Child Protection Theory and Practice

Social work in child protection is underpinned by an ethical duty of prevention and many children's social workers provide long-term, supportive work with families. However, while this approach is effective in most situations, there are others where planned, short-term intervention may be more appropriate. This article argues that short-term work can be an important method of working in child protection but it is often misunderstood. It describes an innovative project in Wales that delivers intensive support to vulnerable families with the aim of keeping children in their families. This is followed by a discussion of how the profession should re-examine child protection theory in order to improve practice with hard-to-reach families.

In Wales the Integrated Family Support Service (IFSS), first pioneered in Newport, has now been rolled out across Wales. It arose out of concerns that existing services were not sufficiently meeting the needs of some children and families with complex problems. Local authorities can refer a family to IFSS when there are concerns about the welfare of children, such as those arising out of parental substance misuse, domestic violence or mental health issues.

The fact that IFSS is separate from children's services has helped to break down some of the barriers to the successful engagement of parents. Research concludes:

Most families explained that they had made an active choice to sign-up to IFSS. They had accepted that they had reached ‘rock bottom’ and needed help. In some cases this realisation was provoked by a specific incident or crisis within the family, which marked the culmination of long-term problems. In other cases parents came to a realisation that the existing situation could not continue. Participation on the programme was viewed as an opportunity to help them overcome the difficult situations that they were experiencing.

The basic theory underpinning IFSS is to promote integrated working between social services and health and deliver short-term, intensive support for parents facing problems with substance misuse. The team is led by a consultant social worker whose brief is to support the team in turning families around where there have been child protection concerns. During the involvement of the team key workers from health and social services continue holding case responsibility.

I will start with a brief account of crisis intervention theory - a theory that has much to offer child protection social workers. Many in the profession argue that 'prevention' is always preferable to 'crisis work' because it is with voluntary clients, unlike 'crisis work' where there is a degree of compulsion. However, there are many similarities between standard preventative work and the work of IFSS. The main difference is that IFSS is designed to work with hard-to-reach families where risks to children are serious and on the borderline of the threshold for care proceedings.

The theory of crisis intervention, which has been developed in mental health services, is rarely applied to children's services. However, this theory can provide a new understanding of the social work role. It recognises that 'child protection' intervention invariably causes parents anxiety and a sense of crisis but, if parents are struggling to manage their lives, the immediate involvement of a social worker may motivate them to accept help with their problems.

Crisis intervention theory puts the focus on the parents' emotional response to the crisis and how to control this rationally. Thompson (2011) sees a crisis as a turning point in people's lives, at which point their usual ways of coping with a problem fail and they are pushed to find a new strategy. The key to achieving constructive family work lies in the bringing together of a range of workers with knowledge and skills from both children and adult services. This theory provides a framework for analysis of both personal problems and relationship problems and an understanding of the link between internal states of mind and patterns of behaviour. The effectiveness of this approach depends crucially on the ability of the team to respond quickly to the crisis that has arisen and to convey to parents the seriousness of their situation.

Obviously, no single theory is enough to explain this work and workers have to be very flexible and creative in their approach. Theories about parent-child attachment and adult mental health, for example, will play a key part in their thinking. At the core of this work is the capacity of workers to build a close relationship with the family and to understand that their role is to be a 'change agent' who cares for everyone in the family and is committed to problem-solving and mobilising additional services if necessary.

The initial stage of IFSS is short-term (4-6 weeks). Parents may find that the intensity of the work gives them the chance to focus on, and think carefully about, their strengths and weaknesses and ideas about how to cope with their difficulties and act more responsibly as parents. During this work the family reveals a lot of information about the way it functions, both in the way family members behave and what they say, and the worker can tackle relationship problems directly. Families benefiting from the work of the IFSS are given an Integrated Family Plan at the end of the initial stage which is then subject to regular review.

Inevitably, some families are unable to make use of the help offered, owing to the fact they have extremely chaotic lives and serious multiple issues to address at once. Although this may be recorded as 'failure' it should not be regarded as an 'inappropriate' intervention, particularly if it contributes to a clearer understanding of how the family functions and the quality of parenting - which can then assist in decision-making.

This programme is in its early days and its development is continuing. The length of involvement has grown to include a less intense Phase 2 of 6-9 months and Booster sessions and, although this may be justified, the move away from the short-term focus may bring new challenges. There are also questions about why families with substance misuse issues are being prioritised for this intervention. Over time the intention is to extend this service to families with needs resulting from parental mental health problems, learning disabilities and domestic violence. However, careful child protection planning would be necessary with parents with more complex psychological problems as the emotional intensity of crisis intervention work may be stressful for some parents, with the possibility that this may heighten the risks.

The work of this project does not replace social work intervention within the structure provided by a child protection plan and core group working. However, crisis intervention theory can illuminate social work practice when formal child protection measures commence. A family may experience a sense of crisis when faced with a formal child protection investigation but if social workers intervene quickly and effectively it may be possible for them to contain the situation and prevent difficulties from escalating. The value of a specialist service such as this to engage families in collaborative working must be given the recognition it deserves - but there must also be an understanding of the inherent constraints within the role of social workers with statutory duties.

One weakness in the current child protection system, common to all parts of the UK, has arisen from an absence of a coherent theory, or a shared understanding between social work and management, of good practice in child protection work. Decision making in child protection, particularly the decision whether or not to remove a child from home, is too often based on a superficial understanding of the social work processes that underpin the work of fact-finding, weighing risk factors and reaching a balanced decision that will stand up in court. Social work theories are most useful when they are rooted in the realities of practice and provide a deeper understanding of what social workers are required to do. Current mainstream practices need to be critically re-examined to develop a child protection service which recognises the value of crisis intervention theory.

Hilary Searing