The Convention on the Rights of the Child states in several articles that the Best Interest of the child should always be kept at the centre of all decision making and should take precedence over all other considerations. This is a very important principle. One that is generally acknowledged to be correct. In fact, in many countries, the law states the same thing. However in practice, the best interest of the child very often falls by the roadside.
“Ideally, x should be done for the child, but…” this is one of ways in which best interest is pushed aside. And there are many, many things that can follow that ‘but’: lack of facilities, lack of finances, lack of staff, lack of training, lack of legislative back up, or simply that it is thought to be less efficient or convenient.
However, there is something else that poses a great threat to the child’s best interest – even to the determination of what the best interest is in a particular case. It is something that I have been familiar with, and frustrated about, for a long time, but that was brought to the fore again when I attended a conference on Trauma Informed Practice, in Birmingham in September. There, Dr Neil Thompson gave a presentation and a workshop on Reflective Practice. He mentioned that reflective practice is something that is left out far too often by people involved in alternative care and family strengthening.
Reflective practice may sound to you as something fancy and complicated, but in fact it is as simple as ‘thinking about what you are doing and why you are doing it’. This is an essential part of every moment of the working day for anyone working with vulnerable children. Without conscious thought on the situation that you are dealing with, what the best way to handle it is, and why that is the best way, it is impossible to make properly informed decisions. It is becomes impossible to determine a child’s best interests, let alone make sure that the best interest is made the core of all decisions made.
In many cases, social workers, caseworkers, caregivers, and managers and coordinators of alternative care systems and family strengthening initiatives are overburdened. They have so many responsibilities that it becomes a challenge to get all the work done. In a situation like that, it is very tempting to just put your head down and keep plodding along, making sure you get through the day and that you tick all the boxes that you are required to tick in order to keep your job. There are also cases where there are so many rules and regulations in place, that it can start to seem like all you need to do is to follow those rules and regulations, no thinking required.
The problem is that when this happens, children stop being children – human beings – in the heads of those responsible for them. They become ‘cases’ instead. This is a form of dehumanisation, which tends to lead to a dangerous deterioration of quality of decision making and care. After all, if it doesn’t feel like you are talking about a person, then it all just doesn’t matter as much, does it?
As Dr Neil Thompson pointed out so well: the rules and regulations are only the traffic signs, telling you where you are allowed to drive, when you are required to stop, etc. Traffic signs do not tell you how to get to where you need to go, and they do not tell you how to drive a car. Similarly, the rules and regulations in social care do not tell you what the best solution is to the unique situation of this particular child. You need to have your brain engaged in every step of the assessment and decision-making process to be able to determine that.
If you don’t realise anymore that you are there to support children, how can you reach a conclusion on the best interest of a child?
Please share this blog to help raise awareness.
