PLAYLINK / Free Play Network

Child Protection discussion

Child Protection is an essential part of being a playworker and generally working with children in comtemporary society.
What concerns me though is that in this 'protection' we are in danager of becoming 'un-natural'therefore going against our instincts in our responses to children, especially when they have fallen down or are just looking for a little reassurance from a playworker that they probably have seen daily for the last 2 or 3 years, even longer.
If we are going to become playworkers who are not allowed to respond with intergity and humanity to children, then the only ones to suffer will be the children.
That, to my mind contridicts the entire essence playwork values and what is trying to be achieved by child protection regulations.

A very useful discussion to be having.
Jane Roberts
Posted by: Jane Roberts, Senior Playworker, Slade Gardens Adventure Playground, 03 May 2007, 17:54

I fully agree with what Jane has said. As a male playworker I am very aware of what people might think about a child sitting on my knee or them giving me a hug but I try not to let this affect the way I instinctively react to each child because to do this would be un-natural. Child protection is all about ensuring children are not harmed but to treat a child un-naturally would be harmful.

It is important that all workers (especially male) argue against people who say you shouldn't have any physical contact with children. This opinion says that you can't be trusted with children, which is obviously false.
Posted by: Mike, 03 May 2007, 17:54

Hi Chris,
I have been told to have no physical contact with the children by a Council employer, that being an across the board policy covering both genders.

Terrible when you think, at best, there's around one male worker to 15 female workers. So the fears of what male workers might do, in this case, all three of them, effectivily curtails fourty five females also having a natural relationship with children.
Mick
Posted by: mick sage, 02 May 2007, 18:30

I would be interested in others experience of gender stereotyping in this area. A male colleague of mine was told by his after school club manager to have no physical contact with the children in his care, a stipulation that was not made to the female members of staff. Another, working in a nursery was tiold not to work with some children as the parents did not want their child with a male member of staff.

In other areas of employment this would automatically lead to some action on sexual discrimination, but in this area it appears to be generally acceptable behaviour.
Posted by: Chris snell, 01 May 2007, 23:43

Laura's comments are really sad. What sort of society ends up providing child protection 'training' which includes telling professionals that if they cuddle a child they must 'record this to cover themseleves'? This isn't good child protection training at all and it should be challenged. As Bernard says, we're muddling categories. The day child protection training started confusing child protection and staff protection was a bad day for children and professionals alike. It's best to remember that trainers who offer this sort of advice are caught up in the moral panic themselves, but others do not have a responsibility to follow suit.
Posted by: Heather Piper, senior research fellow, 01 May 2007, 14:00

Sue Hadingham's comments, drawing on her and her children's all too real personal experience, put centre stage one of the anxieties we all share: how to prevent any child being abused? (Worth noting, incidentally, that the examples given are of incidents perpetrated by other young people - whereas, I suspect, our image of abuse is adult of child, almost exclusively.)

I can offer no simple technical answer here. But I suspect that we are inviting ourselves to take a wrong turn if we think that we must create some sort of 'balance' between responding to children and young people with, as Jane says in her opening remarks, 'integrity' and 'humanity' contrasted with creating protocols and procedures that systematically undermine those very qualities in practitioners.

There is, I suspect, no 'balance' to be struck - we are dealing with different categories, with unlikes that should not be fused into one overarching, distorted and distorting category labelled child protection.

The contrasting categories are, on the one hand, the responsibility to demonstrate, by word and deed, 'care', 'humanity', 'integrity' towards children and young people; and, on the other, the responsibility to prevent abuse.

Neither responsibility can be fulfiled by curtailing adults' easy and warm physical contact with children; nor are our responsibilities fulfilled by requiring adults always to be watched by other adults when engaging with a child.
Posted by: Benard Spiegal, Principal, PLAYLINK, 01 May 2007, 10:14

as a childminder im working on my own with children on a daily basic i feel if a child needs a cuddle why not it my be the only one that they might get as some parents dont have the time to give a child all the attention they need we still have to record this to cover ourseleves just in case any child should say anything out of place
I have just come in from be in on a course for child protetion which has brought me more up to date on thing
Posted by: laura jones , childminder, 30 April 2007, 23:13

I have two vulnerable children one, my son (SLD) who was sexually abused whilst at school by another student (a previous known offender), and the other, my daughter was sexually assaulted whilst a playscheme by another young adult with Aspergers, aslo a previous known offender.
I was appalled mainly at the people who were supposed to looking after them from management downwards. Lack of training by care staff and reluctance of senior management to deal with real child protection issues for fear of bad publicity was the route of the problem. Having insisted on clear policies and training being put in place in both institutions i am glad to say there have been improvements , however i am left dealing with my children's emotional scars through the trauma of their experiences. I agree that physical care, warmth and attention has to be given to comfort our children, and even as a nursery worker when my children were young, the little ones insecure and distraught, want to sit on your knee for a story like they do with mum or dad. Just a sad world for those people who take advantage of this.
Posted by: Sue Hadingham, Parent, 30 April 2007, 22:30

In my opinion it is very simple and the hysteria can be avoided- if the child has initiated the cuddle/hug then it is fine. If they are upset and agree if offered a hug, then its fine. If the adult is doing for themselves, because they want the hug or want to feel a succesful caring adult who can look after children then it is not ok.
It is very important for children to get comfort when they need it and it is co-incidentally very useful for children to benefit from contact with warm caring adults who give them care and touch as they want it. And give them the opportunity to reject or accept the offer of human contact.
Posted by: Faith Bennett, Development & Scheme Support {Childcare], Bristol Association Neighbourhood Daycare, 30 April 2007, 18:25

Jane I agree with you - child protection regulations are all about the needs of the child, not the needs of the professional to be watching their back. It is refreshing that so many of the contributors to these debates feel that defensive practice is not in the interests of the child. If more and more of you feel and act on this basis there is hope that the moral panic we find ourselves in will subside.
Posted by: Heather Piper, senior research fellow, 30 April 2007, 17:17