Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Dedication
- Contents
- List of tables and figures
- Acknowledgements
- Foreword
- one Introduction
- two The significance of ‘information sharing’in safeguarding children
- three So, what is this thing we call ‘information’?
- four Understanding professional information need and behaviours
- five How is information shared in ‘everyday’ practice?
- six Putting pieces of the ‘jigsaw’ together to establish a ‘full’ picture
- seven Professional relationships with information
- eight Emotion information: working with hunches, concerns and uncertainty
- nine Conclusion
- Appendix 1 Children in need model
- Appendix 2 Multi-agency interview schedule used in phase two of data collection
- References
- Index
six - Putting pieces of the ‘jigsaw’ together to establish a ‘full’ picture
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 September 2022
- Frontmatter
- Dedication
- Contents
- List of tables and figures
- Acknowledgements
- Foreword
- one Introduction
- two The significance of ‘information sharing’in safeguarding children
- three So, what is this thing we call ‘information’?
- four Understanding professional information need and behaviours
- five How is information shared in ‘everyday’ practice?
- six Putting pieces of the ‘jigsaw’ together to establish a ‘full’ picture
- seven Professional relationships with information
- eight Emotion information: working with hunches, concerns and uncertainty
- nine Conclusion
- Appendix 1 Children in need model
- Appendix 2 Multi-agency interview schedule used in phase two of data collection
- References
- Index
Summary
Introduction
The previous chapter explored compliance with information-sharing rules and requirements through interviews with professionals. Attention was drawn to professionals’ concerns in establishing a ‘full’ picture of a child's life by connecting the ‘right pieces’ of information, as if completing a jigsaw puzzle. This chapter examines ‘jigsaw’ practices observed and documented in day-to-day child protection work. Empirical data used in this chapter highlights that there is something of a mismatch between the conceptual, jigsaw metaphor and jigsaw practices that operate on the ground. Conceptually, the ‘jigsaw’ engenders notions of ‘connectedness’ or ‘interlocking’ pieces, and in this respect, the metaphor is found to cohere with practices. However, where the abstract metaphor falls short is in the notion of a ‘finite’ or ‘full’ picture that is achievable sui generis. Inevitably, and as shown in Chapter Three, the ‘full’ picture’ will always be situated in and subject to ongoing revision, meaning that the ‘full’ picture’ confounds objectivist policy dictates in its suggestion that it has a stable meaning. Indeed, what I will show in this chapter is quite the contrary: when practices are scrutinised through post hoc interview accounts from various professionals, the very stability of jigsaw pieces themselves is drawn into question.
The political resonance of securing a ‘full’ picture
The notion of securing a ‘full’ picture is pervasive within child protection discourse, and is clearly manifest in official policy guidance. Securing a ‘full’ picture is said to be achieved only through multi-agency working, as outlined in the progress report following the death of 17-month-old Peter Connelly in the London Borough of Haringey:
It is clear that most staff in social work, youth work, education, police, health, and other frontline services are committed to the principle of inter-agency working, and recognise that children can only be protected effectively when all agencies pool information, expertise, and resources so that a full picture of the child's life is better understood. (Laming, 2009, p 36)
The prevailing message in high-profile inquiry reports into child deaths, including that of Peter Connelly, is that if a ‘full’ picture of the children's lives had been ascertained by professionals such tragedies may have been prevented.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Strengthening Child ProtectionSharing Information in Multi-Agency Settings, pp. 113 - 132Publisher: Bristol University PressPrint publication year: 2016