Badge Joe Public blog

Laming report: can we really put proposals into practice?

There are still hurdles to clear before improvements can be made in child protection
Lord Laming's child protection review
Lord Laming: 'Thousands of children are helped, supported and, in some cases, have their lives saved' by social workers. Photograph: Fiona Hanson/PA

Lord Laming's report into the death of Victoria Climbié published six years ago ushered in major reforms to the child protection system. His review of those changes in the light of the Baby P tragedy will be very influential in shaping child protection policy and practice in England in the coming years.

A major concern arising from the post-Climbié changes has been that they have resulted in too much attention being given to organisational changes such as improving information sharing between social workers and other health and police professionals. Such communication is, of course, crucial to identifying and working effectively with child abuse, but the new systems have caused social workers to have to spend too much time at their desks while having less time to work directly with children and families.

So it is a relief to hear Ed Balls, the children's secretary, telling parliament in response to Laming's report that he has "already asked the [social work] task force to review the effectiveness, procurement and IT used in integrated children's systems and it will now report on this next month, so that social workers can both keep detailed records of their cases and spend more time with vulnerable children." If some genuine change were to occur in this direction, progress could be made.

The attention to organisational change has also been at the expense of a more concentrated focus on the experience of frontline professionals and the sheer complexities and difficulties of performing child protection. It is a great relief then to see Laming spell out that: "Every day, thousands of children are helped, supported and, in some cases, have their lives saved by these staff", and to hear him recognise that "rather than feeling valued for their commitment and expertise, professionals across these services often feel undervalued, unsupported and at risk".

This is absolutely true. Ed Balls seems to have got the message, too, stating in response that "when children are at risk, it is the skills, confidence and judgment of frontline professionals which make the biggest difference."

The key question is: how can we ensure that all frontline staff have the necessary skills and the capacity to exercise such professional judgment? Part of Laming's answer is to give a high priority to making senior managers more accountable for their work, having them sign up to a social care code of conduct similar to that required for frontline staff and making it possible to discipline them if their services are found to fail. This is only likely to have a positive impact if it is clear what standards, knowledge and actions constitute good child protection practice. The answer to that is not as obvious as it may appear.

Training could provide some answers but it depends on what people are being trained to do and how the requirements of effective child protection are understood. Laming wants to see some managers receiving training in child protection and for the most senior managers to be supported by social work managers who have extensive child protection experience.

This suggests a welcome recognition of the importance of wisdom in guiding good practice. A crucial question is: what are they being trained to do? I fear that the answer may follow the established pattern of being predominantly seen as developing inter-professional communication and information sharing. If that is the case, it will fail to advance our capacity to protect children.

The core problem in the Baby P case was the absence of an approach which sought to directly engage with the child in the parental home. Baby P was the subject of a child protection plan in Haringey, north London, and was seen by a social worker and a doctor in the last week of his life. His mother and other male "carers" used various tactics to deceive and manipulate professionals by covering up the child's injuries and hiding the presence of the men in the home.

When the head of Ofsted inspections was asked in early December what social workers were meant to do about such deception, she said their inspectors found that Haringey's health and social care professionals and the police did not communicate well enough with each other. But the key point is that before any information can be shared, someone has to find it out.

It is precisely in performing those child protection tasks that the real challenges begin. Getting beyond such deception is very difficult and it depends on much more than the oft mentioned "talking to and listening children" and has to involve touching and examining them to ensure they are safe. This requires the skill to negotiate and use good authority with parents and carers to ensure they do not prevent the child being properly engaged with.

It is in learning about the complex dynamics of such relationships and how to cope with the emotional demands of child protection work while remaining child-centred that training can best advance the capacity of social workers, other frontline staff and managers at all levels to protect children.

• Harry Ferguson is professor of social work at Nottingham University

Today's best video