Search Results

One of the four small rubber feet on the base of my work laptop is not the same size as the others. So as you might stuff a pile of napkins under the leg of a wobbly restaurant table, I have a piece of folded card always at hand, ready to balance the keyboard. Otherwise it moves every time I type a letter. Without that card, whilst not impossible to use, it’s a major irritant. In the wider scheme of things this is not at all important but that such a small insert can make such a difference is quite amazing. When I was a child I was given a book entitled Hobson’s Choice that contained several short potted biographies of famous people who had either triumphed over adversity, made wise decisions or performed heroic acts. One told the story of an Arctic explorer who was sailing in a small boat and became lost at sea. After being rescued, in due course he found the root cause of his confusion was that a brass screw in the boat’s compass had been replaced by a steel one. Evidently, and I really don’t understand the physics of this, the steel screw played havoc with direction finding close to magnetic north. The point of the story was that cutting corners, using a closer to hand substandard alternative even in such seemingly insignificant circumstances, could have had a tragic outcome. The ‘it’ll do’ mentality on that occasion was shown to be inadequate. I think this is different to ‘make do and mend’ where there is a focussed effort on trying to repair or make improvements with limited resources. A cursory risk assessment or missing a stage in the process of recruiting a new volunteer underpinned by an assumption that all will be OK, is not the right way to go about our business. Like the one wonky rubber foot on my laptop, it may not seem important but not following our processes correctly or in full can have potentially life-changing consequences.

Committed to writing each week on a topic that relates to safeguarding, and how the Methodist Church in particular responds to the demands placed on it by the subject, can be a bit daunting, especially when trying to come up every time with a fresh angle. I do try not to repeat themes that have been recently covered, and I’m acutely aware that publishing yet another blog that concludes with reminding readers that safeguarding is ‘everyone’s responsibility’ can sound like a never-ending saga rather like ‘partygate’. But, as the prime minister is finding with the aforementioned Downing Street affair, the issues do not go away. Therefore, finding a way to maintain a positive interest in safeguarding becomes a top priority. So, this week’s piece may or may not pique your interest. But the name Mary Whitehouse may prompt readers who recall her campaigns in the 1960s and 1970s about ‘filth’ on TV to pause and take a closer look. She died in 2001, but currently there seems to be a revisionist view of her work being put forward that suggests her fierce opposition to what she saw as the graphic portrayal of sex and violence on television, on the grounds of its potential negative impact on young people, was well made and prescient. Setting aside, for the moment, her evident homophobia, there is a sense that her concerns about the powerful influence of the media – not social then, of course – on the lives of young people, have proved correct to a large extent. Over the last few years, we have done much in the Church to draw attention to online abuse. ‘sexting’ and the sharing of inappropriate images, whilst stressing respect and explaining how to stay safe. Mrs Whitehouse was a committed Christian and her faith and beliefs guided her in her mission, which she embarked upon with evangelical zeal. Opinion then was deeply divided about her campaign, and probably still is. But we now have substantial personal testimony from #MeToo, Everyone’s Invited (the campaign launched in 2020 to raise awareness of sexual abuse in schools) and the Ofsted 2021 review that followed, that confirms both the pervasive nature of online sexual abuse in schools and wider society and some of Mrs Whitehouse’s worst fears. Wherever you stand on the Mary Whitehouse approval continuum, and given her homophobia would have been at considerable variance to the values that underpin the Methodist Church’s Justice Dignity and Solidarity strategy, it can’t be denied that the wellbeing of many young people has been adversely affected by their exposure to sexualised and violent imagery. Our protective and promotional work to safeguard young people must continue.

Amidst the horrors of Ukraine, the fallout from Partygate and the Rwandan asylum seeker plan, another news story caught my eye. Sir Bradley Wiggins has disclosed in an interview for Men’s Health magazine that he was sexually groomed by his cycling coach when he was 13. No further details were supplied, but he testified to its impact into adulthood. Sir Bradley has already spoken about his difficult relationship with his father, and suffering this newly reported abuse meant that, at the time, he felt there was no-one at home with whom he could share this. This double burden must have made his situation almost unbearable. As is well known, since then, he has been able to achieve so much in his chosen sport. Our safeguarding training encourages us to consider why survivors of abuse can often find it hard to tell their story. Sir Bradley’s own account reminds us that fear of not being believed, and not having a safe place to share what has happened, remain major blockages to disclosure, which can then become the first gingerly taken step of a healing process. Disclosure may also lead to the perpetrator being held to account. Without a safe and trusting environment in which to talk about adverse childhood experiences, or breaches of trust in adult relationships, individual emotional wellbeing is likely to continue to suffer. The perpetrator may also believe they have got away with it if their behaviour is never challenged. They can try again elsewhere. It’s not clear why Sir Bradley chose this interview, this month, to disclose what had happened to him. Research tells us that disclosure may coincide with a simple news report that jogs a memory, the impact of a campaign such as #MeToo, a significant personally affecting life event, or simply a sudden realisation that something locked away needs to be released. Whatever prompts disclosure, our churches need to be ready to offer safe places for assured listeners to hear what’s being said. This is one reason why our training programme is entitled ‘Creating Safer Space’.

Grouse shooting, fox hunting and parking get more public attention than the abuse of older people according to research published late last year by Hourglass, the national charity that used to be known as Action on Elder Abuse. Hourglass conducted a survey of twitter accounts maintained by government departments and parliament, including police authorities, the Home Office, the Ministry of Justice and 10 Downing Street over the year to November 2021, with the findings based on a count of search terms. In the same year, in respect of parliamentary questions asked, no questions at all related to abuse of the elderly, 40 mentioned animal cruelty, 1,403 referenced child abuse and 1,957 referenced parking. A the same time, Hourglass also polled 1000 people to try to gauge their awareness of elder abuse. Invited to say what they thought of when asked about abuse, respondents were asked to identify the characteristics that most sprang to mind. Roughly 50% said being female and being a child, 20% said being an animal, 12% being male and 7% older adults over 65. These and other focussed surveys led Hourglass to assert that ‘The abuse of older people has almost no profile or priority within parliament and in government across the UK. That lack of profile and priority is reflected in public discourse on Twitter and in general public attitudes. For an issue that affects so many people, it is shameful and really concerning that the abuse of older people seems to be last in line for the government and public alike. As our survey shows, not enough people strongly associate older people as victims of abuse and seriously underestimate the number of older people who experience it ‘ (Hourglass; The Safer Ageing Index part 1, December 2021). The research paper was subtitled ‘Last in Line’ portraying elder abuse as being right at the end of a list of other issues, and in the post pandemic world, judged it to be ‘de-prioritised by the government’. Hourglass calls for a vigorous campaign to raise the profile of elder abuse, and given our Church’s demographic, it makes sense to respond, and where we can be, to be proactive in our communities, when local council areas publicise the issue, which many plan to do. The results are quite staggering, although the research did suggest that the 2021 findings were far better than the year before. It seems the first study established a very low base. Churches and other faith organisations generally have substantial contact with older people and so this research is a timely reminder that, as ever, we need to be aware of both individual and wider community circumstances. In so doing we can work collectively to ensure that the issue does not remain at the bottom of the list for public attention.

There had to be a way of shoehorning Crystal Palace’s amazing 3-0 win over Arsenal on Monday evening into the blog this week. This may not mean much to those of you who are not football fans, but the way that the Palace players went for it from the start, and physically ‘put it about a bit’ showed that they were not overawed by a team higher up the league table looking to secure European Champions’ League participation next season. What Palace did not show was deference to Arsenal or ‘polite submission and respect’, as the dictionary defines it. The Oxford and Cambridge Boat Race last weekend also reminded me of times when, as a child, my father and I were kindly given tickets to attend the local rowing regatta. The donor was a local businessman who was also our landlord as I recall. I thoroughly enjoyed the event except for what I saw as the excruciating midpoint ritual of tracking the man down and literally (as schoolboys did in 1963) doffing my cap in appreciation of the gift. It’s one thing to be grateful and appreciative; another to be overly deferential and with hindsight, that is what it felt like. In September 2021, the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA) published a report concerning child abuse in religious communities. In identifying abuse of power by religious leaders as one barrier to reporting, the report stated, ‘children are often taught to show deference and respect to religious figures, who are typically regarded as innately trustworthy’ and ‘ this trust can be exploited to perpetrate abuse.’ This is not to say that showing respect is not appropriate, but the Past Cases Review findings and the current work of the Church’s safeguarding team are threaded through with case examples where undue deference got in the way of legitimate challenge and saying no, or prevented others asking the right questions about what they saw and heard. Crystal Palace asked metaphorical questions of Arsenal’s ability, ambition and approach. As members of the safeguarding community of our Church, we should remind ourselves that asking questions of our leaders, politely, assertively and confidently is one of the best means of challenging poor practice or individual behaviour.

In the course of a work conversation the other day, someone asked why a third person felt they had the right to do what they did. It’s a question that’s often asked. When I wrote up the notes, because of the age I am and my recall of 1960’s popular music, the words of the Honeycombs’ 1964 hit single ‘Have I the right?’ suddenly intruded on my thinking. The lyrics go ‘Have I the right to hold you’ then ‘Have I the right to kiss you’, then ‘touch’ and ‘thrill’. The chorus then chimes in; ‘Come right back I just can’t bear it. I’ve got some love and I long to share it. Come right back to me where you belong.’ At 10 years old I enjoyed the drum heavy foot-stomping beat (courtesy of a female drummer which was pretty rare 58 years ago) with no thought given to the issues of consent or coercive control that can be read into the words. That’s not to say that songs in some music genres today do not reflect such unhealthy attitudes to intimate relationships. But ‘Have I the right?’ was a song of its time and there were many other contemporary examples where partners and lovers were either given ultimatums to return or where consent was subtly (and not so subtly) assumed. Consent is a key consideration in safeguarding work. It can describe the boundary of a relationship, and alternatively governs what steps we can take to intervene when an adult makes unwise choices, or lacks capacity to make safe decisions. Consent also affects what we can do when an adult discloses abuse and they are anxious about what happens next. It impacts on how and why we share information with other churches or statutory agencies. In all, it’s one of those words that conveys so much and weighs equally on our safeguarding practice. To override consent, whatever the circumstances, is a big step to take. The Honeycombs appeared several times on Top of The Pops in 1964. The lead presenter was Jimmy Savile. As we now know, very sadly he never sought any consent for what he did.

Over 60 people met two weeks ago for the first time in two years at the Methodist Safeguarding Conference at Eastwood Hall near Nottingham. No chance to experience the local delights of DH Lawrence country though. It was a full on experience, with five key presentations over a 24 hour period. Colleagues from the Learning Network mixed with District Safeguarding Officers, as well as Connexional staff, Safeguarding Committee members and District Safeguarding Group members, to explore the role of safeguarding in the inclusive church. What are the fresh challenges posed by new ways of ‘doing church’ and engaging with folk who may feel marginalised or excluded in some way? Our presenters shared stories of ‘New Places for New People’ church projects and the thinking behind the Church’s Justice Dignity and Solidarity Strategy that challenges all Methodists to reflect on how they can make a difference to the life experiences of those who feel excluded in whatever way through age, disability, gender, race or sexuality. The Free Church Chaplain from Warwick University challenged the delegates to consider whether churches really do provide safe space for members of the LGBTQi community. Two academic colleagues from Nottingham University introduced us to the less well known phenomena of predatory marriages, which are precipitated by the grooming of vulnerable, often elderly, adults, that can wrest control of finance and property, as well as contact, away from concerned family members. Finally the Deputy Chair of the Nottingham and Derby District shared a moving personal story, that exemplified the challenge of maintaining our ‘All our Welcome’ approach when confronted by poor emotional wellbeing. With time for informal networking and prayer, this was a good opportunity to recharge batteries and check out what everyone had been up to. The warmth of human interaction was apparent everywhere and although the virus is still out there making its presence felt, the conference showed what, with care, can now be possible. For the wider safeguarding community of our Church, the conference offered fresh insights into how to ensure that safeguarding is embedded in all aspects of church life, whether traditional or a new ‘fresh expression’. Being inclusive is rooted in our faith and culture; so is safeguarding.

Did you know that Colchester and Guildford are the most dangerous places in the UK for learner drivers? And that Peterborough and Darlington are the safest? No, me neither. According to a review of data relating to the rate of accidents per 10,000 provisional licences held in these areas, Colchester is a place where there were 25.5 road accidents per 10,000 whereas in Darlington the rate is less than 1. It’s not clear as to which year these statistics supplied by the Bill Plant Driving School apply, but on the surface, the variation is dramatic. I spotted this in a free paper I picked up at my local Sainsbury’s at the weekend and it was the only item of passing interest. On the same day, I read about huge regional variations in the use of Stalking Prevention Orders. These Orders are designed to implement measures that can offer more safety and assurance to people who are affected, both in an attempt to prevent escalation and at a stage prior to possible prosecution. Some police forces had not issued any between when they were introduced in 2020 and 2021, despite the fact that two police force areas have witnessed large spikes in reports of stalking in the same period. In addition, the Orders have been criticised for the seeming slowness of the application process. Health services research can also tell us about better surgical outcomes in some areas, and judicial sentencing surveys show where a custodial sentence for a similar offence is more likely. All in all, it seems that the postcode lottery (and not the widely advertised ‘People’s’ one) still exists and how you fare at a time of personal crisis or trauma may depend on where you live. Just over four years ago the Methodist Council agreed to a new plan for the establishment of a Connexional Safeguarding Team that would supervise the work of District Safeguarding Officers. One rationale for the scheme was that it would create a consistent and standardised approach to the work, so that from Newcastle to Newquay, Dundee to Dover and all points in between, the Church would respond to safeguarding concerns in broadly the same way. Survivors would be assured that common standards of professional practice would be applied, and the revamped training programmes would spell out to all, our policy requirements and what support local churches could expect to receive. The overall aim was to develop and promote an improved culture of safeguarding that would be recognisable across the whole Connexion. Four years on, it’s time to test whether the Church has achieved its goal of consistency and avoided geographical variations in practice. So next month the Methodist Council will study outline plans that have been drawn up with the intention that they will help the Church take stock of itself and identify where in safeguarding it is either doing well or needs to do better. Some in London will be aware of the work that Becky Skinner and Karen Stapley have done already in this field, and how vital such processes are. The Connexional plans will likely dovetail well with what Districts are currently committed to doing, and there will be scope to shape the details over the coming months. This is an important project for the Methodist Church as we anticipate more scrutiny of what we do following publication of the final IICSA (Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse) Report, expected in the summer. So, if you want to avoid a road accident, it seems overall, and according to Department of Transport figures published this month, Blackburn and Darwen is the most dangerous place to drive in the UK, Cardiff and the Vale of Glamorgan are the safest. You have been warned. Oh and how did last week’s conference go, you ask? A summary next week.

Last minute preparations are underway for our annual Connexional Safeguarding Conference which is being held at Eastwood near Nottingham at the end of this week. It seems quite strange for me as the coordinator again to be planning food choices, supplying travel instructions, making sure the presenters have submitted their PowerPoints, checking sound equipment and whether there is a lectern, alongside providing assurance about Covid protection measures. It’s felt a bit like getting on a bike again after a lengthy lay-off, slightly wobbly but hopefully gaining confidence all the time. Next week’s blog will aim to provide a summary of what we focussed on. In the real world we can’t escape Ukraine, but tucked away in the other news items in my weekend newspaper was a lengthy report about the appalling prevalence of sexual abuse and harassment in Football Federations the world over. Investigators had discovered instances from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe, across all continents, with the world governing body FIFA coming under fire for not taking a firmer line or providing sufficiently robust rules and guidance. It was a shocking report, and of course the UK has been no stranger to this phenomenon. The evidence spoke of brave individuals who have tried to take a stand or bring matters to wider attention, but persuading FIFA to listen in the first place, seems to have been one of the key complaints. Hearing without listening and failing to see what’s in plain sight continue to be major concerns for all organisations who have safeguarding responsibilities. This can be at any level and in any corner, and so the struggle to get the voices of victims and survivors clearly heard, and responded to, will always be a top priority even if policies and procedures are exemplary. Our conference has a focus on ‘The Inclusive Church and Safeguarding’. A key aspect of this is listening with care to the experiences of those who find themselves, for whatever reason, on the margins of church life, and maybe society itself. The Church has made some good progress since our Past Cases Review was published in 2015. We hope that the conference will offer fresh ideas to challenge us to do even better.

One of my mother’s favourite aphorisms was ‘bullies never win and cheats never prosper’. Re-assuring words, but challenging to appreciate when faced with the might of Russian armour on the streets of Kyiv. I’m not sure I can add much more to the millions of words already published in the last few days about President Putin’s policy towards Ukraine, but the fact that he is acting as a bully seems not to be in dispute. An article in yesterday’s Guardian started with the words ‘I have suffered from workplace bullying’. The headline was ‘Why priests like me are joining trade unions’ and the piece was written by an Anglican clergyman. He went on to describe a range of experiences he had suffered, and commented on the increasing number of C of E clergy joining the faith workers’ branch of Unite. He also discussed the isolation felt by many priests when something goes wrong in their ministry and disciplinary or other measures are invoked. Having a supportive trade union seemed to him to be the best means of securing personal support, an idea that was probably anathema to many clergy up to a few years ago. The Methodist Church has taken a strong stand against bullying behaviour, whoever the alleged perpetrator, publishing advice and guidance and investing in resources that aim to address the issue. The Safeguarding Team have also become more aware in recent years of cases of bullying that may fit the definition of a safeguarding concern but this can lead to some overlap between the various other Church systems designed to tackle things when they go wrong. What’s really important though is that these systems work smoothly together to challenge the concerning behaviour and offer restitution and relief to the victim. It’s also the case that some people who are the subject of a safeguarding concern will seek support from their trade union if they believe the allegation to be unfair or unfounded, which is another dimension. The strength of the united response to Russian aggression, that has become evident in the last week, seems to have surprised the Kremlin. So one way of tackling a bully is to be joined up in opposing them. After all, as our training emphasises, safeguarding is all about working in partnership.

For a couple of days this week I’m in Lincolnshire. In the flat fenlands, I drove past vast fields of green vegetables waiting to be picked and in one I saw groups of pickers hunched over, doing the back breaking work that starts the journey to our dinner plates. The work is hard and pays little, and I learnt from one of the people I was meeting about the harsh living conditions in which some of the workers live. I heard about one case where the local authority was forced to intervene when conditions were so bad that one ‘packhouse’—shared accommodation block for about 30 people—was condemned as unfit for human habitation. The local Methodist Church stepped in to provide emergency accommodation and support until other arrangements could be made. Our safeguarding policies have been broadened in recent years to recognise modern slavery as a form of abuse, but I would hazard a guess that few instances have come to our direct attention. Although local media will from time to time report targeted raids on establishments where employment practices meet the definition, it’s probably also true that cases of trafficking and institutional abuse are rarely encountered in regular church life. They are included in our policies, practice guidance and training because their impact can be equally as devastating as all the other forms of abuse we probably know more about and have become better at recognising. Furthermore, like the Lincolnshire church responding positively, churches are key to the development of local community safeguarding networks that can identify issues that may be becoming more prevalent in a particular area. This may in turn lead to some joint action, or partnership with other organisations that offer more specialist advice and guidance. This blog is principally written for the London District, not really known for its agriculture. Although in the capital we have been alerted to poor conditions at car washes other forms of modern slavery, such as domestic servitude, are more likely to be hidden away from view. So, as ever, this is a reminder to be alert to these ‘newer’ types of abuse that the Church has now recognised. To learn more about modern slavery and for advice about what to do if you spot a situation that doesn’t look right, visit the website of the Clewer Initiative established by the Church of England to help dioceses develop their own strategies - https://theclewerinitiative.org/. It’s a really helpful website but also shocking in its descriptions of what its research is discovering. The Methodist Church’s position statement agreed in January 2021 can be accessed here: Modern Slavery Statement (methodist.org.uk)

Too late for a commentary on Valentine’s Day, I’m now looking forward to the Methodist Safeguarding Conference that takes place live and in person in three weeks’ time. 60-70 people from the Church’s safeguarding network are gathering at a conference centre at Eastwood in the heart of D.H. Lawrence country near Nottingham. In fact the suite that we had planned to meet in was named the Chatterley Suite, but to enable better social distancing we have been moved to a larger room. Lawrence had much to say about emotional wellbeing, sexuality and personal relationships set against an industrial background. So with our conference title being ‘Inclusive Church and Safeguarding’ I think we are well placed culturally, geographically and, hopefully, psychologically to address the topic in full. But as the conference co-ordinator I am getting towards what the former Manchester United manager Sir Alex Ferguson once described as ‘squeaky bum time’. It’s been a scramble in the last few weeks to get everything prepared after new year Omicron worries made us question the conference’s viability, but all is now in place, fingers firmly crossed. A great opportunity to meet, share and learn after two turbulent years. However last minute uncertainty lingers - will the programme be good enough, will the presenters (and the technology) perform, will the catering be up to scratch, will a welter of positive lateral flow tests affect the final numbers, what if the event becomes a ‘super-spreader’? I am aiming to be philosophical and like to feel that the conference delegates will be warmly receptive and appreciative of the efforts made by many people to get the show back on the road. We managed to meet last in early March 2020 just before the first lockdown and unlike some annual events that have been cancelled twice, we only missed out once in 2021. It’s a good, strong starting point for our SWOT analysis (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats) of where conference planning is currently at. But really the next three weeks will all be about realising opportunities and making every effort to mitigate against threats. An apology – last week I omitted the answers to the historical landmark year quiz. It is of course fully appreciated that there will no doubt be many other, and far more recent, key years that readers will recall which changed much or everything – women’s suffrage in 1918, decriminalisation of homosexuality in 1967, the first Race Relations Act in 1968 etc. So this selection are just earlier examples. 1517 – in October 1517 Martin Luther nailed his 95 theses to the church door in Wittenberg, thus sparking the Protestant Reformation. 1649 – In January 1649 King Charles 1 was executed after a trial organised by Parliament as the winners in the English Civil War, leading to the establishment of the republican Commonwealth by Oliver Cromwell. 1688 – the ‘Glorious Revolution’ when James 11 was deposed, replaced by William and Mary, and Parliament asserted its authority by changing absolute monarchy to the start of the constitutional monarchy in place today. 1789 – the French Revolution starting on the 14th July 1789 signalled the end of the ‘ancien regime’ and prompted the rapid growth of revolutionary movements in Europe and South America in particular. 1832 – the Great Reform Act was passed in the UK that became the starting point for the journey of developing parliamentary democracy and in in so doing, probably averted popular revolution in this country.