Social work Personal & Professional Development
Guidance
Does the evidence presented demonstrate the: extent, type, impact, capacity, risk and protective factors?
Use the tool for each child in the family, so that the issues for each individual child can be articulated clearly.
Area Guidance
Extent and Type of neglect This allows the LA SW to articulate the areas where care is lacking and to what level. Should cover some of the areas below. (tools such as GCP2 would articulate this clearly)
Physical care
1. Nutrition
Quality as well as quantity
All children-
• No concerns have been highlighted in relation to Luby and Lara’s nutrition.
• Ellie has stated children have gone over a week without being bathed.
Zac
• Quantity of food is good, but quality of feeding is poor due to prop feeding with a bottle.
• Slowly weening onto foods.
GCP- 2
2. Housing Cleanliness and appropriateness of home environment
All Children-
• Reports have been made to housing association- in housing arrears
• Dog in house but against rules- not mentioned or seen on last visit
• Housing not appropriate 10th floor flat
• Dog faeces on the floor throughout the flat
• Improvements on cleanliness not to the best standard- variable (dynamic risk)
•
Zac-
• Safety equipment due to be fitted
GCP- 4
3. Clothing Are the clothes adequate for the weather, do they fit
All Children-
• Wear unclean clothes and often smell
• School/ nursery reports evidence Luby and Lara have appropriate clothing for weather.
Zac-
• Observation show only presented wearing baby grows which are often stained and dirty feet.
• Clothes are appropriate for weather
• Blankets in pram and coat for outside
GCP- 4
4. Hygiene Is the child hygiene needs taken care of
All Children-
• Children are not frequently bathed and often smell
• Overall poor hygiene- contributing to poor health
• Toothbrush/toothpaste observed on home visit however children have poor oral hygiene- suggested not being used regularly
• Mum has good functional skills
Zac-
• Home conditions put health and hygiene at risk due to crawling around on the floor
• Nappy is changed and is fed
GCP- 5
5. Health Is the child up to date with vaccinations, are they taken to the doctor appropriately, is medical advice followed
All Children-
• Good immunisations, medical records show needs are met- no A&E admission
• Seeks medical advice when children are unwell
• Dental appointments are attended- appropriate treatment given
Zac-
• Medical and health of Zac is good
• Health visitor visits often, concerns due to measuring underweight
• concerns over prop feeding and delay on weening to solid foods
GCP- 2
Safety
6. How safe is the child’s environment
Are there suitable safety measures in pace. Is the house unsafe for the age and development of the child
All Children-
• Luby and Lara are often left outside unsupervised
• Strangers coming in and out of the house
• Luby and Lara have been instructed by mum to lie to professionals putting them at further risk
Zac-
• Found crawling in doorway with door left open- unsupervised
• Appointment made for safety equipment to be fitted
GCP-5
7. What are the arrangements when the child is left When the child is left with an adult – is that adult safe, family member or known to be unsafe
All Children-
• Children are often left alone or with an inappropriate adult- putting them at risk of physical, sexual, emotional harm and neglect.
GCP- 5
Emotional Care
8. Responsiveness
Does the parent/s** show adequate warmth, response and support. Has the relationship been observed and commented on
How does the child respond to the parent/s? Who initiates the relationship?
All children-
Luby-
• Ellie is not responsive to Luby at all.
• Luby spends a lot of time alone
Lara-
• Throughout PLO process Ellie has shown more attention to Lara
Zac-
• Responses given appear to be functional
• Within PLO process more attention is shown towards Zac- cuddling and reading books.
GCP- 4
9. Mutual engagement Does the child have to demand attention or is the child passive
Luby-
• Will only interact when invited to- does not initiate interaction therefore does not demand attention
Zac-
• Left in the cot and independently does what he wants- crawling around
• Zac appears to be passive- little attachment to Mum.
• Mum has started to cuddle and read to Zac.
GCP- 4
Developmental Care
10. Stimulation
Are the child’s education/ stimulation needs taken into account? Are there age appropriate toys / support for school?
All children-
• Does not have books or appropriate toys- bath toys etc.
Luby-
• No evidence of school equipment such as pens pencils or writing paper.
Lara-
• Attends nursery and will seek out attention of other children
Zac-
• Left in cot with broken toys and a lack of toys to play with.
• Found crawling in open doorway
• No other stimulation or interaction with similar aged children.
GCP- 5
11. Approval Does the parent/s demonstrate adequate support for the child
All children-
• Demonstrates adequate support for children in terms of feeding and appropriate clothing
• No support around developmental needs
• Demonstrates support when needs to- functional but leaves children open to risk
• Left crying and possibly being left- functional needs not being met when being left unsupervised
GCP- 4
12. Disapproval Are adequate and age appropriate discipline measures in place. Is the child supervised adequately?
All children-
• Children are not supervised adequately
• Mum says derogatory comments to Luby
Zac-
• Due to age, little disciplinary measures are needed
GCP- 5
13. Acceptance Does the parent accept and show appropriate support for the child regardless of the child’s needs or challenges
All children-
• Little support is shown unless it is to meet needs- PLO improved this but could be disguised compliance
• No support around attachment- Zac is often left in his cot, Luby and Lara are left to do what they want
• Often left unsupervised showing no support around needs
• Derogatory comments made to Luby
Zac-
• Little attachment and bond with mum and other siblings due to being left in the cot
GCP- 5
Level of neglect Has the scale of the neglect been described? The definitions below are a good guide.
14. Does the reportmake it clear about the scale of neglect?
Does it identify any single issue which may cause potential immediate harm?
Mild neglect
Failure to provide care in one or two areas of basic needs, but most of the time a good quality of care is provided across the majority of the domains.
Moderate neglect
Failure to provide good quality care across quite a number of the areas of the child’s needs some of the time. Can occur when less intrusive measures such as community or single agency interventions have failed, or some moderate harm to the child has or is likely to occur (for example, the child is consistently inappropriately dressed for the weather — wearing shorts and sandals in the middle of winter).
Severe neglect
Failure to provide good quality care across most of the child’s needs most of the time. Occurs when severe or long-term harm has been or is likely to be done to the child or the parents/ carers are unwilling or unable to engage in work.
All children-
• Children at risk of immediate harm- being left unsupervised or with an inappropriate adult.
Level of risk- Severe
• Already in PLO and high possibility of being left unsupervised causing basic needs not being met.
• Little opportunity given for child development and attachment with mum
15. Chronic nature of the neglect All children-
• Nature of neglect has been historic during vulnerable time for children’s development
• Overall lack of supervision of children
• stimulation and hygiene are historic
• Luby is impacted most due to lifelong neglect- evidenced through her behaviours towards people and at school.
Impact on the child
The LA SW needs to be able to articulate the impact of the neglect on the child’s physical, social or emotional development
16. Physical Has the child’s physical development been measured – if under 5yrs (in England) an Ages and Stages assessment should have been undertaken by the HV? Is this included? Is it recent?
All children-
• Yes, it has been done and completed within the last 6 months.
• Luby and Lara are able to communicate verbally and can mobilise through walking.
Zac-
• Able to mobilise through crawling
• Not responsive to positive stimulation- little interaction with mum and siblings.
17. Emotional Has the emotional impact on the child been described? A Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire is one way of showing this. Has this been undertaken have the impact been articulated.
Luby-
• Luby has undertaken a strengths and difficulties questionnaire in school which has highlighted she is high risk in peer relationship problems and emotional problems.
Lara-
• Nursery reports have evidenced Lara’s interaction with others and enjoys social interaction.
Zac-
• Not very responsive with interactions
• Social worker visits show Zac is passive and doesn’t interact
• Social worker observation indicates lack of emotion and happiness
18. Lived Experience Luby-
• Ellie states Luby has many friends however enjoys coming home at the end of the school day. Although school reports have evidenced that she clings onto teachers and does not want to go home at the end of the school day.
Lara-
• Lara and Ellie have similar descriptions of Lara’s day- highlighted enjoyment at nursery and social interaction and development.
Zac-
• Zac is of an age where this is unable to be carried out
Parental issues
Risk factors Neglect is often the outcome of parental issues. The impact of these on the parents’ ability to look after their child should be described. It’s not enough to say there is an issue, the impact on their ability to parent needs to be described. It should explain ‘the so what’ question. Have standardised measures been included to measure the level of the issue. It’s important to articulate any acute risk factors which could at any point increase the immediate risk to the child, alongside the enduring risk factors which may be longer term.
19.Situational Risk Factors
• Stresses due to financial struggles
• Diagnosed with depression
• Post-natal depression with Luby which would explain why they struggle with their attachment
• Family live far aware to no support from them
• Ellie had social care involvement as a child as a result of long-term neglect
20. Enduring Risk Factors • Social isolation
• Relationship issues with Luby
• Struggles to manage Lubys behaviour- in taxi
• Find parenting very stressful
• Risk of domestic abuse from being in a relationship with Dave
21. Underlying Risk Factors • Poverty
• No friends or family close by for support
• Risk of domestic abuse from Dave
22. Areas particularly relevant in neglect
• Poverty
• Social isolation/stress
• Mental illness
• Poor attachment history
• Poor coping skills
• Little social and emotional support
• Infrequent interaction with children
• Not open and honest with professionals
Capacity / Capability
23. Current Capacity
• Ellie is able to meet the functional needs of her children however this can vary from time to time.
• The children require her to be engaging and stimulating to develop their social and emotional needs.
She has the capacity and ability to do this but needs to do more than meet functional needs.
24. Has the parent’s readiness for change been described?
Has the parent’s readiness for change been described? ( Prochaska and DiClemente’s 1984)
Precontemplation (not ready parents don’t perceive that there is a problem
Contemplation (getting ready)- parents are beginning to recognise that is an issue, which is affecting their child that they can / should do something about
Preparation (Ready) starting to make small steps
Action start to modify behaviour, engage in assessment or the work
Maintenance Understood the assessment, made changes and sustaining them.
Relapse sliding back to previous state, this can happen at any time and for varying periods
Ellie is still not accepting responsibility and she thinks PLO is unfair. Ellie has not stuck to the written agreement in place regarding contact with Dave. Workers suspect Ellie of disguise compliance during PLO.
25. Motivation to engage Ellie has agreed to all visits during PLO and has been present during all unannounced visits. Workers suspect disguise compliance during this time as evidence suggests Ellie is still in a relationship with Dave and he continues to visit the flat. Although she has not disclosed this to professionals.
26. Capacity Ellie displace good level of parenting in some areas which suggests she has the capacity to meet all the needs of her children.
Ellie needs to prioritise the needs of her children over those of herself and her new relationship. Ellie also needs to show motivation to change.
27. Capacity (capability) to change Professionals are concerned as Ellie still does not acknowledge that a problem exists despite her having the capacity to change.
28. Patterns There is a history of long-term neglect however there are new patterns regarding inadequate supervision recently. It is suspected that this is as a result of Ellies new relationship with Dave.
Protective Factors
29 Resilience Lara has a positive nursery experience. Luby has cognitive function above average. The family support worker visits weekly and Ellies mental health is under control through medication.
30 Other Positive Options The children receive a good diet and the children’s health needs are met and seek medical attention when needed.
Summary
31. Reflection In my professional opinion evidence has demonstrated that the threshold has been met. Due to an introduction of a pattern of leaving the children inappropriately supervised. Putting the children at risk of physical and sexual harm. Ellie does not acknowledge the danger regarding inappropriate supervision and this suggests it could happen again. Ellie has ignored children’s social care advice regarding her relationship with an inappropriate adult who is having contact with her children. This is leaving the children at risk of physical and sexual harm, and also emotional harm due to the risk of witnessing domestic violence.
Social Worker Case note – 29/12/2018
Children’s Social Care has received a notification of the police being called due neighbours complaining of antisocial behaviour at 108 Bradford Heights. When the officers attended they noted that there were three children present, Luby Stone (07/07/2013), Lara Bright (02/11/2015) and Zac Bright (28/09/2018), but they were asleep in the bedroom. Their mother Ellie Grey (15/03/1995) seemed mildly intoxicated, but agreed to turn the music down and asked those in attendance to leave the property. Officers determined that Ellie had capacity to continue caring for the children with the help of her boyfriend Dave Jackson (06/09/1986) who did not seems under the influence of alcohol. Officers were concerned on the evening due to the home conditions, the possible use of substances in the home whilst the children were present and that many of the people in attendance were known to them due to violent convictions. However, the officers have since run checks on Dave Jackson, and they are concerned due to his criminal history and that he should not be around the children.
Social Worker Case Note – 18/01/2019
Allocated worker visited Luby in school to see how she is feeling after the Child Protection medicals last week. Luby said she does not like school and that she has not been enjoying her lessons. Luby said she is feeling sad at home too because Mummy and Dave are shouting and scaring her, Lara and Zac. Luby said that Dave gets a cross at them all and she stays in her bedroom because of this. Luby said that when she is in her bedroom, she hears lots of banging and people’s voices that she does not know. Luby said that these people have not hurt her, but she is worried about Lara and Zac because they don’t stay in the bedroom with her. I asked Luby if she would like me to talk to her Mummy about this, and she said no because Mummy had told her Dave is not meant to be there and she would get in trouble if the social worker knew.
Social Worker Case Note – 20/01/2019
Allocated worker attended the family home for an unannounced visit and Ellie, Luby, Lara and Zac were home. Ellie was in a good mood but got visibly angry when asked about the evening in which she left the children unsupervised at home. Ellie said she did not want to talk about it, and she doesn’t know why people keep asking her about it, as she was only at her friend’s flat on the 3rd floor of her block of flats. Luby was in her bedroom for the entirety of the visit and did not want to talk today despite the worker asking her many questions. Lara seemed happy and was willing to talk about her friends at nursery, but Zac was sat on the sofa crying for the duration of the visit and appeared hungry. Ellie was not responding to Zac’s needs despite the worker suggesting that Zac may need something to eat or soothing. The worker picked Zac up to settle him and he felt warm and sweaty, as though he had been crying for some time but settled down shortly after. When asked about this Ellie said that he has only just started crying and the reason for this is because he doesn’t like workers coming here all the time. The home conditions were better then on previous visits, and there has been some attempt to clean up the dog faeces. There was still an odour of urine; however, this was not as strong as on previous visits. It was observed that there was male clothing laid on a chair in the master bedroom and male toiletries in the bathroom. When Ellie was asked about these, she said that her cousin slept over last week but had not come to collect his belongings yet, but Ellie seemed flustered and panicked to answer.
