Children Whose Behaviour Harms Others

Harmful behaviour is a spectrum of undesirable, inappropriate and concerning behaviours which create alarm or distress in another person or cause actual physical or sexual harm. It can include physical, sexual or emotional abuse, exploitation, bullying, technology assisted harm, coercive control and may be interfamilial.

Adhering to child protection procedures is crucial when working with a child whose behaviour has harmed others or a child who has been harmed by another child. Following the nationally established ‘Working Together’ safeguarding guidelines will ensure that all children receive appropriate interventions. The complexity in this scenario is developing assessments and interventions that can support a child that has experienced harm whilst also addressing the harmful behaviour of another child. Any plan must seek to reduce the concern for others whilst also considering everyone’s personal safety and wellbeing.

Lincolnshire Children’s Services, Lincolnshire’s Integrated Care Board, Health Teams and Lincolnshire Police must work collaboratively, involving Education and other partners to implement these procedures effectively. When working with a child whose behaviour may have harmed another, professionals must strive to see the ‘whole child’ and to keep them in focus throughout any assessment or intervention. Harmful behaviour exhibited by a child should be understood as outside of healthy child development, this could be a potential indicator that a child is experiencing neglect or abuse themselves. As such, professionals should prioritise professional curiosity, striving to understand the child’s lived experience, and the underlying functionality of their behaviour.

To this end, where concerns are identified, referrals to children’s social care must be submitted for both the child who caused/ is causing the harm and the child who experienced/ is experiencing the harm.

When considering the harm to others from a child’s behaviour, please note the procedural definition of serious impact is identified as: {the behaviour} can have a detrimental impact for others (members of the public, family members, potential known or unknown victims) and the recovery is likely to take time or in some circumstances not be possible. Recovery is considered the point where the person can return to everyday functioning as it was before the event or behaviour. The impact can be physical or psychological”¹. This would include where there are allegations of serious sexual or violent offences.

When services become aware of harmful behaviour and professionals are aware of a context or further information which indicates the child is likely to be experiencing significant/serious harm themselves, a Strategy Meeting must be convened.

Where the impact of a child’s harmful behaviour on others could be serious, consideration must be given to a Strategy Meeting being held. Full consideration should be given to a child’s severe and profound difficulties and any presenting behaviour.  If a decision is taken that no Strategy Meeting is to be held, the rationale for this must be clearly recorded on the child’s record by the Practice Supervisor/manager in children’s social care.

Where a Strategy discussion is convened for these circumstances, Education partners should always be invited. Where the child whose behaviour has caused the harm is aged 10 or over Future4Me (youth justice services) should be invited.

Any strategy meeting/discussion must explore the ‘whole picture’ for all the children involved/impacted. Where concerns are raised within a strategy discussion regarding a child who is not the subject of that specific meeting, the Children’s Services Practice Supervisor leading the strategy meeting must give consideration to the safety of that child and if additional Child Protection activity in relation to that child is required.

MOSAIC relationships should be created to reflect the dynamics between the children. ‘Other/ Friend’ and ‘Alleged abuser’, are available options to distinguish relationships. Adopting this practice will support professionals, such as the Emergency Duty Team, to prioritise the safety of all involved children.

In taking a collaborative, multi-agency approach to a convening strategy meeting and developing a collaborative child protection strategy we are best equipped to ensure that:

• children who have caused harm receive the support they need to prevent further harm (to themselves and others)
• anyone who has been harmed has their needs separately assessed and their safety prioritised.

The guidance on strategy discussions is available at: Strategy Discussions.

^{[1] Youth Justice Board, 2024, ‘Prevention & Diversion Assessment Tool’, YJB Prevention & Diversion Assessment Tool}

Seeing the ‘whole child’ requires us to frame our observations within a developmental perspective. Research has shown that children from an early age can tell the difference between things that are inherently wrong and things that people say are wrong. This means that even young children have their own sense of what is fair and just, not just what adults tell them. Reflecting on this knowledge of children’s moral development is important because it should lead us to explore how the child in our focus has learned about right and wrong. When a child’s behaviour causes harm to another, they do not as a result deserve less of our focus or support. The harm resulting from their behaviour should not eclipse their needs as a child. We should, as child centred practitioners, want to know what the behaviour is telling us about the child’s context and the child’s own experience of justice and fairness. We should want to explore what they have witnessed, experienced or watched that might be shaping their understanding of morality and justice. We know that children developing in an environment free from abuse and violence do have a basic idea of what is moral and can separate what they believe from what they learn from their environment. Within the context of preventing further harm, we need to commit to exploring the child’s world and offering intervention that can prevent further harm to the child or to others².

^{[2] Ha Na Yoo, Judith G. Smetana, Children’s moral judgments about psychological harm: Links among harm salience, victims’ vulnerability, and child sympathy; Journal of Experimental Child Psychology,}

^{Volume 188, 2019, 104655; ISSN 0022-0965,    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2019.06.008.}

The four ‘tenets’ of Child First provide a framework for working with children:

³

In Lincolnshire we adopt a trauma informed approach. We need all practitioners to have as their key stance, an elevated level of professional curiosity into the factors that have impacted the child’s development leading to the harmful act/s. Every effort should be made to enable children to engage, and participate in, assessment and interventions. 

^{[3] Youth Justice Board, 2024, ‘ Child First Toolkit’, Final-Child-First-Toolkit-Guidance-Document-.pdf (yjresourcehub.uk)} 

When planning an assessment/intervention the discussion between practitioner and line manager should always address:

• How can we support a child who has harmed another to reduce concerns and ensure they are not experiencing harm themselves? What threshold of intervention are we considering? Who else needs to be involved?
• How can we explore the concerns safely with the child and their family?
  • Are there concerns for staff safety or the safety of others that need consideration?
  • What format should we use for sessions?
  • What is the safest location for work to take place?
• Who else do we need to work with to assess the needs and develop a shared plan?
• What strengths can be built on to mitigate concerns?
• What barriers are preventing this child from reaching their full potential?
• How can we support this child to reach their full potential?