Anne Lawrence, Barrister Why do we need Mandatory Reporting of child sexual abuse? Wisdom legislation that engages with reality and the banality of evil Three things about me (1) I am a barrister practicing in public law and was asked to give professional opinion on the effectiveness of safeguarding regulations, procedures and guidance within Schools in 2009. I have advised on and support the MandateNow campaign which seeks a change in the law to make it mandatory for those working in regulated activities to report allegations and concerns of child sexual abuse to statutory external authorities (such as LADO). (2) I am a former Chair of an organisation run for and by people who were sexually abused within Churches in childhood and as adults (2009-2012). I was also a founding member of the national committee of its parent organisation run for and by people abused in childhood (1993-1997). Involved in Nolan, Cumberlege Inquiries and the Diocese of Chichester Inquiry. I was sexually abused in childhood and sexually abused and exploited as a young adult. (3) For thirteen year before becoming a barrister I was a mainstream secondary school teacher, researcher and trainer of teachers (19892002). During my time as a teacher I worked with children who had been sexually abused and in institutions where sexual abuse had taken place. 1 Three things I have learnt (1) It was Hannah Arendt, a German Jewish woman who left Germany when the persecutions began in the 1930s, who described what she heard at the Eichmann Trial as ‘the banality of evil’ (1962). The evidence did not disclose acts of great evil but rather the daily unquestioned acceptances of orders, the careless indifference and unthinking actions of soldiers, officers and state administrators, and the turning away from, minimising and denial of what was happening by many millions of ordinary people focused on their own needs and aspirations. It is these dynamics that enable evil to happen in the midst of ordinary life. (2) Teachers and social workers, nurses, doctors and police officers, are ordinary people working in front line services often undervalued and over stretched, earning a salary to pay the mortage/rent, to feed and clothe their children, to pay ever increasing bills, and save for retirement, a holiday - with their own needs and aspirations. Under pressure to fulfil or conform to ever changing professional targets and priorities they are often torn between the competing demands of their professional and personal commitments. They are not heroes, they are human beings, and when things go wrong they deserve our compassion not our condemnation. (3) To be sexually abused in childhood is devastating. It is a shattering betrayal of trust which causes profound cognitive confusion, psychological harm and emotional disturbance to the child. Child sexual abuse is an act of evil; it is about turning the child into an object over which power can be exerted for the gratification of the perpetrator. Those around the child are often groomed and manipulated by the perpetrator to enable the abuse to take place & to silence concerns and allegations. It is a hate filled crime committed. The impact on the victim can be lifelong and the cost to society is incalculable: (research findings on physical and mental health, social care, unemployment, homelessness, crime, prison, drug and alcohol addiction, prostitution. . .) Research has found that between 10-16% of those surveyed had been sexually abused in childhood (NSPPC research 2000 and 2011). 2 Three reasons why mandatory reporting is required (1) There is currently no legal requirement for anyone to report known or suspected cases of child sexual abuse to LADO or the police (Kier Starmer, BBC Panorama November2013). We are left wondering how many lawyers have advised head of institutions where children were abused, that there is no legal requirement to report even known abuse. Statutory legislation and guidance merely provides that if a named person within an institution where regulated activities take place has reason to believe that a child has been harmed or may be at risk of significant harm then s/he should report the case to the relevant external agency. It is for the named person within the institution/ organisation to determine whether any allegation or concern raised meets the ‘threshold’ for reporting. Professional Codes of Conduct and Guidance also provide that members of the profession should report where they suspect a child has been or is at risk of significant harm. Government responses to the MandateNow campaign have included the banal statement that there is no need for a mandatory duty to report, because if a person within an institution or organisation to which relevant statutory guidance applies does not report when they know or reasonably believe that abuse has taken place the institution can be Judicially Reviewed and/or the person could be disciplined. Who would bring the JR claim? The child, the parent, and when will they do it (within 3 months), and how likely is it to be successful? JR is a wholly unrealistic and ineffective remedy for the failure to report abuse. And whilst a professional body can discipline and even remove a person who breaches professional safeguarding duties, such as the HT in the Hill Side First School case (SCR 2012) this will only ever happen years later when the perpetrator has been convicted and a serious case review has taken place. The harm has been done, a child and possibly many more, will have suffered abuse and no one did anything Again it is not an 3 effective response. How many professionals have ever faced disciplinary proceedings for failing to report cases of child sexual abuse? Recent cases best illustrate the ineffectiveness of current guidance to protect children; Hill Side First School (2011), Stanbridge Earl School (2011), Bishop Bell School (2012), St Benedict’s School Inquiry (2011), Downside School Inquiry (2012); all cases where child abuse continued for a considerable period of time with the knowledge of teachers, Head teachers and even the Governors. (2) The current statutory and professional guidance across regulated activities assumes a level of personal courage and a capacity for objective decision-making that is simply not realistic and fails to engage with institutional and social dynamics and the competing professional and personal demands of ordinary people with families to support, careers to pursue and professional/institutional targets and policies to be met, all of which impact adversely on the likelihood of reporting. There are myriad reasons why people who are working in regulated activities do not report what they know or suspect, have been told or even witnessed. If, as in the Hill Side First School case, a teacher sees a colleague abusing a child often the first reaction is to question what was seen, to doubt what it means, and to attempt to rationalise, minimise or deny that it was what she thought. What would it mean if a colleague, a friend, a parent was sexually abusing a child? What would happen to the colleague, the parent or the child? What if the witness is wrong? Then at a practical level, if a child discloses something to a teacher, how long will s/he have to hang around to wait for social services, what if the child is lying, why should she have to deal with this, who will collect her children, it’s someone else’s responsibility, what if he is blamed for overreacting and loses his job? Meanwhile the head of the school, Diocese, hospital . . . has other concerns also; institutional reputation, friendship, staffing issues, the fact that this is the third time someone has made an allegation against the same teacher and he didn’t act 4 before, it may be a mistake or misunderstanding, this is the second person the child made allegations about, what harm really, it was only touching, we’re all human, maybe he just needs a break. Files are suddenly ‘edited’ or destroyed and cases are covered up (Hill Side School 2011, Bishop Bell School 2012, Diocese Chichester Prebendal School Inquiry 2002, Orchard View Inquiry 2013) These responses are seen time and again in recent serious case reviews. Under the current safeguarding regime it takes personal courage to report suspected and known cases of child sexual abuse regardless of the consequences. And even when a teacher, nurse, social worker does report to the named person, if nothing happens what is s/he to do? Report again and risk being called obsessed or a trouble-makers.? What if she goes directly to the police behind the back of her managers, this will certainly cause trouble, especially when, as in the vast majority of reported cases of child sexual abuse (over 95%), there is no prosecution or conviction and nothing happens to the alleged abuser (Orchard View Care Home case 2013, Peter Connolly SCR GOSH 2010). It is simply not good enough for Government ministers and permanent secretaries to say that professionals will always act in the interests of the child. That banal statement denies the vulnerabilities and competing professional and personal priorities of those working in regulated activities and the social and institutional complexities of child abuse cases which make all involved question what they know, the firmness of the ground upon which they stand and the goodness of others. Whilst Government ministers rely on bland assertions that professionals are reporting all the time, they fail to reflect on the fact that the reported cases they refer to must be a fraction of the estimated 5% of child abuse cases ‘detected’ (Equality and HR Commission: How Fair is Britain Report 2011). Given that over 95% of children regularly attend school, are registered with the health services and the most vulnerable are registered with social services, how many people working in 5 regulated activities are not listening, not responding or are not reporting what they suspect, what they have seen and what they have been told? (3) It has been argued time and again by well meaning safeguarding and child protection professionals that there just needs to be better training. I would say that this is crucial, and that it needs to be training which engages with the need for reflective practice, listening to intuitive concerns, and understanding the institutional and social dynamics, competing prioritises and complex feelings that arise when faced with such difficult cases, rather than superficial training which focuses on what child abuse is, the signs to look out for and the institutional procedures to follow which has so characterise the training offered. However the best support you can give to a competent professional working in a regulated activity, with children, a mortgage, child care bills, juggling professional and family commitments, looking for promotion, with plans made for the future money she will earn, is mandatory reporting legislation which cuts across the institutional, social and personal dynamics, and cuts across the fear of getting it wrong. Such legislation would enable a professional to say okay the child has told me this, or I have seen that and by law I must report to the named person and he must report it to the external agency. I will do this now on the statutory reporting form, and the institution will cover any additional child care whilst I do so as it’s a statutory duty related to my job, I will not ‘be blamed’ because I am required to report what I’ve been told, seen or suspect, and I will check to make sure that it has been reported externally as required by law. That’s what I was told in the excellent safeguarding training we received. Legislation that makes the reporting of known or suspected child sexual abuse reporting mandatory provides the support and protection people need to do the right thing when faced with the myriad and complex personal, professional and social dynamics that are engaged when cases of child abuse arise; they cannot be blamed, criticises, or pressurised into not reporting or not checking when a report has been made. They 6 are empowered and enabled by such legislation and absolved of the need to know for sure before acting. They are just following the law and doing the right thing. Anne Lawrence (10th December 2013) 7