Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error
2 Pages<12
Does child sexual abuse come in under the H&S heading
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Previous Topic Next Topic
Admin  
#41 Posted : 19 October 2009 20:07:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin
Posted By Ken Taylor
For those who think that risk assessment is only a health and safety tool - think again.

Risks have to be assessed as part of care programme planning, child protection, finance management, etc, etc.

There seems to be a continuing problem on this forum with H&S people thinking about their own particular (and probably more traditional) job rather than the much wider range of work carried out within our profession and the range of other professionals with which we may be required to work with and for.
Back to top
Admin  
#42 Posted : 19 October 2009 21:50:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin
Posted By martinw
Ok - I understand all of the above. If nothing else I would say that if this topic should come under the auspices of H&S, then you had better make sure that you are so competent that it leaks out of you. Why do H&S people feel the need to get involved with this subject? To me it is plainly a field for other experts of a forensic or maybe social work or crime related expertise. I am none of the above and I would challenge any one of you H&S bods reading this to say that you are. This is, after all, a health and safety forum, not a specialist child protection forum. What does that say about your competence? It is one thing to say that you feel that this is a H&S role which would take on, but who of us could do it? We bait each other regularly on this forum about competence, so where would you start? It is simply that we would have to go outside our profession to get the training and experience necessary to become the practitioners which we would need to be to be able to carry out this delicate and deeply disturbing role.
As for the Porter case, as with the Costain et al case which was so heavily criticised by the judges in successive trials as that which should never have got to court, the defendant in that trial should never have had to face the fiasco which he went through, as evidence by the views of the higher court verdict.
I applaud the idea that H&S should play a part in child sexual abuse as posited by the OP but it ain't gonna happen. If my child was in need of urgent medical assistance I would call an ambulance, not a first aider. That is the choice on offer as I see it here.
Sorry, but this is my opinion. I greatly respect the opinions of those who disagree and mean no offence to them.
Martin
Back to top
Admin  
#43 Posted : 20 October 2009 17:32:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin
Posted By Jez Corfield
Martin,

I agree with your point, and Ken you are correct in thinking risk assessment is a tool used outside H&S, but risk assessment is not a tool that is used exclusively by H&S people.

There is a difference between advising on a process, and having responsibility for childcare aspects. But yes risk assessment is used outside of H&S, and H&S process needs to dovetail with other disciplines, but these other disciplines do not 'de facto' become a H&S topic because of our involvement.

Jez
Back to top
Admin  
#44 Posted : 20 October 2009 19:36:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin
Posted By martinw
OK Jez and I get that too, but I still deeply question the involvement of health and safety bods in an active child protection situation. I think it is a question of knowing where health and safety is present and then becomes something else.
I agree that H&S has involvement with aspects of childcare, and child protection pre-planning to a degree, but not regarding child sexual abuse, which was in the original posting. I just do not get it.
Priorities comes to mind. When we are carrying out our roles on a day to day basis we do our thing - meetings, audits, inspections, tutting, etc etc, whatever. None of our roles include victimology. This is criminal by the skankiest moral and legal standards, psychologically damaging, emotionally disturbing, early burn out territory. And that is just for the professionals who have to deal with it.

To be specific, I understand the inclusion of H&S in regards to safeguarding - but as a junior partner fitting in with other specific professionals working within extremely specific legislatory frameworks and psychiatric strategies. No involvement in interventions in my opinion is relevant for health and safety. In the same way that a fatal accident occurs, it then becomes an criminal or civil investigation by HSE etc. By that time, again, the safeguarding has failed and it is step aside time to leave it to the investigators and lawyers if necessary.

Martin
Back to top
Admin  
#45 Posted : 21 October 2009 17:15:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin
Posted By Pete Chidwick
What about the 'W' in HSW - often forgotten.

Does 'welfare' include 'safeguarding' which in turn includes 'child protection'?

I'm not arguing for anything more than the point already made that we need to think more widely about risk management sometimes and recognise that there are cross over issues where we may need to liaise with others from a position of some insight, depending on the sector we work in, but not 'competency' per se.
Back to top
Admin  
#46 Posted : 23 October 2009 23:56:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin
Posted By Ken Taylor

OK, here's a few example cases relating to H&S professionals working in Education and Child Care fields.

Involvement in the production of policies, safe working practices, internal codes of practice and method statements; inspections; site visits; etc for personal transport arrangements, exchange visits, work experience placements, school trips, residential provision; etc.

Of course the H&S person has to work with those with the necessary competence in child protection - just as he/she has to work with those with competence in other areas of work activity such as science staff, design technology staff, architects, swimming teachers, mountaineering leaders, sports instructors, etc, etc but each person with a legitimate involvement cannot simply work in isolation - there are too many 'overlaps' and 'at the end of the day' any jointly produced management literature has to appear somewhere in the management scheme.

For employers with a duty to protect children in their care from sexual abuse it's another aspect of keeping them safe and they need to employ the services of competent advice and guidance - but this principle applies also in protecting them from work-related injury and ill health whether it's in a chemistry lab, sailing or horse-riding. The H&S practitioner will have some involvement in all these.
Back to top
Admin  
#47 Posted : 24 October 2009 19:53:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin
Posted By martinw
It is not under question that H&S has an input into those company policies which are involved in non-employee safety, which includes children. So do HR. But it is mainly the situation which follows the breakdown of safeguarding which is my issue(but also regarding policy and procedures). Here the person dealing with that situation should be the person(s) in these organisations designated to deal with child protection issues - due to the education, training, instruction and experience they have been given in the child protection field. Unless the designated person described above also is the H&S person, the H&S person would not in my opinion be involved. Additionally in my opinion they should not be involved in policy making in this matter unless they are competent and have some of the education, experience etc described above.
I do not carry out construction RAs because I have no experience etc of construction - I do not have competence. Also, I do not have the competence to have input into child protection policies and procedures for the same reason I do not do construction RAs. I did a great deal of work into research into the new safeguarding legislation and the required organisations' changes in procedure in my last role and became the person who updated the rest of the H&S team, and the organisations which I visited to assess their competence in general learner H&S in these matters. Doesn't mean that I am competent in child protection. Means I read about it and talked about it.
SNS in the second post of this thread made the point that we in H&S do not get involved in other criminal matters. Agreed. There are overlaps at times but not enough to allow H&S folks to elbow their way into something which they do not have the competence to carry out, unless they have had the training, experience etc as described above. And in the first post of this thread the point was made that the HSE do not record child protection as a hazard for their purposes. Because other organisations have the designated legal responsibility for dealing with it from first to last aspects.
Again I mean no offence. Just making the point which has been examined at other times on this forum that competence is of overarching importance - the higher the risk, the higher the levels of competence required in most cases. Get this wrong and the risk is phenomenal.
Martin
Back to top
Admin  
#48 Posted : 24 October 2009 20:42:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin
Posted By Phil Rose
It's a long thread and I don't admit to having read and assimilated all of the posts within it, so please bear with me a bit. I think the answer to the question is what we actually mean by 'health and safety'.

It's interesting to see people talking about the HASAWA and section 3 etc etc BUT if I can be slightly provocative, 'health and safety' (there's that phrase again) doesn't start and finish with HSAWA or other legislation that we mainly attribute to 'health and safety'. To me it has a far broader meaning, and remit, and as such I believe that the protection of children, young people, vulnerable adults, the disabled, etc etc including the risks of sexual abuse are a 'health and safety' issue in the BROADER context of the phrase. Whether any related policies, procedures, responsibilities etc would end up under the 'banner' of 'health and safety' is another matter. In most cases I think it unlikely that they would or that the H&S 'officers/advisers/managers' would be responsible unless they are specifically in a child protection role.

I have done some work in this area, mainly related to the protection of young people on work experience etc, which includes the risk of sexual abuse, allegations of sexual abuse etc, and as far as that goes then my involvement was appropriate to the circumstances. We have a policy and procedure, but in fairness it sits not within the 'health and safety' policy section but as a general policy, which I don't see makes any great difference.

As I think has already been said, it is far better left to those with the competence to understand the often complex issues arising from this.

Child sexual abuse is dealt with on a multi-agency basis, Police, Social services, Teachers, GP's, hospitals, LA's etc etc and overall it's purpose IS to ensure the 'health and safety' of that child, but NO I don't think that this is something that would normally come under what we would traditionally see as a 'health and safety' role.

Hope that makes sense? Ramble over!


Back to top
Admin  
#49 Posted : 25 October 2009 16:43:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin
Posted By martinw
Agreed Phil, well said.
Back to top
dbeese  
#50 Posted : 28 October 2009 09:03:22(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
dbeese
Putting the legal interpretations to one side, does it not all depends upon the level and breadth of the H&S role within the organisation.

As an H&S professional working within the vulnerable adult and childcare sector, in relation to the overall risk management process this is an area I am increasingly involved with.

From the employer risk register and workplace assessment prospective it’s a far less alarming prospect then many of the responses here would portray. Like many other aspects of the H&S professionals’ environment it’s about your specific specialism, about identifying the risks to both employer and visitor, and calling upon, and advising upon the specific expertise as required.

I work regularly with the specialist Child Protection Officers (a growth sector) and we find that we both have a lot to learn from each over.
Back to top
Users browsing this topic
Guest
2 Pages<12
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Powered by YAF.NET | YAF.NET © 2003-2025, Yet Another Forum.NET