Reducing sexual harm in FE – going beyond safeguarding

In this article, Deborah Jenkins discusses the need to go beyond safeguarding in order to reduce sexual harm in the further education (FE) sector. Deborah explores the historical context of the Cleveland Child Abuse Scandal and the subsequent creation of the Children Act 1989, which laid the foundation for the safeguarding industry.Despite the widespread implementation of safeguarding measures, sexual abuse still persists in various institutions. Deborah highlights the challenges specific to the FE sector, such as porous physical spaces and a lack of understanding of current cultural and sexual environments. TDI aims to promote shared accountability and provide tools to reduce sexual harm.Despite the concept of safeguarding being an intrinsic part of everyday life and crucial to the fabric of most organisations, the risk of sexual harm today seems higher than ever. Deborah Jenkins explores the increasingly complicated environment in which we’re working, the unique set of challenges that are faced by the FE sector, and how each and every one of us can play our part in reducing the risk of sexual harm and creating safer communities.THE CREATION OF THE CHILDREN ACT AND TDI – AND THE SEXUAL ABUSE SCANDAL THAT PRECEDED ITI’m going to start by going back 30 years when a particular scandal was still reverberating around the UK, six years after it had first come to the public’s attention. Between February and July 1987, two hospital doctors in Middlesbrough in the North East of England had identified 121 children whom they believed to be victims of sexual abuse, all of whom were then removed from their families, some in the middle of the night. The pressure on social services was such that some of the children had to be accommodated in a hospital ward.In May 1987, parents of the children marched from the hospital to the press and the story hit the headlines. Dame Elizabeth Butler Sloss was appointed to carry out an investigation into the accusations, and in 1988 published her report, which found inconsistencies resulting in 94 of the children being returned to their parents.At the time, public and political outrage around what was perceived as a terrible injustice to innocent parents created a strong disincentive for agencies to pursue concerns. However, in 1997, a highly contentious BBC documentary found evidence that many of those children returned to their parents were subsequently removed again and the abuse against them had been confirmed.What became known as the Cleveland Child Abuse Scandal was a strong factor in the creation of the Children Act 1989, which laid down duties for agencies to safeguard children and promote their welfare. This was fully implemented in 1993, creating the birth of what was to become the safeguarding industry with which we are now all familiar.Against this febrile background, Sue Winfield (at the time second in command of the Northumbria Probation Service), was particularly concerned about how known sex offenders were being managed. Communications between agencies were sparse, offenders could be released from prison and disappear into communities to reoffend, and time and again, opportunities to prevent sexual harm were lost because the trail of decision-making was weak.She asked me to chair a small group of professionals brought together to explore how better multi-agency working might improve the oversight of sex offenders. TDI (The Derwent Initiative) was founded as a charity in 1993 and has spent the last 30 years seeking pragmatic ways to reduce the risk of sexual harm in our systems, institutions, and places.WE’RE TICKING THE SAFEGUARDING BOXES… BUT SEXUAL ABUSE IS STILL OCCURRINGToday, the concept and practice of ‘safeguarding’ has become part of everyone’s vocabulary. The vast majority of organisations have policies, protocols, operating procedures and officers responsible for ensuring that legislation and regulation is complied with. No contract can be agreed, no grant received, no significan...