Given the strong reaction when the then children and families minister, Tim Loughton, first unveiled plans to cut child protection guidance, it is a shame the government did not respond to the consultation before publishing the guidance.
There are political motivations behind this latest announcement. Firstly, the pledge to "cut red tape" echoed findings from social policy expert Prof Eileen Munro, brought in by the education secretary, Michael Gove, to assess the child protection system in England following the death of Baby Peter. Munro found that individuals had become obsessed with maintaining administrative systems rather than being free to "do the right thing" to protect children.
Secondly, when Doncaster council produced a heavily redacted serious case review (SCR) after two young brothers were convicted of torturing a nine-year-old and an 11-year-old, Gove ordered Lord Carlile of Berriew to conduct an inquiry.
Carlile's report called for greater external scrutiny in SCR processes, and also intensive early intervention with children and families.
The revised Working Together to Safeguard Children is certainly a much slimmed-down document, condensing 700 pages into 95.
Carlile's call for children and families to receive intensive early help with their problems is also present. However, the fundamental weakness of early help was the government's refusal to adopt the Munro recommendation that it should be made a statutory duty. My concern is that this section of the guidance is more about exhortation than requirement. Without the necessary levers to transform the notion of early help into a reality, I can't see this doing much...
The acid test is what is going to happen when all local authorities dispense with initial and core assessments? Given that this has already been tested on a select number of local authorities, we desperately need to see the completed evaluation to help all local authorities learn what has worked well and what hasn't.
Alongside this, we need to look at examples of local authorities that have trialled improving the quality of assessments, particularly in relation to court reports, so that this can also be embedded into practice across the country.
Developing professional practice will help to produce confident social workers if done alongside other things, including reflective supervision. The issue of quality supervision is mentioned, but we know from members that it is still in short supply.
In terms of referrals to children's social care, the revised guidance says a social worker has to decide within 24 hours what action to take on every referral. This may be happening in some local authorities already but not all, as some have different kinds of screening processes. So that could be a big ask, particularly in a climate of finite resources.
It's curious that there is no mention of family group conferences as an alternative to child protection conferences – disappointing from a government that had seemingly made such a commitment to them.
The appendix references relevant guidance in terms of addressing issues such as forced marriage, witchcraft, child trafficking and child sexual exploitation but it is not nearly enough, and there was no reference to domestic violence. Sex abuse is only mentioned in the appendix and there was nothing about institutionalised and organised abuse.
What is welcome is the recommendation that local safeguarding children boards (LSCBs) should determine threshold levels, which has been a real bone of contention among many of our members.
Will the new guidance fundamentally change things for social workers? I am not so sure. The task of protecting children remains essentially the same. There is the potential for the revised guidance to increase the workloads of some social workers, once they are tasked with screening every new referral and acting on it within 24 hours.
Whatever Gove may claim, it will not reduce the bureaucratic burden on social workers. I believe this to be a complete misnomer and I take exception to it being sold in this way.
Munro said her reforms would only work if accepted wholesale and that there should be no cherry-picking. I fear that is exactly what we will end up with – a limited version of Munro, given that there is not even a glimmer of it in the children and families bill.
As long as inadequate computer systems exist, admin support continues to be cut, social workers continue to carry crippling caseloads without admin support or quality supervision, the dream of relationship-based social work for the majority will remain just that.
By Nushra Mansuri ( a professional officer at the British Association of Social Workers)
No comments:
Post a Comment