What actually is safeguarding?

[ChickenonaMug]

After listening to the Women's Hour debate today, it was quite clear that Michelle Moore and Layla Moran had very different ideas about what safeguarding is. I have heard this difference in understanding before with some people agreeing with Layla that is about almost entirely about protecting children from abuse or harassment that is occurring or is likely to occur. I know that the explanation of safeguarding that the government uses is:

"Safeguarding is the action that is taken to promote the welfare of children and protect them from harm.
Safeguarding means:
a)protecting children from abuse and maltreatment
b)preventing harm to children’s health or development
c)ensuring children grow up with the provision of safe and effective care
d)taking action to enable all children and young people to have the best outcomes.
Child protection is part of the safeguarding process. It focuses on protecting individual children identified as suffering or likely to suffer significant harm. This includes child protection procedures which detail how to respond to concerns about a child."

To my mind this seems a far broader understanding of safeguarding than the one offered by Layla Moran. My personal concern is how certain trans inclusive policies and teaching, in schools and Girlguiding for example, impact of the very considerable number of sexually abused girls (both those known about and also the very many who are hidden) within these organisations. I think that many or most sexually abused girls will recognise and have a response to someone based on their sex as opposed to their gender identity. Therefore I am particularly concerned about the effect of being forced to share spaces with someone with a male-body which might not only cause significant psychological distress and upsetting trauma responses but also reinforces the message to a previously groomed and vulnerable girl that her boundaries are not hers to define. I am equally concerned about the damage that can be caused to sexually abused girls (and indeed all girls) by teaching them that 'a person is who they identify themselves as' as opposed to who you recognise them to be. I am also concerned about the lack of recognition of the impact grooming, sexual abuse and the fear and shame that it causes will have had on a girl and her subsequent ability to speak up and assert her needs. So if I applied the broader understanding of safeguarding to the impact of trans inclusive policies on sexually abused girls, am I right in believing that there are concerns with regards to preventing harm to their health and development, promoting their welfare, as well as ensuring that they have the best outcomes? Or am I completely wrong in thinking that this is a safeguarding issue?

Sorry, I realise that this post is ridiculously long.

You are correct.

I will add that safeguarding does not only apply to children.

MM is correct, LM doesn’t have a fucking clue, which is disturbing considering she once identified as a teacher!

Thank you both. I find this so frustrating as not only do I think that trans inclusive policies and teaching are causing significant safeguarding concerns for sexually abused girls but also that these girls are being excluded by these policies. Sadly much of that exclusion will remain hidden as so many of these girls will be trying to not draw attention to their situation or past and will therefore withdraw in subtle ways or by giving different reasons.

Good points OP.
Another issue is that trans groups argue that a child coming out as trans is not a safeguarding issue. And at times that will be correct - and other times it will very much be a safeguarding issue with concerns about mental health, social contagion / grooming, self harm, suicidal ideation. That's why their demands that teachers keep secrets (including from parents) are so very dangerous.
When you have a child in need of support or at risk of harm, then that child is entitled to support. Only by sharing information can appropriate support be identified, maybe at school level or perhaps more widely with external support. There's a phrase - 'the team around the child'. Leaving parents out of that team is wicked. Social services and the Police can't leave parents out of their child's lives - they have to go to court for permission and argue their case that the parent is a danger to the child.

Another issue is that trans groups argue that a child coming out as trans is not a safeguarding issue. And at times that will be correct - and other times it will very much be a safeguarding issue with concerns about mental health, social contagion / grooming, self harm, suicidal ideation.

The trans lobby is very keen on the bogus suicide stats. But since they believe them, this conflicts with their advice that parents should not know if their child is identifying as trans. Using their arguments, a transgender child is at greatly increased risk of attempting suicide. If a child is likely to be suicidal, shouldn't the parents be told?

OldCrone
You're right. Of course parents must be told. How else can they protect their child if they don't know? I worked with a school and family where a child took their own life - and it transpired that a teacher knew this child was depressed but failed to share this with the parents. Terrible consequences.

Working in partnership with parents is fundamental safeguarding practice. Apologies for going on about it but I am beyond horrified that these groups (and ignorant Lib Dem MPs like Layla Moran) peddle this crap.

I suspect that tra rhetoric is that if a child discloses to a teacher they are trans, than they must have transphobic parents, therefore the parents should be cut away from the child.

I entirely agree if the mental health and suicide risks are as high as trans lobby groups state then surely it is therefore obvious that parents need to be informed. How can a parent safeguard their child against suicide, self harm or the effects of mental health issues if they are not aware of a child's gender dysphoria? It is not possible to state that there are massive risks to a child's health and wellbeing and then not give the parents the ability to care for them.

The very significant mental health concerns and self harm risks experienced by sexually abused girls and young women are, I believe, well researched and understood and yet nobody in authority seems to be considering or speaking up about the very real risks that trans inclusive policies will have on the emotions, mental health and ongoing wellbeing of these girls. I find this so shocking.

Safeguarding covers a multitude of people and situations.

For example we don't allow sales people in hospitals because patients are unable to walk away from a situation or the setting in which they are pro occupied with an emotional strain (their health) and thus may behave in a way they might not normally do (say anything to get rid of a sales person including buying a product or service they don't want).

The situation - not just your identity - makes you classed as technically 'vulnerable'.

(This is the basis of much of the Consumer Protection Act - which likes of a certain company operating in hospital wards show a flagrant disregard for and are enabled by the NHS, but have never actually been legally challenged on).

Any situation in which a person has the ability to say 'no' removed or restricted which may result in emotional, financial or psychical harm or abuse is a situation which should be stopped or 'safeguarded'.

It's all about power imbalances and trying to remove that imbalance. This requires others who do have power identifying and recognising situations which individuals may stay silent rather than say no because they do not feel able to speak up or say yes rather than no because they feel they have to. (Coercised or under undue pressure to behave in an 'approved' manner)

Girls feeling uncomfortable around someone male in their changing rooms would be a perfect illustration of a safeguarding failure in not understanding or acknowledging reasons why some might feel distress, discomfort or be otherwise feel forced to self exclude.

Yup ItsAllGoingToBeFine It's rhetoric.
No knowledge of safeguarding, child development, children's rights or anything. Just an adult model dumped on schools - that's what Stephanie Davies - Arai was talking about on GMB. An ideological adult model imposed on children.

Thank you RedToothBrush that is very helpful. I did wonder whether the fact that many sexually abused girls are actually unknown by those in authority means that their needs and rights do not have to be properly taken into account. Obviously it is well known that within schools there will be a considerable number of sexually abused girls and it is also known that most of these girls will never be known to those in authority. With this in mind I feel that the impact on these girls should be thoroughly assessed. They should not be ignored because their circumstances or past is so horrific that they can not speak up.

A lot of safeguarding practice (for children anyway) has arisen from serious case reviews which local authorities carry out every time a child dies or is seriously harmed from abuse. It’s where “lessons are learnt” and what’s come from most SCRs is a need for multi agency work, information sharing between professionals and the need for long term planning and support for children who are vulnerable or have already suffered maltreatment.

This is completely counter to how some TRAs want schools etc to handle this, instead promoting confidential disclosures and preventing support by not sharing information.

The point of safeguarding is to consider those who do not have political voices or voices within power structures.

Good rule of thumb: Listen for the silence or absence of voices as well as those who lobby and have loud voices.

What are women or girls who have been abused saying?
Do they have political power?
Do they have lobbying power?
Are they financially free or dependant on others?

These are telling questions.

OP, the key understanding is that safeguarding is a framework of different protocols. This is the statutory guidance for children, which is well worth reading to get a good overview:

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/729914/Working_Together_to_Safeguard_Children-2018.pdf

safeguarding relies on transparency and an understanding of the importance of trust too.

I could go on forever about this, but I'll try and keep it short.

Parents have PR. They are key in safeguarding their children. We cannot withhold information from a parent without good cause and even if a disclosure was withheld, it would only be for a limited time period while initial work took place (ie child discloses abuse from parent). Professionals must NEVER agree to maintain confidentiality, full stop. This is a cornerstone of safeguarding, without the free flow of information we are not keeping children safe. It's all about being able to join the dots.

A child wishing to change their gender presents a mine field of potential safeguarding issues. This is a child who is experiencing mental health difficulties- whether we term it dysphoria or not, and is choosing to keep it a secret from their parents, for whatever reason. This is a child who may cause damage to their body through breast binding for example. This is a child who may be dealing with another trauma via changing their gender. This is a child who may be struggling with pressures and channeling it in a maladaptive manner.

There are lots of maybes in this. And this is what safeguarding is. We look at the issues in hand, assess the risk and look at what strategies can be implemented to lessen and manage that risk. If a parent is not aware, what part can they play in that? What right does a teacher have to override a parents right to know in this situation? None. Precisely none. A child deciding to change their gender is massive and I cannot believe any teacher could think it acceptable to not tell their parents. Any teacher who happens to read this, and is doing this, I hope you reconsider.

To condone the keeping of secrets destroys basic safeguarding structures. If we start to say, well we'll keep this secret but not that, in an arbitrary manner, we're on a slippery slope to put it fucking mildly.

Great thread!

One of the first safeguarding lessons we teach adults is never to promise confidentiality to a child. And get them to rehearse how they will say it.

TBH ALL MPs should know NOTHING BUT safeguarding.

Their entire job is to scruntise and assess the impact on all their constituents when considering a new law, thinking about how everyone from the most vulnerable to the most wealthy will be affected. Their job is to identify unintended consequences and ways in which proposed changes to the law could be exploited by the unscruplous at the expense of the state or individuals (particularly vulnerable individuals).

This perhaps applies more to Labour and Liberal Democrats than Tories by the very nature of their political beliefs.

Thats a lot of where the stuff about 'the Westminister Bubble' and what Lisa Muggeridge talked about comes from; the fact that MPs do not understand the most basic principles of safeguarding or if they do, they do not value them or believe in safeguarding.

I'm finding this thread very interesting. I've never worked in a setting where safeguarding was an issue, so know bugger all about it.

Prawn
When you've worked in safeguarding and seen the terrible things that adults do to access children in order to abuse them, you never forget it. It does affect your thinking as you have to lose that instinct to 'be kind' in order to be prepared to think the unthinkable.

I really appreciate RedToothbrush 's contributions as she adds a political dimension that's not spoken about enough.

I do wonder whether trans groups understand quite how dangerous and self centred they are being as they keep trying to dilute safeguarding for children? To them it's just an ideological game as they push back at women and our safety. At least that's what I hope as any alternative explanations are too awful to contemplate.

Thinking about safeguarding from a medical angle is also useful and relevant.

It covers consideration of ethics, doing no harm, informed consent, undue pressure and evidence based practice.

Another important reason for not allowing confidential disclosures is that doing so creates a chink in the armour against infiltrating abusers. A child with a secret is a child that is easy to control.

It does affect your thinking as you have to lose that instinct to 'be kind' in order to be prepared to think the unthinkable.

Indeed.

There are a LOT of organisations that seem to have forgotten the golden rule that it is easier to have safeguards in place to prevent dubious individuals entering your organisation in the first place, than to remove them once they are there.

WEP, Labour, Greens, Lib Dem’s, Stonewall, Girl guides, I’m looking at you.

The other thing to remember about safeguarding is that it is a partnership between all the agencies (including parents) involved with a child or vulnerable adult. That's why the child guidance is called Working Together. Information sharing is key. Which is why it is a huge red flag not only to ignore parents but also to ignore other agencies. Schools should not be socially transitioning children without reference to parents, GPs, social services and all other agencies working with a particular child. (The Allsorts guidance says this is fine, even recommends it some instances. How it is allowed anywhere near our schools defies belief.)