Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Similar to A whole family approach to tackling domestic abuse
Similar to A whole family approach to tackling domestic abuse (20)
More from CSSaunders
More from CSSaunders (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
A whole family approach to tackling domestic abuse
- 1. 1 Police Foundation Conference A whole family approach to tackling domestic abuse Melani Morgan & Sonal Shenai, SafeLives 29 November 2017
- 2. 2 We are a national charity dedicated to ending domestic abuse. We are independent, practical and evidence-led. We respect local circumstances and learn from local provision to improve the local response, including training and bespoke advice. We need: • The right resources at the right time to make people safe, sooner. • To stop asking "Why doesn't she leave?" and start asking "Why doesn't he stop?“ • To understand the whole picture for an individual and family, to give an effective response. About SafeLives
- 3. 3 Evidence tells us: 85% of victims of domestic abuse seek help five times on average before they get effective support. Four out of five victims of domestic abuse do not call the police. 57% 35% 35% 57% Hospital Idvas are more likely to engage victims who disclose high levels of complex mental health needs than local domestic abuse services (57% vs 35%). After support from an Idva, 54% of survivors reported feeling much safer at case closure. 83%89%
- 4. 4 One Front Door: Earlier identification of all linked individuals experiencing abuse • Ultimately our vision is to create one place for all referrals at all levels of risk for professionals • Single team triages, gathers information, risk assesses and allocates a pathway of support, moving at the pace of the individual at highest-risk • Pathways for all members of the family linked, making more at-risk children visible • Statutory-led • SafeLives has created a national pilot to work towards this solution.
- 5. 5 Risk rating system (Red Amber Green) RED High risk AMBER Medium risk GREEN Standard risk -Acute needs requiring statutory intensive support/management including police, youth offending services, mental health, substance use, DV, adult safeguarding and/or children’s social care. -Meets threshold for child protection. -Meets the threshold for adult protection -Meets the threshold for Marac -Complex needs likely to require longer term intervention from targeted, statutory and or specialist services. -Children or adults may meet threshold for social care assessment or intervention -Children or adults with low level additional needs that are likely to be short term.
- 6. 6 Case study Police are called to an incident at the home of Mike and Julie. Julie has ended her relationship with Mike and has been asking him to leave for the last 6 months and he has finally agreed to go. He is being aggressive and abusive when collecting his things to leave. The children are present and distressed. Julie tells police that Mike is back on heroin after a few years off it. What risk do you see for each family member? What decision would you make? Phillip, 18 months John, 3 Julie, 27 Darren, 8 Mike, 28
- 7. 7 Referral 2 Police made a referral to Children’s Social Care. The decision was made by CSC for no further action after the first referral. Four months later the police are called out to Julie’s home. She reports that Mike is again being aggressive and abusive when visiting the home to see the children. He has locked the children outside of the house which has caused them distress. What risk do you see for each family member? What decision would you make?
- 8. 8 Referral 3 Police made a second referral to Children’s Social Care. CSC decided no further action was required. 14 months later (Phillip is nearly 3, John is 5 and Darren is 10) the police were called to the home by Julie. She reported that Mike had been to see the children and threatened her with a knife then taken John and Phillip against her wishes. They are returned by a friend of Julie’s a short time later. She says Mike is still using heroin. Julie tells police that Darren is staying with her mother as she is struggling to cope with his increasingly difficult behaviour. What risk do you see for each family member? What decision would you make?
- 10. 10 Reflections… What are your reflections on this situation?
- 11. 11 The One Front Door approach A safeguarding concern is identified for any family member Any action taken follows the timescale of the highest risk identified Advice and information Statutory or voluntary agencies Multi-agency or strategy meeting The Each family member is assessed and assigned a BRAG rating High risk Medium risk Standard risk Low or no risk They are referred to the One Front Door team to research, who check relevant information on them and their family
- 12. 12 Our blueprint for safety
- 13. 13 I don’t want in my lifetime to ‘possibly’ see an end to domestic abuse. I want it to become a reality and we must ALL make this happen. Rachel Williams, SafeLives Pioneer www.safelives.org.uk Melani.Morgan@Safelives.org.uk Sonal.Shenai@Safelives.org.uk
Editor's Notes
- Welcome – great to see you all INTRO TO MELANI – Beacons, DA Matters, Marac, INTRO TO SONAL – Consultancy, One Front Door.
- SOURCES: 85% seeking help five times on average: Insights data 2014, Getting it right first time, SafeLives Four out of five domestic abuse victims don’t call the police: Crime Survey England and Wales, ONS, 2014/15 Hospital Idvas are more likely to engage victims who disclose high levels of complex mental health needs than local domestic abuse services (57% vs 35%): Cry for Health, SafeLives 2016 After support from an Idva, 54% of survivors reported feeling much safer at case closer: Insights Idva national dataset 2016-17, SafeLives ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Cry for Health, SafeLives 2016 Just under half (49%) of victims identified in hospitals had post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) compared to 6% of community victims One in six (16%) had been to A&E for an overdose in the last six months, compared to 3% of community victims Domestic abuse costs £1.73 billion to the NHS Our research has found that it would only cost £15.7m for every NHS acute provider to have a robust Idva service. That is £100,000 per hospital. It would provide help for 15,000 additional victims a year.
- Opportunity to intervene earlier, understand linkages and whole families.
- Traffic light system
- I would like you to get in pairs to RAG rate this family – Mother, Children, Father, anyone else. Now consider whether you would share information on this family with other agencies and what legislation you might use. Children’s Social Care: Child Welfare Notification received from Police due to children being present at Standard DA incident and it is noted the children were distressed. Systems checked family not known. First reported DA incident. Police information: Police attend domestic disturbance at the household of Perpetrator Mike and Aggrieved Julie This is the first reported incident between the couple. On arrival Officers separate the couple to prevent a breach of the peace. Officers note three children in the household who are present and are distressed. Mum Julie is comforting them and informs Officers in attendance that Perpetrator has supposedly been leaving for the last six months due to relationship breakdown because of his drug addiction. He’s finally agreed to leave but was aggressive and being disruptive in front of the children so Aggrieved called the Police. Perpetrator agrees to leave the property. Officers inform Aggrieved a referral to Children’s Social Care will be made as the children witnessed the incident. NFA is agreed no crime committed. No ACPO Dash completed standard risk. Verbal only. The Police are aware of Perpetrators criminal history. No violent offences, petty theft & supply of Class A substance. Health Visitor (HV): After the birth of Philip, Mother Julie was noted to have suffered from post-natal depression. Mother Julie has disclosed to the Health Visitor about estranged partners substance misuse he is using cannabis and heroin after being abstinent for four years. HV aware of Police attendance due to verbal argument. HV refers Julie to the local children’s centre as Mother Julie disclosed she was struggling with the children’s behaviour after partner has left. The HV is informed by Mother Julie maternal Grandmother is very supportive and her biological sisters. HV is informed from Mother Julie’s GP, she has used heroin since Darren was around 4 years of age, and Mother of Philip informed her that she sought help from her GP after three months of using. GP referred Mother to a specialist substance misuse service and was prescribed buprenorphine, a replacement for heroin. Mother is still being prescribed a reduced dosage of this drug. Mother is waiting to hear about plans to help her detox to end her use. Substance Misuse Agency: Information held - Julie is accessing a service, she attends appointments and collects her prescribed medication - buprenorphine, a replacement for heroin. Mike, her partner, previously known but no longer in service, he often attended appointments with her. Not been present recently. DECISION: Police make a referral to Children’s Services.
- I would like you to get in pairs to RAG rate this family – Mother, Children, Father, anyone else. Now consider whether you would share information on this family with other agencies and what legislation you might use. Police Information: Police respond to a domestic incident call out to Aggrieved Julie’s home address. Perpetrator known as Mike is being aggressive and disruptive. This is the second recorded Domestic Abuse incident between this couple. Perpetrator has locked the children outside of the house which has caused them distress. Aggrieved Julie is upset at Perpetrators behaviour and tells officers that the property is in her sole name. Perpetrator claims he is retrieving belongings which are his property. Perpetrator is spoken to by attending Officers and agrees to leave and go to his parents’ home. The attending Officers make a second referral to children’s services as the children were distressed and present as per protocol. Standard risk no harm recorded. The Police are aware of Perpetrators previous convictions for petty crime and substance use. Offender has no warning markers or violent offences. 2nd Domestic Abuse report 4 months later Children’s Social Care: Second Child Welfare Notification received from Police due to children being present at Standard DA incident and were distressed. Systems checked family not known. System highlights previous standard risk DA incident verbal argument. No further checks required. Health Visitor: Mother to Philip, Julie, discussed further concerns about ex partners Mike’s drug taking as he had previously stopped using for a number of years. There has been another standard risk DA incident and Mother Julie is concerned by his threatening behaviour after the second incident. Health Visitor (HV) was reassured when Mother Julie informed her that she had taken on the sole tenancy of the property and asked partner to leave. Mother of Philip Julie was continuing to express her concerns about her second son John’s behaviour and him witnessing his dad’s behaviour. HV is aware Julie is attending Children’s centre and receiving support. Mother Julie describes maternal mother’s support and extended family helping with Darren the eldest with overnight stays to give her some respite. HV notes on her records that the house is often in a state of disarray. Mother Julie explains this is due to the children’s behaviour. HV has regular contact with Mother Julie. Recent change is Mother Julie isn’t always available for appointments, HV notes report HV has found Mother easy to talk to, although HV records Mother did not follow or implement much of the advice given. 2nd Domestic Abuse report 4 months later Community Family Support Worker (CFSW) Children’s Centre: Mum Julie is attending for support on a regular basis. Service User(SU) has expressed concerns about her second son John’s behaviour and his delayed speech. Service User has expressed her concerns to CFSW about her ex partners mental health, that he had started using drugs again after a four year break which appeared to be affecting his behaviour and has caused conflict when they had contact. CFSW notes SU Julie continues to seek advice about managing John’s behaviour, Parenting Courses are not attended as advised. 2nd Domestic Abuse report 4 months later Substance Misuse Agency: Information held Client Julie is accessing service- fully compliant with support. No concerns. Mike hasn’t attended with Julie no contact with him. 2nd Domestic Abuse report 4 months later Specialist Domestic Abuse service: No information held. Victim not known. Perpetrator not known. No referral from CSC or Police.
- I would like you to get in pairs to RAG rate this family – Mother, Children, Father, anyone else. Now consider whether you would share information on this family with other agencies and what legislation you might use. Police Information: Police Officers attend Domestic Incident Call out at Aggrieved Julie’s property. This is the third reported call out between this couple. Aggrieved reports to attending Officers that her ex partner Mike, Perpetrator had been to see the children and threatened her with a knife. Perpetrator has then taken John and Phillip against her wishes to an unknown address. Aggrieved tells attending Officers her eldest child Darren is staying with Aggrieved mother as his behaviour is difficult for Aggrieved to manage whilst looking after the other two boys. During the Officers initial local search, a third party known to both parties returned the children. Police officers note Perpetrator biological Father to children is wanted by local police force in regard to two outstanding court warrants. Julie makes a statement to the police regarding a potential charge of theft; A few days later Aggrieved retracts her statement, saying Aggrieved did not want to work with the police, attending Officers describe Aggrieved as hostile. Police aware of Perpetrators previous non-violent criminal history and substance use. No warning markers. 2 outstanding Court Warrants. ACPO Dash completed concern raised on child contact and weapon, fear. Risk level Medium. 3rd Domestic Abuse incident in 9 months Children’s Social Care: Third Child Welfare Notification received from Police. Initial Assessment is agreed to be completed Mother Julie gives consent at the start of the assessment for information to be sought from other agencies. Health Visitor: The HV had regular contact with Julie until 4 months ago, Mother of Philip, Julie stopped being available for appointments, HV has felt that Mother of Philip did not follow or implement much of the advice given and has withdrawn support. Specialist Domestic Abuse Service: No information held. Victim not known. Perpetrator not known. Referral from CSC / Police Medium risk received currently on waiting list to be contacted via phone. Substance Misuse Agency: Over the New Year period Client Julie does not collect her prescribed medication and through a routine test is found to have used cocaine, non-prescribed buprenorphine and diazepam. A letter is sent by the drug agency to the GP informing them of this. POLICE MADE REFERRAL TO CSC as per protocol, it is noted this is the third referral in a nine month period.
- In the end – there were 3 further referrals over a total of a 9 month period (6 in total about the wellbeing of these children). In the sixth referral - Mother and a new partner Ian were arrested for handling stolen goods; two stolen laptops were found in the garden. Police were seriously concerned about the state of the home, bruises observed on the children and external lock on the children’s room. Police made a referral to CSC again and were told CSC would continue enquiries. The police understood interviews would be undertaken with the children at school, but this did not happen. No formal enquiries were undertaken. Child protection enquiries should have stepped up. The implications of the criminal activity taking place in the home, and the presence of unknown adults was not addressed as a risk factor for the safety and wellbeing for the children. The focus was always on the presenting problem, rather than professionals seeking to understand the cumulative nature of the concerns and consider what was the overall picture for these children. Lack of overall coordination and understanding. ULTIMATELY The review was instigated as a result of Philip being taken to hospital by his Mother after four days of abdominal pain and vomiting. At hospital Philip was found to be very seriously unwell, with multiple, significant bruising, several fractured ribs and a perforated intestine. All these injuries were assessed as non-accidental. Mother and her partner (Ian) were arrested on suspicion of GBH S.18. Ian charged and pleaded guilty to S20 GBH and Mother was charged and pleaded guilty to S5 of the Domestic Abuse, Crime and Victims Act 2004. Ian has since been sentenced to 3 years imprisonment. Mother received a 12 month sentence, which was suspended for a 12 month period.
- We are currently piloting the first stage of our model. The pilot creates a plan to integrate the child safeguarding framework and domestic abuse response in 7 local areas. Map existing good practice and structures Recommend a clear referral pathway for all voluntary and statutory agencies to refer child safeguarding and domestic abuse concerns Test how this could work, including implications for safety, risk, volumes, time, resources Create a bespoke implementation plan to achieve this, considering local processes, systems and capacity.
- One Front Door is part of a whole system response underpinned by Idvas and Maracs. SafeLives is exploring innovative approaches to bridge the gaps in pathways to safety. WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE IN PLACE FOR EACH VICTIM OF DA Early, consistent and tailored support that makes them safe and meets their needs. Help made available wherever they need it – whether from the police, their GP or hospital, or where they live. The choice to stay safely in their own home and community. The perpetrator challenged to change and held to account. A response that addresses the impact of domestic abuse on children and young people. Agencies working together to meet the practical needs that people have, providing help on areas such as housing, money and access to justice. We want this for each and every person living with abuse. Wherever they live, whoever they are.