A New Framework for Child Protection

A New Framework
for Child Protection

There is an increasing amount of evidence that some children's social workers are lacking confidence to undertake the child protection role and make tough decisions. This stems from poor training and deficits in knowledge. Low morale in some authorities is also a major problem and leads to staffing problems, increased workload pressures and further stress. While many social workers continue working effectively in the hope of finding the personal rewards that brought them into this work the absence of a coherent theoretical framework for good practice is a major problem. Despite these challenges there are still some authorities which perform well, provide a range of different approaches to the safety planning process and make appropriate use of their legal powers.

The purpose of this article is to show that the current 'safeguarding' framework used by social workers is flawed because it often overlooks the fact that Children’s Social Care is the lead agency for child protection. Some social workers are reluctant to act decisively and swiftly in situations where children clearly require a protective intervention. Obviously, social workers operate in a society in which highly contested arguments are tending to undermine good practice. A new framework for child protection work is required which maintains the principle of working in partnership with parents but also enables social workers to recognise when it is necessary to make use of the powers they are given and take a firmer, more persuasive approach.

The theoretical framework for good practice must be informed by sound ethical principles. The concept of 'child abuse' recognises that violence against a child is unacceptable and occasionally a child may need to be rescued while criminal proceedings commence. However, there are many other kinds of child maltreatment which require professional intervention into family life. In their work with families social workers are expected to engage families, provide services and respect diversity. However, sometimes their offer of 'support' to families is not welcome. Social workers may then need to consider thresholds and whether it may be legitimate to act decisively when risks to a child are apparent.

I was a Senior Practitioner in Children's Services when the Children Act 1989 came into force in October 1991. During the 1990s I worked as a statutory social worker in a Family Centre in Cardiff. At that time we used the 'Orange Book', A Guide for Social Workers undertaking a Comprehensive Assessment (1988) (see below), to help us with the challenges we faced when dealing with complex situations. This Guide gave us a practice framework that was instructive, balanced and illuminating. It recognised that the Children Act gave social workers a stronger duty to face in two opposing directions at the same time. One was the duty to keep families together, if possible, and the other was the new, more precisely defined duty to assess situations where a child might need to be separated from the family. The Act made clear that during the legal process 'the child's welfare shall be the court's paramount consideration'.

This notion of a 'Comprehensive Assessment' was a new development and pointed the way to good practice in information-gathering and analysis. The Guide is informed by a wide knowledge base and recognition of the complexity of the issues to be considered when making an assessment. It gives social workers an in-depth understanding of their duties and the practice dilemmas when more coercive measures are introduced. It also offers examples of the kind of questions that might be useful to ask during the assessment.

The 'Comprehensive Assessment' usually took place after the granting of a legal order such as an Emergency Protection Order, Interim Supervision Order or Interim Care Order. This term is used to denote the purpose of an activity that should be carried out without any preconceptions about the outcome. However, when explaining this to parents a more informal language was used that simply conveyed the idea of a more structured style of working in which the aim was to understand their difficulties and the child's needs. This work took time and presupposed the willingness of family members to collaborate. When completed my assessment report was shown to managers and this, with the recommendations, was then submitted to the court. At the hearing the social worker was able to engage in a real dialogue with solicitors and magistrates or judges about the outcome of the hearing.

During the 1990s our approach to parents with whom our involvement was contested put the social worker at the very centre of risk assessment. This was conducted in a way which was meant to be challenging but without being confrontational. When it appeared that parents had behaved in a way that was putting a child at risk of significant harm immediate protective action was taken in the form of a section 47 investigation. Sometimes it was not possible, or even appropriate, to elucidate the whole range of factors leading up to some particular incident or allegation. However, social workers had a duty to recognise the dangers to a child that existed at one particular moment and, having secured the child's safety, look further into the causes of behaviour to consider the kind of intervention that might be appropriate in the longer term. Some aspects of this work with the family, such as the use of a legal order, would obviously have been unwelcome. Assessment work therefore required social workers who fully understood the ethical imperative to do everything possible to improve the safety and well-being of the child.

The task of conducting a comprehensive assessment is an activity that should only be carried out by social workers with sound professional judgement and in-depth knowledge of child development and attachment. The social worker is often working in the grey area between 'suspicions' and 'evidence' of harm to the child. Assessment requires a careful analysis of the inter-relationship between the negative and positive factors in a child’s life, e.g. the risk factors that are likely to impact on the child’s health and development and the nature of parental feelings for the child. There is often an inter-generational aspect to poor parenting. Some parents may have suffered adverse childhood experiences which have left them with a very limited understanding of the meaning of good parenting. Keeping the child in mind is fundamental to good assessment but this must include an in-depth understanding of the family dynamics and any dangers arising from apparently dysfunctional patterns of behaviour.

I found that it was usually a good idea to invite the parents to the office for an interview. The notion of 'respectful curiosity' is useful in this style of working as it acknowledges that social workers may want to ask questions about subjects that are difficult to talk about. (see below) My interviews with parents were aimed at helping me understand them as individuals and as a couple and how their psychological make-up affected their ability to parent. Sometimes the interviews were a positive experience for parents due to the fact their own thoughts and feelings were taken seriously and this was beneficial in itself even when the issues raised were difficult to face. One father spoke positively of my work with his family. He had apparently found the assessment process useful in making him think about his strengths and weaknesses and his ability to cope with parental responsibilities and with being a step-father. This had given him the opportunity to reflect on his feelings and to begin to act in a more considered way - a process which might be called therapeutic.

The task of assessing the child is never easy and often deals with quite delicate matters. The social worker may already have a basic understanding of the child's difficulties, from previous work with the child and background information on record. The views of the child should be sought in ways appropriate to his or her age and understanding. Children in care may reveal important information to the foster family. Sometimes the child's behaviour is an indicator of distress and provides clues regarding the nature of the child's past experiences and unmet needs.

The 'Orange Book' contains a lot of useful questions for consideration by the social worker. Unfortunately, some social workers made the mistake of using the book as a mega-questionnaire - which was not the intention. It therefore stopped being used after the introduction of 'The Framework for the Assessment of Children in Need and Their Families, 2000' (see below) - a new procedure informed by 'The Assessment Triangle'. This approach to assessment was accompanied by a policy shift away from 'child protection' and the re-framing of social work intervention as 'safeguarding children'. However, it now appears that social workers do not always give equal attention to all three domains of the Assessment Triangle to achieve a balanced understanding of the child's situation. The notion of 'Parenting Capacity' seems particularly difficult for social workers to assess.

In my experience child protection work requires staff with sound professional judgement who fully grasp the dilemmas they face and do not take unnecessary risks. The competence with which the formal investigation under section 47 is handled will crucially influence the effectiveness of subsequent work. Social work intervention with families where a risk of significant harm has been identified is aimed at ensuring that the child is either safely and adequately cared for within his or her own family or, where this is not an achievable objective within an appropriate timescale, that plans are made to provide satisfactory alternative arrangements for the child.

Underpinning the notion of good practice is an expectation that social work assessment should be both purposeful and timely. Social workers need to know why they are undertaking an assessment and to think about what it is they are trying to achieve. However, in the context of social work interventions to reduce risk, social workers often seem confused about their powers when taking a 'safeguarding' approach to children. This may not be a bad thing if it leads to other agencies with responsibilities for children in need conducting their own assessments and offering a supportive service. However, these assessments are for different reasons and the outcomes may not lead to a reduction in the level of risk. The current tendency to conflate 'safeguarding' and 'child protection' often seems to lead to poor risk assessment and decision-making.

The work of conducting a comprehensive assessment takes time and therefore requires social workers who stay long enough in the job to build trust with the family and a collaborative style of working. Social workers have onerous responsibilities and perform better in a management culture which is supportive and where open discussion is encouraged. Social workers are poorly served by managers who do not have a sound grasp of thresholds and the legal powers they are given. The dividing line between harm and significant harm is never easy to draw and this often reflects the differing views that exist within society. Even courts sometimes appear to struggle with the dilemmas before reaching a judgment.

The emotional dimension of relationship-based work in long-term child protection work must be better understood. Case Reviews have often found that the lack of sufficient 'professional curiosity' has contributed to abuse and neglect going undetected and professionals not understanding the place of emotion in inhibiting or distorting appropriate curiosity. Naturally curious people have a predisposition to recognise and search for new knowledge and are interested in supporting personal growth and development. However, the social worker who gets into a supportive relationship with a parent should not try to be a therapist. Instead, a clear separation of therapy and child protection is usually required - in order to prevent the social worker from getting over-identified with the parent and with his or her view of the family situation.

The profession must engage with the Independent Children's Care Review in the search for solutions to the current problems. Sadly, the 'Orange Book' is no longer in print. I believe that an updated version of it would be useful. Comprehensive assessment is related to improved chances of reunification success but, if reunification is not possible, the details obtained about the child's developmental history can contribute to placement stability in the future.

There should also be a stronger focus on recruiting experienced social workers for this work and valuing those with sound professional judgement. Child protection work can never be risk-free and there can be no guarantee of success. However, there are some aspects of current practice that are of little value and social workers need to use their time in a more carefully considered and focused way.

There is also an urgent need for the profession to clarify its understanding of ethically informed practice. Social workers who experience daily exposure to the environment of families under stress living in poverty are inclined to believe that the people they meet need help and should not be controlled or subjected to surveillance. There is often support for this belief from managers who believe in minimal intervention and need to keep a tight control over workloads. However, violence within the family is a very serious matter and society cannot understand how social workers with child protection responsibilities sometimes fail to protect children.

The Review of Children's Social Care was given the task of reforming a broken system and improving the effectiveness of child protection practice. I believe that a new framework for child protection is now required to enable social workers to think more clearly about the social work task. The long-term objective of reforms should be to support the development of stable, committed and supportive teams that keep experienced social workers in front line practice.

Hilary Searing