Beyond Belief….Safeguarding children

1. Beyond Belief….Safeguarding children Nasima Patel, NSPCC with input from Perdeep Gill npatel@nspcc.org.uk[perdeepgill@blueyonder.co.uk] npatel/nspcc with input from pgill

2. Beyond Belief….Safeguarding children From child welfare to children in need to child protection to looked after children and young adults npatel/nspcc with input from pgill

3. Purpose • To present the challenges from practice and systems perspective. • To touch on the guidance/steer. • To explore the impact of social care not having a mainstream expert enough response when dealing with families along religion culture and ethnicity. • Discursive and a developing view • To raise the disproportionaly debate. npatel/nspcc with input from pgill

4. The Gaps: Religion/culture is it protective neutral or collusive in child abuse- • There is a lack of substantive research over at least the last 10 years that examines different forms of abuse in the context of ethnicity/ culture/religion. • Powerful discourse in UK literature which focuses on social and economic inequalities, empowerment, advocacy, anti discrimination and cultural and ethnic sensitivity. So, predominate focus is on external barriers than an ecological examination of what if anything increases risk or acts as protective factors within BME families. npatel/nspcc with input from pgill

5. Religion/culture is it protective or collusive in child abuse- it is all about perception Case 1 – 14 yr old female-Muslim- not at home, drinking, hard drugs, sexual exploited. Background of serious dv, arson and temp accommodation, CS response: go home to yr mum and no further action after she failed to engage with a male muslim worker! Judgemental and punitive- quotes NSPCC response- she has experienced significant harm and it is her Muslim identity that is preventing a suitable response. Profs could not see pass her being a muslim girl who will fare badly in the LAC system, who will lose her Islam, family etc. Outcome- LAC and now a care leaver with intermittent contact with family but has retained her Islamic identity and culture as a positive independent feature of her life. npatel/nspcc with input from pgill

6. Risk and Causation • YP – transgressing family boundaries and values- was at risk. • Family wanted her to go to Pakistan and raised a marriage as an option against her wishes. • Involvement of the imam to talk about the causes of yp’s behaviour and how their parenting could make her safe. Islam used by all as a positive: • ‘Children are entrusted to parents- do not belong to parents. Parents’ should not break this trust.’ • Finding strengths in religious belief was unifying. • Timing of intervention was critical. npatel/nspcc with input from pgill

7. Quote – Ward and Patel 2006 Questions need to be asked as to whether fears of intrusion into cultures that are different from the dominant culture hinder effective intervention at an appropriate stage. There are many issues for consideration here. First, a dominant view, embodied in official policy, is that a child is better off within her own family. In communities where family support is considered strong, assumptions could be made that there is wider family support in place to deal with problems than actually exists. Secondly, intra-cultural issues can present difficulties, for example, the issue of izzat (honour) within the Bangladeshi community (Cottew and Oyefeso, 2005) keeps socially unacceptable behaviour, such as drug use or sexual activity, hidden within the bounds of the family. This means it can be very difficult to penetrate into the arenas where problems are located. It is extremely important that ways of constructive working are developed in order that c/yp get the service they need. npatel/nspcc with input from pgill

8. The Challenges for the cp system and faith communities • Volume of work- supply low and demand is high. • The static nature of assessments • The loss of reflective practice. • The procedural nature of social work. • State ignores, minimises or has a knee jerk reaction to child abuse that is seen to be linked to belief/culture • Faith communities need to explicitly position the protection of children within the context of spirituality. npatel/nspcc with input from pgill

9. Key practice questions • Does this family’s worldview (inc religion/belief) strengthen or harm this child? • Is it a neutral /irrelevant factor? • How can the family’s faith assist to protect this child if not before, then now and into the future? Can it offer solutions beyond the usual? • How does the child experience/understand the family’s faith? • How is the child’s view regarded by the family • How does my worldview impact on what I think or do in relation to this child and family? • How can I integrate this in my assessment that helps paint a fuller picture of the family? npatel/nspcc with input from pgill

10. The Children Act 1989 • Local Authorities will in any decision-making ‘give due consideration …to the child’s religious persuasion, racial origin, and cultural and linguistic background’ • The Assessment framework includes ethnicity as a factor to consider and there is detailed guidance on assessing black children in need and care but has been critiqued as seeing ethnicity as a peripheral issue and religion as a bolt on to ethnicity e.g. Victoria Climbie enquiry npatel/nspcc with input from pgill

11. Working Together 2010 • Children from all cultures are subject to abuse and harm… in order to make informed professional judgements about a child’s needs and parents capacity…..it is important that professionals are sensitive to differing family patterns and lifestyles and to child rearing patterns that vary across different racial, ethnic and cultural groups. At the same time they must be clear that child abuse cannot be condoned for religious or cultural reasons. npatel/nspcc with input from pgill

12. What does this look and feel like? • From a service planning perspective? • From a workforce perspective? • From a service user perspective? • From a professional practice perspective? • From a legal mandate to protect children? • From the child’s perspective? npatel/nspcc with input from pgill

13. Complicated but progressive • An overall good value base in social work/care around individuals, respect and dignity though may clash with collectivist notions of responsibility. • Some good policies and good decisions/casework that has proved beneficial for children and families. • The acceptance/mainstreaming of ‘new’ abuse patterns such as fgm, forced marriage, gang violence. • Good creative partnerships often with little resource involving faith groups. • Good police work – e.g. Met police had to address child abuse across communities, trafficking and are experts. • An emergence of a broader faith/multi-dimensional framework. • A refocus on competence and practice. npatel/nspcc with input from pgill

14. On the other hand…. • The pedantic application of policies which make no sense to the family, community or child. • Children being left in situations of harm as these families are seen as different, good or difficult. • Over reliance on behalf of local authorities on small groups, faith orgs. to deliver complex work perpetuating the divide between the two sectors and assuming small funding delivers huge outputs and outcomes for our children. It doesn’t. • A lack of equality in this partnership plus other factors has meant social work tools, frameworks remain rooted in regulations and procedures. • Cultural competence is still not mainstream that is skilled exploratory reflective practice is not the norm. npatel/nspcc with input from pgill

15. A minimisation of child abuse? • A shift for some (b) me children from being treated from a safeguarding perspective to a community model which sees the family as the only alternative for these children whilst statutory services remain unable to engage and change those families that need to be engaged with and changed. • A lack of expertise within statutory re. the safeguarding needs of children from specific communities. • An avoidance to tackle religious or cultural matters • A lack of shared understanding of what is acceptable parenting in all communities. • A tendency to treat the second or third generation as the first. • Not enough skill to assess if this family will protect the child. npatel/nspcc with input from pgill

16. Disproportionality: Owen and Statham 2009 study findings • Mixed ethnic children are over represented in child in need/child protection registration/LAC categories cf to the pop. • Asian children are under represented in above categories cf to pop. • Black children are over represented. Study took into account local demography as well as national and concluded that the study raises questions…. about social work perception, ….the families…but further study is required…. npatel/nspcc with input from pgill

17. Why could there be disproportionality? • Some communities have less child abuse- others have more? • Some communities are better at tackling child abuse and supporting the victims, dealing with the perpetrators? • That under reporting by victims, their families and professionals because of a fear of ‘betraying’ the community, a disbelief in child abuse combined with the possibility of a poor response combined with high thresholds combined with general secrecy of child abuse and a fear of making things worse makes interventions quite random and partial. npatel/nspcc with input from pgill

18. Areas for consideration • Parenting styles and establishing what support is needed by whom and how. • Perception/discourse on what is abuse. • The challenge in managing cases involving diverse belief systems. • Support/interventions that have faith as strengthening factors. • Building capacity and capability. • Main streaming cultural competence. npatel/nspcc with input from pgill

19. The future for belief and professional practice • It is here to stay and we need to integrate it into how we work and communicate. We need to engage in discussions about religion and spirituality with families. We need to listen what this means for individuals and how it motivates them • It can be part of the contents of child protection practice that has gone missing over the last generation- the depth. • It needs to relate to the child at the heart of the practice as a key individual with agency. • Those who believe and those who don’t need to find ways in their ideologies to accommodate the terrible harm that is done by adults to themselves, to each other and to their children and take a stance. • The system and its staff needs to be reflective, responsive, creative but offer a baseline of acceptable parenting. npatel/nspcc with input from pgill