This article considers the child protection system and the primacy that is given to the notion of 'safeguarding children'. However, this approach can result in social work interventions that fail to protect the child. When serious concerns about a child are raised children's social workers may respond with a knee-jerk 'something must be done' and try to work with the family on an informal basis. However, if their 'safeguarding' approach is found to be inadequate they should then consider the possibility that the child may be at risk of 'significant harm' and an investigative strategy developed, in collaboration with other agencies. At this stage the issues are complicated. Unfortunately, political correctness often muddies the water and makes social workers reluctant to conduct a formal investigation under section 47 of the Children Act 1989. As a consequence of all this the child is not protected from 'significant harm'. The following case is an example of this.

In 2025 Michael and Kerry Ives were convicted of murdering their two-year-old grandson, Ethan, who was dangerously dehydrated, severely underweight and had 40 visible bruises or marks when he collapsed at their home. Ethan’s mother, Shannon, 28, was found guilty of child cruelty and causing or allowing his death. Michael and Kerry Ives, originally from Wolverhampton, claimed their daughter, Shannon, was 'quick-tempered' and would slap Ethan a couple of times a day. Shannon Ives told the court her parents were 'horrible' and abused her as a child.

The murder of two-year-old Ethan Ives-Griffiths in 2021 by his grandparents, and his mother's failure to protect him, has revealed a fundamental weakness in the child protection system. The Minister for Children and Social Care in Wales, Dawn Bowden, has yet to respond to the obvious child protection failures in this case. Her approach seems to be based on an ideology of 'safeguarding practice' with children in need that hardly recognises child protection duties. Without any political leadership in developing a more effective child protection system it seems unlikely that the necessary reforms will be made in the near future. It is therefore important that the Child Practice Review recognises the need for a clearer focus on child protection duties.

When Ethan and his mother, Shannon Ives, went to live with her parents in Garden City, Flintshire during the Covid pandemic it was almost inevitable that professionals would have difficulty in monitoring Ethan's development. Nevertheless, Children's Services acted responsibly by making the decision to place Ethan's name on the Child Protection Register - with a requirement that he should be seen every 10 days. However, during the seven-week period Shannon and Ethan were living with her parents Ethan suffered extensive neglect and physical abuse. Unfortunately, children's social workers and the health visitor, who visited the family on different occasions, were denied entry to the home and access to Ethan. This should have raised concerns about the safety of Ethan. An application could have been made to the Family Court for an Interim Care Order that would have given social workers the powers to remove Ethan from home and have him medically examined.

Despite the fact that the child protection duties of children's social workers are very clearly laid out in the Children Act 1989, social work practice is now essentially framed as caring and supportive, rather than coercive or controlling. Training courses also promote a notion of social work practice that gives primacy to the notion of preventative measures and seems ideologically opposed to the use of authority within the framework of the legal process.

Obviously, the issues that face social workers in child protection work are complicated but in Wales politicians at the Senedd invariably frame social work interventions as 'safeguarding' and have little understanding of child protection duties. Furthermore , the current political culture throughout England and Wales does not ensure that children's social workers are adequately prepared for the difficult task of recognising signs of cruelty and physical abuse towards a child and taking the necessary protective action.

The ideology of caring for vulnerable children and safeguarding them is paramount in children's services. Unfortunately, there is little interest in examining the process in which the cycle of abuse can be repeated through the generations. The mother of Ethan claimed that she suffered abuse as a child. However it appears that the cruelty she had experienced had become normalised and she unthnkingly allowed the same ongoing pattern of abuse to be inflicted on her own son.

Social workers have a legal duty to protect children from physical abuse. However, they may not always consider in detail, or in depth, the emerging patterns of behaviour indicating possible abuse of a very young child and it is only later that their intervention in the family is found to be inadequate. They may be very aware of parental deficiencies but under-estimate the seriousness of them and are reluctant to make use of the legal powers they are given. However, in supervision their line manager should know when it is appropriate to make use of their child protection powers and initiate legal proceedings.

Obviously, those with statutory responsibilities require a sound knowledge of child protection legislation. The lack of clarity about the legal powers and responsibilities of children's social workers has now become a major barrier to good practice and this means that some children are not protected. Training courses tend to focus on the developmental needs of children and how to support families in caring for their children. Consequently, the curent ethos of professional practice is giving children's social workers the idea that informal safeguarding measures and a collaborative approach are the best way to carry out their duties. Nevertheless, Children's Services has a responsibility to protect children from significant harm as laid out in the Children Act 1989.

Hilary Searing

Return to Barefoot Social Worker

Handmade in Wales. © Copyright Hilary Searing 2025. All rights reserved.