Summary
C complained on behalf of A in relation to A's child (B). B, along with their siblings, were placed on the Child Protection Register (CPR, a confidential list of all children in the local area who have been identified as being at risk of significant harm).
B was taken to A&E with a broken arm. The medical staff felt the explanation provided by B's parents did not fit with the injury found. It was determined that the type of injury sustained by B was highly indicative of a non-accidental injury. A cause for concern was submitted to the partnership. The partnership took initial action to allow a relative to act as a protective factor and be present at all times to supervise any contact with the children and parents. The partnership then conducted a child protection investigation.
C raised concerns on behalf of A that the partnership stepped in unnecessarily, whilst refusing to consider further medical evidence and the partnership did not allow C or B's parents to have a voice at the meetings. They also felt that the partnership placed all the children on the CPR when this was not needed.
We took independent social work advice. We found that it was reasonable for the partnership to carry out a child protection investigation in the circumstances and that it was reasonable for all children to be placed on the CPR whilst an assessment of the overall situation was carried out. We found that the meetings held were conducted appropriately, although, there appeared to have been a mixed response to allowing one parent to contribute to the meetings (i.e. at times they were allowed to contribute and at times they were told their contributions were not appropriate – without being provided with an explanation why).
Related reading
View Decision Report 201906576 as a PDF (24.59 KB) Updated: June 23, 2021