4.1.35 Resolution of Professional Disagreements in Work Relating to the Safety of Children |
Problem resolution is an integral part of professional co-operation and joint working to safeguard children. It is often a sign of developing thinking within a dynamic process and can indicate a lack of clarity in procedure or approach.
Professionals providing services to children and their families should work co-operatively across all agencies, using their skills and experience to make a robust contribution to safeguarding children and promoting their welfare within the framework of discussions, meetings, conferences and case management.
All agencies are responsible for ensuring that their staff are competent and supported to deal appropriately with intra-agency and inter-agency concerns and disagreements about a child’s wellbeing.
Concern or disagreement may arise over another professional’s decisions, actions or lack of actions in relation to a referral, an assessment or an enquiry.
Professional disagreement is only dysfunctional if not resolved in a constructive and timely fashion. Professionals should attempt to resolve differences through discussion and/or meeting within a working week or a timescale that protects the child from harm (whichever is less).
Disagreements could arise in a number of areas, but are most likely to arise around thresholds, roles and responsibilities, the need for action, communication.
It is important:
- to avoid professional disputes that put children at risk or obscure the focus on the child
- to resolve difficulties (within and) between agencies quickly and openly
- to identify problem areas in working together where there is a lack of clarity and to promote resolution via amendment to protocols and procedures
The safety of individual child(ren) and focus on child(ren) are the paramount considerations in any professional disagreement.
Effective working together depends on an open approach and honest relationships between agencies.
It also depends on resolving disagreements to the satisfaction of workers and agencies; and a belief in genuine partnership.
Professional disputes are reduced by clarity about roles and responsibilities and airing and sharing problems in networking forums.
The process of resolution should be as simple as possible.
The aim should be to resolve difficulties at practitioner/fieldworker level between agencies.
Attempts at problem resolution may leave one worker/agency believing that the child remains at risk of Significant Harm. This person/agency has responsibility for communicating such concerns through agreed channels.
The following stages should involve consulting a line manager and/ or the agencies nominated safeguarding advisor to clarify thinking. They are;
- recognition that there is a disagreement over a significant issue which impacts on the safety and welfare of a child
- identification of the problem, and clarity about the disagreement and what you aim to achieve
(The term nominated safeguarding children adviser, as it is used in these procedures, describes persons appointed at an operational, strategic or commissioning level or with responsibilities encompassing elements of operations, strategy, commissioning or providing consultation and advice.)
Initial attempts should be taken to resolve the problem. This should normally be between the professionals who disagree unless the child is at immediate risk. It should be recognised that differences in status and/or experience may affect the confidence of some workers to pursue this unsupported.
Professionals should attempt to resolve differences through discussion and/or meeting within one working week or a timescale that protects the child from harm (whichever is less).
If unresolved within agreed timescales the problem will be referred to the worker’s own line manager or advisor, who will discuss with their equivalent in the other agency. Most day-to-day inter-agency differences of opinion will require the involvement of first line managers' equivalents in the relevant agencies, e.g.:
- A Police Detective Sergeant;
- First Line Manager (health);
- Social Care Team Manager
- Designated Teacher
These first line managers should seek advice from their agency’s nominated / designated child protection adviser.
If agreement cannot be reached following discussions between the above first line managers within a further working week or a timescale that protects the child from harm (whichever is less), the issue must be referred without delay through the line management to the equivalent of service manager / detective inspector / head teacher or other designated senior professional /nominated safeguarding advisor.
If having referred the matter via line management, the problem remains unresolved, or one agency/professional fails to acknowledge, recognise, or is reluctant to meet within the stated timescales, consideration must be given to referring the matter to the designated managers within the LSCB.
The professionals involved in this conflict resolution process must contemporaneously record each intra- and inter-agency discussion they have, approve and date the record and place a copy on the child’s file together with any other written communications and information. In particular this must include written confirmation between the parties about an agreed outcome of the disagreement and how any outstanding issues will be pursued
NB The specific procedure for addressing dissent from Child Protection Conference decisions is set out in Initial Child Protection Conferences Procedure
When the issue is resolved, any general issues should be identified and referred to the agency’s representative on the CSCB for consideration by the appropriate CSCB Subcommittee to inform future learning.
It may also be helpful for individuals to debrief following some disputes in order to promote continuity of good working relationships.
End