Parents, families and the wider community can play a crucial role in safeguarding and in the identification of CSE. In a recent Children’s Society poll (Pona et al, 2015) half of 16 to 17-year-olds said that support from families was a key factor in helping them to resist pressures to take part in risky activities. However, a third did not feel supported by their families ‘in most things they did’.
In practical terms, parents may not always have the knowledge or support to safeguard their children in every situation. For example, an evaluation of the Children’s Society’s Self project in Torbay (Smeaton, 2014) revealed that, in the case of children who run away from home and are vulnerable to CSE, some parents did not know how to report their child to the police as missing and some got a negative response from the police when they did.
Recently a Barnardo’s pilot project (Families and Communities Against Sexual
Exploitation – FCASE) aimed to address how professionals working within and with the voluntary sector can best work to raise awareness of CSE among families and young people at risk of CSE. An evaluation by D’Arcy et al (2015) identified key mechanisms for change through which outcomes from direct work were achieved; these included:
Having practitioners who were experienced in working with CSE, but also skilled in mediation (due to the high level of family conflicts experienced) and were adaptable to the family’s needs.
Practitioners worked with parents, responded to their concerns and allowed them to reflect on their experiences. They did not simply dispense information.
The flexibility of the voluntary sector to ‘reach out’ to families and engage in a holistic family-based approach demonstrates the benefits of multi-agency practices. In this case, service users found the less formal approach of the workers put them at ease. (D’Arcy et al, 2015)
Qualitative evaluation of the project found that both families and young people felt more able to identify CSE and associated risks as well as discuss experiences and concerns together. In some cases this also improved relationships between parents and young people.
The Children’s Society’s Safeguarding Children at Risk – Prevention and Action (SCARPA) programme, which supports young people who go missing from home in the Newcastle area, deployed a family worker (between 2009 and 2011) to provide tailored, flexible
support to families of young people involved with the programme, providing a listening service, guidance and family mediation. A qualitative analysis involving parents
(Medforth, 2011) found that some felt increased confidence in their parenting skills and communication within the family and reported improved relationships with children as well as increased family stability. Crucially, parents also reported having to overcome fears or negative past experiences to fully engage with the programme. Professionals highlighted that building trust with parents as well as children was crucial to the success of the intervention.
In their relational safeguarding model, PACE (2014) advises taking a partnership approach with parents towards safeguarding children against CSE. PACE also stresses that the exploitation and abuse suffered by a young person may distort the perception they have of their parent(s) and create tensions, including between parents or carers, which needs to be addressed to safeguard the child successfully. In Blackburn and in Rochdale PACE provides a full-time parent support worker to assist the local multi- agency CSE team, working exclusively with the parents of the child. This can act also as a form of mediation between parent and child if tensions do exist.
It is worth noting, however, that there is still a gap in provision of preventative support and services for families and that news ways of working in line with the findings above are needed.
Reflection pointers
How well are we working with parents and families? Are we providing a systemic and strengths-based approach wherever possible? How empowered do parents and carers feel by our support?
Under what circumstances are family-based interventions proving most useful for young people?
Key messages
Providing help at an early stage can significantly reduce the risk of harm. Barnardo’s evaluation of its services for young people vulnerable to and
experiencing sexual exploitation has found that their interventions are effective in reducing the risk of CSE and connected risk behaviours.
It is important to consider carefully the resources and strengths available to a young person to help them move away from a high-risk situation, for example being homeless, before considering therapeutic or educational interventions.
Building trust and ensuring consistency of case-worker contact are necessary to sustained interventions to address the long-term impact of CSE.
Therapeutic trauma-informed interventions are an essential part of overall service provision for young people who have experienced CSE. They can be understood as therapies designed for survivors of abuse in which trauma-related symptoms are seen as legitimate reactions to abusive situations.
For older children who have experienced abuse, there is some evidence for the benefits of Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) (both individual and group) and Dialectical Behaviour Therapy (DBT). However, the evidence base for DBT is not yet robust, and the evidence base for CBT may not be as robust as has been widely assumed.
Treatment cannot be assumed to be effective in all cases, highlighting the importance of taking an individual approach to the assessment and treatment that recognises the diversity of the young person’s needs and strengths.
The issues that young people can face as a direct result of being exploited can re- emerge later in life. Interventions should not be offered on a short-term basis but for the requisite period of time that the young person needs; this may be costly, but re-referrals and cyclical crises are more so.
Having practitioners who are experienced in working with CSE but also skilled in mediation will help engage families in a holistic family-based approach. Parents value having practitioners who respond to their concerns, allow them to reflect on their experiences and do not simply dispense information.