Reframing child protection: A response to a constant crisis of confidence in child protection

Child protection systems appear to be in a continual crisis of confidence. They get criticised for not doing enough to protect some children, whilst at the same time being criticised for being too intrusive or not managing demand. This constant balancing act drives almost continual reforms, none of which appear to reduce further crises of confidence. The central issue facing tertiary child protection systems stems from their function as makers of sometimes highly uncertain risk screening decisions. Uncertainty leads to errors; false positives and false negatives. Two recurring issues challenging child protection agencies are concerns about these errors. Fears about doing too much are concerns about false positives and fears of doing too little are concerns about false negatives. The need to address both issues within the context of uncertain high stakes decision making, in a highly risk intolerant environment leads to poorly formed sentinel event driven policy that in turn leads to organisational fragility. A decision outcome-based performance model based on Signal Detection Theory provides indicators that explicitly outline the link between these two strategic issues facing child protection systems. This has improved dialogue, understanding and support from sponsors. It has led an informed focus on improving decision making and stabilisation of decision thresholds. It demonstrates that Child protection systems are in fact very responsive and do perform well in their decision making (risk screening) function. Social work decision makers provide value in their decision making in spite of highly uncertain decisions to make. Child protection systems do not need reform, they need to be “reframed” to better understand true performance and so avoid poorly informed reactive policy responses to the genuine challenges that they face.