Working together in child protection.
Section B Q 3 Working together in child protection
The rule of optimism and the rule have pessimism have been identified as relevant to those who are working in the area of child protection. These rules are considered relevant in the identification and the assessment of risk and the decision to intervene in to a child's life. However risk itself is a value-loaded word and is subject to interpretation.
Owen and Pritchard (1993) recognise that risk is difficult to identify as there is a lack of clear criteria for assessing the level of risk and what explicitly constitutes abuse, and adequate parenting. Therefore the role of professionals at a case conference is made more difficult due to this. Multi-disciplinary conferences involve wide variety of professionals from different agencies, that may hold varying opinions and attitudes towards what constitutes abuse and risk, this in itself 'reduces' the identification of risk to a child.
The 'rule of optimism' may determine the way a professional or agency works with their client. It is described by Dingwall et al (1983) 'that staff are required, if possible, to think the best of parents' and this may involve providing justification or excuse and an optimistic interpretation of the clients behaviour.
The rule of optimism is based on 2 factors; firstly the belief in 'natural love' and that parent instinctively love their children. It can therefore lead to denying the fact that parents would intentionally harm their children as it is believed to be against human nature. Dingwall et al (1983) states that this assumption 'makes it very difficult to read evidence in a way that is not consistent' with this principle.
The professional can therefore result in making excuses for the behaviour of their client.
A second important factor that Owen and Pritchard identify is the aspect of 'cultural relativism' where by specific behaviour is attributed to cultural practice. In the case of child abuse Black and ethnic minority children are therefore at a higher risk because warning signs that would otherwise have been picked up are ignored and attributed to cultural practices and norms. For example Rogers, Hevey and Ash (1989) state that the beating of West Indian children can be viewed as traditional use of punishment with that culture rather than observed as physical abuse of children. Owen and Pritchard (1983) attribute this aspect to 'racist beliefs' and stereotyping, where non intervention and lack of concern is justified. The culture is considered deviant rather than the actions of a client or parent.
My own experience relating to the 'cultural relativism' theory is when working as an education social worker relating to the attendance policy of a primary school. The school's attitude to Muslim children whos' attendance fell during the month of Ramadan was explained because the children were 'probably fasting' . This is a good example relating to 'cultural relativism' because the schools over sensitivity to religious background of their pupils was to provide them with an excuse for not attending school, rather than enquiring whether there were other reasons why the children did not attend.
McHugh and Hart(1968)cited in Dingwall et al also discuss an important principle relating to the rule of optimism which they call 'capacity responsibility' they define this as :-
'the ability to understand what legal rules or morality require, to deliberate and reach decisions concerning those requirements...'.
This is the notion of whether a parent deliberately intends to mistreat the child and questions whether the parent had 'deficiency in their knowledge or will'.
In such a case characteristics play a vital part they state that people are more willing to accept people that have a bad reputation, for eg. those Convicted of a crime etc. are more likely to be suspected and investigated on evidence which would not be otherwise considered sufficient. Similarly they claim those people we believe have good characters are not suspected or investigated. A good example of this is where priests and religious figures are considered unlikely to commit such acts, for e.g. Cardinal Bernard Law that resigned this week after allegations of child sexual abuse. (Guardian 2002)
This has been expanded by Scott and Lyman (1968) to suggest that accounts may be produced by observers to either substitute or evaluate those offered by individuals thereby explaining the deviant behaviour. If the account (an excuse or justification) is accepted the behaviour or act which raised concern is 'neutralized' or no longer considered deviant.
Hart and McHugh relate this to the power and visibility factor of children being identified in cases of child abuse. Because parents are in the position of power in comparison to children, they can conceal and dispute facts, and the agencies involved in protecting children may actually be facilitating parents by rationalizing their behaviour and accepting their explanation without question.
Cases such as those of Jasmin Beckford (1985) Maria Colwell (1974) and that of Fred and Rosemary West (1994) are good examples of the rule of optimism where non intervention has led to the tragic deaths of ...
This is a preview of the whole essay
Hart and McHugh relate this to the power and visibility factor of children being identified in cases of child abuse. Because parents are in the position of power in comparison to children, they can conceal and dispute facts, and the agencies involved in protecting children may actually be facilitating parents by rationalizing their behaviour and accepting their explanation without question.
Cases such as those of Jasmin Beckford (1985) Maria Colwell (1974) and that of Fred and Rosemary West (1994) are good examples of the rule of optimism where non intervention has led to the tragic deaths of children, social workers and many other professionals have been criticized for not being sufficiently vigilant. The West's case had
numerous involvements from the professionals such as social workers, doctors, and teachers, however on each occasion there were no further enquiries followed up. The rule of optimism provides a relevant explanation to the events in this case.
One of the dangers highlighted by Rogers et al (1989) relating to the rule of optimism is that it can become a 'catch phrase' which is related to the psychological paradigm of child protection work. According to Rogers et al this is a dangerous misconstruction because he stresses that it is both an organizational and psychological construct.
It can therefore be used as a defence mechanism by those at forefront of child protection work to cope with a 'flood of incoming data'. It can also be used to assist agency staff to make difficult and complex decisions.
Louis Blom-Cooper, cited in Rogers et al (1989) has expanded the idea further by suggesting that the rule of optimism is evidence of 'wide spread dereliction of duty by child protection services'.
However the response to this criticism would be that child protection work must be undertaken with consideration to both the law and social values prevalent in society as well as consideration to the rights of parents/ carers. It would also need to be balanced against the 'rule of pessimism'.
Just as the rule of optimism influences decisions about assessing risk and intervention in the case of child protection, so does the rule of pessimism. However it is an antithesis of this. A good example of the rule of pessimism in operation is the Cleveland case, where Rogers et al (1989) state that a pessimistic approach was applied 'to treat all referrals as suspect until proven otherwise', in this case the cause for concern was immediately intensified into conviction of child abuse, by professionals, such as social workers and doctors.
Recommendations made from Cleveland report and TheReview of Child Care Law (1985) as also Working Together document (HMSO1991) all call for the improvement of interagency co-operation so that child protection is not centralised to social work agencies. The Cleveland report notes that all though the agencies were aware of each others functions ' because of their very different attitudes to the problem they simply failed to agree, and thus failed to co-operate' (Merrick D 1996). In fact the Report criticises the two doctors ' elevating a cause for strong suspicion into that of certainty'.
My own experience as Education social worker allowed me to see how both the rule of pessimism and optimism can easily influence my work with clients. The law states that it is the duty of a parent to ensure a child receives adequate education; Education social workers are in a position of power because they have statutory duties to ensure the regular attendance of children to school. The Education Welfare Service can also play an important role in child protection. An example of my work with clients regarding non school attendance of children, where I would have to investigate the reason for this. Sometimes the explanation provided would be relating to an illness or an explanation that I would consider to be 'genuine' and therefore I would believe the parents account, this can be related to the rule of optimism, however it was important for me to strike a balance between the rule of optimism and that of pessimism and to work together with the school and the parents/ carers.
Both the rule of optimism and the rule of pessimism play a significant part in making decisions relating to the protection of children. Professionals making these decisions; whether to intervene or not to intervene must be aware that they can have a profound impact on a child's life and those that care for him/her.
Factors such as the rule of optimism and pessimism as well as social values, moral values and the law are all important influences that can have an impact on the decisions and attitudes of an organisation and it's workers, in relation to the lives of children.
Section B. References
Dingwall R Et AL The protection of children State intervention and family life 1985, Basil Blackwell Ltd, England
Wilso, K and James A ,(2002)The child protection hand book, Harcourt publishers, Edinburgh
Owen H and Pritchard J(1993) Jessica Kingsley publishers LTD
London
Rogers S W, Hevey D and Ash E,(1989) Open University, Published by B.T. Batsford LTD London
Merrick D (1996) Social Work And Child Abuse, Published By Routledge
London
Adams R, Dominelli L and Payne M(2002)Critical Practice in Social work
Published By Palgrave, Basingstoke Hampshire
Guardian 2002 http//www.guardian.co.uk
Section A. Q 4 Children's Right's
The human rights of children can often be a subject that is a cause for debate. There are many reasons for this including the socially constructed perception of childhood, which may vary in different countries and societies. There are also different views and theories that exist, concerning children's rights, their roles in society, and in relation to adults,
Franklin et al (1995) has provided an explanation that childhood as a social construct is formed by 'social, historical, and cultural factors'. Therefore there is no universal agreement on the definition of childhood, the boundary between child hood and adult hood can vary as well as their experiences.
The United Nations Convention on the Rights of The Child (UNCRC) was ratified by UN General Assembly in 1989 and is one of the pieces of legislation that has attempted to bridge this wide concept of children's rights within society, and is directly related to The Human Rights Act .
The Convention on the rights of the child has 54 Articles the rights include civil, political, economic social and cultural and are related to all children.
There are 4 broad categories of children's rights which are endorsed within the CRC these are the right to:-
* Survival
* Development
* Protection
* Participation in decisions which affect them
( Asquith, S 1993)
These rights are also incorporated within the Welfare Checklist of the Children Act 1989 S. 1, which also recognises the principle of 'paramountcy' in relation to the child's welfare when any decisions are made about him/her. Both the UNCRC and the Children Act 1989 try to protect children's rights by promoting the 'welfare' and 'best interest' of the child.
Owen and Pritchard (1993) state that although it is generally agreed that children have a right to a childhood free from abuse and intimidation and their needs are of paramount importance over their parent or carers 'Ownership of children was enshrined in law about a hundred years ago when children were viewed as property of their parents'. Although this view has now changed considerably and this is reflected in legislation such as the Children Act 1989 parent's rights have been replaced with responsibility, it could be argued that aspects of this view are still prevalent in today's society.
For example although corporal punishment has been banned from state schools, the practice continues in private schools and is accepted as part of parental choice, and similarly physical punishment is seen as the 'rights' of parents to smack their children .
European Convention on Human Rights Art. 8 emphasises the right for protection of family life and prohibits state interference without a legitimate cause, as also the Children Act 1989 where the philosophy is that 'the best place for a child to be brought up is usually with the child's own family'( guidance and regulation on the children Act 1989 vl2).
Illich (1973) James and Prout (1990) argue that childhood is a 'social construct' where adults are seen to have the power which creates their traditional vulnerable and dependant role in society. This dependence can vary greatly from different cultural perspectives in degree and the age at which children can assume 'adult' responsibilities.
This is particularly true as different cultures may perceive the age when an individual is no longer considered a child and reaches maturity. For e.g. when is a young person old enough to have a sexual relationship? Or considered old enough to get married, or vote? These questions and others are determined by the values and attitudes of the society that children live in.
Art. 3 of The Human Rights Act advocates 'the best interest principle' and adults are often responsible for determining what is in the best interest of the child as they are frequently perceived to be 'inexperienced ,incompetent ...and unable to make rational choices'(Franklin ,B 2002). This view is held in society by adults such as parents and carers and also by professionals that work with children.
The Gillick v west Norfolk and Wisbech (1986) Area Health Authority case is a good example of conflict between traditionally held views of parent/ adult making decision for a child/ young person. In this case it was recognised that 'when a child reaches sufficient understanding and intelligence then it is capable of making up it's own mind'. Article 12 of the UNCRC recognises the child's autonomy and decision making capacity which must be taken into account. However Lord Scarman in this decision did not give specific guidelines of when a child is considered 'Gillick competent' therefore it is open to interpretation, and considered to be around the time of puberty.
My work within the Education welfare service as an education social worker enabled me to see the difficulty of balancing rights and social justice, "rights and justice are both indispensable in social work, but seem to be in tension and perhaps even contradiction" (Adams Dominelli and Payne, (2002).
Parent's responsibility towards ensuring that their children receive an adequate level of education is stated in legislation such as the Education Act (1996) which place a duty on parents/carers in this respect.
The importance of education is also emphasized by Art 2 of UNCRC,
however it can be questioned as to whether the state carries out it's full responsibility towards those children in care, and whether they receive adequate education, as figures from the Social Exclusion Unit show that the permanent exclusion for children in care are 10 times higher than the national average and as high as 30% of children in care are out of main stream education. (SEU 1999)
The UNCRC also states that cultural rights must be respected, however CA Wringe (1981) notes that by the very nature of the National curriculum excluding historical context of black and Asian children, these children are being denied their knowledge about their history and culture.
My own practice experience as education social worker (ESW) in relation to school exclusions, allowed me to gain insight into how children can lose their right to education. For example whilst working with a 14 year old boy that had not been attending school for almost a year. In this case the boy had been fixed term excluded on prior occasions, for absconding from school and for difficult behaviour within the school, he was still on the school roll and the school was receiving funding for him.
However I found that the school were reluctant to take him back after the period of exclusion, and although I suggested that he would benefit from some work with him at the Behaviour Support Centre the school were also reluctant to fund this.
In a situation such as this where 'back door' exclusion is used the relationship between the school and pupil have broken down. The pupil can be made to feel 'unwelcome' to return and I found that the power is with the institution, rather than service users; parents and children may be unaware of their rights. It is therefore important for those working on behalf of children to inform them of their rights and their choices, to prevent discrimination and oppression.
The head teacher has power to make decisions about exclusion from school and this cannot be challenged by ESW as they have no power in relation to exclusions from school. Although in the case of permanent exclusions there is a right to appeal by the Disciplinary Committee under the Education Act 1996, the decision for exclusion rests with the head teacher.
The positive influence of the Convention of the Rights of the child in recognising the importance of education, it places the duty with states to provide education and therefore its implication for professionals is to recognise and ensure that a child does not lose this important right.
Therefore an exclusion appeal panel must consider the child's right to education.
However there is evidence to suggest that structural disadvantage exists which can undermine the child's right to education. Evidence from Governments own SEU shows that ethnic minority children are 'seriously over represented' in relation to permanently excluded children, through my own practice experience as ESW working to find previously excluded pupils places back into main stream education, I found that due to a number of reasons including the shortage of school places and the demands of Government policy of performance inspections through OFSTED; it was very difficult to persuade schools to take on children that have been previously excluded. "The majority of those that are permanently excluded do not return to main stream education", (Guardian, 11-10-96).
I also found from my own experience that the relationship between service providers, such as teachers, Education Welfare Service (EWS), school mentors etc. and service users is not a balanced one, the balance of power is with the professionals. The EWS have statutory powers within law to take parents to court under the Education Act 1996, for failing to ensure the regular attendance of their child at school.
An amendment to the Education Act now allows parents to be imprisoned for failing to ensure their child's regular attendance at school. An example of this was the Amos case where the parent (a single mother) was imprisoned for 60 days when her teenage daughters repeatedly truanted from school (Guardian, 14-5-2002). This sentence was considered too harsh especially since the prison sentence deprived 5 children of their mother, and it can be argued whether the children's best interests were fully considered in this case.
Children that are refugees or their first language is not English could possibly be recognised that their right to education is being undermined. Under Art 2. Of the UNCRC the to right an effective education is acknowledged, it can be argued that in the case of refugee children or those whose first language is not English that they may not be receiving an adequate education and therefore educational achievement is hindered. The convention does not recognise that 'minority' languages can be valuable in education.
The importance of education in society has been recognised by many countries and societies that have signed up to the UNCRC, Jean-Jacques Rouseau cited in Wringe (1981) has defined it's importance as being essential to 'the emancipation of the child', whilst Wringe (1981) defined it 'as a commodity to which an individual is entitled to both as an end to itself but also as means to other welfare rights,' (Wringe, CA 1981). This essentially means that not only is it important in developing knowledge but it also enables a child to become a full member of society that can participate through 'employment', 'health care' and 'nutritional requirements' etc.
The convention on the rights of the child stresses the importance of hearing the child's 'voice' (Art.12) and this is one of the most important aspect relating to child protection, that a child which is capable of forming their views should be allowed to express these freely, this is particularly important in relation to decisions made in court about a child.
Pritchard and Owen state the importance of balancing rights of the parents, the child and the legal system, and that the role of professionals to protect the rights of children will be promoted if we actively listen to the voices of children and give them consideration when making decisions, this will enable us to act in the best interest of the child.
The human rights of children need to be protected, although the legislation such as the Convention on the Rights of the child and the Children Act 1989 etc are specific to the rights of children and have significantly improved the situation, however unless the legislation is implemented, resources are provided and the attitude to children by adults changes, children's rights will continue to be undermined.
Section A References
Micheal King(1997) A Better World For Children, Published by Routledge London
Adams R, Dominelli L and Payne M(2002)Critical Practice in Social work
Published By Palgrave, Basingstoke Hampshire
Franklin et al (1995) Handbook of Children's Rights Comparative Policy And Practice, published By Routledge London
Wringe CA (1981), Children's rights a philosophical study published by Allen and Unwin London
Guardian 11-10-96
Guardian 14-5-2002
