| 1. |
Not enough weight is given to information from family, friends and neighbours. |
- Would I react differently if these reports had come from a different source?
- How can I check whether or not they have substance?
- Even if they are not accurate, could they be a sign that the family are in need of some help or support?
|
| 2. |
Not enough attention is paid to what children say, how they look and how they behave. |
- Have I been given appropriate access to all the children in the family?
- If I have not been able to see any child, is there a very good reason, and have I made arrangements to see him/her as soon as possible, or made sure that another relevant professional see him/her?
- How should I follow up any uneasiness about the child/ren's health or well-being?
- If the child is old enough and has the communication skills, what is the child's account of events?
- If the child uses a language other than English, or alternative non verbal communication, have I made every effort to enlist help in understand him/her?
- What is the evidence to support or refute the young person's account?
|
| 3. |
Attention is focused on the most visible or pressing problems and other warning signs are not appreciated. |
- What is the most striking thing about this situation?
- If this feature were to be removed or changed would I still have concerns?
|
| 4. |
Pressures from high status referrers or the press, with fears that a child may die, lead to over-precipitate action. |
Would I see this referral as a child protection matter if it came from another source? |
| 5. |
Professionals think that when they have explained something as clearly as they can, the other person will have understood it. |
- Have I double-checked with the family and the child/ren that they understand what will happen next?
|
| 6. |
Assumptions and pre-judgements about families lead to observations being ignored or misinterpreted. |
- What were my assumptions about this family?
- What, if any, is the hard evidence which supports them?
- What, if any, is the hard evidence which refutes them?
|
| 7. |
Parents' behaviour, whether co-operative or unco-operative, is often misinterpreted. |
- What were the reasons for the parents' behaviour?
- Are there other possibilities besides the most obvious?
- Could their behaviour have been a reaction to something I did or said rather than to do with the child?
|
| 8. |
When the initial enquiry shows that the child is not at risk of Significant Harm, families are seldom referred to other services which they need to prevent longer term problems. |
- Is this family's situation satisfactory for meeting the child/ren's needs?
- Whether or not there is a child protection concern, do the family need support or practical help?
- How can I make sure they know about services they are entitled to, and can access them if they wish?
|
| 9. |
When faced with an aggressive or frightening family, professionals are reluctant to discuss fears for their own safety and ask for help. |
- Did I feel safe in this household?
- If not, why not?
- If I or another professional should go back there to ensure the child/ren's safety, what support should I ask for?
- If necessary, put your concerns and requests in writing to your manager.
|
| 10. |
Information taken at the first enquiry is not adequately recorded, facts are not checked and reasons for decisions are not noted. |
- Am I sure the information I have noted is 100% accurate?
- If I didn't check my notes with the family during the interview, what steps should I take to verify them?
- Do my notes show clearly the difference between the information the family gave me, my own direct observations, and my interpretation or assessment of the situation?
- Do my notes record what action I have taken/will take?
- Do my notes record what action all other relevant people have taken/will take?
|
From: Cleaver H, Wattam C, Carson P, Gordon R. Children Living at Home: The Initial Child Protection Enquiry. The Pitfalls and How to Avoid Them in Assessing Risk in Child Protection. London NSPCC 1998.
