Child Protection Conference

[Panny]

My child is 15, is autistic and has other special needs and mental health diagnoses and has been on a child in need plan for over a year.

Social services have been basically useless and have also continuously lied to me, witheld information from me and made countless mistakes. Because of this I reached the end of my tether and said I wanted to close the case and make complaint. They then applied for section 47 and child protection conference was held.

None of the goals for the child protection plan were different to those on the child in need plan. In fact, were as on the child in need plan we had MDT meetings around every fortnight, they will now be every 3 months!

Of the 10 professionals in the conference, only 2 recommended the child protection plan to go ahead. These were the police and the NHS commissioner. Even the social workers said it should stay on child in need. The police chose the category of physical abuse, the NHS commissioner chose emotional abuse. Both specified it was just to get the child protection plan in place and that they do not think I have harmed my child or allowed anyone else to harm my child. The chair also wanted CPP in place and chose category of physical abuse, stating that this was because my son has self-harmed and is abusive towards me (physically). Again they reassured me I no one was suggesting I had caused harm to my child. The CPP is now in place because the chair over rode the majority of professionals who recommended staying on child in need.

I cannot find any information saying a category can be chosen on the basis of a child harming themselves or harming the parent. Is this actually true? I can only find information stating it is when a parent either causes the harm themselves to the child or allows someone else to cause harm to the child.

Can anyone help clarify this?

Many thanks.

[Suzie, FRG Adviser]

Dear Panny,

Thank you for your post.

Your 15 year old son, who an autism, special needs and a number of mental health diagnoses, has recently been placed on a child protection plan under the category of physical abuse. The Chair states this was because your son has self-harmed and is physically abusive towards you. You were told that this was not because you had caused physical harm to your child. You say you cannot find any information saying that a category can be chosen on the basis of a child harming themselves or harming the parent.

The purpose of the conference is for parents and professionals who are involved with the child to get together and decide whether the child is at risk of significant harm, and if any action needs to be taken to protect the child. Under the Children Act (1989), section 2 (b):
the harm, or likelihood of harm, is attributable to—
(i)the care given to the child, or likely to be given to him if the order were not made, not being what it would be reasonable to expect a parent to give to him; or
(ii)the child’s being beyond parental control.

Harm is defined in the Children Act (1989) under Section 31, subsection 9 (b):
“harm” means ill-treatment or the impairment of health or development [including, for example, impairment suffered from seeing or hearing the ill-treatment of another];
“development” means physical, intellectual, emotional, social or behavioural development;
“health” means physical or mental health; and
“ill-treatment” includes sexual abuse and forms of ill-treatment which are not physical.

Therefore, in your son's case, the Chair has decided that your son has met the threshold for having experienced harm - whilst this may be physical harm directly caused by you - the important thing is that threshold has been met. The Chair may say that any harm your child is experiencing is due to your child being beyond parental control, for example.

Local authorities will often use the categories of physical; emotional; sexual; and neglect to describe harm - this may not be explicit in the legislation, but it encompasses more specifically describes what kind of harm a child may be experiencing.

Under the statutory guidance, Working Together to Safeguard Children (2018), physical harm is described as 'a form of abuse which may involve hitting, shaking, throwing, poisoning, burning or scalding, drowning, suffocating or otherwise causing physical harm to a child. Physical harm may also be caused when a parent or carer fabricates the symptoms of, or deliberately induces, illness in a child.'

I would advise that if you are not satisfied or are confused about the category of abuse that has been identified for your child, that you ask to meet with the Child Protection Chair directly, so that they can explain this to you clearly. You may also find it helpful to read the Chairs' Report and the minutes from the Child Protection Conference.

Best wishes,

Suzie.

[Panny]

Thank you for your reply.

I have spoken to the chair but and she has not said anything about the child being beyond parental control. She says the category was chosen on the basis that he causes harm to himself and me.

Much of the self harm has happened at school so they would have then also say he is beyond the school's control on that basis.