Child Abuse in Cleveland

HL Deb 09 July 1987 vol 488 cc753-60

4.23 p.m.

Lord Skelmersdale

My Lords, with the leave of the House, I shall now repeat a Statement being made in another place by my honourable friend the Minister for Health. The Statement is as follows:

"I will with permission make a Statement about child abuse in Cleveland. The House is already aware of certain action which has been taken by the authorities there in response to the concern expressed in this House and elsewhere. The Northern Regional Health Authority has set up an independent professional panel to provide a second opinion on cases already subject to investigation. It has also established a special group to consider future cases. On Tuesday the Cleveland Social Services Department agreed with the police and the health authority about medical examinations where child sexual abuse is suspected. I hope, as will the whole House, that these steps will go some way to overcome the problems which have arisen.

"However, having studied the reports for which I asked last week from the regional health authority and the Social Services Inspectorate, together with representations by honourable Members and the material they have made available to me, we have concluded that there should be a full inquiry into the arrangements for dealing with suspected cases of child abuse in Cleveland in recent months.

"We propose therefore to establish a statutory inquiry headed by a High Court judge. The judge will be assisted by a panel of three assessors: one with medical experience, one with social services experience, and one with experience of police work. It will be necessary to ensure that there is no risk of conflict between the inquiry and litigation presently arising from individual cases. It will be for the judge to determine how best to carry out the inquiry but 1 can say now that its report will be published.

"Important as it is to resolve and learn from the situation which has arisen in Cleveland, it is no less important to carry forward the work already set in hand to improve our capacity to tackle the problem of child abuse wherever it may occur.

"Draft guidance on the way in which different authorities should work together in this field was issued last year, covering for the first time the specific issue of sexual abuse. Preparation of the final version of this guidance is being pressed ahead with a view to issuing it as soon as possible after taking account of any relevant lessons from Cleveland and the current inquiries into the deaths of Tyra Henry and Kimberley Carlile. Meanwhile, I am asking the Social Services Inspectorate to check with all social services authorities that proper co-ordinating arrangements have been made in their areas.

"As envisaged in the draft guidance, we shall arrange with local authorities for the collection of national statistics on child abuse. I shall be discussing with the NSPCC, whose director I met this morning, the contribution it can make from its special experience in maintaining child abuse registers in various parts of the country.

"The Standing Medical Advisory Committee has been asked to prepare guidance for doctors on the clinical diagnosis of sexual abuse. Practical guidelines are also being prepared for social workers and for nurses, including health visitors. The professional groups concerned are being asked to aim to complete this work by the end of the year.

"The House will also be aware that the European Court of Human Rights, in a judgment published yesterday on five cases from the United Kingdom, has found inadequate our legislation on parental access to children in local authority care. These cases pre-date legal changes made in 1983 and 1986 to strengthen parents' rights, but we fully accept the need to make further changes to reflect the court's findings.

"We shall be studying the full judgment in detail in relation to the proposals of the White Paper on child care law published earlier this year. In framing legislation we shall also wish to take account of the lessons of Cleveland and the other inquiries to which I have earlier referred, but our aim will be to bring such legislation forward at the earliest practicable opportunity".

My Lords, that concludes the statement.

4.30 p.m.

Lord Ennals

My Lords, first I warmly thank the Minister for repeating the Statement made in another place on child abuse in Cleveland. I have no doubt at all that an inquiry is necessary into those events, although I think it is a matter for question as to whether a further inquiry, dedicated purely to events in Cleveland, is necessary, quite apart from the Northern Regional Health Authority's independent professional panel and the Cleveland Social Services Department's inquiry to which the Secretary of State made reference.

I want to say straight away that I believe a most important opportunity has been missed by not establishing an inquiry with terms of reference much wider than simply to look into the situation in Cleveland. I am aware of the draft guidance referred to in the sixth paragraph of the Statement and the additional guidance that is now being prepared for the medical profession. But so much has happened since the drafts were prepared that I believe it is necessary to have an inquiry that looks across the board at some of the major problems which are disturbing not only the professions, parents and of course the children but also, I think, the whole of society. There is hardly another issue which creates for us greater concern and a sense of moral obligation than this.

There are several groups directly involved. We think of the parents, and I welcome the Statement made by the Secretary of State in relation to the decision of the European Court of Human Rights. Here there were five cases in which British parents were denied access to children who had been committed to local authority care, nor were they informed of arrangements for the children's adoption. It was concluded that such action was in breach of the European Convention on Human Rights. A disturbing picture is revealed, which could be part of the broader inquiry for which I am asking. It is the essential right of parents to be involved and to know what is happening to their children.

I also have a great deal of concern for social workers who find themselves right in the middle of family problems. All too often, whether rightly or wrongly, the press has most ferociously attacked social workers who appear to have failed in their obligations when they knew, so it is said, about most disturbing situations within the family. Social workers have been criticised for not stepping in and taking action. Now they are criticised because they did step in and take action. The danger, the difficulty or the dilemma facing social workers is that it is easy to dither and do nothing, but that is the worst thing that can be done.

I am aware of the problems faced by doctors and I am concerned about the methods used by some psychiatrists to get alleged victims of child abuse to make confessions. I recognise that sexual abuse is far more difficult to diagnose than is physical abuse and doctors need to be given advice.

The fourth group about whom I am concerned is the children themselves. First, children stay far too long in care. Specifically, however, looking at the present issue, one encounters the problem of the ability of children to draw a distinction between reality and pretence in situations in which they are greatly confused, sometimes very frightened and sometimes inclined to say what they think the interviewer wants to hear. I am much attracted by the proposals for video interviews undertaken privately with children immediately after certain situations, which could be used as evidence in courts without the necessity of the child being present and having to go through the attendant miseries. Let me say to the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor that I was delighted to see in the press the support that he gave today to family courts.

The Minister will have seen the Starred Question on the Order Paper put down in the name of my noble friend Lady Ewart-Biggs. It is only fair to her, and to me, to say that we have discussed this subject and that simple Question in a sense reflects the rather longer proposal that I now make to the Minister following the Statement. I do not believe that the two matters are necessarily in conflict. I am not asking the Minister to cancel the arrangements for this inquiry specifically into the events at Cleveland, but I think that there ought to be a parallel inquiry to deal with the broader issues of which I have spoken and covering not just sexual abuse but physical abuse as well.

I should like to direct to the Minister three questions about the situation in Cleveland. First, when has the Secretary of State asked for the report to be presented? How long must one wait for the report? Secondly, while I very much welcome the Secretary of State's discussions with the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, whose work I greatly admire, I should be interested to learn whether other organisations, such as Barnardo's, which has invaluable experience, have been consulted. Finally, has the Minister any idea when we may expect the promised legislation which perhaps flows from the report five years ago of the Social Services Select Committee in another place of which at that time I was a member?

Lord Winstantey

My Lords, on behalf of my noble friends on these Benches I join with the noble Lord, Lord Ennals, in thanking the Minister for repeating that very important Statement. We on these Benches believe that it is absolutely essential for all these tragic cases to be investigated as soon and as thoroughly as possible. However, whatever form the investigation may take, we support the proposals made in the Statement. I say whatever form the investigation will take, but we believe that we shall never know the full truth behind all these unhappy cases, which must mean that some unfortunate parents may have been wrongfully accused of abominable offences and thus be scarred for life. On these Benches we believe that it is absolutely essential that everything possible should be done to protect children from molestation or abuse of any kind. At the same time we believe that it is equally important to ensure that parents are not wrongfully accused of horrible crimes which could have a lasting effect upon their lives.

We hope that when handling cases of that kind in the future greater efforts will be made to preserve the integrity of the family than seems to have been made so far in some of those cases. In so far as the Statement mentions medical examinations and guidance for doctors, I hope that we can somehow ensure that a child is not repeatedly examined by different doctors, because that too can be a very traumatic experience.

Like the noble Lord, Lord Ennals, I note with pleasure that the Minister is working closely with the NSPCC whose record in this field is admirable and whose wise judgment can be relied upon. I also welcome the fact that the report of the inquiry will be published. Perhaps on that occasion we may seek an opportunity to debate it.

Lord Skelmersdale

My Lords, I am very grateful to both noble Lords for their reception of the Statement. I think that I go straight to the heart of the matter when I pick up the argument of the noble Lord, Lord Winstanley, that what we are talking about is a balance between the rights of children and the rights of parents, usually but by no means always with the social services department in the middle striving to maintain that balance.

The noble Lord, Lord Ennals, said that clearly an inquiry was needed because we want to know what has happened, and the noble Lord, Lord Winstanley, supported him. I agree with both noble Lords that we need the Bill. However, if we were to have the broad brush inquiry requested by the noble Lord, Lord Ennals, inevitably the time taken would be very much longer. This small specific inquiry, high-powered though it is, has been asked to report by the end of September which means that not only can the guidance to which the noble Lord referred be amended as soon as amendment is proved necessary, but that in the meantime the guidance can be used—as indeed it has been successfully used, so I understand, in many parts of the country, even though it has only been in draft form for the last six or nine months.

The noble Lord also asked about the role of other organisations apart from the NSPCC, which was referred to in the Statement. My honourable friend intends to consider this matter, but the NSPCC is the only voluntary organisation to hold child abuse registers, so it was quite right that he should have gone originally to the NSPCC. I do not know whether he will widen his consultation, but I will, of course, put the point to him.

The judgment of the European Court, as the Statement says, was made on the basis of old legislation. It will clearly be right for the Government to consider very carefully whether the new legislation needs further amendment as a result of that judgment. We have received the judgment only in the last 24 hours, and it would be silly if I were to commit the Government to anything so drastic as that at this moment.

Finally, I say that, of course, we are not talking only about sexual abuse. We are talking about any abuse of children whatever their age. I am sure there will be lessons to be learned from the inquiry concerning physical abuse as well as sexual abuse.

Lord Hailsham of Saint Marylebone

My Lords, can I put one specific point to my noble friend? While I feel sure that his colleague in the other place is correct to go for a narrow rather than a broad inquiry of the kind suggested by the noble Lord, Lord Ennals, there is a specific point I should like to put concerning that inquiry. Will my noble friend convey to his right honourable friend that the true episode of this somewhat disturbing series of events may lie outside Cleveland, although it may have given rise to the Cleveland episode? Will he particularly draw to the attention of his colleague, and perhaps ask that the learned judge, when he is appointed to the chairmanship of the inquiry, be briefed, concerning a judgment delivered by Mr. Justice Ewbank earlier this year, which was to my mind very disturbing? There are in fact two such judgments, but one was reported briefly in The Times and I know the Lord Chancellor's department has a full transcript.

The judgment concerned the methodology adopted by a section of the medical profession in seeking to discern whether abuse had in fact taken place. The suggestibility of children, it was very clearly suggested, was taken advantage of with the result that false conclusions of fact were likely to be arrived at. I can put my noble friend in possession of the transcript because I have a copy. I should like that point to be clearly understood and ask my noble friend to see that those in charge of the inquiry have the point clearly in front of them.

Lord Skelmersdale

My Lords, I am very grateful to my noble and learned friend for his wise advice. Most certainly, I shall pass his comments to my right honourable friend. However, not quite answering his question, perhaps I may make the point that the regional health authority has set up a second opinion panel with six doctors from Leeds, Oxford and from the region. The panel is headed by a child psychiatrist. Therefore, the allegations which are certainly around, namely, that there is medical malpractice going on, is something which by no means has been proven. Certainly, the rights of the children in this particular respect are being looked after.

Baroness Faithfull

My Lords, may I also thank the Minister for the Statement? Will he agree that there are two issues, the here and now and the future. As regards here and now, the Statement states very clearly what is happening, and that there is to be the inquiry and consideration of the law in the next Session. I look back to the time in 1948 when Denis O'Neil died in a foster home, and the Curtis Committee was set up. I suggest that besides looking at the here and now situation—which must be dealt with here and now—we should also look at much broader issues and the framework under which child care is carried out in this country.

First, I believe that we need a different juvenile justice system. Secondly, I believe that the training of social workers needs to be looked at with much more help being given. Thirdly, there is need for a much improved structure of co-ordination between departments. While the Minister mentioned various people, he did not mention education and the teachers, who have a contribution to make. Not sufficient has been said about their contribution.

Therefore, while welcoming what is happening now and the inquiry which is being carried out, may I also ask that consideration be given not to a Royal Commission but to the whole structure of administration and justice and also how social workers may be helped.

Lord Skelmersdale

My Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend for speaking from the depth of her experience in this matter. Of course, family courts have exercised the minds of two of my noble and learned friends over a considerable length of time. I know that my noble and learned friend currently on the Woolsack is considering this matter in great depth, and I hope at some speed.

As to the inter-agency agreement, my noble friend is absolutely right. It is one of the most worrying factors of the Cleveland situation, and certainly, it will have to be looked at. As regards the training of social workers and a better structure generally, my noble friend knows that we published a White Paper on this subject. We have also promised a Bill—a promise reiterated in the Statement today.

Lord Winstanley

My Lords, may I respectfully ask the noble Lord to reconsider his use of the word "malpractice" when replying to his noble and learned friend in relation to doctors? Surely, "malpractice" is not what he meant when we are talking about faulty methodology. Will the noble Lord consider that matter?

Lord Skelmersdale

My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Winstanley. It was a bad use of English and I apologise.

Baroness Ewart-Biggs

My Lords, I agree with my noble friend. I welcome the Statement and the news that there is to be an inquiry. I should like to put one specific question and one general question. I do not understand from my reading of the newspapers why the parents of the children concerned in the Cleveland case were never allowed to put their case before losing their children. My second and more general question is to ask whether the Minister agrees—as, unhappily, more and more cases of child abuse come to light—that the whole procedure following discovery of such cases must be reassessed? Otherwise, there is a real danger that a child will be doubly abused. A child will be abused mentally under the very cruel procedure whereby a child is examined and cross-examined on various occasions before the court procedure takes place.

I hope that the Minister will take notice of an interesting project in Bexley. A video tape is taken of the child who describes the experience immediately after the event once a discovery has been made. The tape will then be used as evidence during the court proceedings. I believe this particular experiment is worth very serious consideration by the Government.

Lord Skelmersdale

My Lords, I must confess that I agree with the noble Baroness, Lady Ewart-Biggs. I do not understand either. I am advised that according to law the time at which parental rights are actually taken away is not the place of safety order stage but the interim care order stage, which is usually about a month later. Therefore, I do not know the answer to that question. I hope that it is one of the points the inquiry will establish.

Baroness Faithfull

My Lords, is it not the case that we, and particularly the press, should refrain from making accusations in any direction until the reports are published, and until we know the facts? I do not think that we should cast aspersions in any direction.

Lord Skelmersdale

My Lords, I quite agree with my noble friend. I go further and say that this excitable reporting has done nothing but damage an already delicate situation.