To believe that every adult in the country should undergo safeguarding training?

[TheOutlaws]

I’m a teacher in a secondary school.

Every year, my colleagues and I undergo (harrowing) safeguarding training. Every week, I report children to our safeguarding lead. Mumsnet threads are full of people recommending that adults keep secrets, which is antithetical to safeguarding.

If you see something untoward, or are party to a disclosure, you MUST report it. Victoria Climbié only reached hospital because a taxi driver disobeyed her ‘aunt’s’ instructions to drive her elsewhere. He took her to A&E instead, where she died of her injuries.

We all have a responsibility to report incidents, because they might be part of a bigger picture.

I have done lots of child protection training and it was a day training its intense I don't think everyone is suited to that and they shouldn't have to be, but I do think we are all responsible for "safeguarding" so if we see something we should say something. Tragically these children who are neglected and abused and end up dead are usually known to SS and school so their neighbour watching a short video isn't going to do much.

And the extra resources that the system would need to cope with the results of this national safeguarding awareness training system, not to mention the resources need to establish run it in the first place, are coming from where exactly? The government gets all of its money from taxpayers, it doesn’t have its own money pot. And paying for all this means not paying for something else - what would that be?

Setting all that aside for a moment, where is the evidence that providing a level of safeguarding to millions of adults across the country is actually an effective means of protecting children?

@Jellycatspyjamas

Our safeguarding training included images of Victoria Climbié when she was admitted to hospital. It was harrowing, there were staff weeping openly.

I absolutely agree that encouraging everyone to take note of safeguarding is a great idea.

I work in a safeguarding role, it's always a bit shocking reading posts on here that are followed by loads of mind your own business etc.

Even the smallest things could be part of a bigger picture.

This sounds extremely unhealthy.

What is the purpose of exposing people to traumatic images?

But that risks having the opposite effect and desensitising people to the point they miss the earlier subtle signs something isn’t right. Going to extremes like that for dramatic response isn’t always going to help the bigger picture.

Its because very often you go through case studies of children that were abused and all the missed opportunities and ways agencies failed them. With pictures. There is often a local child who will be child A and then few national cases like Daniel Pelka and Victoria Climbie. Its quite hard not to be upset by hearing details of how a child died.

They then explain that there are children in your school being abused and thats distressing to know as well. With lots of stats like 1 in 20 children, are sexually abused.

Its not appropriate for everyone in the country to have.

I don't think the general public need to see that and also not everyone is upstanding or decent and they also don't need to see that. You are a teacher sadly this is part of your job.

i think this is a great idea but kinda missing the point.

are we just all ignoring the poster on page one who said her child was abused but someone with extensive safeguarding training? And all this “filling in thr missing peace” chat is because so many opportunities have been missed to help children.

with respect to social workers, police and courts, they are stretched beyond breaking so can only deal with dire situations. That’s what needs dealt with. (And the historic devaluing of women and children). If every child getting abused suddenly appeared on thr radar tomorrow they would still need to be prioritised in a way that lots would be ignored. Which is diabolical

my friend moved from a rough as hell school in an inner city to a leafy suburb and couldn’t believe that while on the surface thr kids were happier and safer just below that it just as hard to keep kids safe and harder to convince anyone that the child with very well to do parents in the big house who went skiing was being abused.

Using pictures is not necessary to convey the seriousness and prevalence.

Well our training is a quick video (then a longer one every three years),

Not training then really.

Completely agree. Being a bystander and 'minding you own business' is why so many awful things are enabled to continue. I've raised safeguarding concerns before with a school about a neighbour's child. The fear of doing it has to be balanced against the guilt of not doing something when you know there is a very serious issue. I would also add that to safeguarding is not just for children. Vulnerable adults and older people also get abused. And I've also reported concerns about a family member with dementia being neglected by another family member. Adult social care have been comprehensively uses less over this. But I'm still glad I at least tried.

I am a retired child protection social worker and i wholeheartedly agree. I this there should be leaflets, adverts on TV and video training available through the government for everyone and for every level of learning capability. People everywhere see things that are not right in relation to children but they often don't realise what they are seeing and how to report it. However this would cost a lot of money and I can't see the government agreeing to anything very comprehensive any time soon.

I dont write or deliver the training. I was just explaining why it is often harrowing as large numbers of employees get this style of training.

The pictures in some do add to the explanation, as they demonstrate a change over time in a childs appearance and the early changes are harder to spot or explain away easier. Its to help you know what to look for rather than convey seriousnes.

I havent seen hospital admission photos like PP. Just ones similar to those in the press of a happy child, then a child who lost a lot of weight.

@TheOutlaws I wonder if the images you've been subjected to have actually been rather traumatic.

This whole policy area is being dealt with so terribly badly across the country.

The pressure being put on teachers/schools is intended to distract from the dismantling of the child protection systems outside schools.

Its because very often you go through case studies of children that were abused and all the missed opportunities and ways agencies failed them. With pictures.

I design and deliver safeguarding training for a living, the only time I’d use pictures of children who’ve been abused if for specialist training for social workers. There’s absolutely no need for foundation level training to show pictures of injured children and research shows it’s utterly ineffective. It hasn’t been considered good practice for over a decade.

I can’t remember the last time I spoke to a child!

I would be very wary of showing any interest in a child, even though I am an old woman, protective parents are a minefield. And there are all the contra indications to consider : feeling uneasy about some pretty blatant boundary removal in schools and libraries can get you a visit from the police. I wonder if Sarah’s neighbours were inhibited from interest in her circumstances by intersectionality?

I work in several schools and at least two still have pictures in their safeguarding training so this message has not filtered down.

But regardless of pictures. I actually find talking about the procedures and how to report and what to do upsetting. Because i know there is a child at the end of the process potentially being abused.

There is often a local child who will be child A and then few national cases like Daniel Pelka and Victoria Climbie.

Case studies used in training should be composite in nature, ie different aspects of different cases, so that the child can’t be identified. Children and families deserve privacy and going through a CP process doesn’t change that.

The danger with poorly designed training is that it raises anxiety levels, makes people hyper vigilant and can sensationalise what is a very sensitive area of work. I’d also argue it’s unethical to traumatise people attending training.

Safeguarding needs a cool head and a considered mind, not “oh my god this child is the next Daniel Pelka”.

I'm pleased you explained this.

What is the impact of exposing school staff to traumatic images? It seems quite seriously risky to be doing this to non-specialist staff.

I don't think that a video would do it. What would be beneficial is something like a media campaign from police/social services/NSPCC to raise awareness that if something sounds or feels wrong then reporting is the route to take.

So many people are concerned that they will be wasting services time by reporting something that may feel relatively minor without realising that this may form part of a bigger picture.

The point of the training isn't so much about what to do, which is mostly common sense. Its about understanding that you have an obligation to do it, and that you are right to do it, plus a little bit of precisely where to go and who to speak to. Given the number of people who are reluctant to speak up about other people's children, it may be sense but it isn't common enough.

Thank you.

The materials and content we use come from the local authority and I've never seen, or shown, images of actual cases.

Sounds a bit like a "shock doc!" approach. And to what avail? Victoria Climbie wasn't going to sit in school looking like that. But her absences from school and hair not having been washed for a fortnight might have triggered a response.

I genuinely think that the average person doesn't have a clue what constitutes "a safeguarding issue". Put "safeguarding" into AS on here and you see that. Showing images of a battered child will only reinforce that.

Videos of a child using sexually inappropriate language (one of the biggest red flags) might be more useful - but on here that tends to be poo-pooed with "all 8 year olds talk like that". Or statistics about what percentage of abusers are members of the child's own family, and very unlikely to be the bloke at the swimming pool who just happens to go swimming at the same time as the children's lessons ((in)famous recent thread which would have had him lynched on the street)

I think YABU to expect everyone to have to take this kind of training because a lot of people don't actually come into contact with kids most days. Someone who doesn't have kids of their own is unlikely to interact with children each day unless their profession requires it, in which case they should and probably do have to undertake some training.

I think a better angle would be to address the reasons why people don't raise concerns. People don't want to look stupid if their concerns turn out to be nothing. People don't want to deal with the fallout of whatever accusation they make.

What we need is a system where if an allegation is made the kids are automatically removed from the parents' custody and there is an assumption of guilt unless the parents can prove otherwise. They also shouldn't be told who made the allegation, if the nature of the allegation could lead to them working out who made it they shouldn't even be made aware of what it is they are supposed to have done.

If this was to be tied with a financial reward for submitting information about potential problems it would encourage more people to come forward with their concerns. There could be a limit to discourage abuse so that if you make more than a hundred false allegations in a year you can't claim any more reward money.

These proposals would of course lead to a lot of innocent parents having their kids taken away but that's just collateral damage because for every few dozen people treated unfairly their might be a genuine case that gets caught that would otherwise have been missed.

I think these ideas would go a long way to end the mindset of "I'm not certain so I'll keep my trap shut, better abuse continues than I look like a twat."

If your employer already involves working with children, then you will be getting safeguarding training already.

If you work in a call centre, or brewery, or another business exclusively with adults colleagues and with adult customers/clients, why on earth would your HR department be running courses on safeguarding? I do accept your point that it's everyone's duty to report things which concern them but obligatory training for all employees is just nuts.

(I'm self-employed, do I have to pay for my own training?)