Search Results

Frances McDormand won the Oscar for best actress at the Academy Award ceremony last Sunday night. The film she starred in, Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri, tells the story of her character’s attempt to get justice following her daughter’s murder in the face of an intransigent local police department. She uses the vacant billboards of the title to promote her cause to great effect. In 2016 the Oscar for best film went to Spotlight, which told the story of a team of investigative journalists exposing a network of child abuse and cover up in the Boston USA Catholic Diocese. It described the process of uncovering the truth and sharing it with a wider public audience despite significant religious and political opposition. Whilst Three Billboards also develops into a story about racism, both films were about seeking the truth about what happened. In so doing they aimed to describe the processes of reporting and then bringing about getting something done about situations that had resulted in children being badly hurt, and in Three Billboards’ case, murder. In the space of two years, two high quality award winning films that can relate to our safeguarding agenda of trying to get to the bottom of what may have happened, reducing future risk, providing care and support and importantly, seeking justice for victims. Like the protagonists in the films, safeguarders in our own church can often experience resistance to the process of seeking to shine a light on earlier and indeed current events, and then implementing the measures that the church requires to keep people safe in the future. This is of course not a coded proposal to name and shame on church notice boards, but it is a reminder that from time to time we need to be fearless in our ambition to find out and take the action we need to effect the changes we need to see. Our stories may not make it Hollywood, but for those who make a difference the red carpet awaits.

The 2014 Care Act introduced the idea that when trying to protect adults at risk, agencies should work directly with the person involved and within a structure that 'makes safeguarding personal'. It's the sort of concept to which we can all nod our agreement. But what does it mean in practice? It's about putting the person who is the victim at the heart of what is done to remedy the situation and working with them to achieve the outcome they most desire from the situation they are experiencing. In this way, it can be empowering and make a real difference to their wellbeing, but it only really works if we can be sure that the person is safe and not likely to suffer any further abuse from their perpetrator. Quite often however, we learn from victims, especially but not only the elderly, that they are reluctant to report what's been happening and when they do, they may not want any action taken. This is because they might have a dependent close relationship with the perpetrator, and in some cases welcome the personal contact that results from it, despite the anguish it may cause. This is often the case when it comes to a report of financial abuse perhaps by a relative or family friend, or emotional abuse from these same people through hurtful words and actions. If we believe that the victim is able to make an informed choice about what they want or don't want to happen, and we respect that wish, then is just leaving it the same thing as making safeguarding personal? The simple answer at first glance may be yes, but a more robust and safer answer is no, and to get to that position, we need to learn to ask the right questions, reflect on what we have learnt with a more experienced colleague and if we can, find out about what has happened to other people in similar situations in other places. Then we can come to an informed view of whether we have really made a wise decision about supporting victim abuse to make their safeguarding solution personal.

It’s the season for Church Councils. I’ve been to two in the last two days and could have been at another last night. Church Councils are so central to who we are as Methodists and as trustees we take big decisions there that can have both an immediate and a long term impact, potentially affecting the experience of church members for years in the future. What’s important right now may well govern how much time and space is given to particular items, be it about a piano, installing a defibrillator, recouping rental income or agreeing plans for the church anniversary. It’s striking how council members can get engrossed in these matters, because they really do matter and for some people a seemingly uncontentious issue is something they care passionately about. Safeguarding is now generally on the agenda at most Church Council meetings if early signs from pilot audits is reflected more generally, but this is not necessarily a plea for safeguarding to be bumped up the agenda or given a disproportionate amount of time. Having it on the agenda is a recognition that along with finance, property and worship matters for example, it’s a key area of church life for us to consider, but hopefully it does not always have to be the subject of lively debate or a big decision. Safeguarding is about doing things safely and well, day in and day out, and having it as an agenda item at Church Council gives the opportunity for members quietly to ask the right questions to reassure themselves that is all is well and that systems are working as they should. So as Councils review their safeguarding policies or consider a report from the safeguarding officer, it’s not always about banging the drum, shroud waving (as we used to call threats to health and social care services) or waving the big stick, it’s more about the encouragement of a carrot and hopefully recognition of a job well done. @�>�

Oxfam’s current predicament is potentially very significant for the whole of the charity aid sector, and its own reputation has taken a serious hit. Reports in papers today (February 13th) also suggest that safeguarding concerns also extend beyond those widely reported in Haiti and Chad to the abuse of a small number of young people who volunteered in local shops, at the hands of adult volunteers. 12 reported cases between 2012 and 2014. Oxfam is a long established national charity with a previously well respected brand and yet it now finds itself under intense scrutiny for failing to report fully concerning incidents to the Charity Commission, apparently failing to listen to what some of its staff were telling senior managers and not handling the allegations properly. The Charity Commission has now launched a statutory enquiry. The reputational damage that Oxfam has suffered may well start to be reflected in public and corporate discomfort about being seen to support the organisation financially. The board of trustees will face some searching questions about their governance arrangements and it will take some time for the organisation to recover. The lesson for our church is obvious. If we don’t listen with care to what people who work directly with children, young people and vulnerable adults are telling us about the behaviour of others that they have witnessed, and we don’t act with appropriate speed and diligence when we are told, then we can stand accused of not displaying the moral leadership that the government has demanded. This is not where the church will want to find itself. Failing to see and deal with what be in plain sight may carry a significant reputational cost.

This week Methodist DSOs are gathered near Stratford upon Avon for their annual conference. This year we are looking at the idea of ‘Partnership, Breadth and Opportunity’ in our work recognising that we can work with other denominations or organisations to advance the safeguarding agenda in the places we serve. It’s a time to catch up with colleagues, share our news and hopefully learn about things we can apply when we get back to our Districts. It’s also a time to reflect in a safe space about what we do and perhaps how it makes us feel. The need for structured space to talk about safeguarding is imperative. People from a social work background will be familiar with the idea of supervision and this is something that the Connexion is planning to formalise for all DSOs from September this year. In so doing this will enable the Church to be confident that a good quality safeguarding service is consistently on offer across the country. But of course it’s at a local church and circuit level where much of the hard work of ensuring good safeguarding practice is taking place. Some safeguarding officers have good links with ministers or other experienced people in their local areas, but we know that for a good number of others it’s a bit of a lonely existence especially when there is not a lot of obvious local support and guidance. It can become dispiriting but also may mean that we fail to act on something that we, collectively, see or hear about. Finding a safe time and place for those charged with discharging safeguarding responsibilities to talk about their work should be built into the life of each church and circuit. But it also needs people who get the agenda to act as that sounding board, so as I journey around the District this year I’ll be asking questions about support for safeguarders, and offering ideas about how that can be achieved. The District conference is an obvious first place to get support, but that’s only once a year. At the same time we don’t need to create new cumbersome structures, so let’s think together when and wherever we meet about what might work out best for all.

It was good to see reports this week that Rotherham Children’s Services have been ‘transformed’ according to Ofsted and are now judged as being good. This is a big turnaround from 2014 when the local authority and South Yorkshire Police were roundly condemned for failing to tackle the child sexual exploitation (CSE) problems that the community had experienced over a period of time. Alexis Jay, the chair of the IICSA, investigated what had happened and a team of government officials was sent in to turn Children’s Services around. The churches in the town, as well as the local mosque, were very keen to offer what they could to promote both healing and social cohesion. They were also anxious to make sure that they could recognise fresh emerging signs of the problem bubbling up again, and the local authority expressed enthusiasm about the faith communities’ offer to be eyes and ears, offering training to support this. In some very small way, it’s possible that faith communities made a contribution to that transformation as part of the wider prevention partnership. Sadly however Rotherham is not the only place where CSE has occurred, but that also means that we in London can play our part in achieving transformation for our communities if we are alert to what is going on in, recognise what we see and respond well. This is why our conference on March 10th is so important as we will be focussing on those new areas of abuse, such as CSE, that feature in our new national policy and training materials. Our faith is about transforming our own and hopefully other peoples’ lives as well. So if we can play our part, however small, by using our safeguarding knowledge and experience, we can help transform the communities we serve.

22 January 2018 Dr Lisa Oakley was our London conference keynote speaker last year. She now works at Bournemouth University and continues in her work there to focus on spiritual abuse and its impact. Last week in a survey carried out by the university in partnership with CCPAS (Churches Child protection Advisory Service), it was revealed that 1,591 respondents said they had personally experienced spiritual abuse. In her presentation Lisa presented us with a number of examples drawn from her own research, which demonstrated the key characteristics of coercion and control, manipulation and pressuring of individuals. On January 9th the Guardian reported the case of an Anglican vicar who had been found guilty by the C of E of spiritually abusing a teenage boy after putting him under ‘unacceptable pressure’ during intensive prayer and bible study sessions in his bedroom. Clergy disciplinary measures were used to bring the case and the bishops’ disciplinary tribunal described in their judgement how the vicar ‘engaged in mentoring so intense that (the boy, aged 15) was put under unacceptable pressure having regard to his age and maturity and was deprived of his freedom of choice as to whether to continue’. This was the first judgement of its kind, but there is a real sense from Lisa’s research that other examples are already known about or awaiting discovery. In our own Church there is a lesson here about promoting an ongoing culture of vigilance and developing a good understanding about what is appropriate in our prayer and bible study activities with people of all ages and in all circumstances. We know from the conference feedback that there is an interest in this area of safeguarding practice and so the offer to provide more training and insight is on the table. Please do contact me if this is something you want to know more about.

Calling to mind our safeguarding responsibilities as charity trustees, and as we approach the new year season of church councils, a timely reminder of these had been provided by colleagues at Farrers’, a London law firm that has a specialist child protection unit. Although there is good evidence that safeguarding is now included on most church council agendas, we may not always recall that the Charity Commission has high expectations of churches’ compliance with all our various policies and commitment to safe recruitment.  It’s a report published by the Charity Commissioners into a recent case that is referenced in Farrers’ bulletin which can be accessed here. Charity Commissioners have statutory powers to investigate organisations where there are concerns about poor safeguarding practice,  so making sure that individual church councils have a real sense of their obligations in this area of our work and mission is a an ongoing priority for the District.  This is also a prompt to trustees that taking care of safeguarding is not just a practice matter for the local church safeguarding officer working with the minister, but an organisational requirement to ensure charitable status is maintained. The Charity Commissioners’ Safeguarding Strategy is a very accessible document that describes the range of issues that may concern it, and reminds charities such as churches of their reporting obligations. It’s recommended reading for all church trustees and is available here.

Amongst the fireworks, news reviews and predictions of new year, some media outlets covered the case of the imprisonment of the former head teacher of St Benedict’s school in Ealing, West London. He had been convicted just before Christmas on charges of rape and other sexual offences against pupils.  He was also the abbot of Ealing Abbey.  In the press there was commentary from a victim about what it had been like to be a pupil at the school and the impact of the abuse he suffered on his life. The victim stated that he felt that things were now better in schools and other institutions but that the safety nets now in place needed to be really strong to make sure that it never happened to anyone else again.  He also commented on the time it took to bring the head teacher to account. ‘Courage Cost and Hope’ was the title of the report of the Past Cases Review conducted by the Methodist Church between 2013 and 2015. It demonstrated the deep and lasting impact on survivors of church based abuse, and described what needed to be done to protect children and vulnerable adults involved in all aspects of church life.  It has set the tone for our own Church’s refreshed approach to safeguarding and is helping to shape what we do on a day by day basis. If you’ve not yet read the report you can access it here. This website therefore aims to make sure that those who access the site can be assured that London District’s net is as strong as it can be, built around the three principles of effective policies, good quality training and safe recruitment to posts in the life of the church. Furthermore, when we hear about any case of abuse perpetrated within the church we will aim to act as quickly as we can to address the issues raised.