Compensating Child Abuse in England and Wales

Author(s):  
Paula Case
Societies ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jarman ◽  
Lanskey

Child abuse in youth custody in England and Wales is receiving an unprecedented degree of official attention. Historic allegations of abuse by staff in custodial institutions which held children are now being heard by the courts and by the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA), and some criminal trials have resulted in convictions. A persistent question prompted by these investigations is that of why the victims of custodial child abuse were for so long denied recognition as such, or any form of redress. Drawing on original documentary research, this article aims to explain why and how state authorities in England and Wales failed to recognise the victimisation of children held in penal institutions between 1960 and 1990, and argues that this failure constitutes a disavowal of the state’s responsibility. We show that the victims of custodial child abuse were the victims of state crimes by omission, because the state failed to recognise or to uphold a duty of care. We argue further that this was possible because the occupational cultures and custodial practices of penal institutions failed to recognise the structural and agentic vulnerabilities of children. Adult staff were granted enormous discretionary power which entitled them to act (and to define their actions) without effective constraint. These findings, we suggest, have implications for how custodial institutions for children should think about the kinds of abuse which are manifest today.


2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 202-214
Author(s):  
John Fox

Purpose The system in England and Wales involves a joint agency response to the sudden and unexpected death of a child (SUDC) and, for various reasons, the police contribution to that investigation is sometimes inadequate. The purpose of this paper is to explore some of the dilemmas which explain this inadequacy. Design/methodology/approach The arguments presented in the paper are made on the basis of empirically derived findings, drawing from original research based upon qualitative interviews with nine senior detectives working in the areas of child abuse or major crime, as well as focus groups of senior detectives, and a limited contribution from pathologists. Findings This paper explores whether there is an investigative deficit in respect of potential child homicide when compared to an adult domestic homicide, and it concludes that in some areas the most vulnerable people in society may be at risk because of issues such as inadequate training, inflexible force policies and under-resourced police investigation of child death. Practical implications It is possible to kill a child and leave few, if any, physical clues on the body. To determine if homicide is the cause of death, the overall police investigation therefore has to be of high quality to identify any clues that have been left by the perpetrator at the scene or in other ways. It is usual for Child Abuse Investigation Unit detectives to investigate SUDC but they are often trying to do so with little training and few resources. Cuts to police service budgets since 2010 have affected all elements of policing, including Major Crime Teams. As a result, these teams are more discerning about which cases they take on and there is evidence they are not taking on child death investigations even if there are suspicions of homicide. The findings reveal important implications for police investigative training and a clear and significant deficit in the investigative resources available to the lead investigator on a SUDC investigation which may or may not be a homicide, compared with the resources available to the senior investigating officer on a straightforward domestic homicide when the victim is an adult. If homicide is missed, then siblings or future siblings with that family may be left at risk of harm. The College of Policing suggested standards for SUDC investigation are sometimes not being adhered to in respect of training and resources. Originality/value The paper is informed by original qualitative research conducted in 2019. The findings are of value to police policy makers, the College of Policing, and police senior leadership teams.


1998 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 34-41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sally A Atkinson

Forty forensic odontologists in England and Wales, as listed for the British Association for Forensic Odontology in Spring 1994, were surveyed by post. The 27 responses received, representing 67.5 per cent of those surveyed, were collated. The aims of the survey were to establish the distribution of experience between those forensic odontologists; to confirm the geographic areas covered by them; to establish the most likely source of introduction to forensic work; to ascertain the proportion of work involving court appearances; to establish a pattern of trends or common risk factors, if any, of susceptibility towards bitemark injury in respect of motive, age, gender, race, socioeconomic factors, and family background in relation to child abuse and adult sexual assault; and to establish if there are preferential sites for bitemark injury according to motive. The survey concluded that most of the work is almost exclusively conducted by a few forensic odontologists, with little or no experience gained for the majority of those available.


Journalism ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 18 (6) ◽  
pp. 754-771 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emma Davies ◽  
Erin O’Leary ◽  
John Read

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document