This week the City of London and Hackney Safeguarding Children Partnership published a child safeguarding practice review examining the case of “Child Q”, a black female child of secondary age who was strip-searched by female police officers because school staff believed the child smelled of cannabis and suspected that she was carrying drugs.
The search, although undertaken by police officers, took place at the child’s school and involved exposure of her intimate body parts, and it was additionally humiliating because she was menstruating at the time of the search.
School staff remained outside of the room, no appropriate adult was present for the search and the child was asked to return directly to an exam afterwards.
The review focuses on a number of areas where failures occurred and says that, ultimately, the best interests of the child - a key tenet of the United Nations Convention of the Rights of the Child - were not upheld by those who should have been protecting her.
Strip-searching the child as a response to the initial concern did not put the safeguarding needs of the child first, and the report says that the child’s race was significant in the decisions made about the response. The review concludes that “one feature believed to have a significance to the experience of Child Q is that of adultification bias… [which is where] adults perceive black children as being older than they are”.
As a result, the child’s vulnerabilities were not considered and appropriate action was not taken to identify risk and provide help and protection.
The voice of the child within this review is especially powerful. Child Q said: ”I need to know that the people who have done this to me can’t do it to anyone else ever again. In fact, so NO ONE else can do this to any other child in their care […] Things need to change with all organisations involved. Even I can see that.”
The purpose of child safeguarding practice reviews is to consider improvements that should be made to better safeguard and promote the welfare of children, and all schools can and should learn from the experience of Child Q and improve their processes to prevent anything like this from happening again.
Safeguarding: What schools can learn from the Child Q case
So what can school leaders do now as a result of this report? In order to respond, schools could take these five steps:
1. Review their approach to searching, screening and confiscation
The school approach to searching, screening and confiscation should be detailed within relevant school policies and it is essential that the school procedures reflect a “safeguarding first” approach with a clear understanding that all children should be protected from harm at all times when being searched.
Guidance on this is available, but the review recommends that this is both updated and strengthened. In particular, the report mentions both “keeping records and engaging parents” as best safeguarding practice.
2. ‘Smelling of drugs’ is first and foremost a safeguarding issue
If children smell of drugs or are suspected of carrying drugs, this is a safeguarding issue first and foremost.
Appropriate responses should be put in place to ascertain the contextual risks to that child and what else may be happening that has meant that they may have drugs on the school site. Punitive action without a safeguarding response is not sufficient.
3. Train staff on the rights of the child
Designated safeguarding leads and school leaders should ensure that all safeguarding leads and teams are trained and confident in multi-agency working.
This review says that the school “deferred to the authority of the police”, and should have been more challenging. Understanding local protocols (such as escalation policies) is important to ensure that agencies work together effectively and hold each other to account when appropriate action is not being taken.
4. Update training for all staff and governors
All staff working in a school should be trained in anti-discriminatory practice - including understanding adultification bias - and the appropriate language to use and actions to take to avoid victim-blaming or victim-shaming.
Avoiding victim-blaming is particularly pertinent where children may be the victims of child criminal exploitation and the Children’s Society’s Appropriate Language guide may assist in this.
5. Review policies considering the voice and experience of the child
The voice and experience of the child should always be considered, and this is an essential component within Article 3 of the UNCRC, which states that “the best interests of a child must be a top priority in all decisions and actions that affect children”.
This is integral to school statutory guidance (Keeping Children Safe in Education) and should already be embedded within school policies, but schools may wish to consider how the views of the child are ascertained and listened to in situations involving searching, screening and confiscation.
Lessons to be learned
The overarching point that underpins all safeguarding practice is that we must always take the time to look, listen and consider what is happening and if it is the right action to keep the child and other children safe. If it isn’t, staff must challenge this to ensure that children are protected and to prevent circumstances like those impacting on Child Q from ever happening again.
Elizabeth Rose has 15 years of experience working in secondary schools as a designated safeguarding officer, and as the safeguarding education officer in children’s services at Coventry City Council
