Local authority protocols for dealing with behavioural issues in children's social care settings can lead to “excessive use of police involvement” and fail to consider the need for a tailored approach to individual children.
This is the conclusion of a team of researchers from ManchesterMetropolitan University, LancasterUniversity, Liverpool John MooresUniversity and University of Bristol who are calling for an end to a “one-size fits all approach” to dealing with behaviourmanagement in settings.
The study, funded by the Nuffield Foundation, analyses 36 local protocols which were created in response to the government's non-statutory 2018 National Protocol on Reducing Unnecessary Criminalisation of Looked-After Children and Care Leavers.
Local authority protocols are used to “guide” social care workers and carers on how to deal with scenarios where disruptive behaviour occurs in residential or foster care settings.
The national guidelines state that carers should avoid police involvement “whenever possible and appropriate”, but adds that “where this is not possible due to the severity of the situation, or where there is concern about immediate safety, police should consider use of discretionary powers to apply an informal resolution response (such as community resolution)”.
Councils can develop their own localised versions of the national protocol, explains the paper.
It identifies that of 157 youth offending teams in England and Wales contacted as part of the research, 49 had a local protocol in place, 21 had a local protocol in development, 25 did not have a one and 62 YOTs did not respond.
The 36 protocols taken forward for research range between nine and more than 20 pages long. Of these, 10 cover all types of placement, while nine cover children's homes only, 11 cover children's homes and foster care, and one covers children's homes and semi-independent homes.
Protocol potential
These protocols have “considerable potential to make a difference to individual lives and could help to prevent children from picking up long-lasting criminal records in care that have an impact across the life course”, say academics.
But they add that children in care have not benefitted from the dramatic decline in numbers of children entering the youth justice system seen in other groups of children, which authors argue gives even more weight to the importance of protocols.
Latest figures from the Youth Justice Board show that first-time entrants to the youth justice system fell by 78 per cent between March 2012 and March 2022.
Analysis by the children's commissioner for England of figures published by the Office for National Statistics last December found that 52 per cent of children in care had a criminal conviction by 24 compared with 13 per cent of children who had not been in care.
“Although this metric includes minor offences such as speeding and graffiti, it is shocking that so many children in care have interacted with the justice system at such a young age,” children's commissioner Dame Rachel de Souza says.
Emily Aklan, chief executive of care provider Serenity Welfare, warns: “Children in care are one of the most vulnerable groups in society, yet it often seems that the authorities around them treat them as dangerous criminals to be managed, even when they haven't actually been accused of a crime.”
‘One-size’ approach
The government's non-statutory protocol, published by the Department for Education alongside the Home Office and Ministry of Justice, states that its “key purpose is to encourage and provide the framework for these agencies to co-develop local arrangements to reduce the unnecessary criminalisation of looked-after children and care leavers”.
It acknowledges that looked-after children and those with care experience are over-represented in the youth justice system and urges professionals to adopt an approach to behaviour management in care settings based on the question “would this be good enough for my child?”.
Manchester Metropolitan University's Dr Katie Hunter, lead author of the report, says that the national protocol is based on one originally drawn up by local authorities in the South East.
“It communicates some key messages really well,” she says. However, she argues that current systems used by authorities can lead to police being called to residential and foster care settings without consideration on how it may impact children differently.
Just one in six local protocols analysed in the most recent study make specific reference to gender and one in nine make reference to ethnicity, both factors that affect the risk of criminalisation of young people.
“To make a difference, councils must develop protocols that recognise the distinct needs of specific groups of children and move beyond a reliance on ‘one-size-fits-all’,” explains Hunter.
Helen Lincoln, chair of the Association of Directors of Children's Services (ADCS) families, communities and young people policy committee, says: “It is important that the range of professionals who come into contact with children in care understand what lies behind a child's disruptive behaviour, such as a bereavement, earlier abuse or neglect, and that responses are suitably proportionate.”
She warns that an over-use of police involvement in managing behavioural issues for children in care could lead to a “normalisation” aroundinteraction with the justice system.
“The over-reliance on policing in some protocols is concerning,” she adds. “At best, this contradicts the spirit of reducing criminalisation and at worst, could result in more children being criminalised in the long term.”
Call for compassion
The report states that care placements are homes, “and we must consider whether such police involvement would be regarded as acceptable, or helpful, for children living with their birth families”.
Recommendations included in the report include a call for the government to introduce a statutory duty on local authorities to reduce the criminalisation of children in care.
“We need to think about what's in the protocols in the first place, then place a statutory duty to uphold them,” Hunter says. “To do that, we need to make sure that everyone's trained, understand exactly what it is that they’re trying to achieve, and exactly how they can reduce criminalisation.”
Aklan adds: “Our focus in difficult cases must be on rehabilitation, not punishment. An evidence-based approach rooted in empathy and compassion makes the most positive difference.”
Meanwhile, Lincoln echoes calls for improved relationships between settings, such as children's homes and local police forces, as well as increased training for staff on managing the behaviour of children in care.
She notes that while the ADCS was involved in the creation of the 2018 national guidelines, “the protocol can't solve everything”.
The DfE says “the majority of children in care do not have any interaction with criminal justice system”. But it appears that a callfor improved understanding of theneeds of the individual children at risk of police involvement when dealing with behaviour management in care settings is widely backed across the sector.
