Saturday, May 28, 2011

SHARON SHOESMITH AND BABY PETER

Whilst this blog generally tries to steer clear of "children, schools and families", the case of Sharon Shoesmith is so important that, on this occasion, I feel the need to wade in.

Although usually unsympathetic to the highly-paid social bureaucrat, I do think that Ms Shoesmith became the victim of a political game of football between Gordon Brown and David Cameron in the final years of New Labour. There are important differences between accountability and media fuelled witch hunts of the kind to which Ms Shoesmith fell victim. Yesterday's court judgement has recognised this.

The cases of Sharon Shoesmith, the former head of education and social services in the London Borough of Haringey, and Baby Peter, the child neglected, abused, and finally killed by the adults who supposedly cared for him, raises a range of issues which need to be considered separately.

Firstly, the creation of a super-department for children, schools and families presided over by Ed Balls was a mistake. Social care fits better with health than education, and it was ultimately the medical profession that failed Baby Peter, whose serious injuries were left undiagnosed, rather than his social workers.

Secondly, as secretary of state Balls was wrong to intervene personally in having Ms Shoesmith sacked. The failures of her council department in managing education and social services were, after all, partly a consequence of the flawed government re-organisation led by him.

Thirdly, the strong tendency under New Labour for power in public sector organisations to concentrate in the hands of a relatively small number of highly-paid officials has ultimately made effective day-to-day hands-on management virtually impossible. Much flatter and more accountable structures are required, with remuneration which reflects this.

Finally, the previous government adopted what can only be described as a naive approach to children, parenting and families, and it looks very much like the present administration will continue this. Whist Balls, Brown, and Cameron are all, I am sure, excellent parents, many people are not. It might well behove governments, therefore, to recognise this in the benefit system and actively discourage those likely to be unsuited to parenthood from having children.

No comments: