News

The main finding of a report in 2000 into abuse and disabled children was that social services were less likely to intervene following disclosure of the abuse of a disabled child than they were in relation to the abuse of a non-disabled child.(1) But it was also noted that in a significant minority of cases adolescents with learning difficulties - who had themselves been abused - were going on to sexually abuse other children.

Our study set out to find out more about this phenomenon. How often do these young people come to the attention of statutory authorities? What kinds of behaviour might trigger an intervention? And, in light of the fact that most adult sexual offenders started abusing when they were adolescents, what therapeutic services are being offered to prevent these patterns of behaviour from becoming ingrained?


We looked at the issue from two perspectives: that of staff in special schools, who work with children and young people with learning difficulties every day and are therefore well placed to spot sexually inappropriate behaviour; and that of professionals in the child protection and youth justice systems.(2)

Eighty-eight per cent of special schools reported incidents of sexually inappropriate or abusive behaviour between pupils; in nearly half of schools these incidents occurred at least once a month.

Most incidents were minor, involving "inappropriate touch", public masturbation, "flashing" or the use of sexualised language. But more serious acts of sexual abuse also occurred: four schools detailed incidents of actual or attempted anal or vaginal penetration.

Despite this, only a minority of special schools had specific policies in place that outlined how staff should respond to sexualised behaviour between pupils. Staff agreed that four factors determined the seriousness of any given act of sexually inappropriate or abusive behaviour:

The act itself.
Any imbalance of power between the pupils involved.
Attempts at secrecy.
Repetition of the act.

Difficulties often arose when schools tried to get social services to respond to abusive factors, particularly if contact was made via the duty team. Cases that reached social services mostly involved serious sexual offending - often rape. In three cases the victims included other disabled children. The cases typically came to the attention of social services via the police, rather than schools or other children's services. Backgrounds of abuse or domestic violence were either known or strongly suspected with most of these young people: "strongly suspected" typically included situations where no disclosure had been made, but a schedule one offender lived in the family home.

In about half of the 15 cases, schools or social services or both were aware of less serious incidents, which had not attracted an intervention, prior to a sexual crime being alleged.

Only a minority of these young people attended special schools; the remainder were in mainstream education. Five had statements of special educational need (SEN) and five did not.

Staff in child protection and youth offending teams found it difficult to identify the presence of a learning difficulty, not least because of inconsistent use of SEN. Despite clues from the young person's behaviour and their level of understanding, they were reluctant to ascribe a label that had not been authorised by other professionals.

Only a minority of these young people were able to gain access to therapeutic support services. Some services for juvenile abusers simply would not work with young people with learning difficulties, others had long waiting lists or rejected individuals after initial assessments showed that they were "not engaging with the therapeutic process".

Several other important issues emerged that have implications for best practice. These are the need for better inter-professional communication, more timely and effective interventions, and the consequences of labelling theories.

Calls for better communication and closer working between different groups of professionals are commonplace: they formed the basis of the Every Child Matters green paper. Research has also identified the need for more therapeutic services to work with young people who have some degree of learning difficulty and have also been identified as sexual abusers. What was perhaps more surprising was the impact which theories of labelling were having upon practice in this field.

Labelling theory suggests that the act of ascribing a negative label to an individual (such as learning disabled or sexual abuser) places them at a social disadvantage and encourages further displays of the same negative traits or behaviour. Labels should therefore be avoided and every person treated as an individual.

Schools and social services appeared reluctant to label young people with learning difficulties as sexual abusers. This is a laudable intention, but in some cases had resulted in a failure to respond effectively to the young person's need. For example, one young man was in mainstream school and had no SEN; he was only labelled as having a learning difficulty after appearing in court on sex offending charges. His defence barrister had requested psychological tests that revealed a "moderate to severe learning disability".


Likewise, the reluctance to label sexually inappropriate behaviour as potentially abusive had in many cases allowed the behaviour to continue and escalate to the point where it became sexual offending. The desire not to label had led to a lack of official awareness of the problem and a consequent lack of intervention.

Schools and social services are to be commended for not wishing to label young people, but they must learn instead to label and record their behaviour more effectively. We believe that every young person, regardless of having a learning difficulty or committing a sexually inappropriate act or abusive behaviour, should be treated as a unique individual. But we also believe that it is only by recognising and responding to acts of juvenile sexual abuse that services can hope to ameliorate its effects.

Refusing to label this problem will not make it go away, but may, sadly, make it less likely that effective interventions will be initiated, as therapeutic services will only be set up if demand is demonstrated. We hope that this study may encourage better recording of incidents and thereby contribute to the development of better therapeutic interventions, particularly in respect of early interventions that can prevent inappropriate juvenile behaviours from developing into lifelong careers of sexual offending.

RACHEL FRYSON is a research fellow specialising in issues relating to people with learning difficulties. She works at the Ann Craft Trust, University of Nottingham and the Norah Fry Research Centre, University of Bristol.

Training and learning
The author has provided questions about this article to guide discussion in teams. These can be viewed at www.communitycare.co.uk/prtl and individuals' learning from the discussion can be registered on a free, password-protected training log held on the site. This is a service from Community Care for all GSCC-registered professionals.

Abstract
This article reports on research from the Ann Craft Trust into sexually inappropriate or abusive behaviour displayed by some young people with learning difficulties. It highlights the need for early intervention and the need for education and social services to identify the problem without labelling the child.

About the research
Research took place across four English councils, it involved:

• A postal survey of all special schools (65 per cent response rate).
• Follow-up interviews with teachers in 10 special schools.
• Interviews in respect of every case over a 12-month period where social services and/or Yots were working with a young person (aged 10-18) with a learning difficulty following an incident of sexually inappropriate, abusive or offending behaviour (15 cases).

References
(1) Pam Cooke, Disabled Children and Abuse, Ann Craft Trust, 2000
(2) Rachel Fyson, Young People with Learning Disabilities who show Sexually Inappropriate or Abusive Behaviours, Ann Craft Trust, 2005

Further information

• More on the work of the Ann Craft Trust at: www.anncrafttrust.org
• For advice about therapeutic services in this area, contact Respond at: www.respond.org.uk

Contact the author
Rachel.Fyson@nottingham.ac.uk