice. In addition Lord Laming conducted a nationwide review of his own recommendations after the Victoria Climbie inquiry. This review highlighted the fact that previous recommendations had not been taken up by all authorities.
In the event of a death or a child is suspected of being a victim of abuse or neglect, a serious case review (SCR) will take place. It is the role of the local safeguarding children’s board (LSCB) to consider whether a review should be undertaken where a child has been seriously injured through abuse or neglect or been subjected to a serious sexual assault and whether there could be other children involved i.e. siblings. The purpose of the SCR is to establish whether there are lessons to be learnt from these cases, what these lessons are, how they can be acted on and what can be expected to change as a result, ultimately this will improve inter agency work and better safeguard for children and young people.
The report found that Khyra's death could have been prevented, and occurred after the authorities "lost sight" of her. Hilary Thompson, the chair of the BSCB, said: "The serious case review concludes that although the scale of the abuse inflicted would have been hard to predict, Khyra's death was preventable. “The report identifies missed opportunities, highlighting that better assessment and information-sharing by key organisations could have resulted in a different outcome."
In all three cases, practitioners across agencies were not in full possession of all the facts, because communication was delayed, mislaid or simply not undertaken. Decision making often rested upon what was known in individual services. The role of information sharing, assessment and decision making were all important factors and impacted upon the delivery of effective service provision. It is estimated nationally that at least 200,000 children live in households where there is a known high risk case of domestic abuse and violence. These issues are a consistent feature of Serious Case Reviews, demonstrating how seriously they put children at risk of significant harm. Communication of this knowledge by agencies was not effectively understood or efficiently shared and without doubt the delay in communicating this information within professionals who were involved in the cases. (Lyon, C. et al (2011)
The death of any child as the result of non-accidental injury is a tragedy. The fact that in England around 80 children die every year from abuse or neglect, and that this figure has remained relatively constant over more than 30 years, is shocking. It is important to understand what had happened in all three cases and how the child protection system and medical care that should have protected them failed. (Bunting, L. 2007)
We must be prepared to take a deep, honest look at the child protection system, and make real and lasting changes that will protect children like Victoria, Peter and Khyra in the future. I recognise that those who take on the work of protecting children at risk of deliberate harm face a tough and challenging task. Staff doing this work needs a combination of professional skills and personal qualities, not least of which are persistence and courage.
Whenever a child is deliberately injured or killed, there is inevitably great concern in case some important tell-tale sign has been missed. Those who sit in judgement often do so with the great benefit of hindsight (Bunting, L. (2007). So I readily acknowledge that staffs who undertake the work of protecting children and supporting families on behalf of us all deserve both our understanding and our support. It is a job which carries risks, because in every judgement they make, those staff have to balance the rights of a parent with that of the protection of the child.
The most lasting tribute to the memory of all three children would be their suffering and death resulted in an improvement in the quality of the management and leadership in these key services. What is needed are managers with a clear set of values about the role of public services, particularly in addressing the needs of vulnerable people, combined with the ability to ‘lead from the front’. Good administrative procedures are essential to facilitate efficient work, but they are not sufficient on their own and cannot replace effective management. This Inquiry saw too many examples of those in senior positions attempting to justify their work in terms of bureaucratic activity, rather than in outcomes for people.
The Government’s response to Lord Laming’s inquiry into the Climbie murder began with ‘Every Child Matters‘, a green paper issued in 2003. It said Victoria’s death had highlighted longstanding problems. The ‘common threads’ linking the failure to prevent hers and other child murders were ‘poor coordination (between different services); a failure to share information; the absence of anyone with a strong sense of accountability; and frontline workers trying to cope with staff vacancies, poor management and a lack of effective training’. These failings, the paper said, were going to be put right, yet we are hearing exactly the same problems still, today. P. Conelly and K. Ishaq still died in a very similar way, in the same place. (Lyon, C. et al 2010)
In 2009, following on from the death of Peter Connolly, Lord Laming, who had conducted the Victoria Climbié Inquiry, was asked to prepare a progress report into the protection of children in England. His report, The Protection of Children in England: A Progress Report, was published in March 2009, and one quote in particular perhaps provides an explanation as to why the lessons identified in the Maria Colwell Inquiry in 1973 were tragically repeating themselves. He stated that policies, procedures, and structures are important ‘but more so the robust and consistent implementation of these policies and procedures which keeps children and young people safe’. He also stated that ‘managers must lead by example by taking a personal and visible interest in frontline delivery’. (Laming, L. (2009)
Evidence from all cases demonstrates that assessments were not of sufficient rigour and poorly focussed. Family and environmental factors and the parenting capacity elements of the Framework for the Assessment of Children in Need and Their Families structure received scant or no regard. Had these areas been sufficiently explored, this may have led to a more integrated multi-professional service for this family and specifically the children.
In K. Ishaq case the Common Assessment Framework (CAF) processes were inappropriately proposed during referrals of child protection concern to Children’s Social Care, families in need should not be excluded from other face to face information sharing between professionals. A child, who is subject to a statement of educational needs which lies outside the CAF process, can and should benefit from a multi disciplinary face to face case review at key points. In all three cases the large number of professional appointments were missed which escalated as relationships with professionals deteriorated. It is now generally acknowledged that patterns of missed appointments are one associated factor in identifying struggling families. By reviewing expectations for responding to such appointments, agencies will support and enable staff to respond to families who have difficulties in meeting the development and health care needs of their children, offering support and early intervention as required. (Wallace, I. 2007)
To play an effective part in protecting children, it is important to have a clear understanding of the rights of children, the legal framework, and the national and local guidelines published for all professionals working with children. Common law has long required any person looking after a child to protect them from physical harm by providing the necessities of life, based on need. Statutory responsibility for child protection rests with the social services department of the local authority. (Anthony, A. 2009)
All professionals who work with children and families should have their organisation’s procedures to follow if they have concerns about the welfare of a child. All schools must have a designated child protection teacher, who is approached in the first instance. Health sector organisations similarly have designated nurses and doctors who deal with child protection issues. Other organisations may have their own procedures, all of which will involve going through the line-manager channel. There are no mandatory reporting laws in the UK, but guidance issued by professional bodies and local safeguarding children boards emphasises the duty to make a referral where there is a reasonable belief that a child is at risk of significant harm.
The current child protection system is based on the Children Act 1989, which was introduced in an effort to reform and clarify the existing plethora of laws affecting children. The Children Act 1989 is still the most important piece of legislation in the practitioner’s toolbox. It remains the basis of our safeguarding system, defining the threshold for state intervention in family life to protect children from abuse. The definitions it contains of ‘significant harm’ (section 31) and of a ‘child in need’ (section 17) are still current. It is still the case that a local authority (children’s social care) has a duty to investigate whenever it receives information which gives reasonable case to suspect significant harm (section 47). Agencies like health services and schools still have a duty to co-operate with a local authority making investigations under this section (47{11{).
The Children Act 1989 has since been amended by subsequent legislation: Lord Laming's inquiry into the death of 8-year-old Victoria Climbié in 2000 led to the government publishing Every Child Matters (DfES, 2003), and subsequently the Children Act 2004 provided the legal framework for the program. While it did not replace the Children Act 1989, it made sweeping changes to the way children's services are structured in England and Wales, which came into force between 2006 and 2008. Section 58 of the Children Act 2004 updates the legislation on physical punishment. It limits the use of the defence of reasonable punishment so that it can no longer be used when people are charged with the offences against a child of wounding, actual or grievous bodily harm or cruelty. Therefore any injury sustained by a child which is serious enough to warrant a charge of assault occasioning actual bodily harm cannot be considered to be as the result of reasonable punishment. (DCSF, 2007). The Education Act 2011 makes changes to provisions on school discipline and will place restrictions on the public reporting of allegations made against teachers. The intention is for most of the sections of the Act to have commenced by the start of the 2012 academic year.
All agencies working with children, young people and their families taking all reasonable measures to ensure that the risks of harm to children's welfare are minimised; and where there are concerns about children and young people's welfare, all agencies taking appropriate actions to address those concerns, working to agreed local policies and procedures in full partnership with other local agencies. Working Together to Safeguard Children (2006) defines safeguarding and promoting the welfare of children as follows:
• Protecting children from maltreatment
• Preventing impairment of children’s health or development
• Ensuring that children are growing up in circumstances consistent with the provision of safe and effective care.
In response to recommendations from Professor Eileen Munro’s report, A child-centred system, the revised Working Together to Safeguard Children 2013 clarifies the core legal requirements on individuals and organisations to keep children safe. It sets out, in one place, the legal requirements that health services, social workers, police, schools and other organisations that work with children, must follow – and emphasises that safeguarding is the responsibility of all professionals who work with children (effective 15 April 2013).
Children’s Minister Edward Timpson said: ‘Eileen Munro’s review found that the system for safeguarding children focused on processes instead of the needs of children. Today’s guidance makes absolutely clear the core legal requirements on all organisations and individuals working with children to promote their welfare and keep them safe. We expect professionals to use the guidance, along with their expertise and judgement, to tailor support to individual children and families’. This guidance will support professionals to take the right decisions and the right action to promote the welfare of children and keep them safe and children have the right to expect nothing less. (DfE 2013)
Working alongside other agencies is extremely effective for improving outcomes for children due to the cross cutting themes that organisations are able to come together over. It’s by coming together to share information and raising concerns that we can increase the likelihood of protecting children from harm and promoting their welfare so that fewer children have to face the terrible circumstances of Victoria Climbie. Anthony, A (2009). The five outcomes, as outlined in the ECM agenda and reiterated in the Children Act 2004 are: be healthy; stay safe; enjoy and achieve; make a positive contribution; and achieve economic well-being. This means that agencies now have a duty to make arrangements to safeguard and promote the welfare of all children, putting measures in place to improve their safety and preventing abuse. The emphasis is on integrated working processes and procedures between all agencies, and the legislation places a duty on ‘relevant partners’ to co-operate and share information. (DfE (2011)
In 2008, Lord Laming was asked by the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families to chair another inquiry in the aftermath of the negative media coverage of child protection services in Haringey following the death of Peter Connelly (DCSF, 2008). Lord Laming’s report expressed concern that in some authorities he visited ‘over half of social workers are newly qualified with less than a year’s experience’, that there was a ‘shortage of experienced social workers with the skills needed to work in children protection’, and that ‘social workers themselves do not think that their training is equipping them to take on the responsibilities for which they are being trained.’ As evidence of this, he cited CWDC (2009) research suggesting that ‘two-thirds of newly qualified social workers felt that the degree prepared them just enough or not at all for their current role’ (Laming, 2009, para 5.9).
Report makes clear that the lack of protection came not because no one was willing to refer her but because of mismanagement, unprofessional performance and the failure to put basic good practice into operation. As the Report stated ‘The agencies with responsibility for Victoria gave a low priority to the task of protecting children. They were under-funded, inadequately staffed and poorly led. Even so, there was plenty of evidence to show that scarce resources were not being put to good use.
The Working Together to Safeguard Children (2013) document highlights that we all share in the responsibility for safeguarding and promoting the welfare of children and young people. One of the most significant ways in which organisations are coming together to do this is through the development of the Common Assessment Framework (CAF) and voluntary organisations play a key role in these forums. Voluntary and community sector organisations are often the ones who work very closely with families and may be the most important service to a child and their family but this might not always be known to other agencies needing to support those families.(DfE 2013)
While the protection of children from harm has always existed in legislation in some form throughout the 20th Century, the Children Act 1989 is seen as the first significant law which put in place most of the child protection structures and principles we use today. These included ensuring the needs and safety of a child is always put first, that professionals should initially attempt to work with parents to keep the child safe and that children should always be placed with their own family rather than in care unless it would put them at risk of significant harm to do so. (Evans, M. 2013)
However, numerous child abuse cases over the previous two decades have prompted a series of overhauls to child protection procedures. The children Act 2004 is not a comparable piece of legislation to the 1989 Act and does not supersede the earlier Act in respect of any of the provisions. However, it introduces a miscellany of reforms to the system, many of which have their origins in the recommendations of the Victoria Climbie inquiry (Laming, 2003) and the Green Paper Every Child Matters (DfES, 2003), these include:
•The establishment of a Children’s Commissioner for England (sections 1-9)
•Provision to allow the government to establish a database of children in England (section 12)
•The requirement on local authorities to appoint Directors of Children’s Services (section 18). These being together all a local authority’s services for children and families – both social care and education
•The establishment of Local Safeguarding Childrten’s Boards (section 13-16) in each Local Authority area.
These all intended to bring together all the agencies with responsibilities for children and families in a locality in order to co-ordinate and commission new services in a particular area. The hope is that these trusts will promote the well-being of children and young people in a more creative way that is less hamstrung by agency demarcation lines than has been the case with more traditional modes of service delivery. In particular the hope is to improve services for vulnerable children and their families prior to the point where they become ‘child protection cases’ and thereby prevent them ever having to enter the child protection arena. It is necessary if more families could be helped at an earlier stage, particularly if we could somehow stop resorting so often to legal compulsion to break up families. (Walker, A. 2011)
The Munro review of child protection: final report (Munro, May 2011) called for a more child-focused system and a reduction in prescriptive timescales and targets from central government. A child centred system: the government’s response to the Munro review (DfE, July 2011) accepted all but one of Munro’s recommendations, and laid out a programme of proposed changes over the following years. Pending alterations have been noted throughout this briefing.
According to Professor Munro ‘government and local authorities should operate in an open culture, continually learn from what has happened in the past, trust professionals and give them the best possible training’. Her recommendations signal a radical shift from previous reforms that, while well-intentioned resulted in a tick-box culture and a loss of focus on the needs of the child. Currently local areas are judged on how well they have carried out certain processes and procedures rather than what the end result has been for children themselves. (DfE 2012)
“Following the tragic deaths of Khyra Ishaq, Peter Connolly and numerous other children known to Children’s Services, there appears to be a crisis of confidence in the nation’s Child Protection system. Social Workers are often the first to point out the system’s flaws so there was a palpable optimism when it was announced that Professor Eileen Munro (an experienced social worker and academic) would be undertaking a comprehensive review of the Child Protection System.
After months of consultation (including the controversial move of appointing Deirdre Sanders of ‘Dear Deidre’ fame to the Task Force), the final report was published in May 2011. There were 15 recommendations made, many of which encouraged a move away from what Munro astutely calls ‘compliance culture’. As practising social workers, we all know what she means; a sense of achievement being derived from completing a Core Assessment in 35 days, regardless of the outcome for the child. Shifting the emphasis away from performance indicators will free up social workers to get back to what they entered the profession to do: to get to know families, identify solutions and to assist the families in putting these solutions into practice. Munro also argues that there should be a change in the way we carry out Serious Case Reviews. At present, she says, there is too much emphasis on what went wrong and not enough emphasis on why. It is understanding why mistakes are made that will allow us to prevent them from occurring again.
The current investigative environment has been influenced considerably by past failures in protecting the right to life of children and is still an area where controversy amongst different affected groups, e.g. in relation to the causation of the death, continues, with the arguments often being played out in courts and the media. The key contributory factors to being an effective child protection system are commitment, dedication and time. It cannot be stressed enough how important these are, especially time. In most circumstances, it is simply not possible for a child protection officer to perform the role effectively. As required by the Department of Children, Schools and Families, a child protection officer in school needs to be able to:
•Refer cases to appropriate agencies
•Offer support and advice to all staff
•Liaise within and have knowledge of the safeguarding children system
•Identify children who are vulnerable, in need of additional services or at risk of significant harm
•Ensure that all staff in school are aware of safeguarding issues and what to do if they are concerned about a child
•Manage clear, accurate, secure records and access resources for children and families.
From anecdotal evidence, there has been some progress but the biggest problem that appears to have inhibited effective inter-disciplinary child protection procedures since it was initiated has been the different perspectives and agendas within which the various professionals operate. The social worker wants to continue to work with the family, and even if the removal of the child is recommended, hopes to reunite the child with the family at a later date, if at all possible. So detection is with a view to keeping the child within the family, as far as possible. The healthcare professional seeks to provide a medical solution to perceived child maltreatment; the police person is primarily seeking to obtain sufficient evidence to secure a successful prosecution. Part of the rationale behind the Children Act has been the notion of partnership between social services and parents. (Banks, S. and Willams, R. 2009)
The central issue remains one of maintaining a balance between protecting the family from unwarranted intrusion and the need to safeguard children. If there is mere suspicion rather than clear-cut evidence, should it still be possible for the state to obtain a care order on the basis that the child is at risk of abuse? One might have thought that in these times of heightened public revulsion at child abuse in response to cases like Baby P, there might well be support for this. But as far as current law is concerned, such a notion has been unanimously and unequivocally rejected by the House of Lords in the case of Re B (Care Proceedings: Standard of Proof) [2008] 2 FLR 141. The three cases resulted in a Public Inquiry or Serious Case Review and there would often be a change in procedures in order to improve the processes and prevent further failings. I have analysed that in these 3 cases, there are three fundamental common failings.
1. The failure to follow agency/LSCB/national procedures or guidelines.
2. The failure to make accurate notes or any records at all.
3. The failure to share information.
I would suggest that to improve the child protection system in England the Education Committee should consider to re- introduce regular visits of Health Visitors to families with children up to school age. Because health visitors are the professional to help parents and help the development of babies and young children. They are easy to welcome into homes and have the opportunity to monitor the environment in which the child lives.
Secondly Children’s Social Care social workers have a vital role in safeguarding children. In the majority of cases they perform to a high standard, despite the pressures and heavy case load. They are required to conduct enquires/investigations into Section 17 and Section 47 Children Act 1989 referrals. Social Work training does not adequately cover two important areas. (i) How to conduct thorough investigations, and (ii) How to communicate; build rapport and interview children and parents. Some of these parents/carers involved in child protection cases can be anti-authority, intimidating and/or difficult to engage. (Banks, S. 2009)
Professor Munro (2011) has provided a very thorough analysis of the issues, including many of the areas the Committee has highlighted as areas it wishes to examine: Whether the child protection system allows for effective identification of, and early help to, children at risk of different forms of abuse and exploitation; factors affecting the quality of decision-making in referral and assessment, and variations across the country; and whether the child protection policies and practices of non-social work agencies and Government departments assist professionals to work together in the interests of the child.
Differences in child protection responsibilities and strategies are tied to geography, political and social history, religion, wealth, social structure, and a more general sense of purpose that blends cultural beliefs about how to protect children with everyday realities. Although there is no one best way to protect children, serious choices are involved and every society stands to do better when the choices it makes are grounded in the rights of children. (Burke, P. 2009)
In one sense, the issues involved in doing child protection work with disabled children are exactly the same as those involved in work with any other child. The child protection worker must find an appropriate way of communicating that will allow the child to convey what she needs to say and the worker to provide the child with the information she needs to have. As with any child, the worker must be sensitive to issues of power, divided loyalties, and so on. Communication with disabled children may involve a range of specific skills, over and above the skills that are required in any case to work effectively with children. Morris found that, ‘only 27% of the children on the caseload of the Children and Disabilities team.. Used speech to communicate, while another 25% used limited speech’. (2010:100).
Attempting an investigative interview, or therapeutic work without being familiar with the child’s preferred means of communication, is equivalent to trying to work with a French child without being able to speak French. Child protection professionals whose brief includes disabled children or communication problem either need to be familiar with the relevant communication systems, or need to develop close working relationships with other professionals who have the necessary skills an are able to act as interpreters. Working with people from other countries requires not just a way round the language difference, but also an understanding of the cultural differences. (Cigno, K. 2009)
Professionals must keep their judgements under critical review (Munro, 2008; Fish et al, 2008) and be able to acknowledge where initial decisions are mistaken. The tragic case of Victoria Climbie is a clear example of the potentially disastrous impact of early ‘mislabelling’. Wrongly categorised as a ‘child in need’, subsequent information concerning Victoria was considered in this light and, consequently, agencies failed to take protective action (Laming, 2003)
Child protection services and managers need to establish the systems, ethos and context in which constant testing and revision of hypotheses and assumptions can underpin practice, as well as creating a working environment where professionals are actively encouraged to question their judgements and to invite alternative opinion – one in which it is acceptable and safe to simply change their mind. In Common errors of reasoning in child protection work (Munro 1999), the author argues that although professionals have often demonstrated a reluctance to revise their initial risk assessments or to reappraise the situation in light of new evidence, by being made aware of this tendency they can also take steps to avoid its dangers.
Initiatives to promote the welfare of children and to protect those likely to suffer harm have been central elements in government policies for children and families over many years. They form part of a wider agenda for improving outcomes for all children, tackling child poverty and reducing social exclusion. The inquiry following the death of Victoria Climbié made it clear that a number of long-standing problems, repeatedly raised by numerous child abuse inquiries over the preceding 30 years, had still not been overcome. These included poor co-ordination between services; a failure to share information between agencies; the absence of anyone with a strong sense of accountability; and the numbers of front-line workers trying to cope with staff vacancies, poor management and inadequate training.7 These were not new issues,8 although the Victoria Climbié Inquiry brought them into sharper focus. (Lawrence, A. 2009)
Early recognition is necessary if long-term damage is to be avoided, because the effects of emotional abuse and neglect appear to be cumulative and pervasive. Both these types of child abuse have serious adverse long-term consequences across all aspects of development, including children’s social and emotional wellbeing, cognitive development, physical health, mental health and behaviour. The risk of fatalities from neglect may be as high as that from physical abuse. Early intervention is of key importance. All forms of maltreatment, including emotional abuse and neglect, are most likely to be first indicated to professionals across a range of universal and targeted services including health professionals, the police, nursery nurses, teachers and educational psychologists. Practitioners in adult services are likely to be well-placed to consider the potential impact of parents’ problem
The Munro Review of Child Protection has recommended extensive changes to the day-to-day delivery of child protection services. Following the death of Peter Connelly, concerns were raised by social workers and others about the nature and amount of guidance and the potentially adverse impact of performance indicators, both of which were thought potentially to stifle their ability to exercise professional judgement or to prioritize time with children and families. In addition, the public anger directed at social workers following the media furore surrounding the deaths of Victoria Climbié and Peter Connelly has been extreme; one consequence has been an increasingly defensive professional culture that may have further reinforced dependency on rules and processes at the expense of professional judgement. The Munro Review adopted a systems approach to analyse why the current problems have arisen, to set out the characteristics of an effective child protection system and to outline the reforms that might help the current system get closer to the ideal. The Government response28 has taken forward many of its recommendations. (Munro, E., 2011)
In Munro’s final report she has recommended the government place a statutory duty on local authorities and their partners to ensure enough provision of early intervention services. Under this duty, councils would need to make every child and family who fell beneath child protection thresholds an ‘early help offer’ of tailored services and resources. Councils would also need to specify:
● The range of help on offer from professionals.
● How staff in universal services, such as teachers and health visitors, can access social work expertise to better identify children at risk of significant harm.
● What child protection training is available for early intervention services staff.
● What level of resourcing will be devoted to early intervention services.
She said that, although the co-ordination of early intervention services was best delivered locally, the government needed to provide a clear legal framework to set out what vulnerable children and young people and their families should expect from local agencies. (Munro, E. 2011)
Recommendations
1. Local safeguarding children boards should assess local outcomes, including the effectiveness and value for money of early intervention services and multi-agency training.
2. Take action to reduce the volume of referrals being received by duty and assessment teams. This is a difficult task, but the following may help:
(i)Increased understanding amongst other agencies about what the role of children’s social care is (and what it is not), to reduce the numbers of inappropriate referrals made to CSC.
(ii)Acknowledge that duty and intake work is among the most complex and skilled areas of social work practice and that this should be staffed by skilled and experienced social workers and managers.
(iii)Increase understanding in local areas of the Common Assessment Framework—this is a key route for obtaining support for families who do not meet child protection thresholds.
3. Professionals do not always listen to children or do not recognise that unusual behaviour may be a cry for help. It is important to ensure that all professionals who come into contact with children are aware of the importance of listening to children and observing their behaviour. It is important to bear in mind that children may have their own ways of coping. Support systems need to resonate with children’s own resilient strategies.
4. Professionals often struggle to balance children’s and adults’ rights. Legislation may not always helpfully enable professionals to balance children’s and parents’ rights. Consideration should be given to how professionals might be enabled to do this more effectively.
5. Another recommendation and one which attracted much attention was Munro’s suggestion that we should appoint a ‘Chief Social Worker’ who would advise the government on social care matters as well as appointing ‘Principle Social Workers’ in every Local Authority to act as the voice of front-line workers. The report indicates that the creation of these new Principle Social Work roles should be part of a wider evolution in the career pathway of a Social Worker. Instead of being directed towards management or Reviewing Officer roles, Munro argues that there should be scope for Social Workers to develop and progress through roles which retain front-line duties. This will come as a welcome suggestion for experienced workers who do not view management as a relevant use of their skills and expertise.
6. Ensure that all professionals who work with children either in a statutory or voluntary capacity receive the appropriate awareness training and know what to do when they are aware that a child is/or suspected of being abused.
7. Improve the supervision of workers by ensuring that service managers in all agencies have the capacity to monitor, support and advise their staff.
8. Ensure that staff in children's social care, police and health who are tasked to investigate child abuse have the appropriate single and multi-agency training.
9. Greater alignment between targeted services and GPs as well as with specialist services is required to support families where there are concerns or suspicions that parents or carers may be harming or are likely to harm their children. There is evidence that these children and families are insufficiently supported when they fall below the threshold for children’s social care intervention, both prior to referral and following case closure.
In conclusion, the child protection system that is in place in England is fit for purpose. It will continue to be updated and evolve. If the matters identified above were addressed and everyone followed the procedures that were applicable to their role in the child protection system, kept accurate records and shared information in accordance with the procedures, more children would be safeguarded. There is a cost to good training and the development of staff. However, skilled, efficient and effect staff will ensure that the child protection processes in England are followed. Children will not die through system failures and the cost of Public Inquiries and Serious Case Reviews will be significantly reduced.
References
DCSF (2007) Review of Section 58 of the Children Act 2004. London. TSO.
Evans, M (2013) Policy guide: Children Act 1989 Amended 2004. Available at: http://www.nurseryworld.co.uk/news/1172880/. Accessed on [29/04/2013]
NSPCC (2011) Child abuse and neglect in the UK today. London: NSPCC.
Her Majesty's Government (2013) Working together to safeguard children: a guide to inter-agency working to safeguard and promote the welfare of children. Nottingham: DCSF Publications.
Munro, E (2011) The Munro review of child protection: progress report: moving towards a child centred system. London: Department for Education.
Ofsted (2012) Framework for the inspection of local authority arrangements for the protection of children. Manchester: Ofsted.
Munro, E (2008) Lessons from research on decision-making In: Duncan, I and Shlonsky, A (eds) Child Welfare Research: advances for practice and policy. Oxford University Press: New York
Laming, L (2003) The Victoria Climbié Inquiry. Report of an inquiry by Lord Laming. Norwich: The Stationery Office
Laming, L (2009) The protection of Children in England: a progress report. London: The Stationery Office
Sullivan, P. and Knutson, J. (2006) ‘Maltreatment and siabilities: a population- based epidemiological study’, Child Abuse and Neglect, 24 (10) : 1257-73
Anthony, A (2009) Baby P: Born into a Nightmare of Abuse, Violence and Despair, he never stood a chance. Available at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2009/aug/16/baby-p-family. Accessed on [10/04/2013]
Banks, S. and Willams, R. (2005) ‘Accounting for ethical difficulties in social welfare work’, British Journal of Social Work, 35 (7): 1005-22
Burke, P. and Cigno, K. (2009) Learning Disabilities in Children. Oxford: Blackwell Science.
Allen, G (2008) Early Intervention: Good Parents, Great Kids, Better Citizens. London: Social Justice and Smith Institute
Wallace, I. and Bunting, L. (2007) An examination of local, national and international arrangements for the mandatory reporting of child abuse: the implications for Northern Ireland. Belfast: NSPCC.
Lawernce, A. (2008) Principles of Child Protection. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Munro, Eileen (2011) The Munro review of child protection: final report: a child-centred system. Norwich: The Stationery Office (TSO).
Lyon, C. et al (2010) Child abuse. 3rd ed. Bristol: Family Law.
Laming, L. (2003) The Victoria Climbié inquiry: report of an inquiry by Lord Laming Cm 5730. Norwich: The Stationery Office (TSO).
HM Government (2010) Working together to safeguard children: a guide to inter-agency working to safeguard and promote the welfare of children. London: Department for Children Schools and Families (DCSF).
