I’ve been reading a lot around child protection recently because of my doctorate, and I found the idea of guardianship to be interesting. As a former Designated Safeguarding Lead (DSL) in a school, I always found it curious that the same people would report time and time again, different instances and different concerns about children, whereby other staff would see the same thing and not report at all. This is called ‘the rule of optimism’ – the thought of ‘what if I am wrong?’ As a DSL I loved getting cases that turned out to be nothing – my most memorable was a youngster with Mongolian Blue Spot, a form of birth mark that looks like major bruising. It doesn’t matter that no further action was needed and I had spent time figuring it out – what mattered what the staff member cared enough to report.
The Australian Royal Commission investigated widespead child sexual abuse and how institutions dealt with it when claims came to light. I came across an article by Lockitch et al (2022) entitled ‘Why Didn’t they Intervene? Examing the Role of Guardianship in Preventing Instititional Child Sexual Abuse’ which I think could be really useful for schools to consider.
The authors used Routine Activity Theory, to examine the findings. This theory claims that crimes occur when there is:
- a motivated offender
- a suitable target
- the absence of a capable ‘guardian’.
A guardian in a safeguarding context could be anyone who witnesses or becomes aware of child abuse. However, to be effective, that guardian has to have a willingness to supervise, the ability to understand what is happening and also the willingness, which includes the confidence and skills, to intervene.
Willingness to Supervise:
This refers to someone else who is in the same physical space as an offender and is attentive to what they are doing. They must be able to notice when someone is acting in a manner that may constitute abuse. In the Royal Commission, witnesses who saw a teacher hold children on his lap behind his desk (where sexual abuse took place) did not report this. Moreover, although this was not studied in this research, lots of the abuse took place in front of other children. There could be scope for empowering children as guardians; or certainly an arrgument that young children should be taught about abusive behaviours and who to talk to if they see something/need help. From working with survivors of sexual abuse, many were abused for years before they realised that this was not normal or okay; they would’ve asked for help sooner if they knew.
Another issue was that the staff:child ratios were not upheld, so offenders often were left alone with children despite this being against school/institutional policy. I would argue having and sticking to staff:child ratios also protects the staff from unfounded allegations as well.
Willingness to Intervene:
If a guardian observes something concerning then they have to make a choice – do I act on what I saw or not, and if I act what do I do? Do I report this to my DSL? Do I speak to the child? Do I confront the adult? Many things can impact this decision.
In the case of William Vahey (the Serious Case Review is here) when teachers reported his suspicious behaviour, this was not acted upon, and when they confronted him directly he would point out that he was, basically, adored by the Board of Governers so they were risking their jobs should they report him. He drugged and sexually abused 100s of young people over a 40 year international teaching career. This has happened time and time again; there can be a diffusion of responsibility – if everyone knows that someone is ‘dodgy’, no-one reports. Maybe they don’t think it is their responsibilty, or maybe they think ‘surely someone else has done it‘.
In the Royal Commission, a sports coach was nicknamed a ‘paedo’ by the kids, and adults would routinely joke that they wouldn’t want to left alone with him. Turned out they were right, he was actually sexually abusing children, but no-one reported it.
These power dynamics, organisational norms and fear of consequences can all impact on whether your staff tell what they see. They need to be able to trust their gut, and be confident that leadership will take what they see seriously.
Capability to Intervene:
This involves guardians knowing what to do and who to report to. Many people in the research were unfamiliar with the reporting structures, or who in the organisation to talk to. Many were given the Child Protection policies to read, but hadn’t done so. Capability to intervene also includes their perception that they can actually intervene and make a difference, which in turn affects their willingness to get involved. Imagine in an international school reporting powerful parents for example, or thinking that, well this is just what happens in this country.
In my own conversations with teachers worldwide there can be a lack of understanding about country laws, and a misperception that ‘there are no laws to protect children here’. When I have done a (usually very quick) google search, I have always found said laws. The laws are there because most countries have signed up to the UN Convention of the Rights of the Child, and Article 19 urges governments to put in place laws and agencies to help protect children from all forms of violence.
This is also why it is so important, you undertake regular child protection or safeguarding training with your staff and you inform them of the laws in the country in which they are teaching. Getting them to do online child protection training from a UK provider does not give them the local knowledge and understanding to be able to believe that they are capable of making a difference to a child.
Finally as a reflection, I would like to ask schools and youth organisations to consider what the point is of their child protection policy. Do you have it to tick some boxes? Do you have it so you can collect information about children’s lives? Or do you have it because you want to actively keep children safe from abuse and harm?
Listen to children and young people when they tell you things – sometimes what they see is hidden from adults. They may use jokes to tell you. We know that, like in the case of William Vahey above, sexual offenders don’t use groom children they also groom adults as well.
Take all allegations seriously.
And finally don’t ask yourself ‘what if you’re wrong’, instead ask what if you are right?