Abstract
First and foremost this is a tale of a 17 month-old toddler who was murdered by his mother and her friends, amidst a background of abuse and deprivation. Throughout the book Jones never lets this be forgotten. The first chapter takes the reader painstakingly through the events leading up to the horrific death of Peter Connelly. It retells the catalogue of errors as Peter and his mother were in regular contact with social workers, community and hospital doctors and the police, amongst other agencies. Jones highlights the lack of experience of the legal staff who were unable to commence care proceedings and the hospital doctor, untrained in child protection procedures, who failed to check the child the day before he died of injuries tantamount to torture. However, Jones is unequivocal that the blame should be laid squarely with three individuals: Peter’s mother, Tracy Connelly; Peter’s step-father, Stephen Barker; and Barker’s brother, Jason Owen, whose existence in the household Tracy concealed, whilst making a pretence of cooperating with the authorities.
The book contains major sub-texts, one of which might be labelled ‘in defence of social workers’. This is the profession to which Jones aligns himself as Professor of Social Work and formerly Director of Social Services, Chair of the British Association of Social Workers and Chief Executive of the Social Care Institute for Excellence. Jones sets out to show that, although with hindsight mistakes were made, social workers were by no means the only agency involved. Yet it was only they, at each level of the organization, who were named, blamed and shamed; Jones is particularly outraged at the scapegoating of the two social workers and Sharon Shoesmith, Director of Children’s Services, who received nationwide infamy as the people held responsible for Peter’s death. Jones contrasts the outcry, led by Rebekah Brooks, over Shoesmith’s salary and unfair dismissal settlement, with Brooks’ own pay off from News International of £10.8million – ‘as Director of Children’s Services it would have taken 100 years to earn this amount: for the social workers, it would have taken 300 years’ (p. 261).
There are regularly tragic child deaths throughout the country so the question is posed as to why Peter’s case was earmarked for publicity? Jones’ answer is that this was a period when the media, under the leadership of Rupert Murdoch and Rebekah Brooks, held close personal and professional alliances with high-ranking politicians and police officers. Consequently, they possessed considerable power to present a particular slant on the story as the ‘truth’, with emotive headlines such as ‘Blood on their Hands’ (The Sun, November 2008, cited by Jones, 2014, p. 254). Complicity came from both Labour and Conservative MPs but David Cameron was at the forefront, goading Ed Balls, with whom he had a long-standing rivalry, into taking what was portrayed as a moral stand by sacking Shoesmith publicly. Of significance is that Peter’s death occurred in Haringey, a short distance from where Victoria Climbié lived and died and that it was a Labour Council. Haringey Council was held up as failing, not only in the tabloids (particularly The Sun), Cameron also raised it in the House of Commons. This ‘story’ made regular reappearances between 2008 and 2011 − ‘simplified, sensationalised and sustained, transforming private individuals into celebrity objects of hate… commercial fodder, feeding the relentless tabloid market machine’ (p. 241). The spotlight was always on the social workers, with the police and NHS managers written out of the story. Jones stresses repeatedly that responsibility for criminal investigations lies firmly within the police remit.
Through intricate analysis Jones takes the reader through the various inquiries and Ofsted inspections, with twists and turns engineered to support the original story of a neglectful service within an incompetent council. At times the narrative becomes confusing and repetitive, reflecting perhaps how it felt for the main players and observers at the time. ‘The Baby P effect’ resulted in an over 40 per cent increase in children being taken into care but no extra social worker jobs and, in Jones’ view, inferior structures with which to support child protection and the disadvantage and deprivation which surrounds it. An inability to recruit in Haringey, already problematic following Victoria Climbié’s death, was exacerbated by the media who ‘tainted, terrorised and traumatised’ (p. 135) individual workers; the impact of this fear of publicized recriminations spread to include other professions in the area responsible for children’s welfare − shealth visitors, school nurses and support staff. Further, Jones argues, that if experienced workers are removed following a tragedy, valuable knowledge is lost and future learning prevented.
Parallel situations will be recognizable to probation officers living through the Transforming Rehabilitation (TR) era. The underlying and sobering message, already familiar within probation, is that stories of poor practice and unfortunate, unforeseen circumstances can be created, embellished and distorted, for financial and political purposes, to target and condemn whole professions.