Within our submission we have reviewed the two Government proposals. Neither provide a framework on which reliable child protection can be delivered by those employed in Regulated Activities. Government is promoting positions close to the status quo that prompted the Home Secretary, now Prime Minister, to initiate the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse. Lessons are not being learned.
The consultation closed at noon on 13th October 2016.
Here are the 779 submissions made to the 2016 ‘Reporting and Acting on Child Abuse and Neglect’ consultation. Councils, Royal College’s healthcare, education, faith, NGO’s and similar
The Information Commissioner’s Office ruled in our favour against the Home Office requiring it to provide us with the submissions to the MR consultation.
The submissions provide useful information, but it’s a depressing picture of sparse safeguarding understanding in so many Regulated Activities. It is the Department for Education which is responsible for the disrepair and dysfunction within the safeguarding framework that fails staff, children and their parents. The framework’s design emerged from social work practice, dominated as it is by familial neglect and its consequences. The resulting thicket of confusion was then misapplied to strategically important and complex Regulated Activities in a thoughtless ‘one size fits’ all approach. As data reveals these settings require the legislative foundation of well-designed MR as data reveals.
You may find many of the responses from professional bodies quite inexplicable.
Surprisingly perhaps, no National Governing Bodies of sport made a submission to the consultation. Why not? Neither did the Catholic Church or the Church of England with the exception of the Diocese of Canterbury (see #556 and the answer to Q7), and it’s worth reading.
To use the data, we suggest you click on ‘Index of Consultation Responses’ and either scroll through or word search what you are looking for. Then open ‘consultation responses’ and go to the corresponding index number.
‘The Church has some form of Mandatory Reporting’ (Peter Hancock – Lead Bishop for Safeguarding) | “Oh no it hasn’t!”
It’s panto season – is it ever not with Church of England Safeguarding ?
On the 14th July last year, Bishop Peter Hancock featured on BBC r4 Sunday programme which reported on IICSA’s final hearing into child abuse within the Anglican Church.
During the programme, which highlighted that Archbishops Welby and Sentamu both called for the introduction of statutory mandatory reporting Peter Hancock, the lead Bishop for safeguarding, in an ‘off-air’ exchange with the BBC journalist, said this:(more…)
It’s inconceivable IICSA will not recommend well-designed Mandatory Reporting. But must we wait until 2021?
A summary of IICSA MR Seminars 1 + 2 with some background.
In Spring 2018 many of us wondered if IICSA’s long promised mandatory reporting (‘MR’) seminar would ever happen. Well-designed MR is a key component of functioning safeguarding, particularly for Regulated Activities. It introduces responsibility and accountability to these strategically important institutional roles where only nominal responsibility and accountability exists presently. It’s in these settings that children spend most time after time with family. Importantly, and always overlooked, MR law also protects staff who are mandated to report known or suspected abuse. This rarely recognised element is as important as the obligation to report.(more…)
The full article as it appeared in the Times is here.
Here is the pre-edited draft sent to The Times which contains important additional facts and supporting data :
‘It’s all different now’ is the default refrain from those who today are responsible for safeguarding in institutional settings such as education, sport, healthcare and faith. The amount of time spent by children in these operationally complex places is second only to time spent with their families. But the assertion begs the question, how is it all different now when today there is still no statutory obligation on ‘professionals’ working in positions of trust to report known or suspected abuse of a child to the authorities for independent assessment? (more…)
Top 10 Myths About Clergy Abuse in the Catholic Church (Psychology Today) 1/8/19 and a reply from Tim Lennon the President of SNAP
A ‘ping’ notified us of an article in Psychology Today (1/8/19) titled “Top 10 Myths About Clergy Abuse in the Catholic Church.” 1) It doesn’t happen? Not quite, but the article by Thomas G Plant Ph.D., ABPP suggests it’s de minimis.
We decided to email Tim Lennon the President of Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests (“SNAP”) to seek his opinion and invited him to respond, particularly as Dr Plant is an American academic :
Reply to Church Apologist :
IICSA Anglican Hearing 3/7/19 – Observation about the work being undertaken by the Social Care Institute of Excellence for the Church of England
On day three of Anglican Hearing at the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse, Dr Sheila Fish gave evidence on the work the Social Care Institute of Excellence is doing for the Church of England.
On the important matter of ‘audits’ that SCIE have been commissioned to undertake in the 42 dioceses of the Church, we alighted on the following comments made by Dr Fish :
The approach we take with audits is flavoured with the Learning Together methodology. So that Learning Together method is SCIE’s model for initially conducting incident reviews …….
Dr Fish continued : (more…)