Reimagining Community Safety as community safeguarding in response to extra-familial harm

Abstract

When introduced, Contextual Safeguarding (CS) promoted two key ways to better integrate responses to extra-familial harm (EFH) into child protection systems. Firstly, building reference to extra-familial contexts (like peer groups) into social work assessments that had traditionally focused on familial contexts. Secondly, promoting that children’s social care, rather than policing, practitioners led responses to EFH. However, in the latest testing of CS, a third legislative framework, and associated operational structure, has become apparent: Community Safety. In England, Community Safety Partnerships (CSPs) are legislatively responsible for coordinating council responses to crime and disorder. This has often involved them leading local responses to crime or antisocial behaviour (ASB), as well as sanctioning those deemed responsible for those crimes/behaviours. Local areas testing CS have found themselves initiating child welfare assessments of contexts that have also been responded to via Community Safety disruption activity. Young people on social work plans due to the exploitation they have experienced are also facing Community Safety sanctions for ASBs they have displayed because of that exploitation. In these situations, the principal driver for decision making is unclear: if part of the response undermines the other, which one should take precedence? In this chapter, we draw upon data from test sites trying to overcome this tension, along with examples of those who have been compromised by it. We situate these examples within legislation in England as a case study example asking whether the use of Community Safety frameworks in this field undermine the principle in child protection legislation.