Improvements at the Border?

I was pleased to see reported in the Crawley and Horley Observer what seems to be a continued decrease in the number of children being detained at London’s Gatwick Airport.

I was also pleased to read in the same article that the Children’s Society, while welcoming the drop in numbers, continues to express concern about border detentions of children and to draw attention to occasions when the UK Border Agency (UKBA) falls short of the required standards.

Sadly there continue to be cases when children, requiring protection and welfare services, are held, albeit for a short time, in accommodation that is also used to hold adult immigration offenders. That is unacceptable.

Under no circumstances is it justifiable to treat trafficked children as if they are criminals. Not until that practice is completely eradicated at the UK border, can UKBA managers claim to be fulfilling the agency’s statutory duty to safeguard and promote the welfare of children.

Increased demand for services in Yorkshire

The Yorkshire Post reports a substantial increase of 34% since 2009 in the number of children made subject to child protection plans in the region. Yorkshire’s biggest city, Leeds, saw a staggering rise of 157% and rural North Yorkshire also saw a big increase of more than 90%.

Professional associations and charities are quoted by the Yorkshire Post as calling for more resources to deal with these unprecedented increases. It seems clear to me that the bulge in child protection work that began following the Baby Peter case continues unchecked. And it is difficult to see how cash-strapped local authorities can continue to meet demand without substantial extra resources.

Sadly this type of situation is a bit like a pressure cooker without a safety valve. The pressure continues to build and build, seemingly without consequence, but it is only when the explosion actually occurs that people realise how dangerous the system actually is.

I think there is a need for careful research and analysis of how well local authorities are dealing with these types of increases. Are existing staff just having to cope or are more resources being deployed? What are the effects on staff morale and, most importantly, the quality of service?

In a sane and rational world I would expect the regulator, Ofsted, to be doing that. Silly me!

Critical Reflection?

I have been thinking about what I should be trying to achieve with this blog and how to do it. Looking back at some of my recent posts I seem to have developed a rather ‘editorial’ style: note something in the news and make a comment. Inevitably that feels to be a bit like standing on the sidelines, watching the world go by: a commentator rather than a contributor.

I have therefore decided to try to include, from time to time, what I am provisionally titling ‘mini-articles’. These will draw on the academic literature, rather than the news, and will provide tighter arguments and hopefully even more persuasive conclusions!

Inevitably mini-articles will take more time to write, but they will be interspersed with the old style comment. So there should still be something here to meet a variety of tastes and needs.

I am currently working on the first mini-article, which I expect to complete over the Christmas period. So watch this space.

Mandatory Reporting

The Irish Government is introducing laws to make not reporting child sexual abuse or other serious crimes against a child a criminal offence (http://www.independent.ie/national-news/shatter-warned-new-abuse-laws-could-overload-social-services-2939752.html). Someone withholding information could be fined or imprisoned for up to five years.

I believe that government and professional guidance should be that anyone suspecting any form of child abuse and neglect should report it, but I do not think making failure to report a criminal offence is a good idea. There is a real danger that the threat of imprisonment will result in professionals reporting cases that do not meet accepted thresholds, just to be sure. That could overload children’s services and so deny some children the level of service they deserve and require.

I believe that the law is a blunt instrument for ensuring that cases of child abuse are appropriately reported. It is better, I think, to help all concerned to be better able to recognise child abuse and neglect and to be more aware of the consequences for the child of not taking action.

Board games

I was sorry to see that a row has broken out in Wales about Local Safeguarding Children Boards (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-16027693). The Welsh government want six new boards to replace the twenty-two existing ones. Local authorities want eight or possibly nine. The government want the new boards to deal with safeguarding vulnerable adults as well. Local politicians argue that’s a mistake.

I think this sort of thing is a big distraction. The design and successful operation of the child protection service is what matters. Get that right and it ought to be clear what support structures are required.

Sadly there is a long tradition, not just in Wales, of messing with the structure and paying too little attention to the service. The Every Child Matters agenda and the Children Act 2004 brought in all kinds of duties and powers and introduced the Local Safeguarding Children Boards in England and Wales. But I don’t expect anyone could name a child who was safer as a result!!

More on the College of Social Work

A little while ago I made an irritated post about the proposed College of Social Work. I was upset by the protracted negotiations; and by claims and counter claims about who was responsible for the delays in establishing this much needed body.

I am pleased to see that the UK Parliament's Education Select Committee has also expressed its frustrations. This committee has now forced some of the participants in the debacle to release various documents which do shed some light on what is happening.

However. I have to confess, having read these, that I am still not clear why all this is proving so difficult. If you have time, read the documents. May be you will have more luck? If you can see a way forward please share it. I'll publish any reasonable suggestions I receive (email me at chris-mills-child-protection-blog@gmx.co.uk).

This matter urgently needs to be resolved.

Statistical Indigestion

It is a while since I looked at any British government statistics on child abuse and neglect. Today I was prompted by an article in Children and Young People Now to look up the Department for Education’s statistical release “Characteristics of Children in Need in England, 2010-11”.

Reading this document made me remember why I stopped reading this sort of stuff some years ago. To be fair to the document it is free of reports of the dire performance indicators that used to be so ubiquitous in the days of our last Government. But it is still packed with too much data, while any useful information is difficult to extract.

And trend information is completely absent. I cannot understand this omission. Surely what most people want to know is how many more or less children are being identified as being abused and neglected and where this is happening. And they want to know what the trend is over a considerable period (e.g. ten years). That way we would have some useful information for planning services and allocating resources. Perhaps that’s too much to hope for from a government department?

To me the most interesting statistic hidden in the pages of this report is the following:

“There were 382,400 children in need at 31 March 2011, which was a rate of 346.2 per 10,000 children. At a local authority level, the rate per 10,000 children varied from 171.3 children in need per 10,000 children in Wiltshire to 1272.4 in Haringey.” (page 2)

That puts identified need in the London Borough of Haringey ten times above the level in rural Wiltshire and nearly four times above the average for England. I wonder how far allocation of resources compensates for this disparity?