News

Debate: the Victoria Climbie report - what next?

Posted: 30 January 2003 | Subscribe Online


The tragic death of Victoria Climbie will be a defining moment in the history of children's services. The Laming inquiry is now complete, but it is important to locate it in the wider context of the social changes that have taken place since social work evolved in the 1950 and 1960s. We live in a more complex, complicated, diverse, faster-paced and demanding world.

In the Association of Directors of Social Services' evidence to the Laming inquiry we emphasised some of the elements that should be in the blueprint for future services. These included:
Article continues below the advertisement



- The role of area child protection committees to be strengthened and placed on a statutory footing, and provided with sufficient resources.

- All agencies working within the ACPC should have a clear, service-level agreement stating the contributions they will make to protect children.

- All agencies involved in protecting children must develop performance targets and outcome measures which reflect the priority being given to protecting children.

- Workers should be co-located in multi-disciplinary teams.

- There should be clear information-sharing protocols between the agencies, supported by solid investment in IT systems.

- Listening to children must be at the heart of any assessment even where the needs of adults are presented over and above those of the children. The protection of children is a multi-agency responsibility.

- Strong universal and preventive services are required.

- Front-line workers across all agencies should be valued, and the image of the work they do needs to improve.

But what about structural change? There are some 50 areas interested in becoming a children's trust. Many areas are integrating services. A number have developed multi-disciplinary child protection assessment services. Will it bring about the desired outcome? In child protection the most frequently debated aspect of structural change is whether or not to create a separate child protection agency.

There must be a danger that the creation of any separate agency will change the boundaries across which people need to communicate. We believe that we need to "reconnect" universal and selective services, not separate them.
Article continues below the advertisement



Many children and their families are vulnerable at different stages of their lives. Families may move along the continuum between needing support and needing protection at various stages in their development. The agency responsibility should not change when their needs change. Child protection is essentially a local activity. It is about the assessment, decisions and the actions of local workers. The availability and quality of the front line response is likely to be of greater importance than the structural arrangement for delivery.

If we are to improve outcomes for children we need to change the relationship between those who provide services face to face with those who receive them. Such a change is about two things: our organisational infrastructures and staff training and development.

Changes in structures which are a natural consequence of developing a more outcome-focused, user-participative culture are something to be embraced. But our objectives should be about providing outcomes for children through developing the culture of our organisations and ACPCs. The focus must be on delivering.

This is not an argument for maintaining the status quo. Far from it - it is an argument for a rational, calm and measured debate on how to improve outcomes for children which will lead to similarly balanced proposals for developing and improving services.


David Behan is president of the Association of Directors of Social Services


Spread the word:   bookmark it! diggit! reddit!



Products and Services
  • RSS Feeds
  • Conferences
  • Jobs By Email
  • News
  • Blogss
  • Videos
  • Magazine Subscriptions
  • Podcasts