On the face of it, a law to protect children from emotional neglect and abuse sounds like something that would get the universal backing of all in the children and young people's sector.
However, the announcement in the Queen's Speech that the government intends to introduce legislation to that effect has divided opinion.
The idea has been championed for some time by the likes of Action for Children and the NSPCC, and has received the backing of the Local Government Association.
But it has also faced opposition from the Association of Directors of Children's Services and The College of Social Work (TCSW), while others have privately questioned its worth.
The NSPCC, one of the leading advocates of the change, argues that current cruelty legislation focuses on physical abuse.
Last month, the charity revealed that it had received 8,000 calls relating to emotional neglect and abuse in 2013/14, of which 5,354 were so serious, they were referred to children's services teams for further action.
Lisa McCrindle, NSPCC senior policy analyst, says tougher laws on neglect will protect some of the most vulnerable children.
"Often, it is very hard to help parents understand the severity of the implications of emotional neglect and abuse," she says.
"Having the ability to say it is as serious as physical abuse and could lead to criminal sanctions could be a useful tool to have. If police go into a house and are extremely concerned about what they find, there is an action they can take."
She adds that, on occasion, parents who have had their children removed go on to have children in another area. "Prosecuting for neglect is a way in which parents can become known to services in the future."
Strengthened legislation on child neglect must be accompanied by other measures such as garnering a better understanding of neglect both among professionals and across society more generally, McCrindle adds. But she points to a survey conducted by the NSPCC in 2012 that found that 65 per cent of social workers were not confident that neglect cases are "appropriately progressed to care proceedings stage" as evidence that action is necessary.
Investment crucial
But TCSW disagrees. It sees the growing number of potential neglect referrals identified by the NSPCC as adding further weight to the argument that investment in early help services is crucial in order to keep families and children safe.
"We know many of these early help services are being cut due to the need to make budget savings and this is undermining the ability of public agencies to support families effectively," chief executive of the college Annie Hudson says.
"We must also address the reality that better identification and increased reporting of neglect will result in greater workloads for all professionals, particularly for social workers.
"While TCSW understands some of the drivers behind the proposal to change the criminal law, it believes that enhancing the quality of help and support to struggling families and enabling social workers to deliver first-class services is more likely to tackle emotional abuse and neglect."
So what exactly does the government intend to change?
Under section 1 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933, it is already an offence to ill-treat a child in a way likely to cause unnecessary suffering or injury, including "mental derangement".
The government has previously argued that this provision already covers emotional abuse and neglect. But following pressure from campaigners, it has said it will insert a clause in the Serious Crime Bill to make it explicit that cruelty which is likely to cause psychological harm to a child is an offence.
Home Office minister Damian Green has said that while he believes the section is already "effective" and courts are "able to interpret it appropriately", he decided it would "benefit from further clarity and updating".
As a result, clause 62 of the Serious Crime Bill will make it "absolutely clear" that cruelty likely to result in physical or psychological suffering or injury is covered under section 1 of the 1933 Act.
Noel Arnold, director of legal practice at Coram Children's Legal Centre, says that if clause 62 is enacted as currently drafted, he is not convinced it will have any real pragmatic affect on professionals involved in criminal justice - such as police officers, criminal defence lawyers or the Crown Prosecution Service. He says: "The purpose of the clause, and government is explicit about this, is for it to clarify the law because the law is currently perceived to be unclear: it does not make substantive changes to the law."
Arnold adds that there could be difficulty defining whether emotional abuse or neglect results in the "psychological suffering" necessary to trigger an offence.
"Potentially, there could be questions as to when does emotional suffering become psychological suffering or, in fact, is emotional suffering a category of psychological suffering and therefore always caught by the offence," he says.
He adds that there could also be debate around at what stage a child's suffering or injury to health crosses the boundary from being "unnecessary" to "necessary" - as the legislation will only apply to psychological or physical suffering deemed to be "unnecessary".
The British Association of Social Workers (BASW) has said it will survey its members before coming to a settled view on the proposed change. Nushra Mansuri, professional officer at BASW, says some social workers have welcomed the plans while others have concerns about its implications.
It is an indication that the difference of opinion over the issue will not be easily resolved.
Definitions
Examples of emotional neglect:
- Ignoring the child's need to interact
- Failing to express positive feelings to the child, showing no emotion in interactions with the child
- Denying the child opportunities for interacting and communicating with peers and adults
Examples of emotional abuse:
- Persistently telling a child they are worthless or unloved
- Bullying a child or frequently making them feel frightened
- Persistently ridiculing, making fun of or criticising a child
Source: World Health Organisation
SHOULD THE LAW BE CHANGED?
YES - says Sir Tony Hawkhead, chief executive of Action for Children
"The Government's impending and long-awaited update to the law on child cruelty will transform the lives of children like Jamie (name changed), a four-year-old boy who was forced to eat different food from the rest of the family all by himself and was banned from playing with his own sisters.
"At night, he wet his bed because it was too dark to find the toilet as the light bulb in his room had been removed. There were maggots in his mattress. As a result of this treatment, Jamie became scared and withdrawn. One social worker described his development as a 'frozen watchfulness'. What a terrible state for a child.
"This is just one of the countless stories of severe emotional cruelty we have heard, not only from Action for Children frontline staff, but also from local authority social workers and police officers.
"In a series of focus groups we held with social workers to help inform our campaign, they told us that the lack of joined-up civil and criminal law was getting in the way of protecting vulnerable and neglected children.
"Many said difficulties were created by the police's inability to act upon cases of psychological abuse. Police, in turn, told us of harrowing experiences when they had to leave houses in which children were obviously suffering badly. They knew the situation was unsafe and psychologically damaging, but, without a bruise or broken arm, were unable to take action. Updating the law will allow professionals to work together more effectively to keep children safe.
"Some critics have said there is no need for this change because measures already exist to protect children from psychological cruelty.
"This is untrue. Action for Children has worked with many partners in identifying these gaps in child protection; legal experts such as Baroness Butler-Sloss, former president of the Family Division of the High Court, have strongly endorsed the law change.
"The law is not intended to criminalise parents unjustly. Quite the opposite. In most cases, parents can be supported to create loving homes in which their children can thrive. In the small minority of cases where this is not possible, however, children must have the law on their side. The alternative is unacceptable."
NO - says Alan Wood, president of the Association of Directors of Children's Services
"What is more necessary than a change in the law is a better understanding of what forms emotional abuse takes, and for social workers and others to feel better skilled in identifying, assessing and providing support for those subject to emotional abuse in family situations.
"It is about ensuring we have the appropriate skills and knowledge and appropriate clinical advice and guidance.
"The quality of child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS) across the country is inconsistent. We need to have a system that is much more easily accessible.
"I am sure it is partly an issue of resources, but it is also an issue of how things are organised. Referral routes are still very complex.
"By giving a definition to categories of abuse, the difficulty is that people begin to tick-box and get caught up in complex legalities about the precise definitions of emotional abuse in a court process.
"It creates a situation where there might be pressure for people to take action through legal means earlier than otherwise necessary. They could potentially take action because they feel there would be criticism if they didn't.
"Adding definitions and procedures to dealing with neglected children, in itself, is not going to aid the speed at which social workers get in to help families.
"It is unusual for children to be in a situation where the neglect they are facing is only one kind. There are connections between physical, emotional and sexual abuse. Having a clearer definition is not going to change the fact that we need to intervene earlier.
"I think we need a greater focus on how we deal with emotional abuse - what tools do we have to intervene in families to allow the child to develop in a more happy and harmonious system.
"We need families to understand the different ways of nurturing and bringing up their children, and provide access to treatment routes for parents whose emotional abuse is rooted in their own needs."
