Daniel Pelka - Serious Case Review

More useful information is contained in another Daily Mirror article. http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/daniel-pelka-trial-lad-starved-2110723

According to this a representative of the Coventry Safeguarding Children Board, told the Mirror that it would be a further six weeks before the Serious Case Review report would be available. She is quoted as saying that new information had emerged during the trial and that the Safeguarding Children Board needs to consider the work already completed in the light of all the evidence presented in court.

Trials – and their outcomes – often pose some difficulties for those completing Serious Case Reviews. But the truth of the matter is that there are often things that need to be said, about the way in which a case was handled, as a matter of urgency, and which do not depend on the outcome of the trial or interfere with due process; for example, problems with communication between schools and medics and Children’s Social Care.

Dotting all the Is and crossing all the Ts is less important than providing timely safety bulletins as lessons are learned from the case. Another child’s life may depend on it.

Daniel Pelka - timeline

The Daily Mirror has a ‘timeline’ of events leading to Daniel’s death. It is not said how this was sourced, but it is a clear chronicle of events and at this stage is the best account I have seen in the press of the terrible circumstances resulting in this tragedy.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/daniel-pelka-trial-timeline-events-2109556

Daniel Pelka - at this stage there are more questions than answers

David Tucker, head of policy at the NSPCC, is right to say that we need to understand what was happening between the school and Children's Social Care in the lead up to Daniel’s death.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-23349527

The crucial questions will concern whether or not a child protection referral was made to Children’s Social Care and, if so, what decisions were taken.

At this stage we are told that a previous concern, involving a broken arm, had been investigated. Apparently no cause for concern was found at that stage. Subsequently Daniel’s condition is said to have deteriorated substantially during his first six months at school. He was said to have lost a great deal of weight and to have been found searching bins for food. We are told that his mother told the school he had a rare eating disorder.

Reports speak of various medical and education professionals being involved, but we are not given the details. It is not clear at this stage whether Children’s Social Care became involved as a result of the concerns expressed by the school.

I was sorry to read that a representative of the teacher’s union NASUWT is reported as already blaming the reduction in the amount of government child protection guidance. The BBC quotes her as saying: "Since 2010, when the government reduced red tape in the child protection system, a number of things have hit the floor that were there to protect not only children but teachers as well.”

I cannot believe that when a child is in obvious distress, as seems to have been the case here, people need a regulation to be able to act. Anybody who has a reason to believe that a child is being abused or neglected should act immediately and report her/his concerns without delay.

The Tragedy of Daniel Pelka

Apparently the Serious Case Review into the death of Daniel Pelka will not be available until September. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-23349527

Nobody should be in any doubt that this is an extremely worrying case. Early indications are that the school, health and other professionals were involved, but there is no mention of child protection enquiries having been initiated, even though the child is described as looking terrible and searching bins for food.

There are echos of Khyra Ishaq’s tragic death, another child about whom the school had serious concerns and who was being starved at home. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/west_midlands/8512503.stm  

I think having to wait until September for an SCR is an unacceptable option. I have for a long time been in favour of having an inspectorate (not Ofsted) which is capable of moving rapidly into a local authority in circumstances like these and finding out without delay the early indications of what has gone wrong.

That’s what happens when the Air Accident Investigation Branch deals with an air crash. Their staff members are on site as soon as it is safe to begin an examination of the wreckage. And anything they learn which needs to be communicated to make other planes safe is disclosed at the earliest possible moment.

I have a dreadful sinking feeling about this terrible tragedy of Daniel Pelka. It has all the hallmarks of a case in which dreadful failures have occurred.

Jones on SCRs

I am pleased to see Prof. Roy Jones in The Guardian (http://www.theguardian.com/social-care-network/2013/jul/25/serious-case-reviews-costly-complex) arguing that Serious Case Reviews (SCRs) have important limitations, which mean that we need to reconsider how and when we use them.

His argument is that SCRs must help, not hinder, child protection. Costly, time-consuming and disruptive reviews that undermine, rather than inform, practice are a bad idea in anybody’s book.

More Work in Manchester

The Manchester Evening News reports that there has been a rise of 23% in the past year in the numbers of children and young people subject to child protection plans. http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/rise-manchester-kids-abuse-risk-5379095 

This is said to accompany a steep increase in the numbers of referrals to Manchester’s Children’s Social Care teams.

No service can cope well with fluctuations of this kind. It is extremely difficult to scale up staffing and facilities to handle this sort of increase and major problems - including redundancy- are encountered if subsequently activities return to previous levels. Inevitably front line staff will feel the brunt of the extra work and the pressure of unforeseen changes.

This is all part of a national trend. There has been a steady rise in child protection work in England since 2008. This may now be tailing off, with the increase from 2011 to 2012 being much less dramatic than in previous years. However the 2012 figure is 47% up on the 2008 figure, an alarming rise. 

Children and young people subject of a Child Protection Plan, England 2008-11

Type of abuse	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012
Neglect	13,400	15,800	17,300	18,600	18,220
Physical abuse	3,400	4,400	5,000	4,800	4,690
Sexual abuse	2,000	2,000	2,300	2,400	2,220
Emotional abuse	7,900	9,100	10,800	11,400	12,330
Multiple	2,500	2,900	3,700	5,500	5,390
Total	29,200	34,100	39,100	42,700	42,850

Source: Department for Education (2012) Characteristics of children in need in England, 2011-12. http://www.education.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/SFR/s001095/index.shtml 


Surprise, surprise - there is no national strategy to deal with this situation. It looks like ministers are just hoping that it will go away. 

The ‘Bane’ of ICS

Having just written a post about computer problems in child protection in British Columbia, my attention has been drawn to an interesting post in the Community Care Social Work Blog at the end of last year that I had missed.

A social worker called ‘Frank’ describes the Integrated Children’s System (ICS) used in England as “… the bane of my life …”

Frank says that the system is very time consuming and difficult to work with. He says he feels as though he is being forced to follow the computer rather than using his professional judgement about children and families.

I strongly recommend reading the whole of his post: http://www.communitycare.co.uk/blogs/social-work-blog/2012/11/ics-is-the-bane-of-my-life-2/ 

It is little short of mind-bending that somehow leaders of children’s services in the UK have agreed to the development and implementation of systems of this type; and that systems of this type are still in use.

Urgent action is required to move to systems which support, not frustrate, effective practice.