Issue - meetings

 Following  the Committee’s initial discussion of the findings of the Judicial Review, the Independent Member  has been asked by the Chair to complete a  short audit of  the  work of the screening team . The audit will  examine in particular  how consent  has been  gained  to share information on cases,  proportionality, and the thresholds  being worked to. Report to follow.

The Independent Member had completed a case audit of referrals to the screening team and in the introduction to the audit the independent member had added some background by referring to the Judicial Review. The Independent member   clarified that she may have over stipulated certain aspects of the case. For example, the background wrongly implied that   the unlawful sharing of information stemmed from the information sharing strategy in use by the MASH. This was implied in the judgement but not stipulated.

The Independent Member had completed her case audit of referrals 4 days after the temporary protocol had been put in place. The Committee noted that there around 20-25 referrals to the first response team every day with discussions held with the refer when received.  The Committee heard about the different kinds of case referrals received by the Screening team and how sometimes it will be obvious that a strategy meeting is needed but there will be cases where information provided is ambigious and there will need to be further clarifications provided form the referrer to assess the right way forward.  Prior to the Judicial Review, cases, where information was missing, would be considered by the MASH for an early view and some were dismissed at this stage. The judgement currently suggests that, where there is ambiguous information provided in a referral, you cannot make enquiries with partners and agencies about the family without parental consent.   In response to a question about   information needed to take forward a section 47  investigation ,where it is not clear that this type of intervention is needed a section 17  should be  implemented and this will enable  a visit to the family and  after this a  move to a section 47 investigation, if needed. The Committee were advised that , if it is not clear  whether a section 17 or  section 47  investigation is required, the judgement  currently implies that  no  action is  taken . This still leaves the service with an open case until either the referrer gets consent or information is obtained which meets the threshold for a section 17 investigation. The Committee were advised that the way forward was obligating the referrer (Midwife, Teacher, and GP) who was in contact with the family seeking consent to make   enquiries about the welfare of the child/young person. The merits of this were that the family are being approached by a professional that they already have a working relationship with. The Committee commented on this responsibility of the professional working with the family and how much they were currently aware of this. They would need to be sufficiently confident in this responsibility and trained appropriately to approach the subject of their concern about the child with the parents and seek approval to make further enquiries about the welfare of the child.  The Committee commented that the social worker would be experienced and educated in the role of approaching a family or person as opposed to a professional from the third sector that may not  ...  view the full minutes text for item 142