Child Protection in England and Sweden - Assignment Example

Child protection in England and Sweden Every society must deliberate on how to protect its children. The laws and culture affect the way social workers attend children and their impact in child protection in England. Child protection is both a public and private responsibility. In England children are seen as part of the broader society. Child protection in England has been under scrutiny for the last few years. In England, everyone is responsible for child protection. However, the department of education has been tasked with the responsibility of statutory nature. This is enacted through local authorities. The local safeguarding boards ensure that key agencies get involved in children work effectively. This initiative began in earnest in the year 2006 (Skinner & Bell 2007). The core membership includes local authorities, health bodies, independent sectors and volunteers (Stevens & Cox 2008). Why is this area of practice important for those who require social work services? In what settings does it take place? In the area of child protection is sensitive to the society. Many parents and children call social workers in times of need. Social workers are responsible for carrying out an initial assessment and enquiries into cases of any child suffering (Stevens & Cox 2008). A social worker is viewed as an ethical worker. English law has taken stern measures against child abuse (Skinner & Bell 2007). A small physical castigation may become a cause for a court order. The law suggests that abuse subjects a child to psychological suffering. Social work services are needed to salvage children welfare. In the past, cases of child molestation have resulted to child death (Saba 2007). The government has taken pro-active measures by involving the community through the use of social workers and advocating for children rights (Stevens & Cox 2008). Social workers are expected to be authentic to both parents and children. Studies demonstrate that social workers face the challenge of fulfilling the prospects of children and parents (Cochrane & Clarke 1993). Dictatorial attitudes by social workers were cited amongst the least projected attitudes from these strategy makers. In England, Social personnel are anticipated to co-work with parents and other stake holders in the profession. The effectiveness of social work determines the welfare of children directly. In extreme cases, professional social work leads to protection of children’s life (Saba 2007). Social work services are considered among the closest sources of urgent help to children who are being molested (Skinner & Bell 2007). This explains why this area of practice is important to those who require social work services. The government has a deterrence strategy to children molesters by taking firm action and securing children who are in danger (Stevens & Cox 2008). The setting of child protection has been brought to the municipal level or local governments. In some cases, it is embedded in the school system (Skinner & Bell 2007). The aim has been to make social work services as accessible as possible. Historical and policy background – when did social work start to intervene in this area of practice in England? Why did they start to intervene? In England, the first formal child death inquiry was the Curtis committee report. The report was an inquest into the death of Dennis O’Neill in 1945. This triggered the establishment of modern child protection. The children Act 1989 has been amended several times. In England, the legislative framework for child protection is given through Children Act 1989. The Act was boosted through the addition of Children Act 2004 that outlined the government’s legal framework in every-child-matters program. This changed the way children services are structured in England. The local authorities are supposed to safeguard children welfare within their area of influence (Corby & Young 1996). This includes assessing children needs and the upbringing of children within their families (Saba 2007). Referrals to the police and NNSPCC helpline are passed to the local authority child protection group. The team assesses the information given and acts within one working day as provided by the law (Saba 2007). The authority may decide to search for further information before giving a firm response. In England, child protection officers are known as social workers. Social workers are responsible for carrying out an initial assessment and enquiries into cases of any child suffering. The length of the inquiry is 35 working days. Information is gathered from children, parents and family (Skinner & Bell 2007). The inquest may also involve other professionals to determine the gravity of the children needs. The social workers are responsible for undertaking assessment and gathering information from all the concerned parties. The social workers also liaise with other professionals like doctors, teachers, doctors and health visitors (Corby & Young 1996). The verdict of the enquiry led by the social workers must uphold the standards of the section 47 that proposes provision to protect children who are in danger (Andersson 1993). Social workers are responsible for drafting a child protection formula or plan (Saba 2007). The plan involves caring and monitoring the child. In extreme cases, the child protection plan may involve removing the child from the family care (Saba 2007). This only happens when the welfare of the child at risk. Which recent policy initiatives affect the development of social work /welfare and the practice and context in which social workers practice? Changes have been done to the child protection and social policy in England. These recent policy initiatives are visible through social work operations and changes in response to children distress calls. Under the current guidance, the initial assessment must be done within ten working days (Cochrane & Clarke 1993). During the assessment, the inquiry can apply for an emergency protection order from the courts if the child is in extreme danger. This gives the social workers the authority to remove the child from home for up to 8 days. There is an alternative for an exclusion order which bans the abusive individual from the family (Coffey & Atkinson 1996). The exclusion order gives the non-abusive parent the permission to stay with the child. The police service can take its own initiative. The police service has the power to prevent the removal of the child from a safe place like the hospital. Police protection can last for up to 72 hours without obtaining the court order. This applies in exceptional circumstances. When a child is considered to be continued risk, a child protection conference is held. This comes after the section 47 inquiry. The conference is held after 15 days. The social workers must attend these conferences and involve all the relevant officers including the family (Coffey & Atkinson 1996). The child may or may not be called to attend the conference. The aim is to get the state, professionals and parents agree on the long term and short term protection of the child (Cleaver & Freeman 1995). The conference comes up with a mechanism of monitoring children welfare through the deployment of social services. This involves reducing the risk to the child by making the necessary changes. The social services in child protection policy in England can obtain temporary orders to allow for further investigation. This is followed by a care plan detailing where that the child will live and school arrangements (Saba 2007). The interim order can last for eight weeks. Judicial interpretation of Children Act 1989 has made the interim orders less needful than in the past. The use of pre-proceedings process has provided an alternative in case of the need for urgent action. What recent policy agendas affect social workers and service users in this area of practice? The changes is policy have increased the capabilities of the social workers in the area of child protection. This has resulted in enhanced and increased functions of social workers. Social workers have been empowered by the law to oversee child protection and the interaction of judiciary, the police service and the community to ensure child protection services are advanced. This has affected the social workers workload and effectiveness. The government needs to empower the social workers with enough resources. The legislation shows high trust for social workers and their ability to make sound judgments on children’s development and welfare. State interventions are added to the social work services to ensure children get the basic services continuously (Coffey & Atkinson 1996). The social service Act regulates social support in preschool child care and economic assistance. Social workers intervene in case of child neglect (Skinner & Bell 2007). In social- cultural setup, formal system structures are replaced by the role of parents and communal initiatives that protect children (Coffey & Atkinson 1996). In social-cultural context elaborate policies and formal structures are built to ensure child protection. A systems approach is not prescriptive. Different actors are assigned unique responsibilities with an aim of cementing strong child protection policies. How does practice in England in this area compare with another country’s ways of providing social work services? England and Sweden The child protection policy and social services in England and Sweden share much in common. Social workers are expected to be friendly, compassionate and caring (Corby & Young 1996). Social workers are expected to be authentic to both parents and children. Studies show that social workers face the challengers of satisfying the expectations of children and parents (Cochrane & Clarke 1993). Authoritarian attitudes by social workers were cited among the least expected attitudes from these policy makers. Social workers in England are expected to co-work with parents and other stake holders. Sweden has been known to be a societal interest state from many viewpoints. In Sweden, child protection is embedded in the legal, cultural and political context. The concept reflects the norms of parental responsibility for diversified child experiences (Coffey & Atkinson 1996). In England, child protection is institutionalized. In Sweden, a social worker is viewed as a moral worker. Swedish lawmakers have taken stern measures against child abuse. In Sweden, a minute corporal castigation may be a cause for a court order. The Swedish law suggests that discrimination or abuse subjects a child to psychological suffering. Therefore, causing a child to feel ugly, worthless or clumsy can attract a court order. Just like England, Swedish child protection policies emphasizes on social services. In addition to the far reaching powers, the Swedish child welfare program enjoys tremendous public support. England and Sweden have a culture of traditionally supporting social control issues. Swedish social workers are known to be professional and effective (Skinner & Bell 2007). The child protection system in both Sweden and England is designed to place emphasis on child support and wellbeing. In both England and Sweden, child protection entails action that stops sexual exploitation, and threats of physical punishment. The laws intervene when a child is subjected to heavy labor or un-normal responsibilities. In Sweden, child neglect covers a broad spectrum which includes insufficient care and lack of medical care. When did child protection start in both countries and where is it practiced? In the beginning of this century, Sweden got its first child welfare legislation. The child protection policy was a result of industrialization and the need to save children from criminal ventures (Coffey & Atkinson 1996). The current teenager welfare legislation, communal services Act, was approved in the year 1980. Adolescent protection is part of social services. It entails child day care and social assistance. Social workers have been strengthened in Sweden through professionalism. In England, the government enacted child protection policy to protect the welfare of children. However, as many children began being born out of wedlock in Sweden, single mothers became overwhelmed by parenting. Many children were neglected in the wake of Second World War and children homes had all the responsibilities. In the current approach of child protection in Sweden, the social workers are given a prominent role (Winefield & Barlow 1995). There is no significant difference between children and youth care in the Swedish child protection program. Just like England, Sweden has many local authorities who oversee the child protection policy (Wilford & Hetherington 1997). Child protection differs from one municipal power to another. In places that have no specialized child protection workers, child protection program is integrated with the school organization (Coffey & Atkinson 1996). In Sweden, the child protection services are legal and fall under municipal authorities (Skinner & Bell 2007). The municipalities have the right to come up with initiatives that protect children as long as the frame law is respected. Sweden does not have organizational dividing lines that explain the different forms of intervention. As a result, young persons under the age of 20 are considered to fall into child protection program (Winefield & Barlow 1995). In both England and Sweden, the history of child protection has grown over the decades. The child protection policies have demanded that social workers have to be humane and professional. Children suffering under abusive guardians have the option of help lines from the local authorities in both England and Sweden. Sweden and England have some of the most progressive child protection and social work policies. References Andersson, G .1993. Support and relief: the Swedish contact person and contact family program. Int J Social Welfare, 2:54-62 Cochrane A. & Clarke J. 1993. Comparing welfare states. Britain in international context. London: SAGE. Cleaver, H. and Freeman, P. 1995 Parental Perspectives in Cases of Child Abuse. London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. Coffey, A. and Atkinson, P. 1996 Making Sense of Qualitative Data: Complementary Research Strategies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Corby, B., Millar, M. and Young L. 1996 ‘Parental Participation in Child Protection Work: Rethinking the Rhetoric’, British Journal of Social Work 26 4: 475–92. Maitra B. 1996 Child abuse: a universal "diagnostic category"? The implication of culture in definition and assessment. International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 42/4, pp 287-3 04. Saba, F. 2007. "A systems approach in theory building." In Moore, M.G. Ed. Handbook of Distance Education. New York: Routledge. Skinner, K. & Bell, L. 2007. Changing structures: Necessary but not sufficient. Child Abuse Review,6, 4, p. 209. Stevens, I. & Cox, P. 2008. Complexity theory: Developing new understandings of child protection in field settings and in residential child care. British Journal of Social Work, 38, p. 1320. Wilford, G. and Hetherington, R. 1997 ‘Families Ask for Help: Parental Perceptions of Child Welfare and Child Protection Services in an Anglo-German Study’, unpublished report. London: Centre for Com­parative Social Work Studies, Brunel University. Winefield, H. R. and Barlow, J. A. 1995 ‘Child and Worker Satisfaction in a Child Protection Agency’, Child Abuse & Neglect 19: 897–905. Young, T. M. and Poulin, J. E. 1998 ‘The Helping Relationship Inventory: A Clinical Appraisal’, Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Human Services : 123–33. Read More