This assignment will be analysing and looking at WTSC (2015) and how it has an impact on children; it will be focusing on chapter 1, which is ‘providing the help, and assessing needs’. Working Together to Safeguard Children (2015) gives a description of ‘seriously harmed’ following concerns that some ‘Local Safeguarding Children Board’ (LSCBs) were failing to make appropriate decisions’ on what included serious harm. Working together to safeguard children (2015) is an important statutory guidance for those who are working with children in England. The guidance sets out how individuals and established organisations should work together and how professional practitioners should carry out the evaluation and assessment of children, ‘Local agencies should have in place effective ways to identify emerging problems and potential unmet needs for individual children and families (HM Government, 2015, pg 12). The key principle it is based on is that the guidance states how to assign allegations of abuse against those people who work with children. It also clarifies what is required from the local authorities and how to notify of any serious incidents; and the definition of serious harm for the purposes of serious case reviews.
The statutory guidance document has developed and changed over a period of time due to the changes in policies. The purpose for these changes in the improvement and development of children’s services are that children are able to have improved outcomes; however they introduced different intervention methods. The cause for introducing different methods of interventions is the ‘Serious Case Reviews’ for when different aspects have gone wrong the intervention method is presented forward and the reports have been made. In January 2003, Lord Laming set up an open public inquiry report after the catastrophic death of a young child called Victoria Climbie, to discover if the child protection policies were effective. It had made various recommendations which were linked to child protection. His key findings showed that numerous organisations failed to protect the young girl and were held accountable which included the police, doctors, social workers and many others. There were quite a lot of occasions where she could have been saved, but because the organisations failed to cooperate with one another, they failed in doing so. He observed that there was a lack of communication between professionals because they failed to pass on information to one another; however, many professionals did not have sufficient training. The managements between the different services was unsatisfactory and as a result of having less funding this emerged to having less members of staff. The Laming report was highly accountable for the foundation of Every Child Matters (ECM). However, the recommendations which were made by Lord Laming were made to make sure that that the changes were to be made to the WTSC document, ‘The government desire for ‘continuous improvement’ increasingly became equated to the need of continuous change’ (Foley and Rixon, 2014: P.10.)The coalition government appears to be acquainted with the fact that the current legislations on child protection in England is lacking.
In the first few years of the Coalition it authorised four reports in the significance of the early interference in children’s lives. The WTSC (Working Together to Safeguard Children) has expanded and developed due to majority of reasons; one of the reasons being is the Munro Review. However, specific importance was given to the Munro Report (2011) which made complete recommendations which were fundamentally child-centric and saw a difference from ticking boxes and filling in forms. However, regardless of the preliminary response of the Coalition agreeing to implement all the recommendation in the Munro Report, limited amount has changed and the recommendations have yet to become law. The Munro Report (2011) is an individualistic review of the policies on child protection in England. Munro’s Review was merely based on a child centred system. One of the principles of the Munro Report states that ‘the family is typically the best place for a child or young person to be brought up in’ (Munro, 2011, pg 23) therefore agreeing with the Children Act that a child should not be removed from the household unless required to do so. A child centred approach gives children the opportunity to think and communicate freely, it also gives them the right to decide for themselves,’ ‘local authorities and statutory partners to secure the sufficient provision of local early help services for children, young people and families’ (Munro, 2011. P.78) by doing this you are ensuring that the child’s perspectives are taken into consideration. (Butler and Roberts, 2004). It is based on the interests and needs of the child, requiring professionals to facilitate the needs as best as they can.
Chapter 1 focuses on early help. It indicates that early help gives a definition of granting and providing support and help as soon as a problem arises in a child’s life from early years to the adolescent years. The document discusses how early help provided is useful when preserving the welfare of the children rather taking too long to look in to the issue which could be resolved before it escalates. Early intervention can help to minimise the chances of any future problems which may arise, because the whole idea of early intervention is about identifying any threats and dealing with them effectively.
There are various early intervention strategies for example; Common Assessment Framework (CAF), TFA (Troubled Families Agenda) and Sure Start. The Coalition government in 2011 indicated that whole concept of children’s centres was to ensure and improvise the outcomes of families and children, mainly on those who were deprived. The CAF which is known as The Common Assessment Framework was introduced after the Children Act 2004 which helps to identify young people and children who have additional needs. The four steps to this process are to assess the needs of the child, reviewing the process, identifying the needs and delivering integrated services.
Working Together to Safeguard Children (2015) indicates that successful early help is formed by local agencies who are working together to identify those individuals who may need support and early help. Professionals need to work together in order to carry out an assessment for early intervention and offer to help targeted services who will help offer and provide children to help meet their needs and achieve the best outcomes possible. This may on the other hands create miscommunication challenges. Communication is a vital aspect between professional’s because it is key. If there is a breakdown between professionals communicating then it could lead to SCR (Serious Case Reviews). SCR have shown the poor quality of communication and information sharing between professionals because it has led to severe injuries of young children and worse comes to worse; death. In order for early intervention to be effective, professionals need to share information between each other. A Continuum of Needs Assessment (CNA) model presents a structure of framework to help identify the needs of children, and when a professional such as a social worker may happen to become involved to see if there is any risk towards the child, or if there is not another substitute option of services.
Sharing information is very crucial and essential, WTSC (2015, pg. 16) states that ‘effective information sharing between professional and local agencies is important for effective identification, assessment and service provision’. Information which is being passed around can assure that early help is provided before it starts to arise.
The Children’s workforce is collaborated with various professionals who work together to improve the outcomes of young people, children and their families. The Common Core Skills and Knowledge (2010) which has now been successfully achieved states ‘Practitioners at different agencies should work together and share information appropriately for the safety and well-being of children.” (pg 22, s.6.1). Sharing information is very important when help is required. However, sharing of information in the children’s workforce necessitates service providers. This is where all the different systems and professionals work closely together in order to meet the outcomes and needs of children and young people. Though, there are some challenges to service providers, this could and may mean that different professionals may view things differently or their knowledge may differ from the rest. For example health, social and education services may have different views which may arise issues and conflict between each other, therefore leading to insufficient information which may not allow the needs of the child to be met. However this approach may present to have many problems in the multi-professional working section due to the differentiation in the systems. An issue that may arise could be that professionals of diverse backgrounds coming to a conclusion and agreeing to see whether or not a child or young person is eligible and meets the criteria for the service for early help. Allen (2011) announced, ‘Early intervention enables every baby, child and young person so acquire the social and emotional foundations upon which our success as human beings depend on (pg.3).
Eligibility criteria are the principles, which permit professionals to evaluate whether a young person or child is appropriate to access the services which are provided. Service threshold is a level put to make use of by professionals within services to evaluate if a child or young person really needs the service. The Government policy has lead to financial cuts which means there has been a alteration to more specialist and targeted services, this indicates that those who are eligible will have the right to use it however could be an use as most people may require the services but may not be able to use it. The WTSC (2015) statutory guidance document points professionals in the right direction stating what is needed for a professional practitioner to intervene as well as giving an overview of what is expected for a young person or child in relation to their stages of social development such as behavioural and welfare. Although there is guidance, there are still some hurdles, for services thresholds as well as eligibility criteria. The challenges could still yet be due to differences which are caused amongst the systems and the way they communicate.
The Working Together to Safeguard Children (2015) examines LSCB’s (Local Safeguarding Children Boards) it indicates that they should assess and observe how effectively the training is which also includes multi professional training and teaching for all professionals within the area. The third chapter of the document focuses on LSCBs. It indicates that LSCB in agreement with the local authority compose and issue a threshold document. This document should include the level of early intervention which is provided for young children and people and how a process of early assessment can help their welfare stay intact.
Every Local Safeguarding Children Board in different areas may and will have produced and published a threshold document; however each document will be different with regards to the language and jargon being used and the requirements as each area may have a different way of doing things. This may then lead to different challenges between the multi-agency professionals because again there may be a misinterpretation due to the jargon being used.
The LSCB associates back to service threshold and eligibility criteria, some organisations/services may only be accessed if they are eligible or if they meet the criteria. However, this could have a negative impact on families and the child itself because if the family and child are in need of the services, professionals may turn around and state that they do not, due to them not meeting the threshold or criteria. Financial cuts may also modify the eligibility and threshold criteria this may mean that less families may have access to the actual service. This may generate barriers.
The growing request to integrated working and multi-agency working has created complicated problems with a selection of potential barriers. Lack of deprived communication amongst professional agencies is noticed to be a massive barrier towards an effective multi-professionals’ working. However multi-professionals who come together from different backgrounds means they are able to seeing things differently from their own point of view. A professional who has an educational background will look at the way the child is progressing in his/her academic studies, whereas a professional worker who comes from a health background will analyse the children the mental and physical perspective. This topic can have an impact on their holistic judgement of the child. Working Together to Safeguard (2015) ensures that different agencies work together alongside the local authorities effectively and persistently to ensure that children are safeguarded and their rights are upheld. Multi-professional working believed to be an effective approach to supporting young people and children who may require additional support and the help to improvise on their outcomes and achievements so that they are able to have a successful chance on life. Sometimes multi-professionals can have their ups and downs with one another therefore, it is not always effective. Due to barriers such as poor communication between professionals, it has resulted in child death such as Baby P, Daniel Pelka and Victoria Climbie. Sometimes professionals working together can have an impact on the child which allows them to have a better future and in some cases it does not. WTSC (2015) demonstrates an outline of what is expected from them so that all professionals are able to work together to so that they are able to effectively provide the help needed.
Reflective Account
In my reflective account; in this part of my essay, I will be writing up a reflective account on what my understanding is based on the experience of multi-professional working. The models of reflection will help me to facilitate, look at the current situation and help me to use them as a learning guidance. A reflective model will help me go through the procedure in order to improve and reflect on the experience. I will however be using Gibbs’s Reflective Cycle model within this reflective account.
Throughout the module of Multi-Professional Working in Children’s Service, It has come to my knowledge that I have learnt a great amount about the way multi-professionals work together and the challenges they comes across and the effectiveness of the way they work alongside each other. However, it has made me analyse and dig deeper into the experience I have when working with others with the setting I attend for placement. I have also gained knowledge and understanding of both the negative and positive effects and what the impacts may lead to in multi-professional working. Though, I have realised that communication is of vital importance. For example in my current setting, all the practitioners communicate effectively with one another; they hold meetings with every staff member once a week and discuss the important aspects. They involve me in everything and treat me like a staff member. Whereas, in one of my previous settings the staff hardly communicated, it felt like they were all awkward among each other. They hardly spoke to me either and treated me as ‘the student’. Seen as though I am a ‘practicing practitioner’ my relationship with the staff members within the setting is a multi-professional relationship. Even though I may be at University and attending placement as a student; I am working towards a degree which will enable me to become a professional once I have graduated. Sharing information is an important element in professional working as it helps to provide effective help for young people ad children.
When I started my current placement, the practitioners have shared information with me but only to a limited amount. I have been notified about children who are on care plans and who require additional support. However, the information which has been shared with me helps me to assist children in providing them with best outcomes. The document Working Together to Safeguard Children (2015) suggests that ‘effective sharing of information is essential between professionals and the local agencies, so that they are able to effectively identify, and provide service of provision.’ Seen as though I only attend placement once a week, I have to repetitively ask the practitioners what background a child comes from and this can have both negative and positive impacts.
As a student, the practitioners may not see me as a professional who needs to know about certain information relating children. I am told a limited amount of information because most times the information is confidential. However, on one occasion the practitioner told me that she had to get social services involved with a child and the family, she did not go into detail because the issue had been resolved, I did not ask for any more information as I respected her wish on not disclosing any more detail. However, next time if an issue emerged then I will have a sit down with the professionals within the classroom and ask them information, this will help me to provide the best outcomes for the children and therefore lead to effective multi professionals working together.
This module has definitely helped me to pick and choose out issues that may have negative impacts on children in multi professional working. By doing this it has taught me how to effectively support children. I have also gained knowledge that the Working Together to Safeguard Children (2015) sets out clear guidelines on how professionals can work together to promote children to have the best in life.