toptermpaper.com

Intervention is rarely defined. It originates from the Latin inter between and venire to come and means coming between Trevithick, 2005: 66. Interventions are at the heart of everyday social interactions and make ‘inevitably make up a substantial majority of human behaviour and are made by those who desire and intend to influence some part of the world and the beings within it’ (Kennard et al. 1993:3). Social work interventions are purposeful actions we undertake as workers which are based on knowledge and understanding acquired, skills learnt and values adopted. Therefore, interventions are knowledge, skills, understanding and values in action. Intervention may focus on individuals, families, communities, or groups and be in different forms depending on their purpose and whether directive or non-directive.

Generally, interventions that are directive aim to purposefully change the course of events and can be highly influenced by agency policy and practice or by the practitioner’s perspective on how to move events forward. This may involve offering advice, providing information and suggestions about what to do, or how to behave and can be important and a professional requirement where immediate danger or risk is involved.

In non-directive interventions ‘the worker does not attempt to decide for people, or to lead, guide or persuade them to accept his/her specific conclusions’ (Coulshed and Orme, 1998: 216). Work is done in a way to enable individuals to decide for themselves and involves helping people to problem solve or talk about their thoughts, feelings and the different courses of action they may take (Lishman, 1994). Counselling skills can be beneficial or important in this regard (Thompson 2000b).

Work with service users can therefore involve both directive and non-directive elements and both types have advantages and disadvantages (Mayo, 1994). Behaviourist, cognitive and psychosocial approaches tend to be directive but this depends on perspective adopted and the practitioner’s character. In contrast, community work is generally non-directive and person-centred.

Interventions have different time periods and levels of intensity which are dependent on several factors such as setting where the work is located, problem presented, individuals involved and agency policy and practice. Several practice approaches have a time limited factor such as task-centred work, crisis intervention and some behavioural approaches and are often preferred by agencies for this reason. In addition, practice approaches that are designed to be used for a considerable time such as psychosocial are often geared towards more planned short-term, time limited and focused work (Fanger 1995).

Although negotiation should take place with service users to ensure their needs and expectations are taken into account, it is not common practice for practitioners to offer choice on whether they would prefer a directive or non-directive approach or the practice approach adopted (Lishman, 1994). However, this lack of choice is now being recognised and addressed with the involvement of service users and others in the decision-making process in relation to agency policy, practice and service delivery (Barton, 2002; Croft and Beresford, 2000).

The purpose and use of different interventions is contentious. Payne (1996: 43) argues that ‘the term intervention is oppressive as it indicates the moral and political authority of the social worker’. This concern is also shared by others with Langan and Lee (1989:83) describing the potentially ‘invasive’ nature of interventions and how they can be used to control others. Jones suggests that in relation to power differences and the attitude of social workers especially with regards to people living in poverty: ‘the working class poor have been generally antagonistic toward social work intervention and have rejected social work’s downward gaze and highly interventionist and moralistic approach to their poverty and associated difficulties’ (Jones, 2002a: 12). It is recognised that intervention can be oppressive, delivered with no clear purpose or in-depth experience however, some seek and find interventions that are empathic, caring and non-judgemental due to practitioners demonstrating ‘relevant experience and show appropriate knowledge’ (Lishman, 1994:14). For many practitioners, these attributes are essential in any intervention and are demonstrated through commitment, concern and respect for others which are qualities that are valued by service users (Cheetham et al. 1992; Wilson, 2000).

Dependent on the nature of help sought there are different opinions on whether interventions should be targeted on personal change or wider societal, environmental or political change. Some may want assistance in accessing a particular service or other forms of help and not embrace interventions that may take them in a particular direction i.e. social action (Payne et al. 2002). In contrast, problems may recur or become worse if no collective action is taken.

Importance has reduced in relation to methods of intervention over recent years as social work agencies have given more focus to assessment and immediate or short-term solutions (Howe, 1996; Lymbery 2001). This is strengthened by the reactive nature of service provision which is more concerned with practical results than with theories and principles. This has a reduced effect on workers knowledge of a range of methods resulting in workers using a preferred method which is not evidenced in their practice (Thompson, 2000). Methods of intervention should be the basis of ongoing intervention with service users, but often lacks structured planning and is reactive to crisis. This reactive response with emphasis on assessment frameworks is concerning, as workers are still managing high caseloads and if not supervised and supported appropriately, workers are at risk of stress and eventual burn-out (Jones, 2001; Charles and Butler, 2004).

Effective use of methods of intervention allows work to be planned, structured and prioritised depending on service users’ needs. Methods can be complicated as they are underpinned by a wide range of skills and influenced by the approach of the worker. Most methods tend to follow similar processes of application: assessment, planning of goals, implementation, termination, evaluation and review. Although the process of some methods is completed in three/four interactions others take longer. This difference shows how some methods place more or less importance on factors such as personality or society, which then informs the type of intervention required to resolve issues in the service user’s situation (Watson and West, 2006).

More than one method can be used in conjunction with another, depending on how comprehensive work with service users needs to be (Milner and O’Byrne, 1998). However, each method has different assessment and an implementation process which looks for different types of information about the service user’s situation for example, task centred looks for causes and solutions in the present situation and psychosocial explores past experiences. Additionally, the method of assessment may require that at least two assessments be undertaken: the first to explore the necessity of involvement and secondly, to negotiate the method of intervention with the service user.

An effective assessment framework that is flexible and has various options is beneficial but should not awkward or time consuming to either the worker or the service user. As Dalrymple and Burke (1995) suggest, a biography framework is an ideal way as it enables service users to locate present issues in the context of their life both past and present.

Workers should aim to practice in a way which is empowering and the process of information gathering should attempt to fit into the exchange model of assessment, irrespective of the method of intervention and should be the basis of a working relationship which moves towards partnership (Watson and West, 2006). As part of the engagement and assessment process, the worker needs to negotiate with the service user to understand the issue(s) that need to be addressed and method(s) employed and take into account not only the nature of the problem but also the urgency and potential consequences of not intervening (Doel and Marsh, 1992).

Importance should be placed on presenting and underlying issues early in the assessment process as it enables the worker to look at an assessment framework and approach that assists short or long-term methods of intervention. An inclusive and holistic assessment enables the service user to have a direct influence on the method of intervention selected and be at the heart of the process. The process of assessment must be shared with and understood by the service user for any method of intervention to be successful (Watson and West, 2006).

The worker’s approach also has an influence on method selection as this will affect how they perceive and adapt to specific situations. The implementation of methods is affected by both the values of the method and value base of the individual worker. The worker will also influence how the method is applied in practice through implementation, evaluation, perceived expertise and attitude to empowerment and partnership.

Methods such as task centred are seen to be empowering with ethnic minority and other oppressed groups as service users are seen to be able to define their own problems (Ahmad, 1990). However, when an approach is used which is worker or agency focused the service user may not be fully enabled to define the problem and results in informing but not engaging them in determining priorities.

Empowerment and partnership involves sharing and involving service users in method selection, application of the method, allocation of tasks, responsibilities, evaluation and review and is crucial in enabling facing challenges in their situations and lives. However, service users can have difficulty with this level of information-sharing and may prefer that the worker take the lead role rather than negotiating something different and not wish to acquire new skills to have full advantage of the partnership offered.

Selecting a method of intervention should not be a technical process of information gathering and a tick box process to achieve a desired outcome. Milner and O’Byrne (2002) suggest it requires combining various components such as analysis and understanding of the service user, worker and the mandate of the agency providing the service otherwise intervention could be is restrictive and limit available options. However, negotiation and the competing demands of all involved parties must be considered and the basis of anti-oppresive practice established.

Methods of intervention can be a complex and demanding activity especially in terms of time and energy and therefore, short-term term methods are seen as less intensive and demanding of the worker as well as more successful in practice. However, Watson and West (2006: 62) see this as ‘a misconception, as the popular more short-term methods often make extensive demands on the workers’ time and energy’.

Workers are often dealing with uncertainty as each service user have different capabilities, levels of confidence and support networks. Therefore, there is no one ideal method for any given situation but a range of methods that have both advantages and disadvantages and as Trethivick (2005: 1) suggests workers need to have ‘a toolkit to begin to understand people’ and need to widen the range of options available in order for them to respond flexibly and appropriately to each new situation (Parker and Bradley, 2003).

When using methods of intervention, workers have to be organised to ensure that the task is proactively carried out and often attempt to prioritise involvement with service users against both local and national contexts and provide an appropriate level of service within managerial constraints. This prioritisation means in practice that, given the extensive demands, work using methods can only be with four or five service users at any one time and with the additional pressure of monitoring and supervising service users and reports, risk response is often responsive and crisis driven (Watson and West, 2006).

To work in an empowering and anti-oppressive perspective is to ensure that intervention focuses clearly on the needs of the service user, is appropriate to the situation than the needs of the service. An understanding of these competing demands and the worker’s ability to influence decision-making processes does impact on method selection however, this should not mean that the service is diluted and methods be partially implemented as this is not conducive to managerial or professional agendas on good practice. Thompson (2000:43) sees this as ‘the set of common patterns, assumptions, values and norms that become established within an organisation over time’ and a concern of workers is competitive workplace cultures where ability is based on the number of cases managed rather than the quality that is provided to service users which may result in use of less time-consuming methods.

For work to be effective, an ethical and a professional not just a bureaucratic response to pressures faced is required and is not about the service user fitting into the worker or agency’s preferred way of working but looking at what is best for the service user and finding creative ways to make this happen.

Workers need to be careful not to seen as the ‘expert’ who will resolve the situation as even the most established and experienced practitioners have skills gaps and often develop skills when working with the service users. This process of learning in practice requires good support and supervision, enabling the worker to reflect on assumptions about service users and their capabilities especially in relation to gender, race, age or disability to prevent internalised bias to impact on what the service user requires to work on to change the situation (Watson and West, 2006).

It is crucial to appreciate the situation from the service user’s perspective and see them as unique individuals as Taylor and Devine (1993: 4) state ‘the client’s perception of the situation has to be the basis of effective social work’. This concern is also shared by Howe (1987:3) describing ‘the client’s perception is an integral part of the practice of social work’. Service users often have their own assumptions about what social work is and what workers are able to provide which is generally based on past relationships and experiences for example, black service users experience may reflect a service which in the past was not appropriate to their needs (Milner and Byrne, 1998: 23) but to alleviate this practitioners need to work in an open, honest and empowering manner and recognise that although service users may be in negative situations they also have strengths and skills that need to be utilised in the social work relationship.

Workers should ensure that written agreements are developed that acknowledge all participants roles and responsibilities and avoid assumptions or issues (Lishman, 1994), this avoids breakdown in trust and encourages honesty and open shared responsibility between service user and worker. This involves negotiation on what should be achieved, by whom, including agency input. Agreements can provide the potential for empowering practice that involves partnership. However, cognisance has to be taken to ensure that the agreement does not become a set of non-negotiated tasks that service users have no possibility of achieving, combined with no reciprocal commitment or obligations by the worker as this does not address the issue of empowerment or oppression and can reinforce the power difference (Rojek and Collins, 1988).

The final stage of the process is termination which should be planned and allow both parties time and opportunity to prepare for the future however, it has to be carefully and sensitively constructed and is much easier to achieve if the work has been methodical with clear goals as it demonstrates what has been achieved. Evaluation is beneficial as it enables the service user and worker to be reminded of timescales and can acknowledge the service user’s increasing skills, empowerment, confidence and self-esteem which can be utilised after the intervention has ended. Endings can however, be difficult for both the worker and service user resulting from various factors such as complexity of service user’s situation, issues of dependency and lack of clarity about purpose and intervention. This lack of clarity can result in a situation of uncertainty for both worker and service user (Watson and West, 2006). Finally, termination as part of the change process creates opportunities but also fear, anxiety and loss (Coulshed and Orme, 1998).

It is important for workers to take a step back and reflect on their practice and review their experiences to ensure that they are providing the best possible service in the most ethical and effective manner. Reflective practice provides support and enables workers to not just meet the needs of the organisation but also develop their own knowledge and skills and increased understanding of their own approach and the situation experienced by service users. A good tool to facilitate this is the use of reflective diaries. Reflecting in action and on action both influences and enhances current and future practice. The use of effective supervision is another process where workload management, forum for learning and problem-solving should take place which should be supportive and enabling to the worker (Kadushin and Harkness, 2002). However, the worker’s role in supervision is often viewed as passive as the supervisor sets the agenda. This can lead to disempowerment of the worker in relation to the agency and is potentially oppressive and discriminatory and provides a poor role model for work with service users and therefore consideration must be given on how they can create a positive and empowering relationship (Thompson, 2002).

In conclusion, good practice requires workers to have knowledge to understand the ‘person in situation,’ (Hollis, 1972) understanding both sociological (society and community) and psychological (personality and life span) and the interrelation and impact on the service user (Howe, 1987). A critical skill for effective and ethical practice is empowerment which is based on knowledge and values and is the difference between informing and genuine partnership and the importance of active participation of service users throughout the process.

Social work is a value based activity and workers through reflection and supervision can all learn from experiences, adapt and enhance these to develop practice and gain self-awareness to understand how they themselves and their approach impacts on service users.

The Scottish Government together with local authorities, partners and stakeholders have initiated reforms in the way in which public services should be provided to achieve ‘a sustainable, person-centred system, achieving outcomes for every citizen and every community’. (Scottish Government 2011a)

It is believed that everyone has to make a contribution. The Government set the aims to the services that should be person-centred, seamless and proactive. Services that would allow everybody to have best quality of life and give the full potential of contribution to the communities people live in. The key aspects involved in the public service provision focus on equality, respect and dignity, support in overcoming inclusion barriers and general positive outcomes and well being. The underlined values relate also to the individualised needs such as religion, culture or ethnic.

Problems such as growth in public spending, social inequalities, poverty, lack of clarity in what lies behind organizations etc. have their origins in the way different services are funded, planned and managed. However, the aim of the Scottish Government remains unchanged and is to reduce the frustration resulting on long standing problems such as inefficiency of the public services, and the gaps that frequently exist within care systems. (Scottish Government Publications 2000).

Researchers investigate what people value most to archive real-life improvements in the social and economic wellbeing of the people and communities. Half of the public finds that the Government’s foreground for service provision should be “what is good for everyone in society as a whole” (Ipsos MORI, 2010). This show that a progress in the development of an integrated public service has already occurred but requires continuation to success.

Reaching an understanding

It needs to be understood that public services and support systems exist for the society that use them. Evidence such as Christie Commission report (Christie, 2011), demonstrate that the needs have not always been central to the planning of services.

The people that use the services often perceive themselves to be not sufficiently informed and not fully able to take part in the growth process of the services.

Some changes in the service provision in relation to ‘shifting the philosophy ’ have already taken place. This makes the service provision more user centred and allows the user to participate actively in the changes and benefit the majority. (Rose, 2003)

Client ‘centredness’ became the watchword for the twenty-first century; however the progress in the implementation of person-centred planning in practice appears slow.

Since devolution, there has been development, changes and new policies for health care, with reorganisations taking place, that are generally called reforms. These refer mainly to patients’ choice; system efficiency; quality of care and accountability acquired through transparency.

In Scotland, for example, the separation of purchasing from provision of health care was abolished (National Health Service and Community Care Act 1990); it is not recommended for the providers to compete; The National Health Service (Free Prescriptions and Charges for Drugs and Appliances) (Scotland) Regulations (2011) implemented free drugs prescriptions as well as personal social care for the over-65s (Community Care and Health (Scotland) Act 2002).

Recent changes relate to the abolition of primary care trusts (PCTs) and strategic health authorities (SHAs), new commissioning of clinical groups (CCGs) and Healthwatch England.

Other examples of success relate to improving the quality of services that include smoking ban legislation; lower mortality levels or decrease in heart disease and stroke through a number of governmental initiatives. These changes led Scotland to become a leader in public service reforms and made visible improvements for the Scottish society.

The system’s integration with social services discourages provider competition and encourages patient choice and strong performance management. The Scottish Government’s 2020 Vision (Scottish Government (a) 2013) aims to enable everyone to live a life that is longer, healthier; possibly at home or in a homely setting. To achieved that the healthcare system that focuses on prevention and anticipation and on the integration with social care.

Positive changes improving people’s lives do take place at national and local levels. However, studies show that the public are overall more negative about services nationally and show positive stance about local services. This can be reasoned by the affirmative actions in which the public can have a bigger impact on how local services operate and the on the decision making. Public Service Trust states that more than a half (58% ) of the public would like to be actively involved in shaping public services. Although this is more than a half of the public it proves that there is the need for more community and local activity an engagement in relation to the public services in order to reduce and minimise the substantial barriers.(Ipsos MORI 2010)

These are only a few examples of the improvement that has occurred due to the governmental actions focused at partnetships between service providers and investment in people. (Scottish Government (c ) (2013)

New legislation was introduced ( The Scottish Government (c)2013) to improve the integration of health and social care provision to make care for the citizens better. This affects particularly older people – free personal care for them and acknowledging the facts highlighted in the Christie report (Christie, C. 2011) that by 2033, the number of people aged over 75 will increase by 84%.

The report ( Christie, 2011) estimates however that additional demands on social care and justice services will be costly (

Although there is evidence demonstrating progress especially in implementing diverse and innovative approaches that appeal to healthcare and social care professionals, practitioners and policymakers there are also many challenges of implementing the client-centerness.

Achieving outcomes for every citizen and every community

While many professionals espouse the principles of client-centred practice it seems much more difficult to implement these into everyday practice.

Health care providers, staff and clients must work together to facilitate changes and ensure that each client receives respectful, supportive, coordinated, flexible and individualized service where standards affirm basic ethical principles, beneficence and social justice. This is however a real change, due to many factors including changes in funding, culture and power relations, as well as in approaches to service management and staff supervision.

This is why attention is paid to more openly and transparent performance of the services .This however according to Dr Barry ( Barry, M. 2007) requires comprehensive strategies to ensure fair, good quality but foremost integrated services for people with the knowledge and well structured priorities in relation to their professional and social roles.

Across researchers (Ipsos MORI, 2010), it is to see that not all the issues policymakers find important for reforming public services resonate with the general public at the same levels. The fairness, good quality standards of customer service, local control, accountability, personalisation and choice are seen as public’s key priorities, however the first two aspects seem to be more important to the public. 63% think that standards of public services should be the same for everyone and everywhere in UK and over 47% would prefer greater local decision-making. This could be a consequence of declining trust in politicians. The findings of Ipsos MORI (2008/9) suggest that the citizens would like to feel more welcomed to take a part in an honest debate about the options ahead for public services because information about the scale of the approaching challenges has not reached citizens in a form they understand.

This demonstrates the need of more control and choice in the consumer, and facilitates individualised rather than universal services.

Roles, relationships and responsibilities of partners within an integrated public service.

Many of current public services continue to operate on the basis of the traditional model of service provision. To allow the changes in how resources are managed and allocated to happen there is a growing need for appropriately trained staff and management. However to support the reforming public services change for a well integrated ‘multi-agency’ working not just at managerial level is needed but a change to the whole culture that governs services.

Collaborative working, partnership and community involvement

Co-operation that would replace competition is required as well as focus on professional responsibility on meeting the increasing complexity. (Royal College of Nursing, 2004). The collaborative work, in practice should involve joint planning between health authorities – both local and national as well as the private and voluntary sectors and education.

Working together includes the whole process of researching, assessing, planning, implementing and evaluation. Balancing power relations in partnership across cultures, ethical, political or religious differences play an important role in promoting appropriate services for the service users. Teamwork and partnership often do not operate in an integrated way where the patient or service user would be seen as the central figure. The users involvement is vital. Working together, joining trade unions, expanding knowledge and engaging with local authorities helps find ways to reach excluded and marginalised groups of a society.(Department of Health 2000 a).

This is already notable in the programs of most of the political parties. The citizens empowerment is seen as a social manner that can influence and shape the public services to suit better the user’s need. Giving people a say in the design and delivery of public services.

This is however a social challenge as the public opinion research show a decrease from 58% to 47% in disposition to the interests in decision-making related to the local areas. ( Ipsos MORI 2010).

This is why people should be motivated to get involved in collaboration and partnerships within the public services, they should be offered the chance to share experiences and discuss actions and widen the pool of resources and skills.

The impetus for integration and collaboration has been pointed out in legislations and government policies such as The Vital Connection (Department of Health, 2000a), NHS plan (Department of Health, 2000b) or in the Government’s Equality Framework (Department of Health, 2012)

This demonstrates clearly that seamless health and social services provision has been a concern of policy makers for many years and that the UK governments underline the need for collaboration. However when the public was asked about getting personally involved in local decision-making, the commitment to involvement in decisions affecting their local area has dropped to 47% from 56%. (Ipsos MORI (2010). This could be one of the explanations why problems continue to exist.

Service planning, empowerment and engagement

The notion of empowerment is central. This however requires people’s engagement. Research shows that people find that vast majority are more interested in having a say (24%) or in knowing more (47%) than actually getting engaged. The service planning should therefore include informative element how the services are delivered and by whom for the users in order to engage them to recreate services they need.

According to the annual Audit of Political Engagement only 11% of adults can be classified as ‘political activists’ and over half the public (51%) have no interests. (Ipsos MORI 2010). It seems that co-making decisions is less important than having the influence to make them.

Managers and frontline workers

Poor image, desinformation and low pay contribute to general feelings of helplessness among many frontline workers that should be involved decision-making and planning processes (Eborall,2003).

Managerial styles need to be empathetic in order for frontline staff to adopt person-centred approaches to their work ( Sherad, D. 2004)

A good style helps demonstrate and articulate the values of the organisation, values personal commitment and relationships with the people it supports. Look for ways to use staff interests and strengths in directly supporting people.

The style shall rather review itself in decision making and in having a clear vision and direction. This encourages new ideas as well as personal involvement and helps to achieve the purpose as a team.

.

The Government support management and frontline staff in public services by implementing programmes that lead to integration of health and social care. One of the examples is The Public Bodies (Joint Working) (Scotland) Bill. The act underlines the importance of the integrated work for health and social care provision across Scotland.

They both have a key role to play reforming the public services, therefore the reform should involve more educational, council, employer and training bodies to help improve the workforce awareness and leadership development.

Also thethird sector organisations should have access to appropriate skills development opportunities, including leadership development .(The Scottish Government ( 2011 b)

Summarising it needs to be believed that people learn from the past experiences and improve partnership at local and national levels to build a well functioning system that could seamlessly provide care for the whole community, including people with complex care needs because at the end of the day we do it for us.

( words 2641)

References:

Barry, M. (2007) Effective Approaches to Risk Assessment in Social Work: An International Literature Review Social Work Research Centre University of Stirling Scottish Executive Social Research [online] available http://scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/194419/0052192.pdf [accessed 11.11.13]

Christie, C. (2011) Commission on the future delivery of public services [online] available http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/352649/0118638.pdf [accessed 01.12.13]

Department of Health (2000 a ) The Vital Connection – an equalities framework for the NHS [online] available http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_4007652 [accessed 11.12.13]

Department of Health (2000 b) The NHS Plan: Principles [online] available http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/www.dh.gov.uk/en/publicationsandstatistics/publications/publicationspolicyandguidance/browsable/DH_4901318 [ accessed 11.12.13]

Department of Health (2012) NHS Outcomes Framework 2013 to 2014 [online] available https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/nhs-outcomes-framework-2013-to-2014 [ accessed 02.12.13]

Eborall, C. (2003) The State of the Social Care Workforce in England. First annual report of the TOPSS England Workforce Intelligence Unit [online] available www.topssengland.net [ accessed 10.11.13]

Hall, S. (2009) Spending priorities in the benefits system: Deliberative research with the public DWP Research Report No 559.

Ipsos MORI (2008/9) Real Trends Slide Pack [online] available http://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/publications/1191/Real-Trends-Flyer.aspx [accessed 11.12.13]

Ipsos MORI (2009) Public Services and Public Spending, RSA Slide Pack Leaders, Parties and spending cuts [online] available http://www.ipsos-mori.com/Assets/Docs/News/news-ipsos-mori-conferences-2009-briefing-pack.pdf [ accessed 18.12.13]

Ipsos MORI (2010) What do people want, need and expect from public services [online] available http://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/publications/1345/What-do-people-want-need-and-expect-from-public-services.aspx [ accessed 12.12.13]

Public Bodies (Joint Working) (Scotland) Bill (2013) [online] available http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/S4_HealthandSportCommittee/Public%20Bodies%20Joint%20Working%20Scotland%20Bill/PBJW0073_-_Scottish_Social_Services_Council.pdf [ accessed 01.12.13]

Rose, D. (2003) Partnership, co-ordination of care and the place of user involvement Journal of Mental Health, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 59–70 [online] available http://informahealthcare.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09638230021000058300 [ accessed 01.12.13]

Royal College of Nursing (2004) Collaborative working, partnership and community involvement [online] available http://www.rcn.org.uk/development/learning/transcultural_health/multiagency/sectiontwo [ accessed 11.11.13]

Sheard, D. (2004) Person-centred care: the emperor’s new clothes? Journal of Dementia Care, March/April, Vol. 12, Issue 2, pp. 22–4

The Scottish Government ( 2011 a) Commission on the Future Delivery of Public Services [online] available http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2011/06/27154527/10 [ last accessed 09.01.14]

The Scottish Government ( 2011 b) ?7 million for third sector [online] available http://www.scotland.gov.uk/News/Releases/2011/07/18120453 [ accessed 10.11.13]

The Scottish Government (2013 b) Route Map to the 2020 Vision for Health and Social Care (no author) Topics[online] available http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Health/Policy/Quality-Strategy/routemap2020vision (last accessed 04.10.13)

The Scottish Government (2013 c) Scotland leads the way on public service reform (no author) News [online] available http://www.scotland.gov.uk/News/Releases/2013/06/PSR19062013 [ accessed 01.12.13]

The Scottish Government (a) (2000) Our National Health A plan for action, a plan for change ( Deacon, S) Publications [online] available http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/158732/0043081.pdf (last accessed 05.12.13)

The Scottish Government 2013 a) 2020 Vision (no author) Topics [online] available http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Health/Policy/2020-Vision (last accessed 04.10.13)

Reading:

Social Research (2004) Health and Community Care Research Programme Public Attitudes to the National Health Service in Scotland http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/26800/0025702.pdf

– 2004 Survey Research st accessed 04.10.13)Commission on the Future Delivery of Public Services

The North East of Scotland Child Protection Committee (NESCPC) has produced this Risk Assessment Framework in response to an identified need for a Pan Grampian approach.

This framework is for use by all agencies located within Aberdeen City, Aberdeenshire and Moray with the aim of ensuring that there is a consistency of understanding and approach to risk assessment across all sectors.

The framework is written with the additional understanding that all practitioners have a responsibility to ensure that they are familiar with and follow their own organisation’s child protection procedures. These should all link to the overarching NESCPC Guidelines and give advice on who to contact, how to take immediate action and how concerns should be recorded.

Background

Several models of Risk Assessment exist but are not used in a systematic way because they are not thought to be comprehensive enough to be used in all situations (Scottish Government: Effective Approach to Risk Assessment in Social Work: an international literature review (2007).

To enable greater consistency and conformity across Scotland, the Scottish Executive (2005) proposed a programme of change: Getting it Right For Every Child, incorporating the development work undertaken on an Integrated Assessment Planning and Recording Framework (IAF). This is based on requirements to gain a thorough understanding of:

the developmental needs of a child

the capacity of a parent/carer to respond appropriately to those needs

the impact of the wider family and wider environmental factors on parenting capacity and on the child’s needs

This 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 consider the totality of the child’s development and any unmet needs rather than focusing too narrowly on a need for protection.

This approach should make sure that:

Children get the help they need when they need it;

Help is appropriate, proportionate and timely;

Agencies work together to ensure a co-ordinated and unified response to meeting the child’s needs;

The plan is used to put in place arrangements to manage risk and to co-ordinate help for the child or young person;

The plan is based on assessment and analysis of the child’s world, including the risks, needs and resilience factors.

What is Risk Assessment?

Risk Assessment is a frequently used term without practitioners always being clear about what is meant.

“Risk assessment is merely the description of good 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, continuous and dynamic process, which involves the gathering and weighting of relevant information to help make decisions about the family strengths, needs and associated risks and plan for necessary interventions. Good systematic assessment confirms what may have happened, how this may affect the immediate and future safety of the child or young person, places this in context and informs what needs to be done. Risk assessments can also be used to predict the escalation of the presenting behaviour as well as the individual’s motivation for change. Assessing risk is not an exact science; prediction involves probability and thus some errors are inevitable.

Basic Principles when assessing risk.

The welfare of the child is paramount.

Risk assessment should be based on sound evidence and analysis

Risk assessment tools should inform rather than replace professional judgement

All professionals involved in risk assessment should have a common language of risk and common understanding of information sharing to inform assessment

Risk assessment is influenced by professionals own personal and professional values, experiences, skills and knowledge

The judgement and experience of practitioners needs to be transparent in assessment

No tool, procedure or framework can adequately account for and predict human behaviour

Effective communication and information sharing is crucial to protecting children

Children, young people and family views should be sought, listened to and recorded with clear evidence of their involvement in decision making where possible.

A good risk assessment process should elicit and highlight both commonalities and differences in professional and family perspectives

Good risk assessment requires the best possible working relationship between worker and family members

All staff must always be alert and aware to situations where children may be at risk and address any potential concerns through their own agency’s child protection policy / NESCPC child protection guidance.

Risk Assessment Framework

This 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 stages:

Using the SHANNARI well-being indicators (Safe, Well, Active, Nurtured, Achieving, Respected, Responsible and Included).

2. Getting the child and family’s perspectives on risk.

Drawing on evidence from research and development literature about the level of risk and its likely impact on any individual child.

4. Assessing the likely recurrence of harm.

5. Looking at immediate and long-term risks in the context of “My World” triangle.

Using the Resilience Matrix to analyse the risks, strengths, protective factors and vulnerabilities.

7. Weighing the balance of that evidence and making decisions.

8. Constructing a plan and taking appropriate action.

9. Management of Risk

1. Using the SHANARRI well-being indicators:

The Scottish Executive (2004) agreed a vision for Scotland’s Children. They should be:

Safe

Healthy

Active

Nurtured

Achieving

Respected

Responsible

Included

Using these SHANARRI indicators, professionals consider the child’s holistic needs. In any assessment professionals should ask themselves the following key questions:

What is getting in the way of this child being safe, healthy, active, nurtured, achieving, respected, responsible and included?

Why do I think that this child is not safe?

What have I observed, heard, or identified from the child’s history that causes concern?

Are there factors that indicate risk of significant harm 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 family’s perspectives on the risk.

The involvement and partnership with children, young people and their families is integral and essential to successful risk assessment and management. Information is incomplete and a good understanding of the risks of harm and needs of the children cannot be reached without families’ perspectives on the risks to their children’s difficulties. An open and transparent approach that actively involves all involved, including the children and families is of clear benefit in that:

Children, young people and families can understand why sharing information with professionals is necessary;

Children and families can help practitioners distinguish what information is significant;

Everyone who needs to can take part in making decisions about how to help a child;

Everyone contributes to finding out whether a plan has made a positive difference to a child or family;

Professionals behave ethically towards families;

Even 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 children’s wellbeing and development. Core 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 child’s own nature and environment.

In all cases of child abuse, parenting capacity should also be considered and this involves taking account of historical 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 harm. The factors should be used as a knowledge base to underpin more detailed 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 reoccurrence;

Pattern of harm is escalating: if harm has been increasing in severity and frequency over time, it is more likely that without effective intervention the child/young person will be significantly harm;

Pattern of harm is continuing: the more often harm has occurred in the past the more likely it is to occur in the future;

The parent or care-giver has made a threat to cause serious harm to the child/young person: such threats may cause significant emotional harm and may reflect parental inability to cope with stress, the greater the stress for a person with caring responsibilities, the greater the likelihood of future physical and emotional harm to the child/young person;

Sexual 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 harm;

Chronic neglect is identified: serious harm may occur through neglect, such as inadequate supervision, failure to attend to medical needs and failure to nurture;

Previous history of abuse or neglect: if a person with parental responsibility has previously harmed a child or young person, there is a greater likelihood of re-occurrence;

The use of past history in assessing current functioning is critical.

Factors relating to the child or young person

Physical harm to a child under 12 months: very young children are more vulnerable due to their age and dependency.

Any physical harm to a child under 12 months should be considered serious and the risk assessment should not focus 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 display 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, substance misuse, dangerous 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-giver

The 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-giver’s 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-giver’s behaviour is violent or out of control: 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 disability, 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 poor parenting skills. Parents or care-givers who do not understand normal developmental milestones may make demands which do not match the child/young person’s 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 person’s wellbeing and may not meet their emotional needs.

Indicators of poor care-giving include repeated requests for substitute 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. Highly 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 immaturity, lack of parenting knowledge, poor judgement and inability to tolerate stress.

The parents or care-givers themselves experienced childhood neglect or abuse: however caution has to be exercised here; parenting skills are frequently learned/modelled but later positive experiences can counteract an individual’s own childhood experiences.

Factors relating to the Environment

The 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 sanitised conditions, where the child’s needs are not recognised or prioritised is also harmful.

4. Assessing the likely recurrence of harm.

When assessing how safe a child is consideration must be given to likelihood of recurrence of any previous harm.

Factors for consideration:

The 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. Other agencies may be able to add additional knowledge and expertise to inform an effective risk assessment.

Looking at immediate and long-term risks in the context of the “My World” triangle.
The Assessment Triangle

Being healthy Everyday care and help

Learning and achieving Keeping me safe

Being able to communicate Being there for me

Confidence in who I am Play, encouragement and fun

Learning to be responsible Guidance, supporting me to make the right choices

Becoming independent,

looking after myself Knowing what is going to happen and when

Enjoying family and

Friends Understanding my family’s background and beliefs

Support from School Work opportunities

family, friends and for my family

other people Enough money

Local resources Belonging

Comfortable and

safe housing

An important principle underpinning the evidence-based planning in Getting it Right for Every Child is that there are many positive and negative influences in the world

each child experiences. Each child is unique and will react differently to these influences but all children will react to what is going on in different parts of the family

and 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 child’s

whole world when assessing children’s development. This is called a child’s ecology

and 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 Matrix

As defined by Daniel and Wassell, (2002).

RESILIENCE

Normal development under difficult conditions eg.secure attachment, outgoing temperament, sociability, problem solving skills.

High Support / Low
Concern
PROTECTIVE ENVIRONMENT

Factors in the child’s environment acting as buffer to the negative effects of adverse experience.

ADVERSITY

Life events / circumstances posing a threat to healthy development eg. loss, abuse, neglect.

Low Support / High
Concern
VULNERABILITY

Those 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 Concern

Families 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 as:

Emotional 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 peers / 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 include:

Age.

Prematurity.

Learning difficulties or additional support needs.

Physical disability.

Communication difficulties / impairment.

Isolation.

Frequent episodes in public or substitute care.

Frequent episodes of running 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 predisposition 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 child’s safety. These decisions lead to a plan to protect the child. This plan should also address the child’s broader developmental needs.

Stages of decision-making:

Data gathering

Weigh relative significance

Assessment of current situation

Circumstances which may alter child’s welfare

Prospects for change

Criteria for gauging effectiveness

Timescale proposed

Child’s 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 Assessments

Assess all areas of potential risk

Define the concern, abuse or neglect

Grade the risks

Identify factors that may increase risk of harm

Consider the nature of the risk – its duration / severity

Set out and agree time scales for the assessment to be carried out

Specifically document the identified risk factors

Gather key information and evidence

Has all the required information been gathered?

Assess the strengths in the situation

Check if any risk reducing factors exist?

Build a detailed family history and chronology of key events/concerns

Assess the motivation, capacity and prospects for change?

What risk is associated with intervention?

Be aware of potential sources of error

Identify the need for specialist supports

Plan your key interventions.

Constructing a plan and taking appropriate action.

Constructing the child’s 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 child’s plan. This also includes an analysis of the child or young person’s circumstances based on the “My World” triangle and should cover:

How 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 involved;

The strengths and pressures of the child or young person’s wider world of family friends and community; and

Assessment of risk, detailing:

The kind of risk involved;

What is likely to trigger harmful behaviour; and

In 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 Person’s Plan”, Scottish Executive. 2007, page 13).

The plan should address key questions:

What is to be done?

Who is to do it?

How will we know if there are improvements?

The Child’s 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 child’s 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 Management

There is a need to ensure that the ongoing shared plan:

Manages the risk

Puts 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 describe “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. Examples include:

Children 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 perceptions 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 person’s safety, taking account of any indications of accelerated risks and warning signs. The type and level of intervention, irrespective 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 child 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:

Adult services MUST ALWAYS consider any potential risks for any child linked to their adult clients.

Children’s 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).

There is a saying that there is nothing new under the sun as far as the calamities of the world go. This saying may very well be true, but because of an increasingly larger population, school-aged children of today are forced to face more problems much earlier than their predecessors did. Because today’s children have so much to face, it is important for them to have a good support base at home as well as at school. Together with other school-based mental health professionals, school social workers are expected to support the needs of at-risk students attending public schools (Altshuler & Webb, 2009). In order to provide children with the support they need for positive development, school systems need social workers that have been properly trained in choosing the correct intervention method and in proper service delivery.

The National Association of Social Workers identifies four major areas of school social work practice: Early intervention to reduce or eliminate stress; within or between individuals or groups; problem-solving services to students, parents, school personnel, or community agencies; early identification of students at risk; and work with various groups in school to develop coping, social, and decision-making skills (). Social workers have been providing services to public schools for over a century, and there are many ways school social workers can utilize their knowledge, skills, and values to improve the lives of students. The services that workers provide have evolved over time but have maintained an overall purpose of addressing environmental barriers that negatively affect the ability of students to succeed academically (Altshuler & Webb, 2009).

There are several factors that determine the need for intervention by social workers. Family issues, attendance problems, and academic concerns are all prevalent factors presented for intervention (Kelly & Stone, 2009). There are also issues of neighborhood violence, drug use, deviant peers, teen pregnancy, and poor impulse control.

Early life experiences (while not the sole determinants of later life mental health and behavior disorders) may be important influences in children’s development and children living with substantial environmental stress early in life are at increased risk for aggressive and antisocial behavior in youth and adolescence (Hudley & Novak, 2007). It is up to today’s school social workers to find and implement more effective strategies for decreasing and eliminating these behaviors, especially now that behaving aggressively has become an essentially automatic response to stressors in some youths.

Social workers can assist students in dealing with stress or emotional problems by working directly with the children and their families. By acting as institutional and cultural brokers between families and their children’s school, social workers are filling a very important void. This is especially significant for schools where often the least successful students come from families who are experiencing poverty-related barriers and constraints. Bridging the gap between school and families is important because when parents are involved effectively in their children’s schooling, student achievement typically improves (Alameda-Lawson, Lawson & Lawson, 2010). Because school success is critical to future life tasks, interventions are worth our attention.

School social workers’ broad skill sets, ranging from advanced clinical to highly skilled generalist approaches (with particular emphasis in school mission, functioning, and processes), are essential to the assessment process and design of effective interventions. All students, their families, and school personnel benefit from access to the expertise of school social workers in implementing system level universal (school or district), evidencebased programs, as well as early-targeted interventions. This expertise is particularly critical in working with students struggling with behavioral, emotional, family system, and ecological challenges to ensure a truly systemic, comprehensive assessment.

Workers can also address problems such as misbehavior, truancy, teenage pregnancy, and drug and alcohol problems and advise teachers on how to cope with difficult students. Some of the methods that school social workers use are individual, group, and family/community therapy. Some workers teach workshops to entire classes on topics like conflict resolution. School social workers extend opportunities for students to volunteer, serve others, or contribute to their communities by referring students to existing service opportunities; facilitating service projects and clubs; or creating an array of individualized opportunities for students to help peers, younger students, adults, or the community.

By encouraging students to participate in service, social workers are helping students to develop more protective and promotive factors such as self-esteem, friendships, and confidence, as well as ensuring that the students gain familiarity with the social worker and feel more comfortable going to him or her for help with crises. Integrating youth development principles into school social work practice is a powerful application of the strengths perspective and an important way to build resiliency. Youth development activities such as service can also be conceptualized as tiered interventions within a response to intervention and positive behavioral interventions and supports system (Leyba, 2010).

While it is vitally important for the social worker to forge a positive and trusting relationship with students and their families, it is just as important that the worker remember to be empathetic without being sympathetic. Delivery of needed services is tantamount, but there are policies, ethics, and rules of practice to be considered at all times. The National Association of Social Workers and School Social Work Association of America have recommended specific requirements for professional preparation and competency of the school social worker.

Social workers shall function in accordance with the values, ethics, and standards of the profession, recognizing how personal and professional values may conflict with or accommodate the needs of diverse clients.

To work in a school setting, a social worker must have an MSW degree from a Council on Social Work Education approved program. The worker must have completed a school-based internship and have taken

In conclusion, social workers provide an invaluable service to the school system. Today, school social workers are represented across the 50 states, performing duties in a wide variety of roles, all of which are ultimately focused on facilitating systemic change to support the academic success of students (Altshuler & Webb, 2009).

Summary

This essay focuses on safety of miners in the opal fields. It looks at the major potential hazards in the opal fields and ways to ensure safety from these hazards. These hazards include explosives, unstable ground, shafts, machinery and dust.

The claim is only as safe as the miners who are working on it. If miners can not follow laws and preventions outlined then the claim will not be as safe as it could be.

Introduction

Opal mining is an exciting but potentially hazardous occupation. A responsible miner should be able to identify and minimise risks. Many people can come onto a claim such as noodlers, miners and tourists. The claim can either be current with people working or it could be old and abandoned. The condition that the claim is left in has a major impact on the safety of any person who walks onto the claim. Specific laws and regulations have been set down by the government, which must be abided by to ensure a minimum safety standard is set. The top five potential hazards are explosives, unstable ground, shafts, machinery and dust.

Content
Claim Preparation

Many risks arise from previously worked areas. Old workings such as drill holes and backfilled or covered shafts, which could be covered by vegetation, are potential risks. Shaft positions should be approximated if mining nearby. As these old shafts can collapse, it is advisable to leave a safe distance between shafts. If work is to be commenced in old shafts a number of checks should be completed. Drives, pillars and levels poor ground should all be checked and noted. Notes may include workings on two levels with the lower level directly beneath the upper. Large un-pillared areas, thin crowned pillars and fretting or cracking of pillars. Lastly cracks in the wall and roof and pillar size should also be checked.

Claim boundaries are also a key point to avoid breaking into other neighbouring shafts.

Explosives

Experience in using and handling explosives can often lead to complacency. Inexperienced people not only can be potentially dangerous to them but can also pose risks with miss fires, unstable walls and fly rock. Licences to purchase, transport, store, handle and use explosives must be acquired and kept up to date. This ensures a minimum standard of safety is achieved.

Not only are licenses important to ensure safety but storage, transport and use of explosives can be more important. Ensuring that all explosive equipment is stored appropriately is a must. Explosives should be stored correctly in a cool, dry place with detonators stored separately from explosive material. Other storage measures which should be met is that the explosive boxes are wood lined and locked. The boxes must be wood lined to ensure no static build up occurs and creates a spark.

The storage areas of diesel and Nitropril should be well separated to ensure if there is a spill that they do not mix.

Many laws are already put in place for the way explosives are transported, prepared and blasted. These laws are put in place for a specific reason which is safety, any deviation from the processes set out could result in a potential injury.

Explosive Fumes

Various gases are generated due to blasting. Gases such as carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides along and other noxious gases pose a potential health hazard after a blast. The reason these gases are dangerous is because they displace the oxygen available for breathing. For this reason adequate ventilation is required to release these gases before entering the blasted area.

When a blast occurs a blast radius should be put in place to ensure the safety of other miners. In underground mines there is no law but it is recommended that miners do not stay underground. Gases generated from the blast can disperse throughout other shafts and may also cumulate their if there is inadequate airflow, the blast may also cause sections of the roof to collapse. Gases which are dispersed throughout the mine can cumulate in low or high cavities depending on the gas. Carbon Dioxide is heavier than air and can cumulate in low spots and floor cavities. Carbon Monoxide is lighter than air and can cumulate in high spots and roof cavities. Areas of known for having inadequate airflow should be checked after blasting to ensure the gas levels are at a safe level. Fans, blowers and other ventilation systems should be used to extract the noxious gases from the mine. These should be used in preference to natural ventilation as they are much quicker.

Unstable Structures

The geological structures of opal fields vary. There are some structures which can support a wide underground area, yet others are blocky material with faults which makes mining difficult and not recommended. Opal mining in South Australia is quite difficult as the general bearing rock is weathered, brittle and fractured. Each place in SA is different due to the stress distributions and rock types. With all of these factors it is up to the miner to decide weather it is safe to start underground mining in that area.

In certain geological structures cave-ins can occur. A survey of the underground mining area should be done, noting old workings. Whenever underground a miner has to be constantly aware of the conditions especially the roof stability. An unstable roof which could be due to hidden faults could result in a rockfall which could be fatal.

Weather conditions can also affect the wall structure and integrity. Air entering the mine can dry out ground and open up cracks, slides or faults. This drying of material can cause slabs of ground to fall. If a large amount of water gets into the mine the supporting strength of walls and pillars may be reduced. Care should be taken to identify if and fretting has occurred at the base of structures. Any operating shaft should have the entrance to it kept in good condition. Loose rocks, material and tools should all be cleared from the entrance as these can easily be knocked into the shaft. The likes of wind, weathering or even a blast close by could cause material to fall.

For all of these reasons outlined with falling objects it is essential to wear a hard hat at all times. All of these factors can potentially be fatal, but these factors are generally overlooked as miners often become complacent and do not check the stability and strength of walls and roofs very often. These checks should become essential to a miners daily routine.

Shafts

Shafts are the key entry point to the underground sections of the mine. Keeping the shaft in good condition is essential to safety. Support structures at the top of the shaft, such as timbers and pipes, should be kept in good condition. When entering any new shaft weather it is blind or dead it is essential to ventilate the shaft to clear away gases.

Underground areas must have at least two means of exit. This is in case one exit gets blocked for some reason which could be due to a rock fall. Having two exits requires regular maintenance to ensure that both mechanisms, which are subjected to corrosion and weathering, are safe to use.

There is a significant risk of people falling down an open shaft. Not only are tourists at risk but also the miners. Small shafts can catch a person’s leg or ankle and cause injuries whereas larger shafts pose risks of vehicles and people falling in. It is recommended to leave a ring of dirt around the shaft entrance to signify that a shaft is there. When a miner leaves the claim, it is their responsibility to leave the shaft and its surroundings in a safe condition. Manner

Machinery

When operating any machinery either above or below ground a pre-start check should be completed. This is to ensure the machine you are about to operate is in a safe working condition. Items which should be checked are fluid levels, tyre inflation and condition, track tension, gauges, lights, hydraulic rams, lines and buckets, brakes and steering.

Any diesel machinery in operation gives off carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides and other noxious gases. These gases are similar to blasting gases and can be fatal if inhaled in large concentrations. When in large concentrations these gases can not be seen or smelt. Care should be taken when operating any machinery underground ensuring adequate ventilation.

Dust

A major hazard when working at a mine is dust. Dust can cause or trigger numerous health problems such as skin irritation, allergies and respiratory damage. Generally particles of dust are caught within the nose, throat and bronchial tubes. A small amount of these particles however get into the breathing system, due to their size and shape. It is these particles which cause the most respiratory problems. Dust particles which are of a particular concern are silica. Silica is found predominantly in sandstone host rocks. High exposure to small silica particles can potentially cause a fatal lung disease called silicosis. Although all dust can not be tested for silica it is essential to restrict dust exposure to a minimum.

Ways to control dust include extractors, collection systems and maximum airflow. Wearing a respirator or a dusk mask at the absolute minimum will help prevent the amount of dust that a miner will inhale. Although it is essential that the correct respirator or dust mask is used, as each one is different, depending on what cartridge is installed in the device.

Electrical

Operating machines or tools underground will generally use electricity. It is important to remember that electricity seeks the path of least resistance to earth. Most cases the path of least resistance is the human body as it is 80% water. It is vital that the design and installation of any electrical supply is safe. The miner can not come into contact with any live electrical component.

Personal protective equipment

Personal protective equipment (PPE) will help in protecting a miner from potential hazards. PPE is not a replacement for getting rid of a specific problem. It would be preferable to fit an extraction system for dust rather than wearing a dust mask.

A number of items should be worn when working in a mining area such as hard hats, footwear, breathing, hearing and eye protection. Hard hats can be uncomfortable, fall off and restrict clearance in small spaces, but these inconveniences save lives. Footwear suitable for miners are steel capped boots. They provide much more support for ankles and grip when walking on loose and rugged surfaces. The steel cap provides protection for your toes if something drops or falls onto your feet. Breathing protection general comes from dust masks either rubber of paper. Both are designed to sit on a clean shaven face. If the miner has a bear or stubble the effectiveness of these masks is reduced. Hearing protection generally comes in two forms which are ear plugs and ear muffs. Ear protection only cuts out part of the noise, usually around 20db(A). Since only part of the noise is cut out it is important to ensure that the miner realises that higher levels of ear protection is required when working next to excessively noisy machines such as jack hammers. In general eye protection should be worn at all times. There is a constant risk of particles of some nature being airborne and possibly entering the eye. Damage to the eye may be something small like a scratch to actually losing an eye.

Discussion

These rules and advised safety precautions to be taken are put in place for a reason. It is solely to help protect the individual from getting injured or killed. But miners in the opal fields generally have the she’ll be right attitude. A large amount of preventions can be put in place to help ensure safety but if the miner does not follow them these are next to useless. They may think only a short amount of exposure to dust is fine, but if they continue to have exposure to dust containing silica they could cause the onset of silicosis. Not only can you do internal damage through various noxious gases and dusts, but a lot of damage can be done to the body itself. Cuts, sprains and broken bones are a number of things which can occur depending on how safe, cautious and or ignorant the miner is.

Conclusions

The top five potential hazards in opal field mining are explosives, unstable ground, shafts, machinery and dust. All of these potential hazards have laws, regulations and precautions put in place to ensure a minimum standard of safety. This minimum standard of safety is only reached if the person who enters the claim follows the guidelines. The bottom line being that safety in the opal fields comes down to each individual that enters the claim. If the miner is ignorant, complacent or plain lazy the safety of not only themselves but for others working with them could be at risk. It is the miner’s responsibility to ensure that not only are they safe but also fellow co-workers.

‘Ms Cameron took Victoria to the accident and emergency department of the Central Middlesex Hospital around 11am on 14 July. Victoria was seen by Dr Beynon within an hour of her arrival. Dr Beynon took a history from Ms Cameron which, together with the results of a basic examination of Victoria, concerned him enough to refer the matter to a paediatric registrar. In his view there was a “strong possibility” that this was a case of non-accidental injury.’ Such case as this allows one to think whether or not the professionals who were working with Victoria were not attentive as to what was taking place. The first signs that rose attention were after;

‘A number of Ealing staff who saw Kouao and Victoria together during May 1999 noticed a marked difference between Kouao’s appearance (she was always well dressed) and that of Victoria (who was far scruffier). Deborah Gaunt, who saw the two of them together on 24 May 1999, went as far as to say that she thought Victoria looked like an’ “advertisement for Action Aid”.

The United nations describes a universe suitable for the lives of children to be one in which ‘We will promote the physical, psychological, spiritual, emotional, cognitive and cultural development of children as a matter of national and global priorities’ (United Nations 2002, p.5). Such elected regions where purpose is necessary in order to put this world into being can recognized the same as: putting one into good physical shape, the provision of excellent education; protection from abuse, mistreatment and violent behaviour; and fighting against issues such as HIV/AIDS. Related aims and the process put into such areas form an important factor of policies considered to enable safeguarding and promoting the wellbeing of children in the entire signatories to the UN Convention. A child’s welfare cannot be promoted whilst been separated from others, because they will not thrive but for their needs been met equally by parents, or other key carers, and also by means of the environment in which they live. A definition used by the Government in regards to safeguarding children is said to be;

‘The process of protecting children from abuse or neglect, preventing impairment of their health and development, and ensuring they are growing up in circumstances consistent with the provision of safe and effective care that enables children to have optimum life chances and enter adulthood successfully.’

As Individual we have the right to live freely from violence and abuse. This autonomy is supported by the responsibility on public agencies that works under the Human Rights Act (1998) to intervene proportionately to protect the rights of citizens. Such rights include ‘the Right to life’, ‘Freedom from torture’ which may include humiliation and shameful treatment and ‘Right to family life’ to uphold the individual. The experience of abuse and neglect is likely to have a significant impact on a person’s health and well being.

‘On more than one occasion, medical practitioners who noticed marks on Victoria’s body considered the possibility that children who have grown up in Africa may be expected to have more marks on their bodies than those who have been raised in Europe. This assumption, regardless of whether it is valid or not, may prevent a full assessment of those marks being made.’

In the year 2009 October the 12th a new ‘Vetting and Barring’ scheme was produce whereby several new lists came into existence, one protecting individuals working with children and that of working with adults. The restricted files will be governed via a different body, which is known as the Independent Safeguarding Authority (ISA). Individuals found on such records within the ISA are obliged to be banned from a far wider range of keeping up performance than before. Harmonised actions will be reinforced generally to NHS and social care workers. The recent proposal is been established on a phased basis which comes into effect from July 2010. Individuals who are now working with children or vulnerable adults whom has changed professions will be forced to sign up through the ISA. At present district nurses in positions are obligated to register from 2011, so therefore all referrals are now expected to be made to the Independent Safeguarding Authority (ISA).

‘The Independent Safeguarding Authority (ISA) was created as part of the Government’s Vetting and Barring Scheme (VBS) to help prevent unsuitable people from working with children and vulnerable adults. It is a Non Departmental Public Body, sponsored by the Home Office’. They work in corporation along with the Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) to assist in making certain there is no rationale for why individuals who wants to work or volunteer in the company of children or vulnerable adults should not do so.

As stated in the Safeguarding for Adults frame work article it says that the group of adults who are in subjective by the ‘No Secrets’ are individuals “who is or may be eligible for community care services”. In such groups, folks who “were unable to protect themselves from significant harm” are called “vulnerable adults”. Though the term “vulnerable adults” elevates the occurrence in maltreatment experienced by the individual or the group, at hand it is acknowledged that this

characterization is debatable. Therefore been labelled can mislead, because one can direct basis of mistreatment towards the victim, instead of placing accountability by means of conduct or elimination of others. The demand of safeguards to shield vulnerable adults and children was tainted by the Richard Inquiry (2004) shortly after the murder of Jessica Chapman and Holly Wells in 2002. Following the proposal of the Inquiry, the Safeguarding Vulnerable Group Act 2006 came to pass to make sure that there is a more forceful structure to safeguard folks at risk. The Act came into existence on the 20 January 2009, to improve procedures for safeguarding vulnerable adults from abuse or the possibility of harm by workers or volunteers whose employment allows them a considerable amount of access to such individuals. Emphasis is now placed on aiding adults to have admission to services of their own choice, instead of ‘stepping in’ to afford protection. ‘Better Government for Older People’ is a model of how the support of dynamic residency for all is been assessed as an investment on a fundamental position in avoiding risks to their independence. Meanwhile, the responsibility to offer protection to those who do not have the mental capacity entrance themselves has become clearer (e.g. Human Rights Act 1988, Mental Capacity Act 2005, Domestic Violence Crime and Victims Act 2004). In acknowledgment of the shifting context, earlier suggestions to the safety of “vulnerable adults” and to “adult protection” effort are currently substituted by the new term: ‘Safeguarding Adults’. This expression measures all toil which permits an adult “who is or may be eligible for community care services” to maintain independence, security, preference and their human right to exist in a life that is liberated from abuse and neglect. Such explanation particularly embrace individuals who are considered as being able to majority of the care services, as well as those in good health and are entitled for societal care services but such needs in relation to safeguarding is for admittance to normal services such as the police.

The children Act 1989 puts in place legal requirements for child protection practise. The Act introduces actions that are applicable for when a child may be at risk of abuse. Community and undisclosed guidelines correlated to children works under such law, in a progression of values overriding the performance and procedures, equally in and away from court. An important fundamental in regards to the requirements of the children Act, 1989, ‘is that the child’s welfare should be ‘paramount’ in making decisions about her life and property’. There is no exact description in the Act to say what is understood by ‘welfare’ nevertheless it is obvious in an attempt to clarify its meaning that by far it is a substantial and objective welfare and that it furthermore refers to the child’s emotional, social and moral well-being. Shortly after the Children Act of 2004 introduced a legislative structure intended for the support of the community to protect children within England and Wales. All organisations that came into contact with services to children, together with healthcare organisations, are required to cooperate to make sure that in implementing the purpose they safeguard and uphold the safety of children. Safeguarding children is dependent on the efficient professional work done in connection with the organisation and specialist with respect to their different job roles and expertise.

Baby peter’s death was very upsetting, it went quite far beyond been an exceptional crime. Too many children has been killed in similar situations which tallies up to 30 children in this country since that of Baby P and majority of them has died at the hands of a carer or parent. What raised attention to these cases was due to how many times the local authority, including Haringey who handled the case of Victoria climbie’ and was judged for neglecting the protection which was meant to be given to her several years earlier, such children were seen not be taken seriously therefore protection was not given. Whilst baby peter was alive he was taken to the hospital on many occasions with injuries shown and was seen to up to 60 times by different professional’s just months before he passed away. The guardian cited that couple of days before peter died he was seen by a paediatrician who did not realise that his broken back and paraplegia. A headline on the Article noted that ‘Baby peter was born into a nightmare of abuse, violence and despair, he never stood a chance’. It went on to say that snarled family life of Baby Peter is a realistic forewarning of the trails that many generations of abandoned and primitive abuse can visit on children.

‘Although children comprise one of the largest and most vulnerable groups in society, their needs are frequently not recognised or met’ (Cloke & Naish, 1992).

The Every Child Matters (2003) article places an interest that a child’s wellbeing and safeguarding of him or her from trivial distress is critical and the liability is that of the parents, carers and professionals working with children. ‘There is a shift in attitude amongst policy makers that suggests the welfare of children is the responsibility of everyone’ (DoH, 2002). During earlier period to current times, extreme cases that ranged from 197O’s to recent times where children have been abused or died by the direct hands of their carers, because of this the protection of children has become a soaring concern for the government. Cloke and Naish (1992) has reasoned that the nursing profession holds a definite input in tackling child abuse, from happening to them getting involved in an extended period local authority care. Professionals working within the healthcare plays an important position in making sure that children and families recieves the best care, assistance and services they require in request to improve children’s wellbeing and development. ‘Working together to safeguard children is the national framework for child protection practise and its guidance applies to everyone working with children and families'(DH,1999). This justifies how the child protection procedure works, appointing the duties of professionals and the measures to pursue whilst there are apprehension regarding a child. ‘One of the principles of working together and the accompanying framework for the Assessment of children in need and their families is that child protection practise should be operated within a broader framework of children in need'(DH, 2000). This take into consideration the requirements of children whom are been looked after, have a disablity, somewhat abused in the course of prostitution or suffer societal exclusion. ‘It is fair to state that the Laming Inquiry into the death of Victoria Climbie (Laming 2003) has resulted in much of this unprecedented governmental activity and that this is now driving national policy development even though other children have died through parental or carer abuse’ (DoH 2002a, DHSS 1991, DHSS 1982).

It is obvious that to hand is an overload of policy change are controlling how the society protects and safeguard children and vulnerable adults and this is more recognised within the health care. ‘The NHS has been subjected to the audit and inspection of child protection arrangements across all trusts (DoH 2002b, CHI 2003a, CHI 2003b) many following on from the Laming Inquiry’ (Laming 2003). This was also related to the rationalization of the duty carried out by higher administration at a level for safeguarding children, structured on overruling the guidance of Child Protection Responsibilities of Primary Care Trusts published in 2002. In addition to such proposal the Kennedy Report (DoH 2001) has asked agencies and folks to think about how they support and safeguard children in health care and this has develop into a crucial issue supporting of the Children’s National Service Framework (DoH 2004b). ‘Given all these initiatives it can be difficult for primary care practitioners, because of their diverse working environments and practice, to keep abreast of the changes that will be affecting their role and particularly if children and young people are not their designated client group’ (Thain 2000). In time it will be expected that primary health care practitioners needs to increase their awareness on the basis about safeguarding children, undertaking specialized training and to be able to take on challenges if and when necessary action is needed. Whilst the need for widespread child protection training and particular medical administration are fairly recent in the health service programmes, the accountability is for everyone to take it upon themselves to be aware of when a child may be at risk is the requirement of section 47 of the Children Act 1989 (DoH 1989). ‘This requirement is detailed within Working Together to Safeguard Children (DoH 1999) and the more recent publication What to Do if You Are Worried a Child is Being Abused (DoH 2003) sent to every practitioner on the NMC register’. Although the Children Act stands as, the Code of Professional Conduct is also there to identify the dependability of practitioners to ‘protect and support the health of individual patients and clients’ (NMC 2002, Robsbaw and Smith 2004). Therefore referrals of children who have a need or may be at risk of abuse should be pointed to the appropriate authorities whom are already surrounded by the protection of the code; on the other hand practitioners are compelled not to infringe secrecy except given the go ahead or within the public’s interest to do so.

The question is asked as to what safeguarding might be; a definition specifies that for one to develop and thrive, the youth should be tested of their ability the same as been kept out of harm’s way through the community contributing opportunities in order for them to grow. To safeguard young people it is more than just protecting them, it requires a complete action taken to ensure no harm is potentially placed in their way. ‘By its very nature abuse – the misuse of power by one person over another – has a large impact on a person’s independence. Neglect can prevent a person who is dependent on others for their basic needs exercising choice and control over the fundamental aspects of their life and can cause humiliation and loss of dignity’. ADSS, 2005

To answer this question I am going to critically evaluate the impact of direct work with children from a safeguarding perspective which will include children who have been placed in foster care as a direct consequence. In addition I will identify and critically assess the impact of current legislation and research on the lives of children. I will first explain direct work and its importance; secondly I will evaluate the impact of conducing direct work with children in light of legislation and policy and thirdly critically evaluate the critical issues highlighted in the theory behind the use of observation.

Hapgood, 1988 ( cited in Fahlberg, 2012: 338 ) posits that; “direct work with children is used to enable children to understand significant events in the past, confront the feelings that are secondary to those events, and become more fully involved in the future planning of their lives”. Social work with children can be challenging especially as they are working with individuals who are not fully developed and may not be able to express their needs as adults can. It is at this point that a firm understanding of how to obtain information from children is understood in order to protect them, Winter, (2011).

Direct work with children can take many forms and typically consists of; Listening, communication, observations and interacting with the child, (Winter, 2011). There are a variety of tools and mechanisms that can be used to undertake direct work with children and family’s such as; using drawings, life story work, playing games and using toys, (Ruch, 2014). Carroll, (1998) illustrates some tools that can be used with children such as; Treasure Island and magical houses, during my practice placement I used some of these tools as part of the single assessment, a single assessment is a holistic framework used by social work professionals which is based on an ecological approach to assessing children under three different domains, (Ferguson, 2011). For example I worked with a child who had been exposed to parental abuse and was subsequently placed in foster care. To establish a relationship with the child and explore the child’s experiences I used the Treasure Island task which allowed me to establish the child’s relationships, which the child has a strong attachment with and or any concerns with their relationships, McMahon, (1992). Subsequently conducting direct work has come from lessons learnt from the past, an Ofsted report highlights that the previous focus has been on the parents and not the child, Ofsted,(2009 / 2010). To illustrate a young girl was a victim of a sexual assault by a male known to her mother, her mother misused drugs and alcohol, it was found that the girl was only spoken to once and her wishes and feelings had not been prioritised thus leaving her in a vulnerable position open to the attack, (Ofsted, 2009 / 2010). With this in mind in and reflecting on my practice from the previous example, I would adapt some of the tasks I used in this scenario; this is because I found the magical house task was too advanced for younger children: it may have been more appropriate if I used the buttons task because using objects can make things easier for younger children to understand.

The impact of serious case reviews and inquiries have seen a drive to integrate direct work into social work practice which has been reinforced by legislation. The Children Act, 1989 (as amended by section 53 (4a) of the Children Act 2004) requires that the local authorities give due regard to a child’s wishes and feelings, of which S.22 (4a) Children Act 1989 includes those children that are or maybe looked after by the local authority. The Working Together To Safeguard Children’s Guidelines 2013 further strengthened these obligations as it was found, in the Daniel Pelka’s serious case review that Daniel was not spoken too until too late and at that point may not have been able to articulate himself, therefore his wishes and feelings had not been heard if they had been heard this may have saved Daniel from his untimely death, (Lock et al,2013). The importance of the Child’s Voice is also enshrined in Article 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998 which requires;” the Local Authority to ascertain the ‘ wishes and feelings’ of children and give due consideration (with regard to the child’s age and understanding) to these when determining what services to provide, or what action to take”, ( Munro, 2011:24). In addition the UK has ratified in 1992 with The United Convention of the Rights of the Child, (UNCRC), of which Article 12 (1) states; “Parties shall assure to the child who is capable of forming his or her own views the right to express those views freely in all matters affecting the child, the views of the child being given due weight in accordance with the age and maturity of the child”, (UNCRC,1989: 5). The local authority must also follow the; National Minimum Standards for both Adoption (2013) and Fostering (2011) which is used in inspections by Ofsted. While the Children and Families Act, 2014 affords children greater protection and support ensuring all children can be successful, Donovan, (2014) .

However although legislation has reinforced the need for direct work with children there are challenges that persist in its use, ( Ruch, 2014). Luckock, (2013) argued that with the increase in legislative controls this has had an impact on the beauracracy within social work, and as Ferguson, (2011) argues this may lead practice to becomes target driven and service led rather than client led. Furthermore Ferguson, (2011) purports that practioner skills are being eroded because of the time spent at their desks typing out assessments and meeting statutory requirements. For example on my practice placement I have had experience of completing paper work for a child whom became a Looked After Child by the Local Authority, the administration that was generated from this process restricted me to the office for at least three days because statutory guidelines require that; LAC reports, court reports and legal meetings must be completed within specific timeframes. The Working Together Guidelines reinforce this need for protocol for instance by stipulating that; “ every assessment should be focused on outcomes”, (Working Together To Safeguard Children, 2013:22), which could perhaps be seen as leading towards a service led practice instead of child centred practice. In addition social care staff have also highlighted that they feel as if they are working in a culture of fear such that, any display of warmth towards a child could be misconstrued as unprofessional and exploitative, ( Mcleod, 2010). This raises difficulties for professionals when they conduct direct work with children and hope to form a relationship that allows the child to feel comfortable speaking about their experiences, (Tyler et al, 2005, cited in Oliver, 2010). Notably when Looked After Children were asked what they wanted from their social worker, they said; “ they would like their social worker to be like a friend” (Oliver,2010: 29). This

Current research and theory have also had an impact on the use of direct work in the lives of children who need safeguarding or who are Looked After by the Local Authority, (Luckock, 2013). Development theory such as attachment by Bowlby, (1969) can inform direct work with children to obtain the child’s wishes and feelings, observation is a method which can inform and use attachment theory to aide in the assessment process (Sharman et al, 2004). During my practice placement, I used observation as a method to inform my assessment. I observed a one year old child who became Looked After by the Local Authority. I observed the Child at the foster carer’s house, during my observation I noted that the young girl had trust issues, this was indicative from her behaviour; she would not have eye contact with adults and if she did look she would cry inconsolably. Importantly she did not allow her foster carer to touch her, she would push her hand away. When she was placed in her play pen she could scream uncontrollably and rock back and forth, her head was also flat which was an indication that, she had been left in one spot over long periods.

Prior to this observation I planned how I would conduct the observation. I thought about the key purpose of the observation and from my thought process I concluded that I needed to ascertain what the infants’ attachment style was, (see Ainsworth, 1969). In addition I needed to observe the child’s relationships with others to establish how the infant had been emotionally affected by her mother’s maltreatment. As the child was Looked After it was the LA statutory duty to visit the child in the foster placement therefore consent was not an issue at this time. I also thought about which observation method I should use, I used the naturalistic style of observation, this meant I had to sit quietly and observe the child, it also meant that I must be careful not to make eye contact, I made notes in the present tense and my main focus was on the infant, (Fawcett, 2009).

However practitioners must be aware of how their own personal and cultural experiences can have an impact on the observation, (Fawcett, 2009). Lord Laming, (2003) illustrates this point in the Victoria Climbie report by suggesting that; the focus was on Victoria’s heritage and cultural background and because of this, it acted as a barrier for professionals in assessing the need of the child, of which the need was that of any child who was suffering from abuse irrespective of cultural explanations. With this in mind Fawcett, (2009) suggests that typically, we tend to have a set hypothesis when observing and as such we try to find evidence to fit that theory, what Fawcett, (2009) explains is that we need to have an open approach to observation and think holistically. For example, I had to be mindful that although I was aware of the mum’s case history and that the case was going to court, I had to ensure that I was not looking for evidence to support the court report but that my task was to assess holistically.

Furthermore there are strengths and limitations of using the naturalistic method of observation. The strengths to this approach is that; one is able to keep an ecological picture of the situation, notes can be taken immediately thus insuring the observation records are as accurate as possible and that it is in a natural setting, (Sharman, 2004). For example, because I was able to write the notes as the observation was happening I managed to get the intricate details , for instance her hand gestures which I may have forgotten had I written the notes later. However Sharman, (2004) noted that the limitations to the naturalistic approach raised dilemma’s such that there was no direction as to what data should be collected and the data that was collected was subsequently amassed together without structure. Reflecting back on my practice with this observation, I would have preferred to observe the child with both of the foster carers present, because the female foster carer told us that the young girl was afraid of female carers but was comfortable around the male carer her husband, it would have strengthened the assessment if I was able to observe this early on in the placement.

In addition to the strengths and weaknesses of naturalistic observations another aspect to be aware of is the impact of the observer’s emotional responses in the observation (Fahlberg, 2012). For instance in my observation I had to manage my emotions when watching the child in distress, because that would have clouded my judgement of the situation. Trowell and Miles, (2009) suggests that the observers need to realise what observations are their own emotional responses and thoughts and these need to be separated and noted which emotions have come from the observer and which is the child’s. Luckock, (2013) argues that if the observers emotions are not acknowledged and examined this may lead to a different outcome of the observation as your own emotions may distort your judgement of what is actually occurring. Similarly Fawcett, (2009) highlights that the observer needs to be aware that every child is unique in for example in temperament and may not react the same way because their developmental path which is a mixture of biological and environmental experiences. The Every Child Matters agenda recognises such differences and purports to highlight that child development is holistic and must thus be assessed as such, Fawcett, (2009).

As discussed previously consent for this observation was not problematic however at times it can be. I have had to manage a situation when this has been an issue; a young 15 year old boy had been maltreated. Children’s Social Care (CSC) wanted to observe the boy in school to see his attachment behaviour to inform their assessment. CSC would not have been able to speak with the child without permission from the parents and this was not an option. As the local authority did not have parental responsibility this can pose as a dilemma for practitioners who are assessing children that may be at risk of significant harm. However in some instances the local Authority can assess the child as Gillick competent, NSPCC, (2015) this means that the local authority are saying that the child who is under 16 is mature enough to give consent for example to being observed, NSPCC (2015).

Gaining consent for the observation and using clauses such as Gillick competence raises issues of power and how social workers should work in an anti – oppressive and anti – discriminatory way, (Luckock, 2013). Essentially observation can be oppressive for the child, it can perhaps make the child feel uncomfortable and highlights the power imbalance between them and the professional, Luckock, (2013). Therefore Baldwin, (1994) posits that groups that have less power for example; children, the elderly and BME groups should be assessed on the basis of being “seen and heard” (p,79). Similarly observers need to recognise that society views for example about; being Gay, black or disabled are not necessarily positively viewed as for instance being a heterosexual white male. Therefore these differences need to be recognised when observing and the observer should perhaps use a socio – cultural frame work and discuss the observation afterwards with a supervisor as this allows for a reflective stance when making judgements, and could help achieve records that are as accurate as possible,(Hsu and Arnold, 2006).

Overall legislation, policy and research has had an impact on direct work, legislation as discussed has reinforced and compelled the use of direct work in practice. This has can be seen as a positive influence leading to a child centred way of working which may be beneficial for children as they will have a voice and receive the required help. On the other hand research into how direct work can be effective for example; in observation can help to inform the direct work process and insure that children’s experiences and lives are being assessed accurately as possible.

According to the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) every individual, regardless of their race, nationality, gender, age or disability, has a right to a free compulsory elementary education. The access to education is a requirement for full realization of the right to education (Article 26). Education is the key to child’s enjoyment of many other rights. It helps children to ensure to reach their full potential, their well-being, and to assure their short and long term interests. Indeed, Education right leads children to participate as an active responsible individual in society, and to enshrine the value of others and natural environment (Hodgkin & Newell, 1998). It also decreases their vulnerability to poverty; inequality and social exclusion (Hart et. al, 2001).

There are several responsibilities of local education authorities, schools and statutory provisions which have a bearing on this area including; Local authorities have to safeguard and promote the welfare of children in need and provide a level of services which is appropriate to those children’s needs (Children Act 1989, Section 17). Moreover, LEAs and other organisations are required to participate in the exercise of functions. They are also required to make child protection enquiries if they find a reasonable cause to suspect a child in their area (Children Act 1998, Section 47). Furthermore; they have to make arrangements to ensure that their functions are accomplished with considering the safeguarding and promoting of children’s welfare with regards to Secretory of State guidance (Children Act 2002, Section 175). Education Act 2002 and The Education Regulations 2003 stated that the managers of independent schools and governing bodies of non-maintained special schools have to safeguard and promote the welfare of children at the school as approved by the Secretary of State (Non-Maintained Special Schools Regulations 1999). Local education authorities, governing bodies must consider the purpose of section 175 and 157 of the 2002 Act. They have to make arrangements with relevant agencies including district councils, police, the probation service and NHS bodies to collaborate in improving the well-being of children. LEAs also set out 11 standards, which should be met by educational, social and health services by 2014 (children Act 2004, Section11). Local education authorities and educational establishment’s performance are subject to inspection relevant legislation and guidance. Their performance will be judged not only by the available procedures but also by their effectiveness in terms of safeguarding children from harm (Morris, 2005).

Safeguarding Children in education

According to Children Act 2004, safeguarding and promoting the welfare of children is defined as protecting the children from maltreatment, preventing them from health or development impairment, ensuring children to growing up in safe circumstance and effective care; and enable children to have optimum life chances and successful adulthood. The main aspects of safeguarding are; minimizing the risk of harm to children’s welfare and working in full partnership with other agencies to agreed local policies (Department for Education, 2004).

Although protecting children from maltreatment is essential in preventing the impairment of health or development, they are not on their own adequate to ensure that children are breed in safe and effective care. Under Section 10(2) of the Children Act 2004 various aspects of safeguarding and promoting welfare is set out. Five outcomes are considered for children’s wellbeing including: “physical, mental and emotional health; protection from harm and neglect; education, training and recreation; making a positive contribution to society; and social and economic well-being”. For this purpose, State provided range of services for helping parents to take good care of their children, such as universal services of health, education, housing and income support. Furthermore, early intervention to deal with the adverse effects of socioeconomic disadvantage is a key priority for UK Government by providing an easy access to stimulating environment for parents to support. In 2010 Graham Allen was commissioned by the Government to undertake an independent review, investigating how children at greatest risk of multiple disadvantages get the best start in life. In 2003, second form of early intervention is embodied in the Every Child Matters reforms. These reforms looking for increasing the involvement and contribution of different services which working with children and their families to observe and respond to their difficulties. Sure start is designed to support the Communities First initiatives in disadvantage areas. It gives particular attention to the early years (0-3). In 2004, for early year education intervention, the Welsh Assembly Government aimed to provide a good quality education through Flying start.

According to Department for Education (2006) local authorities and schools safeguarding covers more than a child protection in relation to individual children. It also covers issues such as health and safety of the pupil, bullying, and a range of other issues, for instance school security, drugs and substance misuse, providing first aid and medical needs of children with medical conditions. To achieve the children’s protection, children must feel supported and valued by a group of reliable professionals. As stated by Department for Education guidance Safeguarding children and safer recruitment in education (2006), schools must provide a safe environment and move towards identifying and protecting children who are at risk of significant harm and taking appropriate action and making sure that they are kept safe both at home and in the education setting. Indeed schools are responsible for preventing unsuitable people from working with children to increase safe practice and it requires that all staff should be suitably trained and be aware of action to take. Besides, schools have to work in partnership with other agencies which provid services for children. Local authorities are responsible for providing model policies and procedures on all aspects of safeguarding to ensure that schools are aware of, and fulfil, their responsibilities. For that reason, they offer advice and training for schools’ staff and governors (DfE, 2006).

Recruitment and selection

Staffing Guidance under section 35 (8) and 36 (8) of the Education Act 2002 stated that education setting, local authorities, schools and agencies which supply staff to the education sector should adopt robust recruitment and vetting procedures which help to prevent unsuitable people from working with children. Face to face interview, checks and professional and character references should be carried out on people as part of the recruitment process, to check if an applicant is physically and mentally is capable of preforming the job tasks. Criminal record must be undertaken routinely and should be mandatory. The Criminal Records Bureau and any necessary checks of the POCA list and List 99 can illuminate the majority of unapt applicants. According to School Staffing Regulations (2006) and intended Further Education Regulations (2006), all who seek positions in schools which involve contact with children such as volunteers as well as checking employees and supply staff, are subject to enhanced background checks.

Staff Protection Training

Basic child protection training is vital for all staff who is working with children (Lord Laming’s report The Protection of Children in England, 2009). Bandele (2009) on his report on safeguarding training within the education sector inferred that schools need to offer appropriate safeguarding training to all staff in order to ensure, they are confident about their day-to-day work in terms of safeguarding children (Munro, 2011). According to Ofsted’s (2010) survey of social worker across England, professional development and training of the social workers have progressed considerably. In general, social workers have been reported that such training helps them to have a better understanding of children’s needs and their work.

The LSCB child protection procedures are in consistent with ‘Working Together to Safeguard Children’ (Children Act 2004) and the All Wales Child Protection Procedures (2008). Staff needs to have the knowledge that equips them to recognise and respond to child welfare. Applicants working through Protocol Education are well placed to observe abuse or neglect. According to Department of Health (2003) it is an applicant duty who is working within a school or nursery to consider not only major incidents, but also signals which give cause for suspicion or concern. When this occurs the applicant must report any concerns to the school’s designated member of staff with particular responsibility for child protection work. It is also his or her responsibility to follow the specific guidelines which set out in school’s Child Protection Policy. It is an applicant’s duty who is working outside of the school or nursery environment to report any concerns to the Social Services Department. Applicants have a responsibility of explaining on first contact and they cannot keep information confidential. If abuse is suspected the concern should be reported at branch level and then discussed with the Operations Director and then reported to Social Services (Safeguarding Children in Education, 2008). If a candidate has a reason to believe that a child is being abused then the safety of that child has to be a vital consideration in deciding what action needs to be taken. If there is a complaint of abuse made against an applicant who is working through Protocol Education it should be reported to the Branch Manager and Line Managers( Welsh Assembly Government guidance circular, 2004). The necessary action will be taken in accordance with Protocol Education’s Complaints Procedure. An applicant should never interfere on his/her own (Children Act 1989, Section 47).According to Protocol Education ,all applicants of the position outlined in the 1996 Education Act, are forbidden form any form of physical contact and corporal punishment. Under certain circumstances teachers and other staff are allowed to use reasonable force to control pupils which have been authorised by the head teacher. All schools should have a policy about the use of force to control or restrain pupils. Failure to comply with the relevant legal requirements will result in removal.

Child Protection Training

Another step to protect children in the education sector is to develop a curriculum that improves children’s understanding about safeguarding and welfare. Training children is as important as staff training. As a part of developing a healthy and safe lifestyle, Personal, Social and Health Education curriculum materials (2010) provide resources which enable schools to challenge issues regarding healthy relationships, such as, bullying, abuse and domestic violence. Personal safety’s discussions can reinforce the point that any kind of violence is unacceptable. For example it makes children and young people to be aware of the behaviour that is not. In 2011 PSHE education became a statutory subject in schools in England. PSHE provides the opportunities for children to learn about how to keep safe; and who to ask for help if their safety is threatened. For example, recognising risks in different situations and managing how to behave responsibly. Indeed it helps them to judge what kind of physical contact is acceptable or unacceptable. Also help them to recognise when pressure from others threatens their personal safety or develop effective ways of resisting pressure, including knowing when and where to get help. In all schools corporal punishment is forbidden for all pupils. Teachers or other staff member are outlawed from using any degree of physical contact which is intentionally intended to punish and to cause pain, injury or humiliation.

In UK recently, relevant legislation improvements in safeguarding have been widespread such as, The Children Act, Every Child Matter and The Education. Almost all schools now give high priority to getting their safeguarding procedures right. In Ofsted’s Annual Report (2009/10), Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector wrote:

“Safeguardingaˆ¦is an issue addressed not only with increasing sureness by those responsible for keeping children and learners safe, but one felt keenly by those most vulnerable to harm and neglect.”

Children’s welfare, safeguarding, and early intervention for children should be the main priority of Government. Government policy must enable vulnerable children to be treated as children first. The Department for Education have overall responsibility for the welfare of all children in school through promoting programs, policies and creating a safe learning environment by developing comprehensive child protection policies, inter agency cooperation, early education intervention and children’s protection training.

Abuse can be defined as maltreating, making bad use of, oral and corporeal attacks, insulting , the mistreatment of, or the possessions of unjust or dishonest exercises on an object, individual or being both (Thomas, Holland, 2010). Actions filling the above descriptions and specifically directed towards the child could be termed as “Child Abuse”. These particular types of abusive action, the child personality together with the prevailing environment contribute to how the abuse may affect the child, both at the time of abuse as well as later (Reder et al., 1993). However, this is not a simple concept and involves the duty of child’s guardians to enable their child protected from the conditions of harm (Reder, Duncan 1999). Generally, the child’s guardians may be one or both of the biological parents, but this may not be always. Regardless of who the potential guardian is, the critical duty to safeguard the child from the significant effects of harm remains the same (Quinton, 2004; Powell 2007). Recent statistics by the government of United Kingdom on Child Abuse show that, the illegitimate deaths of children owing to child abuse and specifically, killed by their parents increased to about seventy percent and this percentage was found to be higher with the statistics taken in 2001 (around fifty percent) (Department of Health, 2000). This essay provides a critical analysis of issues associated to child abuse and considers the role of family support in protecting and safeguarding the needy children.

Among various different forms of abuse, physical, emotional and sexual types are considered by the government of United Kingdom. In the public sense, negligence (or neglecting others) was often believed to be as a form of abuse, though the regulations stipulate to consider neglect or negligence a linked but a different issue (Adams et al., 2002). Furthermore, it can be considered as the rising crisis. Most lately, this was highlighted by the civic and media objection with regard to the death of Victoria Climbie, slaughtered by her own aunt and uncle, the snitch ciphers of child abuse mistreated by copious professionals (Adcock, White 1998). On the other hand, the full horror story of Baby P was unfolded before the court by the year of 2008. The jury investigated about the case and it was observed that the baby’s father and mother were involved in the act of child abuse. The shocking signs pertaining to torn ears, absence of toe nails, finger nails and finger tips together with the lesions on the scalp summed up to the tragic and appalling incident in United Kingdom (Adams et al., 2002). The Cleveland Child Abuse Scandal can be taken as another example for the issues related to child abuse. This scandal occurred in Cleveland, England in the year of 1987 during which around 121cases of doubted child abuse were recognised and diagnosed by Dr Marietta Higgs and Dr Geoffrey Wyatt (Child practitioners in Cleveland County). After the court trials, twenty cases that included children from 12 families were identified by judges as incorrectly diagnosed, 100 cases among 121 children alleged to be sexual abuse victims, in rest of the cases, the child was subjected to a protection order and some of them were separated from their parents permanently (Adcock, White 1998). In the year of 2007 (March 21st), Dr Marietta Higgs said in an interview that she would perform the same act again by relying on facts and she suspected that number of individuals who were being abused were even higher than that of named 121 cases. Following these incidents, awareness was developed among the health officials in safeguarding the children in a way by applying proper procedures for the complete management of child protection and subsequent prevention of abuse (Department of Health 2003; Department of Health 2000).

Based on the above illustrations, it can be understood that safeguarding children is the prime responsibility of any social worker regardless of his biological reaction with the child. The vocabulary of child protection has undergone major changes over the last fifty years (Falkov, 1996). The exact meaning and ideology of these changes and their significance in policy and practice linked to welfare and child safety was little ambiguous. The effects of these changes in indicating a cosmetic, superficial updating terminology over time within the complex framework was not found to be intact (Department of Education and Skills 2003; Department of Education 1995). Questionably, these vocabulary changes till the year of 1990’s were suggestive of refinements in identifying, controlling and interfering in the cases of child abuse and neglect ever since its rediscovery in the 1960’s; the agenda related to safeguarding was found to herald more significant modifications. It can be explained as signifying a more methodical and comprehensive approaches to child welfare issues can reduce the incidence of Child Abuse and these approaches were further extended in Every Child Matters (ECM) initiative (Department for Education and Skills, 2004). Following the death of Victoria Climbe, an inquiry report was introduced and it involved strenuous efforts to certify no child slips by the use of preventative services, efforts to enhance information partaking and functioning together with skilled experts that incorporated the foreword of Common Assessment Framework, transformed methods to overcome social segregation and with an objective of providing children a tone of voice in public and government life (Broadhurst et al., 2009). Therefore, Safeguarding children is the key element of current communication in children’s services, still there exists certain ambiguity and overlies about the critical understanding these concepts and principles (Corby, 2006). Contemporary guidelines and developments in the United Kingdom have prejudiced strategies in protecting children to cuddle a great deal responsibility with a focus on recognition, early intrusion and deterrence (Davies, Duckett 2008).

With the concept of protecting the child and improving the quality of child protection services, Professor Eileen Munro published a review, The Child’s Journey by the year of 2007. The first report of this review helped in offering an analysis of unintentional consequences of past developments that aroused within child protection system (Munro, 2007). It completed by ascertaining that professionals are forced from maintaining attention on the child by the difficulty and inflexibility produced in investigations and conventions. Diverse areas recognized for development at this specific stage of re-examination associate, consequently, to these elements of the system (Munro, 1995). To support further changes, the review panel has been functioning in partnership with five different organisations who have appealed superior litheness when calculating the desires of children with an ultimate goal of distributing enhanced results and more directed approaches. This review explains that a good child safeguarding system must be concerned with child’s journey by a system from desiring and receiving help, keeping a clear focus on children’s best interests and throughout. This involves developing expertise and the presence of organisational environment that assist professionals in functioning with children, adolescents and families to provide more assistance (Munro1995; Munro 2007).

In addition, professionals working in various agencies with children and adults who possess parenting rights exchange a common commitment to protect and promote the welfare of the child and for many agencies this feature is underpinned by statutory duties (Howarth 2004; Howe 2005). The guidelines about these duties were explained in the document of “Making Arrangements to Safeguard and Promote the Welfare of Children” published in 2007 (Department of Children, Schools and Families, 2007). Under the Education Act 2002, the laws governing the duties of local authorities in carrying out the functions with a view of safeguarding children and enhancing their welfare was depicted and the same duty was now imposed upon independent schools, academies and technological institutions and colleges (Education Act, 2002). Additionally, the Children Act 2004, independent schools that offer accommodation to children also contain a duty in safeguarding and promoting the welfare of children under the threat of abuse (Children Act, 2004). The document on Every Child Matters: Change for Children, provides information about the local authorities and their arrangements in place to necessitate combined working with each other and with their parents in improving the child’s wellbeing and quality of life (Department of Education and Skills, 2004).

Besides these, to fulfil the responsibilities and to protect the child, each and every organisation must provide their specific services for children, parents and families must support or work with children and should have in place the following guidelines (London Child Protection Council, 2007):

Defined priorities for protecting and promoting the child welfare as stated explicitly in key documents that are concerned to policies and commissioning approaches (HMSO, 2004).

Social workers must develop a culture of engaging with the children, asking their views in the appropriate way to their age, understanding, analysing and considering the obtained views in establishing and developing specific policies as well as in improving the services (Bridge Care Development, 1996).

A determined commitment by senior officials and subordinates to the significance of protecting children and enhancing their well-being.

An unambiguous line of ascendancy and responsibility within and across the firms for providing and commissioning services for safeguarding the children (Department of Education and Skills 1988; Department of Health, 1995).

Developing an understanding about the work pattern in a way to keep the child safe with relation to innovative technologies by being properly equipped to mitigate the potential risks of new methodologies.

Designing procedures for dealing with the abuse and its allegations against staff members, volunteers, commissioners and providing contractual arrangements to make sure about the proper placement of these services.

Making arrangements for the staff and social workers to necessarily train the families who are involved in child abuse and this must be updated through refresher training techniques (London Child Protection Council, 2007).

Appointing child advisers and enabling easy access to staff during service delivery at times needed. Additionally, arrangements must be made to promote effective prevention of internal and external challenges and complaints in relation to access and service delivery (London Child Protection Council, 2007).

Nevertheless, implementation of these duties present a potential challenges for social workers and these may hinder the process of protection and promotion of child’s welfare. One such challenge can be on facing difficulties to reach the child abuse families and these include:

Cultural issues: relating to ethnicity and society.

Language Barriers: This can be observed with the families who may not be able to gain service access owing to their illiteracy and these families that demand an urgent need of interpreting service (for example, marginalised community like asylum speakers who may speak limited or no English). Nevertheless, the usage of interpreters may seem to be critically expensive and difficult in times of limited resources. Besides these, Domestic Violence also plays a significant role in making families difficult to reach by the social workers (Powell, 2007). The violent, aggressive and threatening families present complexities for the social workers in establishing the relationships with that family in order to spend time with the child, listening to them and understanding their views (Reder et al., 1993).

Functioning with families and disabled children: It can be understood that regardless of level of disability (whether moderate, mild and high), working with the disabled child critically presents a challenge to the social worker (Davies, Duckett 2008). Yet, the challenge remains still if the child’s speech is impaired. In such cases, the social workers must rely on the information presented by their parents and other professionals like (Doctors, Speech and language therapists and Psychiatrists, Nursing and other health care skilled workers) who are involved in working with the child.

Inter-personal conflicts: The behaviours pertaining to jealousy, job dissatisfaction, superiority feelings, certainty (being inflexible in one’s willingness in listening to others) and win-lose mentalities also present a challenge to the social workers. But these are minimal and can be avoided by a proper planning and involvement (Quinton, 2004).

In case, if the workers understand that they are being oppressed, Anti-oppressive practices may be employed in a way to identify the oppression in societies, communities, economies and cultures and aiming social work in such a way to negate the critical influences of oppression (Powell, 2007)

Lastly working with the individuals from distinct professionals may offer a challenge for the social workers. However this can be avoided by implementing medical and social models that imbibe the principles pertaining to both health and other fields (Quinton, 2004).

Further research is definitely needed to focus upon the effectiveness of current interventions and practices. In addition, the protocols that are relative to different techniques utilised by practitioners are essential and they must be implemented after testing. In addition, there exists a requirement to establish particular age-related treatment models for childhood abuse and this should be followed by specific longitudinal studies that focus on outcomes of treatment models for further more effective implementation. Although much research was been explored in the area of abuse, still more is needed to efficiently address the issues and this can be enabled by the presence of determined individuals and parents in understanding about the child development and protection.

Although it has been difficult to break down the gender blindness of development history, since 1970, gender’s role in family welfare was made as a visible social construct in development (Kingsbury et al., 2004; Bannon and Correia, 2006). Parallel to improvements made in women’s position in many societies, the importance of gender to economic analyses (Kadam, 2012) and their active participation in development has been one of the most troubled aspects of the development debate (Kingsbury et al., 2004). In the rural sector, the attention to gender issues is even more challenging. This means that understanding the linkages between gender equity and development effectiveness is essential aspect of rural studies. Therefore, gender issues have been a core priority of governments including Iran. Although Iran has made considerable progress in terms of human development, its rural areas face some important challenges. Today rural people have, more than ever before, access to education, health facilities and occupational opportunities. But close examination of their living conditions indicates that although the aggregate level of production and consumption has increased, the distribution of benefits continues to show persistent inequalities, including the need for more equitable income and wealth distribution, improved access to health and basic sanitation services. The concern for increasing the development of the rural women makes researchers eager to focus on enormous diversity of pathways to human development monitoring and evaluation. These attempts lead to determining list of indicators for monitoring and evaluation a range of economic, social and environmental goals. However, various life domains directly contribute to individual development. Perhaps, human development approach presents an opportunity not only to review achievements in human development domain, but also to determine challenges at different global, national and regional levels, systematically. Not surprisingly, the human development approach, which proved very popular in public discussion, has a crudeness that is somewhat similar to mechanical devices of economic development. Besides, this approach is concentrating on what remains undone especially for different regions. Therefore, the validity of the original human development vision has been criticized on a number of fronts. This paper discusses a modified index for measuring rural women development. The present study outlines different concepts important for concerning rural women development, specifically: (1) quality of life; (2) income; (3) social capital; (4) health and sanitation; (5) food security; (6) rate of education; and (7) life expectancy among rural women in Choram County, South-Werstern of Iran. These concepts provide understanding that rural communities are both an environment of care and a cause of disease.

Background

Since 1990, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) has published a series of annual Human Development Reports (HDRs) in which the human development index (HDI) is computed for each country (Sagar and Najam, 1998). HDI embodies Amartya Sen’s “capabilities” approach to understanding human well-being, which emphasizes the importance of ends (Stanton, 2007). This framework has continued to be the keystone of annual reports from the UNDP on dimensions of human development demand most attention in the contemporary world: to lead a long and healthy life, to acquire knowledge and have access to resources for a decent standard of living. Adult literacy and combined enrolment ratios have been selected as indicators for the knowledge dimension, life expectancy at birth as the indicator for a healthy life and an adjusted GDP as the indicator for the standard of living. In essence, the HDRs have pushed the development debate boundaries beyond a traditional economic perspective (Sagar and Najam, 1998). Despite the positive view of these qualities by many scholars (Streeten, 1994), yet not all sides of the story are positive. However, substantial progress has seen in many aspects of human development, even in countries facing adverse economic conditions (Human development report, 2010). In the other words, the progress was proved in improving health and education and raising income, which expand people’s social capital (power to select leaders, influence public decisions and share knowledge). But not in poverty and deprivation reduction to end the inequality and insecurity around the world. As much as the HDI has introduced new way of development thinking, it has also been faced with a number of criticisms (Sanusi, 2008). Unfortunately, over the years, the HDRs seem to have become stagnant, repeating the same rhetoric without necessarily increasing the HDI’s utility.

Progress has varied, and increasing inequality has also seen among people in different countries, across regions, and especially rural areas both within and across countries. The HDI is a measure which reflects its aims imperfectly; and other important questions concerning human development are left out of the HDI altogether. Srinivasan (1994) summarizes the HDI critiques in five main categories: poor data, incorrect choice of indicators, various problems with the HDI’s formula in general, incorrect specification of income in particular, and redundancy.

In fact, the authors have modified the index to address many of its sharpest criticisms, and thus the HDI has evolved over the seven issues of the Human Development Report. Plans that maximize the modified index directly trade-off the allocations to consumption, education and health against each other. This leads to plans that balance expenditures across the three components. Engineer et al (2008) consider net income, in education and health expenditure domain, as indicating capabilities not already reflected in the index and argue for a modified HDI that replaces the income component with a net income component; i.e. income that is net of expenditures on education and health. The multi-dimensional nature of poverty is being emphasized by many analysts and policy makers. Addressing these issues requires new tools. Hicks (1997) proposed a method of incorporating distributional inequalities of three measures of income, education and longevity into the HDI framework. He believed that Gini coefficients could potentially measure inequalities in human development (annual income, educational, and life-span attainment).

A number of attempts have been made to adjust the raw measure of life expectancy to take into account quality of life and time spent in poor health. One concern is that while females generally live longer, their quality of life may be lower due to poorer health than men. The Global Burden of Disease project popularized one such measure, namely disability-adjusted life expectancy (Murray and Lopez 1996). The World Health Organization (WHO) measures healthy life expectancy (HALE) based on life expectancy at birth adjusted for time spent in poor health.

Although, these new thinking approaches and thus the new measurement tools reinforce the continuing validity of the human development vision (HDR, 2010), the study of development in regional contexts, rural areas, bring a second debate on the fore, that focuses on the extent to which the definition and experience of development is culturally specific. And, are the standardised indicators appropriate applied devises for all regions?

Even when progress in the HDI is experienced in the country level, this does not necessarily excel in the local and regional levels. In the other words, as averages can be misleading, it is possible to have an acceptable rate of progress in HDI and be unequal. These patterns pose important challenges for how to think about human development dimensions, its measurement and the policies to improve outcomes and processes over time especially in regional areas and among the mass development neglected target groups, rural women.

Perhaps, the understanding, measurement, and improvement of human development especially in local level have been commonly expressed by the term quality of life (QOL) across multiple disciplines (including sociology, economics, psychology, environmental science, and medicine).

The term QOL is a complex, multi-faceted concept (Farquhar, 1995; Carr et al., 2001; Holmes, 2005) which according to Costanza et al (2007) is generally meant to represent either how well human needs are met or the extent to which individuals or groups perceive satisfaction or dissatisfaction in various dimensions of their lives. Similarly, Calman as stated by Vyavaharkar et al (2012) defined QOL as a gap or difference between hopes and expectations of a person and the person’s present experiences at a given moment in time.

The limited amount of research has focused on QOL in development studies. However, it seems that QOL in the rural setting according to Phillips (2006) is a multifaceted phenomenon determined by the cumulative and interactive impacts of numerous and varied factors (Zaid and Popoola, 2010) like housing conditions, services, infrastructure, access to various qualities and amenities, income, living standards, satisfaction about the physical and social environment (Phillip, 2006).

An integrative definition of quality of life contains two sets of subjective (Carr et al., 2001; Holmes, 2005; Phillips, 2006; Costanza et al., 2007) and objective indicators (Phillips, 2006; Costanza, 2007). The subjective indicator focuses on respondents’ own assessments of pleasure as the basic building block of human satisfaction, happiness well-being or some near synonym of their lived experiences. However, so-called “objective” indicators of QOL on the other hand, focuses on indices and data that can be gathered without a subjective evaluation being made by the individual being assessed (economic production and security, health, food security, literacy rates, life expectancy, …) and may be used singly or in combination to form summary indexes, as in the UN’s Human Development Index (Costanza et al., 2007).

However, there are well-documented differences in subjective QOL between men and women, and in different localities as reflected in various researches. While discussing the definition of well-being, Arku et al (2008) emphasized that the indicators can differ between urban and rural residents within a country and similarly between men and women within the same society because of differences in needs, priorities (Chambers, 1997). Shek et al (2005) and Diener and Suh (2000) mention that the indicators are socially and locally constructed based on the cultural values of communities. Veenhoven (2005) also arguing for the need of incorporation of cultural-specific indicators in determining people’s quality-of-life. Similar results are found in the study of happiness. In a recent exploration of this theme, Camfield et al (2009) revealed that the definition and experience of happiness is culturally specific.

To understand the position of Iranian rural women in the development debate, it is necessary to modify HDI and thus examine the status of women within household and community structures regarding indicators which were chosen to reflect the average quality of life (QOL) – defined as subjective social well-being, food security, social capital, education and training, income, and life expectancy.

Women living in rural areas of Kohgilouyeh and Boyer Ahmad, Iran, are generally known to be suffering from general deprivation including access to and control over land and other productive resources, services and infrustructures, opportunities for employment and income-generating activities, and access to health care. This paper sets out to evaluate development status of rural women in Choram County, Kohgilouyeh and Boyer Ahmad province, South-Western Iran. It proposes ways in which the modified HDI can be improved to better reflect its conceptual intent. The scope of this essay then is not to nit-pick on the finer details of the proposed index, but rather to conceptualize a constructive discussion on how the modified proposed index can be improved to better fulfill its own goal of measuring human development in rural areas.