Multi-Agency Practice for Children in Need of Protection - Literature review Example

Multi-agency Practice for Children in need of Protection Introduction Protection of children and promotion of their welfare is a collective responsibility and activity. It is the duty of different agencies to work jointly to prevent neglect and abuse, to safeguard children from injury and to recognize and report concerns on child abuse and neglect. Protecting and promoting the wellbeing of children, particularly safeguarding them from considerable harm depends upon effective combined working amid professionals and agencies with different expertise and roles. Individual children, particularly the most vulnerable children together with children at utmost risk of harm will require coordinated assistance from education, health, children’s social care, voluntary sector as well other agencies, entailing youth justice service. Multi -agency activity in child protection According to Wigfal and Moses (2001) multi-agency practice refers to the range of diverse services having some shared or overlapping objectives or interests , brought together to work jointly towards a common purpose. In Every Child Matters government document, it is the right of every child to be given the opportunity to fulfill their potential through minimizing levels of ill health, educational failure, teenage pregnancy, neglect and crime. (HM GOV ECM, 2017). According to HM Government (2017) every person who works with children, entailing teachers, general practitioners, police, youth workers, social workers and community and voluntary workers has the role of safeguarding and protecting children. According to (HM Government, 2017) working together to safeguard children document, it is the responsibility of local authorities to safeguard and promote the welfare of every child and young person within their area. The children Act 2006 requires local authority to make sure that the advice and information to local early years’ sector is availed, and training is offered for the people working within the early years. A referral must be made to a children’s social care if there exists reasonable cause to suspect considerable harm or the child seems to be in need under section 17 of Children Act 1989(Owen & Hughes, 2009). Challenges of multi-agency working Communication and information sharing A key challenge of working jointly is poor sharing of information and lack of communication amid professionals and agencies. According to Percy-Smith (2011)Lack of clear communication channels as well as absence of quality communication between agencies can act as a threat to interagency working in protection of children in need. Transparent communication structures, maintenance of consistent communication all through the functioning of an inter-agency group along with technical platforms for communication such as adequate information technology systems can be facilitative (Percy-Smith, 2011).When Jenny, a staff member of the early years’ setting noticed bruising on the back of Peter’s back, she did not record and also did not report to the manager. Inter-agency processes According to Percy-Smith (2011) inter-agency processes are a major factor affecting the success of interagency working. Inclusive planning and consulting with member agencies and service users on priorities, issues and needs in significant for implementation of multi-agency working, for instance extensive consult results to bottom up development and contributes to extensive commitment (Percy-Smith, 2011). When the manager of the early years’ setting report received a report from the staff member (Nicola) about Peter being abused by his father and he was uncertain about making a child protection referral, he consulted social care. Funding and resources Funding is a barrier that collaborative agencies face in their work. This is due to concerns about sustainability, conflicts over financing between and within agencies and a universal lack of financing multi-agency development work, training of professions and service delivery costs (Tilstone & Rose, 2012) Tilstone and Rose (2012) argue that funding is a barrier to collaborative working of agencies because different agencies have different short-term and long-term budgets. Short-term funding, financial uncertainties and lack of equitable and joint budget amid partners are obstacles to effecting working of multiple agencies. Time is important in the establishment of projects and development of relations and it is hard to fully exploit collaborative advantage if financing is short-term (Tilstone & Rose, 2012). According to Moran et al (2009) sufficient resources, in terms of staffing, time and funding is core to the effective functioning and success of multi-agency working. Financial equity and certainty is important as well as clear arrangements on how agencies share or pool resources. Time limited or insufficient funding is a problem to multi-agency working. A rapid staff turnover, recruitment intricacy and inadequate time allotted for multi-agency activity are potential barriers to the success of interagency working (Moran et al, 2009). Roles and responsibilities Issues that relate to effective multi-agency working include commitment, role demarcation, respect, knowledge and trust of other agencies. The willingness to work jointly is vital as the commitment to multi-agency working by members at every level. Thus lack of commitment is a barrier to multi-agency working (Leathard, A, 2012). In Charlie’s case, the designated officer is not committed to work together with teacher Jonathan and Charlie’s parents. Leathard (2012) argues that a clear demarcation of responsibilities and roles along with a shared acknowledgement and understanding of the manner in which every role varies and its contribution to inter-agency work is vital. Role uncertainty as well a blur of professional borders can serve as an obstacle to multi-agency working. The development of mutual respect, trust and an affirmative regard for all experts in all agencies is of great significance. Stereotypical thinking along with inability to identify the contributions that other agencies make hold back multi-agency working. Thus, it is important to be attentive to and tackling issues of status, hierarchy and power (Leathard, 2012). Cultural issues Some agencies are highly structured and their staff wants a culture of focus, agreed aims and routine. Engagement of diverse agencies makes professionals to be in contact with diverse systems of values which are dissimilar from those experienced in their own organization (Pycroft & Gough, 2010) Establishment of realistic and clear objectives and aims that are acknowledged and understood by every agency, development of a mutual vision as well as setting up of right targets can facilitate multi-agency working through offering clarity of rationale (Moran et al, 2009). Nevertheless, this barrier can be overcome through shared learning as well as inter -professional or inter-agency training particularly when it is a portion of ongoing professional education to enhance better collaboration between agencies (Pycroft & Gough, 2010). Management and governance Management of multi-agency activities at the strategic level is challenging due to conflicts of interest in inter-agency management teams. It might be hard for experts from diverse agencies to work jointly because some professionals might have the feeling that they are more significant in power and status than other professionals or an agency may feel that it is more powerful and experienced than other agencies (Pycroft & Gough, 2010). Darlington et al (2010) point out that leadership is a major factor influencing multi-agency work. Leadership drive at the strategic level, entailing obstinacy and vision promotes functioning of multiple agencies. Clear managerial presence and support as well as a distinct coordinator or leader is instrumental to inter-agency working. Lack of apparent leadership and absence of commitment and support from the top management can be harmful to multi-agency working (Darlington et al, 2010). In Peter’s case, the upper management of the early years’ setting does not demonstrate commitment. When Nicola reports that Peter was physically and emotionally abused by his father, the manager was initially reluctant to make a child protection referral. Nevertheless, after consultation with the designated officer, he decided to contact social care to make referral. Statutory Assessment Social workers perform statutory assessment of a child if he or she is considered to be suffering significant harm or is in need. Children Act 1989 children in need are those who are not likely to maintain or reach a satisfactory degree of development and health or their development and health will be considerably harmed with no provision of services (HM Government, 2017).When information collected during assessment makes the social work to suspect that the child is likely to is suffering considerable harm, there is a strategy dialogue with police and other pertinent professionals such as referring agency to verify that enquiries under section 17 of Children Act 1989 must be performed, or to settle that in light of additional I analysis and information this isn’t needed(HM Government, 2015). According to HM Government (2017)the Children Act 1989 obligates local authorities to offer due regard to the wishes of a child when establishing what services to offer under section 17 and before deciding on the action to be taken to safeguard an individual child under section 47 of Children Act 1989. Turney et al, (2011) note that when practitioners responsible for the welfare of children does not succeed to get access to the child, a local authority must consider if they might the need to apply for a child assessment order from the court, compelling parents to avail the child to practitioners. Focusing on the child is a fundamental ingredient to successful assessments. Nevertheless, it can be hard to be achieved due to the tension amid needing to concentrate on the child and having to have effective relationships with the parents whose collaboration is important if the assessment process is to be successful (Turney et al, 2011). Child welfare practitioners might differ on opinions on how assessment should be performed for the fear of hurting the interests of both the child and parents (Turney et al, 2011). In Peter’s case, when Nicola got information that Peter was abused by his father and shared the information with the manager of the early years’ settings, the manager was reluctant to contact social care to make a referral. The manager was anxious about harming a good working relationship with Peter’s parents or damaging the reputation of the setting by making a child protection referral. In Charlie’s case, the designated officer does not communicate with Charlie’s parents when Jonathan informs him about Charlie’s bad behavior A delicate balance is supposed to be maintained to avert neglect of relations with parents, being too engaged with adults in need or becoming so involved in the chaotic situation of family that focus is deflected from the needy child (Turney et al, 2011).Apart from gathering information, assessment also entail making sense of the huge volume of information and facts which can at times seem contradictory or unrelated. Good assessment is vibrant and reactive to the transforming level and nature of need or risk that the child faces. If the social workers make an early judgment in the case, they might often be required to act so as to adjust their decisions when new information is obtained. So as to effectively analyse assessment information, practitioners must have the skills and knowledge to think reflectively, c analytically and critically (Turney et al, 2011). When it is confirmed that is a risk of injury, a child protection plan must be established to offer support which entails sufficient supervision and monitoring. A child protection conference organizes and share information whether a plan needs to be established to minimize risk of injury to the child. All children must be supported to take part in child protection conference concerning them (HM Government, 2015). This is challenging because given the nature of safeguarding concerns, professionals might find it unsuitable for children to be in attendance (Turney et al, 2011). When it is agreed that a child safeguarding plan should be established, there is monitoring of the progress through a frequent review process which will entail child protection review conferences (HM Government, 2015). This is challenging because in several cases, are not able to make timely and sufficient change to make sure that the child doesn’t go on suffering considerable harm and impairment to their development and health (Turney et al, 2015). In Charlie’s case, the designated office is dismissive of Charlie’s change in behavior and does not contact his parents to discuss the issue. Although the officer agrees to keep an eye on Charlie, there is no formal monitoring of his progress. Conclusion Multi-agency working is faced with several challenges, which reflect the complexities involved by professionals who engage in joint ventures. The major challenges are lack of equitable funding and resources, ambiguity of responsibilities and roles, communication difficulties and cultural differences. Reinforcement of working relationships is core to successful multi-agency working. Issues that should be addressed include fostering commitment, establishment clear separation of roles and promoting respect and trust between professionals and agencies. Bibliography Owen, H, & Hughes, L, 2009, Good Practice in Safeguarding Children: Working Effectively in Child Protection, Jessica Kingsley Publishers, London. Moran, P, Jacobs C, Bunn, A, & Bifulco, A, 2009, Inter-agency working: implications for early intervention social work team, Child and Family Social Work, 12, 143–151. Tilstone, C, & Rose, R, 2012, Strategies to Promote Inclusive Practice, Routledge, London. Pycroft, A, & Gough, D, 2010, Multi-Agency Working in Criminal Justice: Control and Care in Contemporary Correctional Practice, Policy Press, England. Darlington Y, Feeney, A, & Rixon, K, 2010, Inter-agency collaboration between child protection and mental health services: Practices, attitudes, and barriers, Child Abuse and Neglect, 29, 1085–1098. Percy-Smith, J, 2011, What Works in Strategic Partnership: a Research Review, Children and Society 20: 313–323 Leathard, A, 2012, Models for interprofessional collaboration. In Leathard, A, 2008, Interprofessional collaboration: From Policy to Practice in Health and Social Care, Routledge, London. Turney, D, Platt, D, Selwyn, J, 2011, Social work assessment of children in need: what do we know? Messages from research, Department for Education, London. HM Government, 2017, Working together to safeguard children: A guide to inter-agency working to safeguard and promote the welfare of children Retrieved on April 26, 2017 from: HM GOV ECM, 2017, Every Child Matters, Retrieved on April 26, 2017 from: Read More