by Maria Ahmed
The recent discovery of a child's remains in a former children's home in Jersey has reignited concerns that - at least historically - all is not well on the child protection front. But how far the Jersey police will get in their inquiry will be interesting to follow.
After my own investigation into the sacking of Simon Bellwood, a UK social worker who criticised a system of locking children as young as 11 in solitary confinement, I came across a wall of silence.
Apart from Bellwood and former health and social services minister Stuart Syvret nobody was prepared to go on the record about children allegedly being put at risk on the island. I had plenty of anonymous calls basically corroborating Bellwood's and Syvret's claims. In response, not one Jersey social worker who worked in any of the establishments under fire from Bellwood and Syvret came forward to set the record straight. "That's just Jersey culture," one insider explained to me. Two Jersey social workers I met in London by chance grumbled about Jersey getting a bad image from my stories, but both declined my offer to put their views in public. While the island's chief executive Bill Ogley gave us a statement, it did not really probe into why questionable practice had occurred in the first place.
Now as the police investigation into historical abuse on the island escalates - potentially threatening to open up a grotesque can of worms - it is surely time for some transparent, honest talking from the Jersey establishment. On the Today programme this morning, Jersey's chief minister Frank Walker said that while "no stone would be left unturned" in the investigation, he was confident there was no current malpractice. He said he would await the publication of UK expert Andrew Williamson's imminent report on child protection on the island. But is that response really enough, given the shocking nature of the police discovery?
Williamson's review began before the police investigation went public. It's remit is vague - "to address issues relating to child protection in Jersey" but no particular establishments are named, and the time-frame is unclear.
If Walker thinks this review's publication will vindicate all historic abuse on the island, he should think again. Surely Williamson should join forces with the Jersey police on this one, to look at - for a start - just how a child could go missing and their remains could go unnoticed for so many years.
The recent police find sheds a whole new unwelcome light on the history of child protection on the island, and the Bellwood case shows concerns are still current.
The Jersey establishment must have the courage to start answering the chilling questions that are emerging from their own police investigation. They must not use the Williamson review as a PR front to show that all is well.
Comments (1)
Maria Ahmed's comments are timely and should cause the whole matter of individual and professional accountability to be re-visited.
During the time that Frank Beck, for instance, was active in his abuse of children in Leicestershire there were many who had doubts about what he was doing - referred to almost clinically as 'regression therapy' - how did he get away with so much? - because no-one had the courage to go public. Equally it called into serious question the quantity, quality and rigour of his Supervision by senior managers.
What scares me is that despite much increased standards of Regulation & Inspection it still seems that it is no easier for individuals to speak out. The increasing reports of bullying by managers within social work ought to cause a national Inquiry into what is happening. If staff are too fearful to raise concerns because of either perceived or actual career repercussions then all is far from well. I had my own agency senior management position terminated recently after just 2 weeks as it was clear that I was raising issues that were uncomfortable - hardly an endorsement of open and honest more senior management.
The Codes of Conduct seem too one-sided in favour of employers and the concerns of staff are not seen as helpful leading to them becoming labelled as 'burnt out' or 'trouble-makers.' By contrast senior managers seem to be able to do little wrong!
All is not well within social work and I have to say that I regard it as largely a senior management weakness. What happened to those once passionate and committed frontline / grassroots social workers who went on to become senior managers? Budgets seem to over-ride needs, tiers of management with often their own unique 'language' have become distant from the workforce and mistrust has grown.
As public servants local authority social workers are primarily accountable to the public and not to their employers. Many have little idea of the origins of social work and its charitable foundations and leave Universities with their degrees but little experience and even less knowledge. How can social workers truly and meaningfully recognise the impact, for instance, of parental mental illness when they have had no training in it themselves? Gone are the days of generic training without which, I know for certain, I would have been much the poorer a practitioner and manager.
The social work profession is in crisis and needs dismantling and restructuring to make it far more responsive to the needs of those we are paid to serve rather than to our employers. Performance Indicators are useless unless they are met with QUALITY assessments, interventions and outcomes.
Posted by Philip Measures | February 25, 2008 10:54 PM
Posted on February 25, 2008 22:54