This study is prepared for the usage of a Child Protection Case Conference for the five members of the Jones household. The Jones household consists of Mark ( 25 ) And Sue ( 21 ) and their three kids John ( 6 ) , Emma ( 4 ) and David who is merely 3 hebdomads old. The conference is being held to see the extent to which the demands of John, Emma and David are being met, as besides the hazards to which they are exposed.
With the Child Protection Conference being a meeting between the parents of kids and the people from different bureaus who know the household, this study aims to supply a brief item of the household scenario and a brooding commentary on the household fortunes, appropriately supported by the theoretical and practical cognition of the writer on the hazards faced by the kids and the model chosen for such hazard appraisal.
This introductory subdivision is followed by a brief overview of the instance, a brooding commentary and eventually a summational subdivision.
The appendix to this study provides inside informations about the household scenario and can be accessed by users of this study. To province really briefly, the Jones household has three kids. John, the eldest kid suffers from address holds and is exhibiting behavioral troubles at place and school. He demands single attending and has inclinations for unmanageable choler and physical force with kids every bit good as adults. He has besides exhibited delinquent behavior and has been reported for daze lifting. Emma, the 2nd kid is good natured, loves traveling to school, has been assessed to be developmentally advanced and loves her male parent.
David, the freshly born is a premature kid and is non in the best of wellness. It is hard to feed him and he cries frequently. Mark Jones the male parent has a history of young person offense, condemnable behavior and domestic maltreatment. He has grown up in hapless societal and economic fortunes and is now working as a driver of heavy vehicles, a occupation that frequently keeps him off from place. Sue the female parent, had her foremost kid when she was 15 and suffered from station natal depression. Not in the best of wellness and holding suffered from domestic maltreatment, she finds it hard to take attention of her three kids. Whilst she comes from an flush background, she has small contact with her parents, who disapprove of Mark.
Caring and protecting kids is now at the really nucleus of the societal work system of the UK ( Cleaver, 2004, p 14 ) . Whilst the importance of protecting, fostering and alimentary kids and the demand to supply them with appropriate environments for accomplishment of physical, emotional and mental development has ever been felt to be of import by policy shapers in the UK, a figure of episodes that have taken topographic point over the old ages show that kids continue to be exposed to assorted unsafe and need suitable protection. The deceases of Victoria Climbie and Aliyah Ismail in 2000 and 1998 ( BBC News, 2005, p 1 ) created tremendous media tumult and public indignation and led to legion legal and policy steps that aimed to protect and safeguard kids ( Norton, 1999, p 1 ) . The recent deceases of Baby Peter and Khyra Ishaq, who died in awful fortunes, the first on history of force at the place ( Duncan, et Al, 2008, p 1 ) and the 2nd from famishment, revealed that kids continue to be in danger and in demand of protection and safety, both in and out of their families ( Carter, 2010, p 1 ) . Appendix 2 provides dismaying inside informations on a figure of kids who experienced force that resulted in serious hurt and even decease.
I have, in these fortunes tried to synthesize the assorted legal and policy steps that are available in the UK for protection and safety of kids every bit good as appraisal of the hazards to which they are exposed, for the consideration of the Child Protection Conference on the demands of the kids of the Jones Family. The legislative model for kid protection in England and Wales is provided by the Children Act 1989, farther amended by the Children Act 2004 ( NSPCC, 2010b, p 4 ) . The act defines injury as sick intervention or damage of physical or mental wellness or physical, emotional, societal, rational or behavioral development. The act besides enshrines of import rules. The paramountcy rule implies that the kid ‘s public assistance should be paramount for determinations on his or her upbringing. The wants and feelings of kids should besides be ascertained before the passing of any order ( NSPCC, 2010b, p 4 ) . All attempts should be made for saving of the place and household links of kids. The jurisprudence besides underlines the importance of parental duty in the conveying up of kids ( NSPCC, 2010b, p 4 ) . A figure of other Acts of the Apostless like the Children and Young Persons Act 2008 and the Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006 and the Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004 besides lay down the jurisprudence on protection of kids in different fortunes ( NSPCC, 2010b, p 4 ) .
Apart from extended statute law for safeguarding and protecting kids, the authorities has introduced a series of policy steps after the decease of Victoria Climbie and the publication of the Laming Report in 2003 ( Department of Health, 2003, p 7 ) . The Every Child Matters Programme inside informations governmental policy for guaranting the safety, nourishment, growing and development of all kids in the state ( Department for Educationaˆ¦ , 2005, p 4 ) . The counsel “ Working Together to Safeguard Children: a Guide to Inter-Agency Working to Safeguard and Promote the Welfare of Children ” defines kid maltreatment and neglect and provides counsel on the action that bureaus should take to protect kids. The “ Framework for the Assessment of Children in demand and their Families ” provides counsel to professionals to place kids in demand and determine the best possible ways of assisting such kids and their households ( NSPCC, 2010a, p 3 ) .
The kids in the Jones household are being presently challenged by hard fortunes. Mark, the male parent has a occupation that keeps him off from place for long periods and he is therefore non truly able to assist in family work or conveying up the kids, except by fiscal support. He has a history of criminalism and domestic force. Even though it should be considered that he is undergoing an choler direction programme in order to get the better of his emotional instability. Sue, the female parent is merely 21 and has already had three kids. She besides has a history of station natal depression, which could perchance come up once more after the birth of David, the youngest kid who is non even a month old. Coming from an flush household, with whom she is estranged for some old ages, she is evidently fresh to the really hard household fortunes in which she is placed and the duties of a female parent of three kids. The opportunities of all three kids being neglected is really high in these fortunes, where the male parent is non at place most of the clip and is seeking to get the better of his emotional instability and aggressive behavior and the female parent is prone to depression, physically tired and worn out and has been burdened with the duties of caring for and conveying up three immature kids.
The three kids in the household face the existent danger of physical and emotional disregard. Such disregard could specifically harm their physical, emotional and cognitive well-being and development, affect their public presentation at school, expose them to dangers of under nutriment and unwellness and badly impact their life opportunities ( Howe, 2005, p 31 ) . Neglected kids are besides more prone to truant behavior and substance maltreatment. John the eldest kid already suffers from address jobs, fond regard upsets, attending seeking behavioral jobs, uncontrolled choler and inclinations for force. Such a state of affairs could hold arisen because of attending shortages in his early childhood old ages and greater attending being given to his younger sister by his male parent. John now poses a serious physical menace to his two younger siblings because of his fury and violent temperament. Emma and David are unfastened to the hazards of disregard, every bit good as physical injury. Whilst Emma is the front-runner of the household and portions really good relationships with her parents and may non hence be exposed to pretermit, the status of the youngest kid David is unstable. A premature kid who is given to enduring from colic, David needs excess attention, support and nutriment, which may clearly be beyond the ability and capacity of Sue, in her frame physical status and her history of station natal depression. Apart from disregard, which could harm her physical and emotional development at a important period in her life, he besides faces the menace of physical force from John, who can good ache him severely in a tantrum of fury, if his demands for attending are non met.
I feel it to be really obvious that the three kids in the Jones household are at considerable hazard, all three from disregard and the younger two besides from force. The GIRFEC ( acquiring it right for every kid ) theoretical account provides a new attack for designation and meeting of demands of kids. The theoretical account places the well-being of kids and provides a common model for appraisal, planning and intercession across all bureaus ( Lamey & A ; Rattray, 2009, p 2 ) . Whilst the GIRFEC is a comprehensive theoretical account, it is specifically focused on taking the whole kid attack, puting the kid at the Centre and maintaining kids emotionally and physically safe. Its scope is therefore broader than mere child protection ( Lamey & A ; Rattray, 2009, p 2 ) . It adopts a holistic position and an grounds based attack, wherein the engagement and sentiments of the kid and parents are of import for good results. The theoretical account has three of import constituents, viz. the Wellbeing Indicators, My Word Triangle and the Resilience Matrix, which can be used both individually and together for happening the best solution for kids in demand ( Lamey & A ; Rattray, 2009, p 2 ) . The My Word Triangle in peculiar provides counsel to societal workers on what kids need from people who look after them. These include ( a ) everyday attention and aid, ( B ) maintaining the kid safe and ( degree Celsius ) being there for the kid. These three issues are specifically of import for sing the fortunes of the three kids of the Jones household ( Lamey & A ; Rattray, 2009, p 2 ) .
This study has been prepared for the Child Protection Case Conference to see the demands of the kids of the Jones household, the extent to which they are being met and what more demands to be done to guarantee the safety, development and growing of these kids. Appraisal of hazard and guaranting safety of kids is a critical component of current societal work theory and pattern in the UK. Extant statute law and programmes call upon societal workers and other concerned bureaus like the instruction and wellness services to work in close cooperation and coaction with each other to guarantee the safety and protection of kids in demand and at hazard with the aid of specific appraisal models, tools and procedures. An application of the GIRFEC theoretical account reveals that the kids of the Jones household could confront troubles on history of their parents non being able to supply equal mundane attention and aid, maintaining them safe and being at that place to guarantee their physical and emotional attention. These fortunes become more baleful in visible radiation of the female parents frail wellness and past history of station natal depression, the frequent absence of the male parent from place on history of his work and the violent inclinations and behavioral jobs of the eldest kid. The conference must see all these fortunes in order to suitably measure the demands of the kids and the extent to which they are being met and thenceforth to be after for appropriate interventionist action.
BBC News, 2005, “ Climbie study impulses childcare reform ” , Available at: news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in… /uk/ … /victoria_climbie… /default.stm ( accessed February 28, 2011 ) .
Birchall & A ; Hallett, C. , 1995, Working together in Child Protection, London: HMSO.
Bodley, A. , “ Risk Assessment and Child Protection ” , Creative Minds, Available at: www.mylearning.org/learning/science… /Child % 20Protection.pdf ( accessed February 28, 2011 ) .
Brandon, M. , Howe, H. , Dagley, V. , Salter, C. , Warren, C. , 2006, “ What appears to be assisting or impeding Practitioners in Implementing the common appraisal Framework and lead ” , Professional working Child maltreatment Review, 15: 395-413.
Carter, H. , 2010, “ The calamity of Khyra Ishaq ‘s decease ” , Available at: www.guardian.co.uk/ … /khyra-ishaq-starving-death-background ( accessed February 28, 2011 ) .
Cleaver, H. , & A ; Walker, S. , 2004, Measuring kids ‘s demands and Fortunes, London: Jessica Kingsley.
Department of Health, 2000, Measuring kids in demand and their households: pattern guidelines, London: the Stationery office.
Department of Health, 2003, “ The Victoria Climbie Inquiry study of an enquiry by Lord Laming ” , Available at: www.dh.gov.uk aˆ?A HomeA aˆ?A Publications ( accessed February 28, 2011 ) .
Department for Education and accomplishments, 2005, Every Child Matters, Green paper London: HMSO
Duncan, C. , Jones, S. , & A ; Brindle, D. , 2008, “ 50 hurts, 60 visits – failures that led to the decease of Baby P ” , The Guardian, Available at: www.guardian.co.uk/ … /baby-p-child-protection-haringey ( accessed February 28, 2011 ) .
Ferguson, H. , 2004, Protecting kids in Time: kid maltreatment, Child Protection and Consequences of Modernity, London: Palgrave McMillan.
Howe, D. , 2005, Child Abuse and Neglect: Attachment, Development and Intervention, London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Lamey, R. , & A ; Rattray, M. , 2009, “ The Shetland Guide to GIRFEC ” , GIRFEC Project Team, Available at: www.shetland.gov.uk/socialwork-health/ … /1GuidetoGIRFEC.pdf ( accessed February 28, 2011 ) .
Norton, C. , 1999, “ The sad life, inexorable decease and awful treachery of Aliyah, 13 ” , independent.co.uk, Available at: www.independent.co.uk aˆ?A NewsA aˆ?A UKA aˆ?A Home News ( accessed February 28, 2011 ) .
NSPCC, 2010a, “ The kid protection system in the UK ” , National Society for the Protection of Cruelty to Children, Available at: www.nspcc.org.uk/Inform/ … /child_protection_system_wdf76008.pdf ( accessed February 28, 2011 ) .
NSPCC, 2010b, “ An debut to child protection statute law in the UK ” , National Society for the Protection of Cruelty to Children, Available at: www.nspcc.org.uk/ … /child_protection_legislation_in_the_uk_pdf_wdf48953.pdf ( accessed February 28, 2011 ) .
Unity Injustice, 2005, “ A Child Protection System so secret it Kill ‘s ” , Available at: www.unity-injustice.co.uk/child_victims.htm ( accessed February 28, 2011 ) .
Wilson, K. , & A ; James, A. , 2007, The kid Protection Handbook, London: Bailliere Tindall
Ward, H. , 1998, “ Using a Child development Model to measure the results of Social Work Interventions with Families ” , Children and Society, 12 ( 3 ) : 202-211.
( To see to what extent the demands of John, Emma and David are being met ) .
The Jones household late moved out of a council level in metropolis to little town rural country. They are fighting to pay the mortgage on their two sleeping rooms level. There is no outside drama country, and the level is accessed via outside stepss.
Mark – Dad- 25 old ages old.
Mark has a condemnable record as a young person wrongdoer. He has a history of domestic maltreatment and is set abouting an anger direction plan. He is employed as an HGV driver. He has a big drawn-out household. Mark ‘s background is working category with hapless socio-economic fortunes.
Sue – Florist’s chrysanthemum 21years old.
At age 15 Sue had postpartum depression which was non recognized. She has a hapless relationship with her ain parents. They are really flush ; Sue ‘s female parent continually expressed her letdown in Sue when she was turning up and does non O.K. of her relationship with Mark. Sue has ne’er worked she is pregnant with her 3rd kid.
John – Son ( of Mark and Sue ) 6 old ages old
John has terrible fond regard issues. He is exhibiting behavioral troubles and has a important address hold. He has been identified as necessitating Additional Support for Learning.
Emma – Daughter ( of Mark and Sue ) 4 old ages old
Emma is the favoured kid. She is an easy kid to care for and loves traveling to the baby’s room where it has been noted that she is developmentally advanced. She has a really good relationship with her pa.
January 2010 – John starts at the local primary holding transferred from a big school in the metropolis. He is in a composite category of 5 and 6 twelvemonth olds and he is one of the oldest. John has a important address hold.
March 2010 – Records for John have been requested from his old school but have still to get. Meanwhile, his instructor, Mrs Smith is holding trouble pull offing John ‘s behavior. He is really demanding of single attending and if this is non forthcoming he becomes really angry. He throws things around the schoolroom and over the past two hebdomads has hit three younger kids. He has besides kicked his instructor. He has been reported for shrinkage and has been grounded by his parents for bad behavior. His choler is exacerbated because he has trouble in pass oning.
David was born prematurely last month, and was little for gestational age. He is hard to feed and is really flatulent. He cries a batch and is now 3 hebdomads old. Following the birth of David, Mary the wellness visitant has visited the household place to offer support and advice to Sue. Sue present as tired, level and listless. The house is disorganised. Sue tells Mary that David is a truly hard babe to feed and that he cries invariably. Mark can non assist as his occupation takes him off from the household place for drawn-out periods of clip. On the rare occasions he is at place, he is tired, cranky and sleeps a batch. The state of affairs in the place is non helped by the changeless demands of John. However Emma is co-operative happy and helps her female parent around the place and with the babe.