Councils 'unaware of child neglect risk'

Of a total of 80 authorities that responded to a Freedom of Information request by Action for Children, 60 per cent said they were unaware of the extent of child neglect in their region.

As a result, the charity is calling for a national strategy to tackle child neglect, with local agencies working together to understand the scope of the problem.

Action for Children also wants councils to develop a joined-up strategy to understand the early warning signs of neglect, which could include bullying a child or failing to clothe them properly.

Sir Tony Hawkhead, chief executive of Action for Children, has expressed concern at the findings.

He said: “The tragedy is that due to a lack of gathering the right information, children whose lives could be improved are needlessly put at further risk.

“This is unacceptable when we know more can be done – we cannot allow the suffering of any child. Neglect can be stopped in its tracks.

“Families need help as early as possible so they can make positive changes in their lives, transforming their and their children’s stories by being the best parents they can be.”

David Simmonds, chair of the Local Government Association’s children and young people board, has questioned the findings of the research, which was only sent to 118 authorities and did not include any councils in London.

He said: “It is difficult to draw robust conclusions from this misleading research which misses out large parts of the population.

“Measuring complex and social problems set against rapidly changing demographics is not like counting potholes. Social workers must intervene robustly to help children at risk of harm.

“With neglect being a major reason for councils intervening in two-thirds of child protection plans, the issue is taken extremely seriously.”

The research comes as a serious case review by Gloucestershire Safeguarding Children Board found that a three-year-old girl was unable to walk as a result of neglect.

According to the report, the neglect of the child, and her three siblings, took place because key agency workers underestimated the extent of what was happening.

It states: “One of the contributory factors was the fact that the parents were successfully avoiding professionals and the children were subjected to further neglect and harm.

“While the health visitor was most persistent in her attempts to access the family, the acceptance of the seriousness of the situation by all agencies was delayed and the parents reluctance to engage and blatant avoidance of professionals was allowed to go on for too long.”