Case Study C
Jack came into the local authority care due to sexually assaulting his sister over a period of 9 months. The police arrested Jack due to the assault.
Their was a long history of sexual abuse form his father to Jack ’s older siblings and to himself and sexual violence and domestic violence from his father to his mother
Jack remained within a local residential unit and a multi agency risk assessment meeting was held. His former school refused to allow him to come back due to a sexual incident 2 years ago and stated they needed a more thorough risk assessment.
A decision to complete an AIM2 risk assessment a specialised risk assessment for young people with sexually harmful behaviour. However this assessment can not be completed until the young person has been charged within court.
During this time with the young person we ascertained that he was a victim as well as a perpetrator, this was the social worker getting alongside the young person and building up trust whilst sticking to the social work values of non judgemental attitude unconditional positive regard.
Sadly the local residential unit breached his confidentiality and it was Jack disclosed to his social worker that he was being bullied within the residential unit.
The situation was unmanageable due to the risk from the local community and the young person was moved to and out of county residential unit..
As the social worker we co-ordinated his care within this unit regularly risk assessing the young man within multi agency risk assessment meetings, the attendees being specialist social worker in sexually harmful behaviour, education ,residential care.
The young person court outcomes were concluded and he was sentenced to 2 year youth rehabilitation order, 14 hours community service and register as a sex offender for 2 years.
Gradually Jack’s Social Worker, YOS and his therapist worked collaboratively in moving the young person forward using the AIM2 moving on tool, this tool enabled his keyworker and YOS worker to de-brief him after unsupervised time within the community if he had any sexual thoughts.
The social worker co-ordinated a permanency planning meeting to ascertain everyone’s views of Jack residing out of county and all professional were in agreement that the residential unit provided the stability, security for Jack to keep himself safe and those around him safe whilst also pushing him forward to reside within the community safely.
Now the young man is heading towards early adult life it was agreed that he could remain there until he was ready to move to supported lodgings. Jack worked hard within the residential unit and the right package of car was found for him he engaged

well with YOS and with his therapist and his risk has significantly reduced, allowing him to attend a local college.
From this work the social worker was able to assess the service that was provided for children with sexually harmful behaviour not just looking at the micro system of this one case but the mesos system of how we support children with SHB and macro system of the attitudes of society.
From this critique of the local authority a thinking group was established at how we can serve young people whit SHB better, looking at foster carer training, challenging preconceived ideas, the use of language when talking about children with sexually harmful behaviour and how that could be perceived. Exploring the resources we have to support children with sexually hamful behaviour.