Search Results

Last week Lord Ahmed was imprisoned for 5 years having been convicted of offences against two children in the 1970s when he himself was a teenager. His victims spoke about the burden of shame they had each carried with them for around 50 years, and about justice having now been done. The judge commented on the lifelong impact of the abuse that they had suffered, and that Lord Ahmed’s conviction therefore warranted a stiff sentence. Our safeguarding training at both the Foundation and Advanced levels aims to underline the significance of the lifelong impact of abuse experienced in childhood. The Past Cases Review recognised this, sensing that many in the church did not appreciate it, and that we needed to be far more alert to it. Hence the inclusion of this topic in each course. As some survivors have told us, the trauma they experienced at the time can be vividly brought back to the surface again by a trigger that to others might seem quite innocuous. Other survivors have testified as to how what happened to them, in some senses, shaped how they have lived their lives. The training also focuses on trying to understand why churches, and individuals who are part of that community, can sometimes find it difficult to hear what a survivor of abuse, or someone experiencing abuse of any kind at the present time, is trying to say. We recognise embarrassment, feeling uncomfortable and changing the subject as initial human responses, then backed up with concerns about not knowing what to do about it, not wanting to interfere or being fearful of the consequences of passing on the information. So this is really yet another plug for churches to take up the Reflect and Respond study course, which has been produced by survivors, with the aim, not necessarily of making the subject any easier, but of enabling the wider church community to learn about why this is such an important area of the Church’s mission. The course will help church members to feel more confident about their own ability to respond to victims and survivors in a way that does not perpetuate a culture of silence or denial. Full details are here on the Methodist Church website (in the safeguarding pages) or ask your minister about it.

Has there been a year for you when everything changed ? (And I’m not thinking about the last two). Was it a year you had planned and longed for, or was it a year of unexpected developments, for better or worse? My weekend paper contained a feature in which seven writers were invited to nominate a particular year they each thought was the greatest for film, music, art and TV and arguably changed the course of popular culture. The suggestions were from 1965 to 2003. I was right there with 1965 and 1975, but from 1984 onwards it all became a bit hazy, so I suppose that shows my age! I won’t bore you with the details of each year but when I read that Bruce Springsteen believed the single snare drum beat at the start of Bob Dylan’s 1965 single Like a Rolling Stone was ‘like somebody kicked open the door to your mind’, I felt that tingle. Two weeks ago I was asked to make a short presentation at the first ‘Survivor’ webinar, in which I would detail the history of safeguarding in the Methodist Church in 6 minutes. A tall order, but as originally an historian, I found sequencing the key dates of legislation, policy publication, a presidential address, the Past Cases review and IICSA, and what these meant and still mean for the Church, a really helpful way of demonstrating the evolution of our improving practice. These dates were not necessarily pre-planned, and we know that survivors of abuse and others with increasing awareness had campaigned long and hard for many of the developments that have occurred over time. For some, those future dates, the milestone years, were longed for without knowing when exactly the change might happen. There are historic and current parallels here in respect of, say, the ordination of women or same sex marriage. Although we might feel and see tides turning, and recognise new thinking emerging, the date that something actually happened can infuse our individual or collective memories. This was the highpoint, or perhaps sadly the low point, or the pivotal moment when it all changed. Our history is riddled with such dates and historians will argue forever about which is the most significant. For John Wesley it was 24th May 1738 at 8.45pm. So in our safeguarding world, what will be the next important date and what will it signify? My final observation in the webinar presentation was that we are still on a journey, and to some extent we don’t know when, or even if, we will arrive. For a bit of fun, here are five years in which events occurred that some say changed everything. Do you know what happened in each? Answers next week! 1517, 1649, 1688, 1789, 1832

Last week I visited the National Army Museum in Chelsea. It’s well worth a trip and best of all it’s free. The museum underwent a radical revamp a few years ago and in addition to having a light and airy feel, the displays pose thoughtful questions about conflict and the human cost. It’s quite removed from more traditional regimental museums that, to my mind, tend to gloss over such considerations. The particular exhibition I’d gone to see at the invitation of my son, was about a tank regiment, the Sherwood Rangers, who landed in France on D –Day and made their way over the next 10 months all the way to Berlin. Evidently in so doing they accumulated more battle honours than any other regiment in the Second World war. The exhibition, coinciding with a book launch about the campaign, was told through the eyes, and letter writing, of 8 men who served throughout, one of whom was the Chaplain, Revd Leslie Skinner, a Methodist minister. He had served as a missionary in India in 1937 where his hearing became impaired through illness, but that didn’t stop him hiding his partial deafness and bluffing his way through army chaplaincy selection and service until 1942 when he was found out! Somehow, he managed to re-enlist in time for D-Day in 1944 – the museum commentary suggests a degree of not exactly subterfuge was involved and acknowledges it could not access the detail of how this happened. Two things are clear though – his bravery and his selfless service. One of the tasks he assigned to himself and no other on that long and arduous drive to Berlin, was to retrieve the bodies of service men whose tank had been hit in battle and who had probably been instantly incinerated. Revd Skinner did this so that other soldiers would not see what had happened to their comrades. He also made sure that each soldier was properly buried. Later the Sherwood Rangers liberated a concentration camp and that held a different set of horrors. After the war Revd Skinner returned to circuit ministry and when he ‘sat down’ in 1977 he was the superintendent in the then Walton and Weybridge circuit to the south west of London. Although elements of this story were previously known to me, it was quite affecting to see it all in one place, especially when I had not been expecting to encounter him on this visit. This has nothing obvious to do with safeguarding, but confirms that bravery, single-mindedness and a commitment to address or prevent trauma can make a lasting difference. A good example to follow.

Unless you regularly look after an under five year old, you may not know about Paw Patrol. You reach it via the far reaches of the kids’ sections of your Sky or Virgin media systems. It’s an animation about six puppies with remarkable physical attributes and gadgets that emerge from their bodies, who work together to accomplish rescue missions of alarming proportions. They are led by a tech savvy 10 year old boy, who controls a myriad of communication systems, but also, crucially, recognises what response is required and matches the puppies with their particular skills to the required task. Their aim is to safeguard the inhabitants of Adventure Bay where they all live. Evidently there have been 196 episodes to date since 2013. Who’d have known it? Paw Patrol starts from the premise that the main protagonists are search and rescue dogs, who fulfil roles similar to emergency service professionals such as a policeman, fire-fighter and an aviation pilot. There’s also my favourite, Rubble, who has a JCB excavator in his backpack and wears a hard hat. With their headgear I’m often reminded of the quirky Village People YMCA outfits as I watch the programme with my grand-daughter. Their human leader, Ryder, very much directs what’s happening but does it via simple explanation and encouragement. I wonder if you have already picked up some key words from our safeguarding lexicon here? Safeguard, of course, but recognise and respond as well. The programme generally requires two or more of the pups to work together at any one time, so there’s effective partnership and coordination in the mix too. I suppose there are many other children’s TV offerings that have similar characteristics, and clearly Paw Patrol is straight off the production line of a high quality animation company who know their market. Maybe it’s simply because it’s now my turn to watch this type of programme alongside a captivated almost three year old, but I find it re-assuring that there are some key positive messages being conveyed here. There may be other deeper meanings or different readings but I’ll leave these, open-minded, for another day. I’m not sure we can replace that part of our Foundation Training Module that focusses on the 4 R’s of recognise, respond, record and refer with a Paw Patrol clip just yet. I don’t think they have mastered record and refer. However, being alert and in regular communication, seeing what’s amiss and identifying what needs to be done and by whom, is a good start. For those that have been avid fans of Paw patrol for 9 years, apologies that I am so late to the party.

There were two excellent programmes on TV last week that both featured people fighting to achieve justice in the face of bureaucracy, poor police practice and simple attempts at cover up. ‘Anne’ told the story of a Liverpool mother’s tireless campaign to find out the truth about what happened to her son who died at Hillsborough in 1989. ‘Four Lives’ described how four young men were murdered in East London between 2014 and 2015 and how police mistakes and seeming indifference hampered the investigation, until one man was caught and convicted. Both programmes shown over consecutive nights were very affecting and left me feeling quite angry. Organisations, including the church, can often go into ultra-defensive mode when errors are pointed out to them or complaints made about poor practice or individual behaviour. To some extent it’s the immediate instinct to circle the wagons and protect those within, and that immediately gives out the wrong message. Even when an organisation tries to appear transparent and acknowledges its failings it can still be seen by those on the outside as unwilling to listen or change. Bureaucratic inertia can be crippling. The 2015 Past Cases Review, in particular, demonstrated that the Church still had to take steps to address where its own processes, or individuals’ actions, were not good enough to address safeguarding concerns brought to its attention. Since then a lot of effort has gone into refreshing our policies and revamping our training, and the recent IICSA report acknowledged positively the journey that the Church has made. But what came over from both programmes was a strong suspicion of professional indifference and ingrained attitudes, towards football fans and young gay men in these two cases, in addition to organisational defensiveness. None of us like being criticised, even if the criticism is well intentioned and helpful, but being active to achieve safe space for all means checking unconscious bias and both personal and organisational sensitivity at the door.

A consequence of committing to write a weekly safeguarding blog, that in part offers a commentary on news items that have safeguarding relevance, is that, sadly, it can become a litany of tragic events. Before Christmas we learnt within a matter of a few days about the deaths of Arthur and Star at the hands of their parents and their respective partners. There was also a report of a deputy head-teacher, and safeguarding lead in her school to boot, being convicted of being complicit along with her partner in the rape of a teenage girl. Such awful and almost unbelievable stories. Add to this the transatlantic drama of Ghislaine Maxwell’s recent trial and its outcome. Conversely I have tried, at times, to inject some wry or self-deprecating humour into the column, but that can appear trite in comparison. So as we enter 2022, again in a time of national uncertainty characterised by a tension between the Government and its own scientific advisers, I’m left wondering what tone to adopt! I hope, at various times, the blog has been reflective, finger wagging and funny, whilst urging compliance with policy, promoting best practice, recommending training, conveying news, sharing research, story-telling and being mildly campaigning. How readers see and understand safeguarding and its context is also relevant, whether members of the Church safeguarding community or the wider congregation who may read this. Going forward – a bit of organisation shorthand speak, sorry – I hope this year to explore what it might mean to be a safeguarding activist in our churches. Activism implies being vigorous in taking action, having identified an issue that needs prompt attention. So what do we still need to do as church communities to maintain them as safe spaces for all? How do we really make safeguarding part of ‘being church’?. How best do we enthuse the next generation of local church leaders? Do we need to think again about the language we use or the way we go about our business if it’s not inspiring enough? Answers on a giant postcard please! And happy new year to all!

Before Omicron suddenly exploded over the weekend and started to cause me to re-think what I had planned to do, I attended a retirement party in a riverside pub. I had appointed the retiree to her first post in the borough we both worked for 30 years ago. It was as a residential social worker looking after teenagers in care. She later progressed to be the manager of a supported accommodation leaving care project, and so some of the evening was spent thinking, with other ex-colleagues, about those young people who had lived there and where they might be now. Whilst all had experienced a series of adverse childhood experiences, we felt far more positive about some than others. Equally we were pretty clear that in a few cases, the trauma they had experienced had led to long term difficulties that impacted badly on their adult lives. What came across in the speech delivered by her current manager in the youth offending team, where she had worked for the past few years, was my former colleague’s passion and commitment she showed in working with those young people who present the most extreme challenges. She believed in them and their potential capacity to learn, grow and succeed. I’d like to think I spotted some of that back in 1991. Living nearby, each Christmas Day before I retired, I used to visit the same leaving care project to see how residents and staff were faring. Before the holiday, plans were made to enable as many of the eight residents to spend some time with their variously estranged families if at all possible. These generally involved expensive taxi rides and choreographed entrances and exits. But we also knew that those carefully constructed plans could change in a moment – a misspoken word on the phone or some behaviour that was the last straw (and that wasn’t necessarily on the part of the young person). Rarely would these plans involve overnight stays, so two staff were required on shift, and especially if the planned home visit did not happen or was called off a few moments after it started. So I drove round, never sure what might greet me. I suppose it all worked out for the best when the door was opened by a staff member wearing a paper hat who led me through to the communal kitchen where, on the table, stood the ‘just in case’ turkey with the other staff member sitting down to eat in their paper hat too. And no young people there at all. On this occasion, if only for a short while, a Christmas truce of some kind had been achieved. The belief in and potential for reconciliation was there.

The media headlines over the weekend reflected a national sense of outrage over what happened to Arthur Labinjo-Hughes. He died in June 2020 aged just six years old. The death of Arthur was a cruel tragedy. Last Friday, his father and stepmother were convicted of his killing and both received lengthy jail sentences. Press reports detailed the suffering he experienced. The accounts were harrowing. It appears that his grandmother tried to raise the alarm but her voice was not listened to and even three months before Arthur’s death, children’s services apparently had no concerns. West Midlands police were supplied with photographic evidence of bruising, but seemingly failed to act. There will now be a serious case review to determine how this tragedy unfolded. The government has also ordered a wider review of children’s safeguarding. One factor that seemed to play a part in this very sad case was the impact of the pandemic. With schools closed Arthur was off the radar of the authorities. He was isolated at home and no-one was able to monitor how he was faring. Some commentators are rightly saying that this should not ‘let the (Solihull) council of the hook’, especially as statistical evidence shows that referrals to children’s social care fell by about a fifth in the first few months of the pandemic (Local Government Association research). There is an obvious concern that levels of vigilance were not maintained, when at the same time there was growing recognition of significant pressure on families, child and adolescent mental health and domestic abuse. However the abuse that Arthur suffered appeared very deliberate as opposed to being a consequence of family stress. It will be for the inquiries that have been set up to determine how systems failed Arthur and who has to be held accountable. As this column has often emphasised before, in these still uncertain times, our churches can be well placed sometimes to offer the first chance to spot that something is not quite right and report it. Our mantra remains recognise, respond, refer and record. But arguably there is an earlier, more proactive stage when we know that families and vulnerable adults are under pressure – come, look and see. Not quite like Philip and Nathaniel in John’s gospel, but stepping forward to make the right connections.

A report by Barnardo’s into the sexual abuse committed at Southampton FC by Bob Higgins, a youth football coach, was published last week. It detailed the horrific abuse he perpetrated against boys over a 25 year period, despite concerns about his conduct being raised on several occasions. The report described his manipulative behaviour and how he inveigled his way into the family lives of boys who were dreaming of football stardom. It was said that he became something of a father figure to them and even now some of his victims seem to remain conflicted and confused about what they think of him. Others, including the parent of one victim described their feelings of ‘guilt, shame and revulsion’, that they were unable to protect their son. It appears that Higgins was able to sustain an unspoken code of silence that in turn protected him for many years. Higgins was convicted in 2019 and sentenced to 24 years in prison. The Barnardo’s report was commissioned by the football club to understand what had happened, and it concluded, in the words of a news report, that Southampton had ‘ institutionally failed to protect (the boys) and that people in other football authorities neglected to act’. Another sad indictment and another name to add to the list of other coaches who have been convicted of sexual abuse over the last 25 years or more. The Barnardo’s report set out a timeline that actually started with one man’s series of convictions in 1960, 1961, 1965 and 1984. Often when I write about football in this column it’s generally in a humorous way. But this matter is deadly serious and shows yet again how common abusive behaviour has been in a several of our top tier clubs. It’s also clear that these same clubs are now making strenuous efforts to ensure this type of abuse never happens again. This week the club I watch in London SE25 is advertising for a match-day safeguarding officer whose primary task would be to ensure that the club’s safeguarding policies are strictly observed across all aspects of on-the-day activity. Quite a responsibility with a crowd of 25,000, and probably hundreds of staff, stewards, and ball boys all on site at the same time. The role would also extend to having oversight of safeguarding arrangements for some of the junior teams. The skill set to manage safeguarding at such a major event is therefore quite broad, and obviously relies on many others playing their parts as well. They will need to be trained, as our church leaders are, to recognise, respond, refer and record. Our Creating Safer Space training programmes do focus to a large extent on grooming and the long term damaging impact of abuse perpetrated as a result. A report in the Church Times this week noted a clergyman receiving a 19 year sentence for a series of sexual offences. The judge described him behaving as a ‘sinister, extremely manipulative sexual predator’. Our churches, football clubs and many other institutions remain well advised to be ever on their guard.

‘Procession’ is a new documentary film telling the stories of six men in Kansas City, USA, who were victims of child sexual abuse perpetrated by Catholic priests. They are the actors in and directors of dramatized scenes that tell their story, and they made the film principally to raise awareness about what had happened to them. At this point I haven’t yet seen the film, but reviewers have been very positive about it, generally also recognising it as an act of healing and to some extent catharsis. If it’s anything like ‘Spotlight’, the 2015 film which followed investigative journalists uncovering abuse in Boston, it will be a hard, but compelling watch. Telling the story to raise awareness of abuse is a key aspect of the ‘Reflect and Respond’ study guide that the Church published almost a year ago. A guide to help potential group leaders who may be wary of or anxious about the topic, has now been published. Again written with input from survivors, the guide does not necessarily make the subject ‘easier’ but offers practical tips to offer re-assurance about how to lead a group safely especially when the leader may not know what the four week course will stir up. This week the Church is focussing again on domestic abuse through a webinar that is being broadcast on Thursday morning from 10-12. This promises to be a very positive event with input from the President of the Conference and academics as well as from the MP Jess Phillips who is the Shadow Minister for Domestic Violence and Safeguarding. But above all it will be the stories told by survivors on the day that bring home the need to effect change and give impetus to actions the Church may take. If you want to join here are the details: Domestic Abuse Webinar: Thursday 25 November 2021 (methodist.org.uk) Stories told in a variety of ways and settings, by those who have lived experience, are often the best means of raising awareness and prompting responses. As Advent approaches, please keep watching and listening.

Having two jobs is much in the news just now. It’s not for this column to comment on what MPs do in their ‘spare’ time, and who for, but it’s a fact that in the Church many of us have two, three or even four jobs. There is a keen sense that if we didn’t, essential work to keep going would not get done. Some jobs, such as church treasurer, require a particular skill set and knowledge, and take up a good deal of the person’s time. Others take less time on average, are arguably less demanding but equally important. The development of church projection and sound systems has created a new range of church jobs that add to the weekly rotas. It can feel on some Sundays that the majority of people there have a job to do! Last week this column encouraged churches to think about recruiting the next generation of safeguarders. This could apply equally to many other church roles as well. But a rush to recruit at all costs is not always the solution. Practising safe and considered recruitment is essential to ensure that the right person is engaged, and that all the necessary checks the church requires have been carried out. Sadly the Church, along with other organisations, has at times been swept along by the euphoria of finding a new, energetic and willing person to fill a role that no-one else wants to perform, only to find later that the person is not suited, or worse, has joined simply to seek opportunities to abuse. So the moral of the story is that the nirvana of one person, one church job is probably not easily achievable, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be talent spotting and thinking about how we might re-shape what we do now to attract new people. Being a church safeguarding officer, for example, carries a lot of responsibility, and so any recruitment drive should also design in the available support that will make the job doable. On the other hand, many of us quite like being busy! Now what’s on my church to do list this week?

Activists of all types seem to be everywhere from the M25 to Glasgow and no doubt in many places between. COP26 has aroused and enthused people of all ages and from diverse communities to make a clear statement to all those meeting in Glasgow that now is the time for action. Words are no longer sufficient. Climate change is already taking effect. The word activist has been defined by the Oxford English Dictionary as ‘a person who campaigns to bring about political or social change’ . Of course what activists may do to pursue their campaign of choice will vary from local awareness raising events, to direct action targeting those organisations who are resistant to change, or to civil disobedience. For all sorts of reasons people will respond in different ways. Our Church, too, is active this week offering a Methodist COP26 Hub at a church in Glasgow that, according to the Church website, will ‘host a series of events organised by our young climate activists’. I’ve written before about how we might use the idea and language of activism to promote our safeguarding agenda. Activism implies action now, rather than putting off; practical steps rather than quiet reflection; getting to grips and speaking out, rather than simply hoping that everyone will get the message at some point. Activism suggests energy and vigour, backed by a conscious commitment to bring about change. We know from our own Past Cases Review and the more recent IICSA reports that there is still more to be done to ensure our churches are safe spaces, and that a culture of safeguarding permeates the whole Church. As a Church we have made good progress in recent years across many areas of safeguarding practice and in some part, that’s because brave people, such as the late Revd David Gamble took a firm and campaigning stand in his Conference speech in 2009. However, those of us in the safeguarding community who still feel that we are not properly listened to along with those who have been harmed through their connection with the Church, will also testify that the time for further action is now. It may also be time now to recruit the next generation of safeguarders in our churches, who get the changing digital agenda, understand the #MeToo movement, and are better informed, for example, about domestic abuse, spiritual abuse and the misuse of power in church life. Activism, of course is not simply the preserve of the young and there is much that older generations can offer, but given our membership profile now is the time to enthuse and inspire our successors.