Radicalisation response needs a revamp
Andy Elvin
Tuesday, August 29, 2017
Research highlights the child protection system's challenges in tackling radicalisation, with agencies needing to reassess how to address them.
A report commissioned by the Department for Education, Safeguarding and Radicalisation, highlights a wide range of issues facing local authorities and providers of children's social care services, such as fostering agencies and children's homes. Below are the three key challenges.
1. Radicalisation is everyone's business
What is worrying from the DfE study is that it reveals some authorities downplay the safeguarding element as they do not get many cases. This is naïve and dangerous.
Radicalisation is best seen alongside child sexual exploitation (CSE) and sexual abuse as a form of exploitation of vulnerable children by those who have gained their trust and cooperation for nefarious intent.
The only real difference is the nature of the abuse which the abuser or groomer intends to inflict on the child.
Such an approach ignores the way in which children and young people are radicalised.
They do not have to live in a so-called "high prevalence" area where more young people potentially vulnerable to radicalisation live.
Recent cases have clearly demonstrated the role of online grooming in radicalisation.
An isolated young person alone with their internet connection may be far more vulnerable to groomers than one who is in a "higher prevalence" area, but has community connections which may act as protective factors.
2. Instilling confidence in practitioners
The report finds that in too many cases staff lack confidence in tackling the issue. Training and support for frontline staff utilising real-life cases and survivors of grooming and abuse is vital.
Tact recently ran such training provided by survivors of CSE in Rotherham. We all learnt a huge amount about the everyday nature of how grooming begins, how signs were missed and how quickly the everyday becomes sinister, controlling and abusive.
The Prevent brand is an issue, and letting the Home Office lead on it was an error as it should have been obvious that for the target audience - minority communities, social workers, the wider children's workforce and community groups - the Home Office is not viewed favourably. This should have been developed as a safeguarding approach by children's services and local government leaders.
3. A new lead agency is needed
Another systemic error was not having police child protection teams as the lead police agency. Not doing this has led to confusion about thresholds for intervention with non-child protection team police officers misunderstanding what constitutes safeguarding concerns.
There are clearly differences of approach to what even constitutes a risk of radicalisation and a lack of a common understanding of the issues at play and how to respond to them.
This translates into a lack of confidence at frontline practitioner level, which then leads to awkward and negative relationships with families where children are deemed to be at risk.
The report's executive summary concludes by stating there is an "appetite for a central resource of information and guidance that could help build capacity and capability within the safeguarding and child protection system to respond to these cases".
This describes the original intent and purpose of the Child Exploitation and Online Prevention Centre (Ceop) before it was merged into the National Crime Agency and lost focus, expertise and credibility.
Statutory responses to all forms of grooming are hampered by the lack of a lead body that crosses child protection, law enforcement and education.
The best single thing the government could do to address this is to reinstitute Ceop as an independent, standalone agency, with a lead role in supporting local authorities, schools, community groups and police services to protect children from radicalisation, CSE and all forms of online exploitation and grooming.
Andy Elvin is chief executive of The Adolescent and Children's Trust (Tact)
CAFCASS TACKLES THE ISSUES
Radicalisation is becoming ever more integrated into our safeguarding work, writes Neville Hall, assistant director of the Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Services (Cafcass).
"We've done this by ensuring staff have the right training and structures in place to assess the threats posed to children by radicalisation. The Department for Education report shows radicalisation cases are particularly prevalent in certain areas, but our 1,200 family court advisers are spread throughout the country and many have never encountered it.
We have integrated how we approach radicalisation into our National Child Exploitation Strategy so that all practitioners will be well informed when they come across radicalisation risk factors. A network of ambassadors promotes the strategy across our workforce, and provides expertise and training when they are needed.
In some of the cases we work on, children at risk of being radicalised are not particularly vulnerable or neglected. This presents a challenge to practitioners who are used to working with children subject to care proceedings for these reasons. Work on identifying all safeguarding concerns starts at the earliest possible stage, so any risks can be identified, assessed and prioritised.
Our National Psychology Service enables practitioners to discuss any concerns in a consultation with a clinical child psychologist. This is particularly important with radicalisation cases; what complex needs are leaving children susceptible to extreme views?
About a third of our radicalisation cases are in private law, where we identify it as a safeguarding risk during our assessments of a child's separated parents. This is when our ability and readiness to share our evidence with other agencies becomes crucial.
The DfE's report highlights the challenges facing the sector, but reinforces a lot of the good work already being done to tackle radicalisation as a children's safeguarding issue."
FURTHER READING
