The undertaking of personal care is also a time when workers may notice signs that the child is being abused, such as bruising and even discharges. The worker has a duty of care to report any signs of abuse or they could be accused of being neglectful. They can protect themselves from this by following the setting’s procedures and records of what the practitioner has seen may even be needed as evidence in court. A practitioner who fails to comply with this duty of care is leaving themselves in a vulnerable position which could lead to disciplinary action and even being placed on the DBS children’s barred list.
Any major concerns should always be forwarded to the Designated Person for child protection in their setting. A high profile incident which did not follow proper procedures was the case of Lauren Wright in 2000. As well as a child losing her life it was also to have drastic effects for many of the practitioners involved with Lauren. David Wright, director of social services, said: "Had we followed the correct procedures which were already in place, Lauren would be alive today." (Kelso, 2001) The NSPCC said the case was one of the most disturbing it had come across, and in calling for a public inquiry the local MP Gillian Shephard said "It is worse than the Victoria Climbié case in my opinion because it all took place in full view of those people who should have been caring for Lauren Wright."
Lauren was killed by a blow to her stomach by her step-mother, Tracey Wright, but had been enduring abuse long before this. In reflection her class teacher said ‘Lots of times, often she was covered with lots of small bruises and with major bruises about once a month. These included black eyes, bruising to her face and scratches across her back. The headteacher said ‘Her physical deterioration had been apparent at least 5 months before she died’. The senior social worker responsible for the Lauren’s case resigned, and was described by a colleague to be "a suicide case". This demonstrates the high stakes for practitioners when proper procedures are not followed. When looking into what went wrong it became apparent that Lauren’s step-mother had been a member of staff in the school. The senior designated professional had left the school and the role had not been replaced and Lauren’s teacher had not received any child protection training. Furthermore, the school did not make a referral to children’s social care. The serious case review which followed, expressed lessons that the school needed to learn. The school failed to act on and refer the early stages of abuse and neglect and there had been poor record keeping. They failed to listen to the views of the child and failed to re-assess concerns when situations did not improve. Moreover, information was shared too slowly. A referral should have been made to children’s social care. If a referral had been made at the correct time and the form completed properly this would have shown any inquiry that the worker who completed the form, such as the senior designated officer, had acted professionally and they, themselves, would then be in the clear if they faced disciplinary proceedings. They would also be much less likely to feel the wrath of an angry public. In the case of Baby P, practitioners who had been perceived as not following procedures correctly even had to leave their own homes because of fears of attack from the public.
When completing the referral form it is important that the practitioner studies the form guidance and makes sure that all sections are completed properly. For example, including the date and time of referral will protect the worker by showing that they did actually refer the case at the proper time. Also, the reason for referral should be completed accurately. The duty of care in nurseries extends to making sure that children are not left in soiled nappies or pull ups and that they are fed and given water and kept free from danger. It is important therefore to make sure that all procedures are followed correctly and that proper equipment is used. The Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 is a key law which governs the safety of children when in the care of childcare settings and there are particular areas where practitioners need to be extra vigilant with their duties. For instance, teachers organising and taking part in school trips accept responsibility for the care and welfare of pupils, and they act in loco parentis. They also have duties as employees and/or managers under health and safety at work legislation. The significance of this can be seen by the imprisonment of the teacher who did not follow proper health and safety procedures where a child drowned on a school trip (Carter 2005). A practitioner can protect themselves by carrying a thorough risk assessment prior to the trip and completing all of the necessary forms.
Practitioners also need to be careful about the way that they talk and behave when working with children and young people. For example, inappropriate comments about a child’s genitals when changing their nappies is totally unprofessional and is another reason why workers may be disciplined. Also, whilst working with particularly young children there are times when a distressed child may need a cuddle but again, especially since the Plymouth nursery incident, any type of contact with a child could lead a professional open to allegations of abuse. For example, Twinkle Star Day Nursery in Portsmouth has a strict policy on contact with staff which says ‘Children are encouraged to be independent therefore prolonged periods of cuddling and sitting on practitioners’ laps is discouraged. Kissing of children is forbidden and may result in a disciplinary.’ This can be awkward, for example, children may want to kiss the nursery nurse goodbye on leaving the nursery but one manager expressed ‘I tell my staff not to kiss children and explain the reasons for it to protect them from any allegations.’ It would also be advised to find alternatives to the commonplace ‘I’ll kiss it better’ when a child has hurt themselves. For example, you could put a magic plaster on it. Although these measures may seem a bit drastic sadly in today’s society they are sensible ways to protect workers from allegations of misconduct and inappropriate behaviour.
A major area of concern for practitioners lately has involved the use of digital technology and it is common for mobile phones and cameras not to be allowed to be used where the children are in the setting. Rules regarding the use of digital technology are important to follow in any child care and young person setting, such as a school. The recent Facebook phenomenon is an innovation which has resulted in some professionals making inappropriate things public which consequently have led to disciplinary action. The Association of Teachers and Lecturers advises teachers to protect themselves from facing disciplinary action and advises that teachers use the Facebook privacy setting ‘only friends’ when posting updates and uploading photos. They also advise teachers to ‘untag’ themselves from photos on friends’ pages if they could be considered inappropriate and not to post comments that could be considered defamatory or in breach of copyright legislation. Finally teachers can protect themselves by regularly checking their profiles to ensure it is free from inappropriate comments and/or images. These measures will go some way to protecting a practitioner from being reported by a member of the public for inappropriate behaviour. Practitioners also need to be aware of the differences between work and home and it is advisable to never post any comments about a place of work, or indeed photographs. This could be seen as a serious breach of confidentiality and again lead to disciplinary action.
Confidentiality covers a large area in all health and social care settings. First, there are rules to follow when a disclosure is made, or abuse is suspected. The professional must always be honest with the child or young person who they are working with by informing them of the process that follows a disclosure. This should be done in a reassuring way and that you are there to protect the child. If the child asks you not to tell anybody else it is important that the professional explains the reason why the disclosure has to be forwarded to a senior member of staff such as the designated safeguarding officer. Failure to follow these procedures correctly can result in damaging consequences to the professional as with the case of Lauren Wright and many more children.
All of this information needs to be handled very carefully and it is important to follow the guidelines set-up by the organisation which should be in line with the law, such as the Data Protection Act 1998, and the procedures set out in the DfES’s Child Protection circular 10/95 – ‘Protecting Children from abuse: The role of the Education service’.
These laws and guidance cover what information must be shared and what should be kept confidential. Indeed it is good practice to share information nonetheless this should only be with people involved with the case, and failure to share this information properly could also have dire consequences as many high profile cases have shown. Also, all written and electronic information should be kept locked away in a safe place and practitioners should never gossip about any sensitive information that they come across. For example, they may hear about divorces, affairs, illnesses, money problems, drug addictions, abuse, as well as other snippets of personal and sensitive information.
Conclusion
The abuse and the safeguarding of children has become a central political topic which quite often receives widespread media attention when tragedies and scandals occur. Media coverage then intensifies the need for political action. The ramifications that this has for practitioners is that they are constantly under the gaze of the public. Any errors made by a practitioner could have serious consequences for them. As well as being disciplined a worker can face losing their job, become local and even national news, and end up being placed on barred lists and never allowed to work with children again. In some cases the practitioner may even receive a custodial sentence. The changes that have occurred recently in childcare protocols have been huge and at times confusing. For example, Penny Tassoni, president and Professional Association for Childcare and Early Years (PACEY) and author of many books on child development believes “it is actually the duty of anyone working with young children to offer physical contact” However, in today’s litigious society practitioners must be very careful of how they work with children and young people so that they can protect themselves from any accusations of misconduct. It is important for practitioners to always follow the procedures of the organisation, to know about the issues of confidentiality and to report and record all important matters in the correct way.
by
nerobinsonhotmailcouk (student)
