Scotland Child Committee Purpose Social Work Essay

Scotland Child Committee Purpose Social Work EssayThe North easternmost of Scotland Child Protection Committee (NESCPC) has produced this Risk sound judgement Framework in response to an identified coming back for a Pan Grampian approach.This mannikin is for use by altogether agencies located at bottom Aberdeen City, Aberdeenshire and Moray with the aim of ensuring that thither is a consistency of understanding and approach to fortune sagacity across completely sectors.The framework is written with the additional understanding that all practitioners suck in a responsibility to ensure that they be familiar with and follow their own organisations electric s saver protection procedures. These should all link to the overarching NESCPC Guidelines and give advice on who to contact, how to take quick action and how concerns should be recorded.BackgroundSeveral models of Risk Assessment exist but be not used in a systematic way because they are not thought to be comprehensive enough to be used in all particulars (Scottish Government Effective Approach to Risk Assessment in Social Work an international literature review (2007).To enable greater consistency and union across Scotland, the Scottish Executive (2005) proposed a programme of change Getting it Right For Ein truth Child, incorporating the discipline work undertaken on an Integrated Assessment training and Recording Framework (IAF). This is based on requirements to gain a thorough understanding ofthe developmental inescapably of a infantthe dexterity of a refer/carer to respond appropriately to those needsthe advert of the wider family and wider environmental factors on erecting capacity and on the kidskins needsThis Framework emphasises the need to treat assessment as a process rather than an event. In evaluating the assessment and planning a response, practitioners are expected to hit the books the totality of the childs development and whatsoever unmet needs rather than snap too narrowly on a need for protection.This approach should make sure thatChildren get the help they need when they need itHelp is appropriate, proportionate and well timed(p)Agencies work together to ensure a co-ordinated and unified response to meeting the childs needsThe plan is used to put in place arrangements to manage venture and to co-ordinate help for the child or one-year-oldish somebodyThe plan is based on assessment and analysis of the childs world, including the risks, needs and resilience factors.What is Risk Assessment?Risk Assessment is a frequently used term with forbidden practitioners always being clear ab surface what is meant.Risk assessment is merely the description of obedient methodical practice to risky situations (Jones, 1998).Risk Assessment is a critical element of the integrated assessment process pulling together, as it does the identified strengths within a family as well as those areas of concern or risk that need to be addressed. It is a complex, con tinuous and dynamic process, which involves the gathering and weighting of applicable learning to help make decisions about the family strengths, needs and associated risks and plan for necessary interpositions. Good systematic assessment confirms what whitethorn have happened, how this may affect the ready and forthcoming safety of the child or juvenility person, places this in context and informs what needs to be done. Risk assessments rotter also be used to name the escalation of the presenting demeanor as well as the single(a)s motivation for change. Assessing risk is not an exact science prediction involves probability and thus some errors are inevitable. prefatory Principles when assessing risk.The welfare of the child is paramount.Risk assessment should be based on sound evidence and analysisRisk assessment tools should inform rather than set back professional judgementAll professionals involved in risk assessment should have a common language of risk and common u nderstanding of teaching sharing to inform assessmentRisk assessment is influenced by professionals own personal and professional values, experiences, skills and knowledgeThe judgement and experience of practitioners needs to be liquid in assessmentNo tool, procedure or framework can adequately account for and predict human behaviourEffective communication and selective information sharing is crucial to protecting childrenChildren, puppyish people and family views should be sought, listened to and recorded with clear evidence of their involvement in decision qualification where possible.A satisfactory risk assessment process should elicit and highlight both commonalities and differences in professional and family perspectivesGood risk assessment requires the best possible working birth between worker and family membersAll staff must always be alert and aware to situations where children may be at risk and address each potential concerns with their own agencys child protect ion policy / NESCPC child protection guidance.Risk Assessment FrameworkThis framework is adapted from the work undertaken by Jane Aldgate and Wendy Ross (A Systematic Practice Model for Assessing and Managing Risk, 2007) and is structured in 9 different stagesUsing the SHANNARI well-being indicators ( right, Well, Active, Nurtured, Achieving, Respected, Responsible and Included).2. Getting the child and familys perspectives on risk.Drawing on evidence from research and development literature about the take of risk and its presumable cushion on either soulfulness child.4. Assessing the likely recurrence of deadening.5. face at immediate and long-term risks in the context of My origination triangle.Using the Resilience Matrix to analyse the risks, strengths, overprotective factors and vulnerabilities.7. Weighing the balance of that evidence and making decisions.8. Constructing a plan and taking appropriate action.9. charge of Risk1. Using the SHANARRI well-being indicatorsThe Scottish Executive (2004) agreed a vision for Scotlands Children. They should beSafeHealthyActiveNurturedAchievingRespectedResponsibleIncludedUsing these SHANARRI indicators, professionals consider the childs holistic needs. In any assessment professionals should ask themselves the following key questionsWhat is getting in the way of this child being safe, healthy, active, nurtured, achieving, wondered, responsible and included?Why do I think that this child is not safe?What have I observed, heard, or identified from the childs history that causes concern?Are there factors that indicate risk of significant distress present and is the severity of factors enough to warrant immediate action?What can I do?What can my agency do?Do I need to share / gather information to construct a plan to protect this child?What additional help may I find from other agencies?2. Getting the child and familys perspectives on the risk.The involvement and partnership with children, young people and thei r families is integral and essential to successful risk assessment and focus. Information is incomplete and a good understanding of the risks of trauma and needs of the children cannot be reached without families perspectives on the risks to their childrens difficulties. An open and trans put up approach that actively involves all involved, including the children and families is of clear benefit in thatChildren, young people and families can understand why sharing information with professionals is necessaryChildren and families can help practitioners distinguish what information is significantEveryone who needs to can take part in making decisions about how to help a childEveryone contributes to finding out whether a plan has made a positive difference to a child or familyProfessionals behave ethically towards families point in cases where compulsory action is necessary, research has shown better outcomes for children by working collaboratively with parents.3. Drawing on evidence from research and developmental literature about the level of risk and its likely impact on any individual child.Risks need to be seen in the wider context of short and long term risks to childrens wellbeing and development. force factors can be identified in relation to abuse or neglect but these should not be used as predictors for current and future abuse without being considered in the context of the childs own nature and environment.In all cases of child abuse, parenting capacity should also be considered and this involves taking account of historic information as well as assessing the here and now. Protective factors need to be weighed up against risk factors and vulnerability to determine the level of risk to the individual child or young person and the likelihood of future damage. The factors should be used as a knowledge base to underpin to a greater extent than critical assessments of strengths and pressures based on the My World triangle. (See Section 5).Factors to be considered(This list is not complete but is a general guide). Adapted from City of Edinburgh Risk taking Policy and Guidance (2004).Consideration of significant harm (link to Safety Threshold considerations, Section 3 NESCPC guidelines for further explanation)Current injury/harm is severe the more severe an injury, the greater the impairment for the child/young person and the greater the likelihood of reoccurrencePattern of harm is escalating if harm has been increasing in severity and frequency over time, it is more likely that without effective interference the child/young person ordain be significantly harmPattern of harm is go on the more often harm has occurred in the past the more likely it is to occur in the futureThe parent or care-giver has made a curse to cause serious harm to the child/young person much(prenominal) menaces may cause significant emotional harm and may reflect paternal inability to cope with stress, the greater the stress for a person with caring r esponsibilities, the greater the likelihood of future personal and emotional harm to the child/young personSexual abuse is alleged and the perpetrator continues to have access to the child/young person if the alleged perpetrator has unlimited access to the child/young person, there is an increased likelihood of further harmChronic neglect is identified serious harm may occur through neglect, such as inadequate supervision, failure to attend to medical needs and failure to nurturePrevious history of abuse or neglect if a person with agnatic responsibility has previously harmed a child or young person, there is a greater likelihood of re-occurrenceThe use of past history in assessing current functioning is critical.Factors relating to the child or young personPhysical harm to a child under 12 months very young children are more vulnerable due to their age and dependency.Any strong-arm harm to a child under 12 months should be considered serious and the risk assessment should not foc us solely on the action and any resultant harm, but rather that the parent has used physical action against a very young child. This could be as a result of parenting skill deficits or high stress levels.Child is unprotected the risk assessment must consider parental willingness and ability to protect the young child.Children aged 0-5 years are unable to protect themselves, as are children with certain learning disabilities and physical impairments. Children, who are premature, have low birth weight, learning disability, physical or sensory disability and dis scarper behavioural problems are more liable to abuse and neglect.The child/young person presents as fearful of the parent or care-giver or other member of the household a child/young person presenting as fearful, withdrawn or distressed can indicate harm or likely harm.The child/young person is engaging in self-harm, capacity misuse, tremendous sexual behaviour or other at risk behaviours such behaviour can be indicators of past or current abuse or harm.Factors relating to the parent or care-giverThe parent or care-giver has caused significant harm to any child/young person in the past through physical or sexual abuse once a person has been a perpetrator of an incident of maltreatment there is an increased likelihood that this behaviour will re-occur.The parent or care-givers explanation of the current harm/injury is inconsistent or the harm is minimised this may indicate denial or minimisation. Where a parent or care-giver fails to accept their contribution to the problem, there is a higher likelihood of future significant harm.The parent or care-givers behaviour is violent or out of reign over people who resort to violence in any context are more likely to use violent means with a child or young person.The parent or care-giver is unable or unwilling to protect the child/young person ability to protect the child/young person may be significantly impaired due to mental illness, physical or learning di sability, domestic violence, attachment to, or dependence on (psychological or financial) the perpetrator.The parent or care-giver is experiencing a high degree of stress the greater the stress for a parent or care-giver, the greater the likelihood of future harm to the child or young person. Stress factors include poverty and other financial issues, physical or emotional isolation, health issues, disability, the behaviour of the child/young person, death of a child or other family member, divorce/separation, and large numbers of children.The parent or care-giver has unrealistic expectations of the child/young person and acts in a negative way towards the child/young person this can be linked to a lack of knowledge of child development and abject parenting skills. Parents or care-givers who do not understand normal developmental milestones may make demands which do not match the child/young persons cognitive, developmental or physical ability.The parent or care-giver has poor care -giving relationship with the child/young person a care-giver who is insensitive to the child or young person may demonstrate little interest in the child/young persons wellbeing and may not meet their emotional needs.Indicators of poor care-giving include repeated requests for fireman placement for the child/young person.The parent or care-giver has a substance misuse problem. Parental substance misuse can lead to poor supervision, chronic neglect and inability to meet basic needs through lack of money, harmful responses to the child/young person through altered consciousness, risk of harm from others through inability to protect the child/young person.The parent or care-giver refuses access to the child/young person in these circumstances it is possible that the parent or care-giver wishes to avoid further appraisal of the well-being of the child. high uply mobile families decrease the opportunity for effective intervention, which may increase the likelihood of further harm to the child/young person.The parent or care-giver is young a parent or care-giver under 21 years may be more likely to harm the child through im adulthood, lack of parenting knowledge, poor judgement and inability to tolerate stress.The parents or care-givers themselves experienced childhood neglect or abuse nonetheless caution has to be exercised here parenting skills are frequently learned/modelled but later positive experiences can counteract an individuals own childhood experiences.Factors relating to the EnvironmentThe physical and social environment is chaotic, hazardous and unsafe a chaotic, unhygienic and non-safe environment can pose a risk to the child/young person through exposure to bacteria/disease or through exposure to hazards such as drug paraphernalia, unsecured chemicals, medication or alcohol.Conversely, an environment with overly hygienise conditions, where the childs needs are not recognised or prioritised is also harmful.4. Assessing the likely recurrence of ha rm.When assessing how safe a child is consideration must be given over to likelihood of recurrence of any previous harm.Factors for considerationThe severity of the harm (How serious was it? How long did it continue? How often?)In what form was the abuse / harm?Did the abuse have any accompanying neglect or psychological maltreatment?Sadistic acts?Was there any denial? This could include absence of acknowledgement, lack of co-operation, inability to form a partnership and absence of outreach.Are there issues with parental mental health? This could include personality disorder, learning disabilities associated with mental illness, psychosis, and substance/alcohol misuse.These also link to consideration of additional family stress factors, the degree of social support available to the family, the age of the children and number of children and the parents own history of abuse. new(prenominal) agencies may be able to add additional knowledge and expertise to inform an effective risk a ssessment.Looking at immediate and long-term risks in the context of the My World triangle.The Assessment TriangleBeing healthy Everyday care and helpLearning and achieving Keeping me safeBeing able to notify Being there for meConfidence in who I am Play, encouragement and funLearning to be responsible Guidance, supporting me to make the right choices suitable independent,looking by and by myself Knowing what is going to happen and whenEnjoying family andFriends Understanding my familys background and beliefsSupport from School Work opportunitiesfamily, friends and for my familyother people Enough money local resources BelongingComfortable andsafe housingAn important principle underpinning the evidence-based planning in Getting it Right for Every Child is that there are many an(prenominal) positive and negative influences in the worldeach child experiences. Each child is unique and will react differently to these influences but all children will react to what is going on in diffe rent parts of the familyand the wider world in which they are growing up. This is why recent thinking in child development urges that we take a look at all the different influences in a childswhole world when assessing childrens development. This is called a childs ecologyand is encapsulated in the My World triangle.Each domain of the My World triangle provides a source of evidence that enable a full developmental holistic assessment of any individual child. The domains can be used to identify strengths and pressures, which balance risk and protective factors.6. Using the Resilience Matrix to analyse the risks, strengths, protective factors and vulnerabilities.The Resilience Vulnerablity MatrixAs defined by Daniel and Wassell, (2002).RESILIENCENormal development under difficult conditions eg.secure attachment, outgoing temperament, sociability, problem solving skills.High Support / LowConcern preventive ENVIRONMENTFactors in the childs environment acting as buffer to the negative e ffects of adverse experience.ADVERSITYLife events / circumstances posing a threat to healthy development eg. loss, abuse, neglect.Low Support / HighConcernVULNERABILITYThose characteristics of the child, their family circle and wider community which might threaten or challenge healthy development eg. disability, racism, lack of or poor attachment.Low Support / High ConcernFamilies assessed to be in this category are the most worrying.Low Concern / High Support.Families in this group have a network of support and are generally more able to cope with advice and guidance from standard services.Resilience includes the protective factors that are features of the child or their world that might counteract identified risks or a predisposition to risk such asEmotional maturity and social awareness.Evidenced personal safety skills (including knowledge of sources of help).Strong self esteem.Evidence of strong attachment.Evidence of protective adults.Evidence of support networks (supportive pe ers / relationships).Demonstrable capacity for change by caregivers and the sustained acceptance of the need to change to protect their child.Evidence of openness and willingness to co-operate and accept professional intervention.Protective factors do not in themselves negate high risks, so these need to be cross-referred with individually identified high risks and vulnerabilities.Vulnerabilities are any known characteristic or factors in respect of the child that might predispose them to risk of harm. Examples of these includeAge.Prematurity.Learning difficulties or additional support needs.Physical disability.Communication difficulties / impairment.Isolation.Frequent episodes in public or substitute care.Frequent episodes of sackingning away.Conduct disorder.Mental health problems.Substance dependence / misuse.Self-harm and suicide attempts.Other high risk behaviours.The more vulnerabilities present (or the more serious one single vulnerability is) then the greater the predisposi tion to risk of harm. The presence of vulnerability in itself is neither conclusive nor predictive. These must be set alongside identified risk factors to be properly understood as part of an assessment process.7.Weighing the balance of that evidence and making decisions.Decisions now need to be made about what to do to address the needs relating to the childs safety. These decisions lead to a plan to protect the child. This plan should also address the childs broader developmental needs.Stages of decision-making information gatheringWeigh relative significanceAssessment of current situationCircumstances which may alter childs welfareProspects for changeCriteria for gauging effectivenessTimescale proposedChilds plan (child in need plan, child protection plan or care plan, depending on the status of the child).What Factors Reduce the Effectiveness of Risk Assessment?Poor integrated working practices between agencies and individuals.Lack of holistic assessment.Inadequate knowledge of signs, symptoms and child protection processes.Information that has not been shared.Difficulty in interpreting, or understanding, the information that is available.Difficulty in identifying what is significant.Difficulty in distinguishing fact from opinion.Difficulty in establishing linkage across available evidence.Working from assumptions rather than evidence.Over confidence in the certainty of an assessment.A loss of objectivity.Making Effective Risk AssessmentsAssess all areas of potential riskDefine the concern, abuse or neglectGrade the risksIdentify factors that may increase risk of harmConsider the nature of the risk its duration / severitySet out and agree time scales for the assessment to be carried outSpecifically document the identified risk factorsGather key information and evidenceHas all the required information been gathered?Assess the strengths in the situationCheck if any risk reducing factors exist?Build a detailed family history and chronology of key events/conc ernsAssess the motivation, capacity and prospects for change?What risk is associated with intervention?Be aware of potential sources of errorIdentify the need for specialist supportsPlan your key interventions.Constructing a plan and taking appropriate action.Constructing the childs plan is a fundamental part of the Getting it Right for Every Child (Scottish Executive, 2005) initiative. This specifies that there will be a plan for a child in any case where it is thought to be helpful. This can be in both a single agency and a multi-agency context. The assessment of risk and the management of risk is incorporated into the childs plan. This also includes an analysis of the child or young persons circumstances based on the My World triangle and should coverHow the child or young person is growing and developing (including their health, education, physical and mental development, behaviour and social skills).What the child or young person needs from the people who look after him / her, including the strengths and risks involvedThe strengths and pressures of the child or young persons wider world of family friends and community andAssessment of risk, detailingThe kind of risk involvedWhat is likely to trigger harmful behaviour andIn what circumstances the behaviour is most likely to happen.The plan should note risk low, medium or high as well as the impact of the child or young person on others. (Guidance on the Child or Young Persons Plan, Scottish Executive. 2007, page 13).The plan should address key questionsWhat is to be done?Who is to do it?How will we know if there are improvements?The Childs Plan should be monitored and reviewed and amended as need, circumstances and risks change. (Scottish Executive, 2007).Child Protection Case Conferences play a key role in the management of risk. A Child Protection Case Conference will be arranged, where it appears that there may be risk of significant harm to children within a household and there is a need to share and assess information to decide whether the childs name needs to be placed on the Child Protection Register and be subject to a Child Protection Plan. (Link to Part 4 NESCPC guidelines)9. Principles for Risk ManagementThere is a need to ensure that the ongoing shared planManages the riskPuts the decisions into a recorded form that clearly shows how and why decisions were reached.Makes the risk management an ongoing process that links with all areas of agreed and informed professional practice and expertise.Ensures that the decisions made have actions with named persons, clear timescales and review dates.Ensures that any agreed timescales can be reduced if new risks / needs become apparent.Ensures that new risk assessments and analysis inform reviews.Lessons from Significant Case Reviews.Significant Case Reviews repeatedly bring out warning signs that agencies have failed to react to which have should acted as indicators that children and young people at risk of serious harm. Example s includeChildren and young people who may be hidden from view are unavailable when professionals visit the family or are prevented from attending school or nursery.Parents who do not co-operate with services fail to take their children to routine health appointments and discourage professionals from visiting.Parents who are consistently hostile and aggressive to professionals and may threaten violence.Children and young people, who are in emotional or physical distress, but may be unable to verbalise this. Children and young people who are in physical pain (from an injury) may be told to sit or stand in a certain way when professionals visit the family or may hide injuries from view.Children and young people who have gone missing / run away (with or without their families).Workers should adopt an enquiring and investigative approach to risk assessment and not rely on parents or carers statements alone. Further corroboration of statements and challenging of parental views and percep tions is essential if to effectively determine the risk to the child or young person.Interventions should not be delayed until the completion of an assessment, but they have to be carried out in accordance with what is required to ensure the child or young persons safety, taking account of any indications of accelerated risks and warning signs. The type and level of intervention, disregarding of when it is made, must always be proportionate to the circumstances and risks faced by the child.Workers should pay particular concern to the rule of optimism. Many significant case reviews have illustrated that practitioners views can be strongly influenced by factors such as seeing indicators of progress or apparent compliance and co-operation. This does not, however, always mean that the child or young person is safe and such factors need to be balanced against the overall balance of evidence and actual risks.It is essential that those exercising professional judgement in relation to chil d protection take account of all multi-agency skills and expertise. This is of particular importance in relation to understanding of child development and the impact of child abuse and/or neglect on children and young people, both in the immediate and long term. Thus whilst immediate safety provisions have to be put in place, consideration must also be given to the longer term outcomes as a result of abuse or neglect.Significant case reviews highlight the importance of communication between all agencies that work either directly, or indirectly with children and/or their families.Thus it is imperative that gravid services MUST ALWAYS consider any potential risks for any child linked to their adult clients.Childrens services MUST ALWAYS ascertain whether any adult services may be involved with their child clients.All services MUST ALWAYS ensure there is effective communication where there are concerns about the protection of a child.Concerns relating to actual or potential harm should never be ignored and are an indication that immediate intervention might be needed to ensure the protection of the child from future harm. Decisions to protect children and young people should never be delayed and where applicable, emergency measures should be considered. (see Part 3 of NESCPC Guidelines).