Child Protection Case Good Practice Example

Family Composition Julie-Mother Alan-Father Lesley-Aged 11 Alan Jnr-Aged 5 John- Aged 2 David-Aged 0 Jenny – maternal aunt

Family History Only Julie known to SWS prior to investigation and this was for a future needs assessment back in 1996 Parents met at Hollybrook School as both have additional support/learning needs Alan has mental health issues, illicit drug use, socially isolated, vulnerable with criminal convictions Julie has suffered from post natal depression, domestic abuse, socially isolated and vulnerable Lesley known to SWS in 2006 due to a domestic incident between Alan and Jenny Further concerns about housing standards in 2011

Child Protection Investigation May & July 2014 – 2 calls by Lesley to Police reporting domestic abuse by Alan against Julie Julie noted to be pregnant. Pre birth assessment initiated Poor home conditions noted August 2014 – anonymous allegation that Alan is breaching his bail conditions and being violent October 2014 – Alan detained at Leverndale Hospital of suspected drug inducted psychosis 21.10.14 – Initial Child Protection Case Conference held

Initial Child Protection Case Conference of 21.10.14 Three children’s names were placed on the Child Protection Register The unborn baby’s name was placed on the Child Protection Register with a case conference to be held prior to any discharge Risk Indicators - domestic abuse, impact of parental drug misuse and physical neglect

Discussion Question What protection plan should be agreed at the initial core group meeting?

CP Plan from initial core group 1. Ongoing registration 2. Cordia check calls to continue on a daily basis. Support family with routines, hygiene at home 3. Regular health visiting home visits to be made 4. Weekly cp visits to be made by M Durey. Mum must be at home 5. Graded Care Profile to be completed jointly between sw and health 6. Alan Snr to remain living outwith the family home until a risk assessment is completed

CP Plan from initial core group 7. Community Addiction Team (CAT), Criminal Justice (CJ) and Mental Health staff to be invited to the next core group meeting 8. Homestart and Children's 1st referrals have been completed 9. Addiction referral has been completed for Alan 10. Support within extended family to be discussed by with Julie

CP Plan from initial core group 11. David has been discussed with SCRA and report to be submitted 12. John to start nursery in January 2015. 12. Welfare Rights Officer (WRO) appointment to take place 13. Lesley and Alan Jnr to attend school and school staff to monitor 14. Bed to be sourced for John 15. Charity applications have been made for clothing and toys

CP Plan from initial core group 16. Counselling to be considered by parents 17. Parents to be provided with info about the impact of domestic violence on children 18. Further assessment of Alan Snr to take place Review case conference due on 20.02.15

November 2014 - February 2015 Hazel Cameron began working with the family in January 2015. She was the family’s 6th health visitor At least 35 home visits were made by the allocated social worker in the first three months of registration John started nursery 2 periods of detention at Leverndale Hospital in January and March for Alan £3000.00 found in Alan’s pillow in hospital and concerns that he was selling drugs to other patients The recommendation from the CPCCR was for the planned accommodation of the children at the next Children's Hearing.

Discussion Question What can other agencies bring to the child protection plan to affect positive change?

Turning point – March to June 2015 Underlying mental health problem diagnosed in respect of Alan Alan fully engaging with MH services, CAT and CJ Both parents participated in sessions of domestic violence input Joint home visits undertaken by health visitor and social worker Completion of Graded Care Profile More open discussion by Julie about Alan’s mental health issues Better level of engagement and participation during home visits Evidence of home conditions being improved

Turning point – March to June 2015 Evidence of better quality clothing for children being bought Evidence of more nurturing care especially for David Evidence of good quality food being provided to the children Comprehensive medical assessments completed. Main issue in respect of David is lack of stimulation which is preventing him from reaching his developmental milestones Intervention by Charlotte Muir (Community Nursery Nurse) with the family in March 2015

Review Case Conference-May 2015 Improvements noted in relation to home conditions, presentation of children, family interactions and parental engagement. Core group membership identified that there were still areas of improvements to be built upon and concerns about the parents ability to sustain the changes Julie’s mood noted to be better More honesty

Review Case Conference – May 2015 Reconvene a review child protection case conference prior to any children’s hearing to reassess the plan and review the recommendation for the Children's Hearing Ongoing registration recommended 9.06.15 – further review case conference held as children’s hearing date was set and recommendation was that accommodation should not be sought at hearing Acknowledgement that risks still existed but did not meet the threshold for accommodation to be recommended 12.06.15 – children’s hearing held and no order was made

Review Case Conference-November 2015 The positive changes made by the family were sustained and maintained Children spoke of more positive experiences within the family home Graded Care Profile revisited with scores being mostly 2’s, with some 1’s Children’s name removed from Child Protection Register due to risks being reduced significantly.

Review Case Conference – November 2015 Alan moved back into the family home in November 2015 Ongoing support to continue to be offered by the core group membership Post deregistration meeting held in January 2016 and risks have not increased following deregistration Further multi agency meeting to be convened to assess family’s current circumstances

Reflection on Core Group Sense of commitment and ownership from all professionals Joint working imperative within the core group Positive working relationships with parents Understanding of each individual child’s needs Each agency fulfilling their roles and responsibilities Utilisation of Graded Care Profile as a working tool for assessment and maintenance of plan.

Reflection on Core Group Targeted home visits Good multi agency communication Parents aware of the communication between agencies