Increased pressures in children's services are coming from more referrals, court work and unfilled posts. These have been exacerbated by tighter budgets and make it inevitable that social workers will only be able to focus on children at serious risk and in greatest need. Support services must be more effective in reducing the risk of abuse and neglect and preventing the need for care.

Social work may struggle to accept these harsh realities but it must recognise that it has spread itself too thinly and is doing too much unfocused preventative work. Responsibility for low risk cases should be shifted on to the voluntary sector and community-based groups. A clearer focus on child protection and children in care might help to make training more relevant to the social work task.

A recurring theme throughout the past forty years has been the struggle to achieve an appropriate balance between care and control. In the 1980's controls were emphasised through well-established child protection procedures and a key part of the statutory social worker's role was to investigate child abuse allegations. Since then the balance has shifted away from control towards a more caring approach with greater emphasis on the social work task of assessing vulnerable children. This has been accompanied by over-bureaucratic procedures and excessively complicated guidance which make it even more difficult for social workers to get the balance right and make sound decisions. In some situations this is leading to poor social work practice.

At the core of child protection work is the capacity to recognise 'significant harm' to children and to take action that may provoke strong emotions amongst clients and the professionals involved. The work requires fine judgements and the balancing of risks. It seems inevitable that some mistakes will occasionally be made, owing to human error, but with good supervision these should be identified and corrected. However, recent scandals have shocked the public and raised concerns about the poor judgement of some social workers involved in this work.

Serious Case Reviews provide some insight into the culture of many children's services and why mistakes are made. In the Peter Connolly case social workers focused on supporting the mother and lost sight of their over-riding duty to protect the child. In the Daniel Pelka case social workers never seemed to think of their work as formal 'child protection'. In other cases risks to children were not fully understood by social workers due to a reluctance to make make use of formal measures such as section 47 investigations, multi-agency conferences and ongoing work under a child protection plan.

While the increase in the number of care applications following the death of Peter Connolly was probably a positive development, particularly if authorities are taking a more balanced approach, this is now raising concern that practice is moving too far back towards control. The current mantra of 'thinking the unthinkable' comes across as particularly authoritarian. What is really needed is more balanced way of thinking that includes a recognition of the harm that can be done by unwarranted intervention into family life.

Many problems have arisen from the widespread confusion about the social work role due to policies which have blurred the boundary between child protection and safeguarding work. Social workers may be doing more work to safeguard children and identify their needs but there is gulf between the rhetoric of family support services and the reality - which means that social workers spend too much time refusing people help. There is now a great deal of public concern about the way children's services are being run and this comes from all social classes.

Another problem that must be confronted has arisen out of joint working with other agencies. Good practice is based on the recognition that social work is the lead agency in child protection. However, when children's services use the argument that child protection is the responsibility of all agencies it sends a signal that social workers do not need to be proactive. In reality, all social workers should be trained to look for indicators of risk and skilled in assessing risk. Furthermore, their employing organisation should fully understand the thresholds for formal child protection intervention and offer consistent support and guidance to social workers in recognising the signs that a child may be at 'risk of significant harm'.

Top priority must be given to improving the system for dealing with child protection referrals. At the root of the problem is the integration of the child protection investigation into the Common Assessment Framework. Complex procedures mean that the social work task is insufficiently focused on the investigative role. Situations where signs of abuse have been missed may arise because social workers sometimes find it very difficult to perform the dual roles of 'assessment' and 'investigation'.

Continuing problems in some authorities have resulted in the loss of much social work expertise and there is little opportunity for newly qualified social workers to learn their skills in a safe and supportive environment. It can then be very difficult to guarantee that all social workers fully understand their child protection duties and have the confidence to take the necessary protective action. In authorities which are struggling it may be appropriate to create an intake team dealing only with referrals where there are child protection concerns. Splitting off the formal investigation from the other types of social work has two advantages. The separation of the investigative role provides the opportunity to clarify roles, develop staff expertise and provide training which is more focused on staff need. Secondly, a single referral point specifically for child protection concerns is more easily understood by other agencies and the public.

Very often the focus of an investigation is on a single incident and some critics have complained that this is unfair and causes unnecessary stress on families. However, a prompt investigation of an incident may be necessary in cases where there have been long-standing child protection concerns. The opportunity to obtain medical evidence of abuse should not be missed, particularly if legal proceedings are being considered. On the other hand, if concerns turn out to be unfounded it is important that matters are quickly resolved and the family is not subjected to unnecessary stress. Whilst much social work combines protection with support the formal investigation requires a different mindset on the part of the social worker - similar in some ways to detective work. The style of working is very different from support work. It requires a greater level of detachment, a more probing approach and considerable skills in terms of tact, perceptiveness and sound judgement.

Not all social workers are suited to child protection investigations. This is why it makes sense to have a specialist team of social workers who are comfortable with doing this type of work and are appropriately selected, trained and supported.

The current child protection system is not working well. Abused children are falling through the net whilst others get caught up in it unnecessarily. Much practice wisdom has been lost. Good practice is profoundly important at the front door of children's services in view of the risks to children if mistakes are made. Whilst there are problems in all parts of the system those at the point of referral must be urgently addressed.

Hilary Searing

Links to Further Reading

Children in need of help or protection (12 October 2016). National Audit Office.

Performing ‘Initial Assessment’: Identifying the Latent Conditions for Error at the Front-Door of Local Authority Children's Services (18 January 2009). Research by Dr Karen Broadhurst at Lancaster University.

Social Work Practice: Section 47

Open Letter to the Chief Social Worker

Return to Barefoot Social Worker

Handmade in Wales. © Copyright Hilary Searing 2010-19. All rights reserved.