How everyone’s business can become no one’s business: A systems study of interprofessional referral to child contact centres

• Published in: Children and youth services review 2020-02, Vol.109, p.104661, Article 104661
• Main Author: Caffrey, Louise
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Case studies; Child contact centers; Child contact centres; Child protection; Child welfare; Children; Complex adaptive systems; Decision making; Interdisciplinary aspects; Interprofessional working; Protection; Referrals; Social workers; Systems approach; Vigilance
• ISSN: 0190-7409; 1873-7765
• DOI: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2019.104661

•Complexity of child protection systems makes interprofessional working unpredictable.•Gaps in child protection process can occur due to ‘systemic role contradictions’.•Tools alone cannot address problems in interprofessional working if challenges are cognitive.•To address systemic contradictions we need to explore actors’ ‘local rationalities’. Research suggests that interprofessional working is key to child protection but it is also challenging since misunderstandings and omissions can easily occur. This article explores interprofessional working in referrals to supported child contact services in England. It aimed to understand why procedures and tools introduced to improve interprofessional working in this area failed to have the desired effect. The study adopted a systems approach and involved 58 hours of observations in six case study child contact centres covering both supervised services (which offer a high level of monitoring of contact) and supported services (which provide little oversight). In addition, 47 interviews were conducted with individuals working in centres and solicitor, social worker and judge referrers. The findings demonstrate that cases which could not be safely managed continued to be referred and accepted at supported child contact centres because all actors believed it was someone else’s role to analyse the case and make a decision to accept or reject. Only social worker referrers took responsibility for this role but some social workers continued to refer cases that could not be safely facilitated because they assumed the service provided a higher level of vigilance then existed. The study draws attention to the limits of tools and protocols in enabling safe practice and the importance of exploring the potential for, what I term, ‘systemic role contradictions’.