“Whilst it is clearly important that the
Tribunal is able to produce a rigorous and
accurate analysis of the past, the main value
will be to inform the future.”
1 The Association of Directors of Social
Services (ADSS)
represents all directors of Social Services in England,
Wales and Northern Ireland. Social Services departments
are responsible for some 54,000 children in the public
care, approximately 30 per cent of whom are placed in
residential settings. These settings include residential
homes and residential schools operated by local
authorities and the private and voluntary sectors;
residential health settings operated by the National
Health Service and the private sector, and young
offenders and other special institutions operated by
central government. Other children living away from
home and who are the responsibility of social services
departments live in foster homes. Some of these
placements are provided by voluntary organisations, and
the private sector, whilst the vast majority are provided
by local authorities.
2 The submission repeats some of the points
made by
ADSS to Sir William Utting. However, the points bear
repetition as they are also directly relevant to the work of
the Tribunal. They represent the views of chief officers
who have a unique perspective upon the problems under
investigation because of their position as providers,
managers and commissioners of a significant proportion
of residential provision for children and young people
since the Children Act 1948.
3 There have undoubtedly been many important
advances
in the public care of children over the years. The
framework of guidance and regulation provided under
the Children Act 1989, together with the more recent
Looking After Children material developed under the
auspices of the Department of Health and Welsh Office,
have provided a robust basis for good practice. There
are, however, a number of issues about which ADSS has
been concerned and upon which this submission will
focus. A consistent underlying theme is that they cannot
be addressed by social services alone, and that a
continuation of a fragmented approach to children’s
services will serve to undermine the best efforts of
individual departments and agencies to safeguard
children.
4 The catalogue of allegations of abuse in
children’s
residential settings which has emerged has been of
devastating proportions. ADSS shares the feelings of
outrage experienced by all who consider what happened
to many children who were removed from risky and
unsatisfactory family situations only to experience even
greater risk and trauma in care. These powerful feelings
will, however, only be of direct benefit to future
generations of children if the events and context of the
past are analysed objectively and dispassionately and if
there is a real will to effect future change. We would like
to highlight the following issues:
l There can be no
simple organisational remedy, as
seriously abusive situations have been revealed in services
operated by every sector (private, voluntary and
statutory), in every service (education, health and social
services) and within the frameworks and responsibilities
of both local and central government,
l Despite the scale of
allegations, completed
investigations reveal that the staff identified as alleged
perpetrators are a small proportion of the total numbers
working in residential care. We should therefore,
recognise that there were, and are, a majority of
dedicated and caring practitioners and managers
working in residential care,
l Information
currently available would suggest that a
large proportion of alleged and convicted perpetrators
appear to have worked in the old approved school system,
l Change for the
better will not be cost neutral,
particularly in the short term, and any suggestion that it is
will lead to cosmetic and ineffective responses,
l Change for the
better will also require a holistic
approach to children’s services which places the needs of
children above organisational or professional interests.
5 This submission is not written in defence
of chief officers
responsible for the service under scrutiny by the Tribunal,
nor as a comprehensive analysis of the issues. It is
intended as an objective comment from the perspective
of the Association as a whole, addressing and
commenting upon the past, but concentrating more
upon what needs to be done to protect vulnerable
children in the future. In the knowledge that the Tribunal
has already received a large volume of detailed factual
information from other well informed sources, this
submission focuses more upon the practical implications
of the legal and organisational context within which
residential care for children has operated. It also attempts
to provide a “feel” for what it was like to work in
children’s services during the period under scrutiny.
6 Provision for children in care during this
period saw a
transition from the cottage homes, large orphanages and
nurseries run by local authorities and voluntary
organisations under the Poor Law and charitable
provision, to a pattern of smaller family group homes,
some larger homes (including some
reception/observation centres), foster homes and hostels
for young people of working age. The early part of this
period was inevitably pervaded by the culture, values and
approaches associated with the Poor Law and the major
child care charities. Physical care tended to be at least
adequate but care settings reflected all the typical
characteristics of large institutions, such as rigid routines,
strict discipline and limited opportunities for the
development of individual potential. Whilst the Curtis
Committee and the 1984 Act demonstrated a more
enlightened approach, many staff and local politicians
inevitably carried forward previous understandings,
experiences and behaviour. Typically the vision and
enlightenment of legislation was not reflected in public
understanding and opinion, or in practice.
7 The establishment of children’s
departments and
specialist chief officers did, however, herald changes in
attitudes and thinking. In particular, there was a steady
but slow evolution towards the values and principles of
today:
* Many children are better served by supporting them
within their own families or by returning them to their
families as quickly as is consistent with their well-being,
Historical Perspective 1948 - 1968
The ADSS evidence to Waterhouse
ADSS page 1
* Large institutional settings are generally not conducive
to healthy child development, especially for very young
children,
* People vested with responsibility for the care of deprived
and disturbed children require proper training for the
work.
8 From these early days there was generally
a separation
between the management of residential care and the
training, status and remuneration of its staff and the
management, training, status and remuneration of field
work staff (then child care officers).
At the same time, the Administration of Children’s Homes
Regulations 1951 shaped a situation in which local
authority members became disproportionately involved
with the residential sector. They carried out visits to
homes, often appointed staff, even to very junior level,
and sat on sub-committees dedicated to the
management of children’s homes.
9 The new children’s officers were not only
faced with the
legacy of the fragmented situation which preceded the
1948 Act but also had to deal with acute administrative
and resource problems. As receptions into care were now
to be based upon an assessment of need, rather than a
test of destitution, many more children were received
into care and courts made increasing use of their new
powers to commit neglected children and children
beyond their parents’ control to local authority care. The
number of children in the care of local authorities
increased by just over 40% between 1946 and 1953. The
strain this placed upon a system, which at the same time
was required to change radically, is obvious and the
repercussions of this scenario were felt for some
considerable time.
Residential care was the most tangible element of the
new children’s departments and was therefore given a
high priority by senior managers, politicians and the
Home Office Inspectorate.
In her definitive publication Children in Care Dr Jean
Heywood observed:
“it is easy to judge after the urgency of events has faded,
but it seems a pity now that pressure was not brought
on local authorities to appoint more field staff with the
right training, who could extend the amount of boarding
out, and help foster parents to understand its change in
nature. The Children Act 1984 did convey such powers.
Section 41 (5) laid down: ‘A Local Authority shall secure
the provision of adequate staff for assisting the Children’s
Officer in the exercise of his functions’ and Section 13 (1)
laid on the Local Authority a primary duty to board out
the children in care. Doubtless the difficulty of
persuading local authorities to accept the need for staff
was extenuated by the lack of available candidates
qualified for the work and so the emphasis was laid on
the immediate and easier provision of residential shelter
and care.”
Significant deficits in the supply of sufficient numbers of
skilled staff, and the failure to look across the whole child
care service has continued to undermine the
development of a balanced, comprehensive and skilled
service for children in need.
10 An anecdotal point which cannot be easily
demonstrated
by documentary evidence, but nevertheless made
powerfully by many former children’s officers and
managers in children’s departments, is that the new
service was not well understood, and was unpopular with
politicians; particularly the less tangible, but crucial areas
of direct therapeutic and remedial work with children
and their families in which it was difficult to demonstrate
the work and to show results. Furthermore, concepts of
“deserving” and “undeserving” recipients to welfare
services tended to influence political thinking and,
perhaps understandably in this context, notions of
providing quality services for “feckless” families and their
children were not well supported. Many children’s
officers felt that they developed their services against the
prevailing attitudes of the times and they needed to rely
heavily upon their ability to invoke the new legislation.
This did not always endear them to those responsible for
apportioning local authority resources. It is interesting
that, much later, when local authority social services
departments were established, fewer children’s officers
were appointed to the new chief officers’ posts than
might have been anticipated. The informal view among
many workers in the services at the time was that this
was because children’s services were not well understood
or favoured by the majority of local politicians.
11 Throughout this period there was a quite
separate system
of remand homes and approved schools administered by
the Home Office. These homes had local management
committees and heads, usually with an education
background who enjoyed considerable power and
autonomy. They were, however, subject to regulations
and inspections and were accountable to their
management committee. Few had any training or
qualification in the care of deprived or disturbed
children. These units were staffed by education and care
staff. The latter were generally unqualified and the
former usually only qualified in teaching.
These units tended to be isolated. Management
committees were very dependent upon the information
which heads made available to them, and members of
the committees rarely had the skills or the knowledge to
bring the necessary rigour and challenge to bear in
exercising their responsibilities. Local authority social
workers and probation officers would visit children but
often felt intimidated or uncertain in the setting (a not
unusual experience in large institutions). They often did
not have the experience or status to challenge senior
staff in the institutions when dissatisfied. Others, perhaps
naively, accepted that these specialist institutions were
properly set up and regulated and accepted that they
were doing a proper job. It is easy to understand that
young people who complained would find it difficult to
be believed in such circumstances. It also appears that
young people rarely complained, perhaps because they,
too, recognised the power of the regime.
This level of power and closeness with influential people
which was undoubtedly enjoyed by the heads of
approved schools was sometimes replicated in the larger
local authority residential institutions. There, too, senior
staff would have considerably more contact with senior
managers and politicians than staff at senior levels in
other sectors of the service. Where regime and practice
were sound this may not have been significant. Where
they were not it would have been difficult for lower level
practitioners or managers to raise concerns.
ADSS page 2
12 Finally in this section, it is important
to note that, despite
the difficulties outlined, there was a developing identity
and professionalism in children’s departments. This was
underpinned by improvements in professional training
for social work practitioners, including those in the
residential sector.
This, in large measure, contributed to the overall
reduction of the numbers of children in care which
began to accelerate later in the period. The Children and
Young Persons Act 1963 supported a move towards
more preventative work and the development of skills in
direct work with children and families. There was also a
gradual increase in the use of foster care, with social
workers becoming more successful in recruiting and
supporting foster parents able to deal with children with
complex needs. Both these tends led eventually to a very
different cohort of children and young people in
residential care. Instead of a wide spectrum of children,
only a small proportion of whom presented very
challenging and disturbed behaviour, a reducing number
of residential homes were increasingly having to deal
with a total population of very difficult and demanding
children and young people.
13 The early part of this period was
dominated by the
implementation of the Children and Young Persons Act
1969 and the Local Authority Social Services Act 1970.
The former was historic in that for the first time it
correlated delinquency with deprivation. It also
attempted to ensure that measures to deal with
delinquency should be varied and flexible. Approved
schools and remand homes, as operated under the Home
Office, were abolished. The existing institutions were
incorporated into the responsibility of local authorities for
community homes with education and for observation
and assessment centres. The concept of regional
planning was introduced. This required each region of
the United Kingdom to look at the whole spectrum of
residential care in every sector and to ensure adequate
provision within its region to meet the needs of children
in order to reduce overlap and duplication through
statutory and voluntary agencies working together. There
was a phased introduction of this new legislation running
over a number of years. Again, as Jean Heywood
commented, this piece of legislative reform has placed
very heavy burdens upon the children’s sections of local
authority departments. She also commented, “the Act is
to come into effect by stages, since it is recognised that
resources of manpower and public opinion cannot yet
cope with all its ramifications.”
14 Regional planning authorities were created
and
developed during the early 1970s. The whole of Wales
was one regional planning area, serviced by a small unit
working to the director of social services for Mid
Glamorgan. The authority comprised political
representatives from the Welsh local authorities, which
became eight in number from the time of Local
Government Reorganisation in 1974. They were advised
by the directors of social services and serviced by various
regional groupings of specialist officers.
15 Most of the former approved schools and
remand homes
became the responsibility of local authorities, generally
within the area in which they were located. There were
1968 - 1989
also controlled or assisted and voluntary children’s homes
and an increasing number of unregulated private
children’s homes.
Given the historical position of the independent power
and status of the heads and the high salary grades which
were a legacy of the Home Office system, line
management presented a practical problem to local
authorities. For example, heads (even those of relatively
small establishments) were frequently paid more than
senior managers in local authorities with overall
responsibilities for residential care. This often led to
complex systems whereby heads were notionally
accountable to deputy or assistant directors, but for
practical purposes worked to other operational senior
staff. Such situations were open to confusion and
indecisive or unconfident management.
16 The regime in many of the former approved
schools and
remand homes was robust and sanctions included the
use of corporal punishment. The relationship between
staff and the young people being cared for was
significantly different from that which exists today.
17 Regional planning authorities and
individual local
authorities were also eager to change the perceived
culture of approved schools in order to move towards
the objectives underlying the Children and Young
Persons Act 1969. Many, although not all, of heads of
schools and remand centres were somewhat reluctant to
co-operate with plans for change.
An added complication was the reduction in demand for
remand homes and approved school places being
brought about by changes in practice, legislation and
demography. This led to significant closures of former
approved schools and remand homes during the late
1970s and the transfer of many of the staff to other parts
of the residential sector. Because of their existing salaries
and conditions, which in the main were considerably
better than those in the former local authority sector,
many of these staff transferred to senior positions
regardless of whether their skills, training or experience
really suited them for the task.
18 Not surprisingly, regional planning tended
to be
dominated by issues arising from the former approved
school and remand homes system, including the
provision of secure accommodation and it was difficult
for planning authorities to engage fully with the wider
objectives of the Act. It is fair to say, however, that
regional planning in Wales was probably more successful
than in many other areas.
19 The developments in regional planning took
place in
parallel with major upheavals in local authorities:
* Following the recommendations of the Seebobm report,
new generic departments were set up in 1971, which
brought together three very different services.
* There were increased public expectations of the new
social services departments, which generated higher
demands.
* At the same time, two major pieces of legislation were
implemented (the Children and Young Persons Act 1969
and the Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 1970)
both of which produced a dramatic influx of new work.
ADSS page 3
* This organisational change involved both departmental
mergers and rapid expansion at the same time, with staff
at all levels undertaking new tasks and developing new
working relationships and systems.
The impact of major organisational change upon the
stability and development of operational services has
been well documented and does not need to be
rehearsed here. Major changes and uncertainty in
organisational structures and in individual personnel
clearly increases the risks of vulnerable children within
the systems concerned.
20 Staff in children’s departments were
generally supportive
of the concepts behind the Seebohm report as there was
a ready acknowledgement of the need for strategic and
multi-disciplinary approaches to children in need. This
was seen as being much more feasible within the
auspices of larger departments commanding greater
resources and status within local authorities. In the event,
it continued to be difficult to raise the level of general
interest and awareness of children’s issues. Insofar as
senior managers and politicians were able to give
attention to children’s services, this tended to focus upon
the political and strategic aspects of the former approved
school and remand home system. It seems likely that
organisational preoccupation and priorities led to less
attention being given to wider practice and quality of
care issues in children’s services. Thus lacunae in
management systems may have been created which
allowed bad practice to develop or continue unidentified.
21 In parallel with these events, there was
an explosion in
training places for social workers. Inevitably, as with any
rapid expansion, the quality in this development was
uneven. The Seebohm report had recommended generic
departments but it had not specifically recommended
generic social workers. However, many local authorities
interpreted the report in this way and throughout the
1970s and early eighties many social workers were
carrying generic case loads. Although the core elements
of social work methodology may be applied in a variety
of situations, there are clearly bodies of knowledge and
skills which are specific to certain situations and client
groups. Thus many social workers were struggling with
new and unfamiliar work. Social work training was also
trying to grapple with covering such a wide canvas and
there was increasing concern that a two year basic
training course could not equip a practitioner to work to
a satisfactory standard in all fields. This problem has
continued, and it is still the case that a newly trained
social worker may have limited knowledge or specific
experience of working in children’s services.
22 At the same time, changes were taking
place at central
government level. The former responsibilities of the
Home Office and the Department of Health for social
work services were combined into the new Department
of Health and Social Security. Previous Home Office
inspectors were incorporated into a new Social Work
Service which was not at this stage an inspection service.
In the years immediately following the reorganisation the
impact was not felt too severely because individuals with
expertise in children’s services were still available and
known to local authority staff. Inevitably, as time went
on, this expertise became diluted.
23 The Community Homes Regulation 1972
restated and
sharpened local authority management and inspection of
community homes. However, restructuring of
departments and the addition of former approved
schools and remand homes meant that local authority
members and managers with little experience of
children’s services were often involved in visiting and
inspection responsibilities.
24 The first central government circular
covering child
protection was issues in 1974. Since that time there has
been a developing awareness and expertise in local
agencies, initially in the field of physical abuse of
children. During the 1970s and early 1980s knowledge
and understanding of sexual abuse tended to be
confined to occasional cases of incest in families and
indecent assaults by strangers. Sexual abuse within the
family or by care staff was not recognised as a major
issue by central government, local authorities or any
other major agency. In any event, staff issues, including
those involving complaints about criminal or
unprofessional conduct, tended to be dealt with in a
managerial and personnel context rather than through
child protection procedures.
25 During this period there were significant
changes in the
contracts of employment of residential social workers,
many of whom would work for very long periods without
overtime. The introduction of a fixed working week was a
significant change, as was the increasing tendency for
residential social workers not to live on the premises but
to have their own personal accommodation elsewhere.
26 There has been a history in residential
care of strong
union membership and support. While there has been a
long standing need to address issues of conditions of
service for residential staff, many of the traditional
approaches of unions, and indeed employers, to staff
rights and conditions are not necessarily appropriate in
residential care for children. Although it is important that
staff interests and rights are upheld and that individual
staff receive adequate training and support in what is
demanding and often stressful work, there is also a need
for different approaches to working patterns and to
discipline in this sector of local authority work. Some of
the accepted practices and processes which might be
appropriate to, say, manual workers in technical services,
are frequently not at all appropriate to those who work
with children. During the 1970s and 1980s it was often
difficult for managers to manage, and where necessary to
discipline and remove, unsuitable staff. Advice was often
given to social services managers that they could not act
against obviously unsuitable staff. Similarly, there have
been occasions where managers have acted and formally
disciplined or dismissed unsuitable staff only to find their
decisions reversed by appeal panels of members, or to
become embroiled in adverse and costly industrial
tribunals.
27 The Children Act 1989 has been a watershed
in
children’s services. It has reinforced existing good
practice and introduced further improvements in the
statutory context of residential care. There have also
been other valuable initiatives, including the Department
of Health’s Support Force, the Warner Committee and
other enquiry reports which have made valuable
recommendations.
1990 to the Present
ADSS page 4
28 However, implementation of the Children
Act was
overshadowed in local authorities by the implementation
of the Community Care legislation. It was difficult for
chief officers to maintain a focus upon children’s services
at a time when major additional responsibilities were
being transferred to local authorities, central government
was requiring formal agreements with health authorities,
and when powerful lobbies for services for elderly and
disabled people were active.
29 Despite the improvements following the
1989 Act, there
are still a number of fundamental problems which ADSS
believes need to be addressed. The Association fully
supports rigorous enquiries into allegations of abuse in
children’s homes and wholly rejects practices which
directly subject, or indirectly condone, abuse of children.
We also recognise that those practitioners and managers,
who are in the majority, practising with skill and integrity
and who are fully committed to good quality children’s
services must be given sufficient support and resources.
Too often they have to work in spite of the prevailing
systems to produce good quality services.
30 Sadly, many of these issues have been
recognised and
commented upon since 1948. Although the Children Act
1948 achieved much, the divisions of responsibility
between the Home Office, the Department of Health and
the Department for Education which were a cause for
concern at the time still exist. Separate departments
continue to have responsibilities for children in need
requiring care and separate legislation, regulation and
professional practices. There are still serious shortages of
experienced and skilled practitioners available to work
with looked after children. There is still a significant
ambivalence in our society about children in need which
translates directly into conflicting legislation, priorities
and limitations in resources.
31 Although there have been undoubted
improvements in
best practice over the years this is not universal. In
addition, practices and priorities in other services often
impact directly and detrimentally upon the quality of
services to children in need and specifically to children in
the public care. The causes of these problems are
complex and their effective resolution requires
determined and consistent medium to long term
strategies. Some of these problems have been
exacerbated by the increase in the number of local
authorities as a result of local government reorganisation.
Amongst the factors which adversely affect the provision
of a consistent service of adequate quality to children in
need and in the public care are:
* Real cuts in social services year on year throughout the
1990s have severely reduced the available pool of skilled
and experienced staff. The increase in the number of
social services authorities has also had the effect of
spreading the small pool of specialist expertise more
thinly. The pattern of severe reductions in budgets is
continuing in plans for the 1998/99 financial year.
* Although local authorities have tried to protect “front
line” services, reductions in administrative, supervisory
and managerial resources have a direct effect upon the
capacity of front line staff.
* Preventative and supportive services have been a major
casualty of the lack of proper funding for the Children
Act 1989. Services do not generally engage with children
in need until a late stage, when their problems have
become severe. This has obvious implications for looking
after children when they eventually enter the public care
with serious behavioural and other difficulties.
* Community health services which can contribute
significantly to preventative and supportive work with
families are inadequate in some areas.
* As Sir William Utting has identified, there is a real
scarcity of good quality placements for children in any
sector. Poor placements lead to control and discipline
problems within groups, inability to meet the needs of
damaged and vulnerable children, a high level of
movement of children between placements and despair
and demoralisation among field and residential staff and
foster carers. Desperation about finding a placement can
lead to greater risk taking and acceptance of lower
standards of practice.
* In many areas the education system does not provide
adequately for children in need or those with challenging
behaviour. Many children looked after are excluded from
school and do not receive appropriate education.
* Many health authorities do not provide an adequate
mental health service for children, including specialist
support to those caring for very disturbed young people.
* Lack of public sympathy and support for services to
children in need, and the public opprobrium heaped,
often very unjustly, upon social workers over the years
has helped to create a situation in which it is difficult to
attract and retain able people to work in children’s
services.
* There has been an increase in the number of
inexperienced local politicians now charged with
responsibilities for children’s services. Political
inexperience is a greater problem in social services than
other local authority services because, unlike education
and environmental services, they are not universal and
deal with issues outside the personal experience of the
majority.
“Whilst it is clearly important that the
Tribunal is able to produce a rigorous and
accurate analysis of the past, the main
value will be to inform the future.”
32 This submission has attempted to give some
local, and
perhaps subjective, operational colour to the context of
the events under consideration by the Tribunal. The
Association hopes that this will provide a useful
perspective upon the issues under consideration. Our
greatest concern is to try and ensure that the
opportunity provided by the recent review by Sir William
Utting, together with the report of the Tribunal, will
produce some fundamental reforms and proper long
term investment in children’s services.
Issues for the Future
ADSS page 5