7.2 Resolution of Professional Disagreements

SCOPE OF THIS CHAPTER

This chapter has been developed in line with the guidance set out in Working Together to Safeguard Children, 2010, to develop quick and straightforward means of resolving professional differences of view in specific cases, e.g. on whether a child protection conference should be convened.

1. Potential Areas of Disagreement

At no time must professional disagreement detract from ensuring that the child is safeguarded. The child’s welfare and safety must remain paramount throughout.

1.1	There is a range of situations in which professional disagreements may occur. Examples are given below although this list is not exhaustive. A referral is not considered to meet eligibility criteria for assessment by Children and Young People’s Services Children and Young People’s Services conclude that further information should be sought by the referrer before a referral is progressed There is disagreement as to whether child protection procedures should be invoked Children and Young People’s Services and the Police place different interpretations on the need for single/joint agency response There is disagreement regarding the need to convene an Initial Child Protection Conference (see Section 2) There is disagreement over the sharing of information and/or provision of services Disagreements over the outcome of any assessment and whether the appropriate plan is in place to safeguard and promote the welfare of the child.
1.2	The professionals should attempt to resolve differences through discussion and/or meeting within one working day, but if they are unable to do so, their disagreement must be reported by them to their managers or equivalent.
1.3	With respect to most day to day issues, the relevant managers will liaise – wherever possible this contact should take place within 24 hours. The purpose of this contact is to review the available information and to resolve the concern. Where necessary this may involve a meeting between the managers. In some cases it may be helpful to involve a third party or hold a professionals only meeting. Any action agreed through this discussion should be fed back immediately to the operational staff involved, confirmed in writing between agencies and, where appropriate, include a date for review. If it affects the plan for the child, then the necessary procedures for reviewing the plan should be invoked.
1.4	If agreement cannot be reached following discussions between the above ‘first line’ managers (who should normally seek advice from her/his line manager or designated/named/lead officer) the issue must be referred without delay through the line management structure of the respective agency/agencies.
1.5	Additionally, advice may be sought directly from the Designated Professional or Named Professional.
1.6	At this point a meeting, which could in exceptional circumstances involve the Chair or Vice-Chair of the Safeguarding Children Board, should be called to discuss the situation involving all parties. Records of discussions must be maintained by all the agencies involved. The outcome of discussions and agreed actions should also be recorded.

2. Disagreement about Need for Child Protection Conference

2.1

The decision whether or not to convene a Child Protection Conference rests with Children and Young People’s Services. However, those professionals and agencies who are most involved with the child and family, and those who have taken part in a Section 47 Enquiry, have the right to request that Children and Young People’s Services convene a Child Protection Conference if they have serious concerns that a child’s welfare may not otherwise be adequately safeguarded.

2.2

Any such request that is supported by a senior manager, Designated Professional or Named Professional should normally be agreed. Where there remain differences of view over the necessity for a conference in a specific case, a consultation with the Safeguarding/Independent Review Unit must be sought and every effort should be made to resolve them through discussion and explanation.

3. Disagreement at Child Protection Conferences

3.1	If a Child Protection Conference Chairperson is unable to achieve a consensus as to the need for a Child Protection Plan, s/he will make a decision and note any dissenting views. Where there is disagreement at the conference, the decision-making powers of the Conference Chairperson are set out in Section 11.5 of the Initial Child Protection Conference Procedure
3.2	The agency or individual who dissents from the Conference Chairperson’s decision must determine whether s/he wishes to further challenge the result.
3.3	If the dissenting professional believes that the decision reached by the Conference Chairperson places a child at (further) risk of Significant Harm, it is expected that s/he will formally raise the matter with their line manager and/or the Designated Professional or Named Professional in their agency. If this does not resolve the matter, it should be discussed with the Designated Manager (Children with a Child Protection Plan) or their nominated representative, who will consider what further actions are required.

4. Disagreement Regarding the Implementation of the Child Protection Plan

4.1	Concern or disagreement may arise over another professional’s decisions, actions or lack of actions in the implementation of the Child Protection Plan, including participation in Core Group meetings.
4.2	This concern should be brought to the attention of the line managers of the professionals involved who should attempt to resolve them.
4.3	If agreement cannot be reached following discussions between the above ‘first line’ managers, the issue must be referred without delay through the line management of each agency.
4.4	Additionally, advice may be sought directly from the Designated Professional or Named Professional.
4.5	Where the issue cannot be resolved, consideration should be given to convening a Child Protection Review Conference.

5. Where Professional Disagreements Remain

5.1	If professional disagreements remain unresolved, the matter must be referred to the LSCB representative for each agency involved.
5.2	In the unlikely event that the issue is not resolved by the steps described above and/or the discussions raise significant policy issues, it should be referred to the Safeguarding Children Board Manager who will determine a course of action including reporting to the LSCB Chair.
5.3	In all cases where it has not been possible to resolve differences and/or where there may be lessons to be learned for future practice, consideration should be given to holding a management review, which could be under the Serious Case Review Procedure.

End