Assessing the risks to childrenfrom domestic violence

‘I feel a lot more confidentnow going out to visit a

family where there isdomestic violence.’

Social worker

Findings from two pilot studies using the Barnardo’s Domestic Violence RiskAssessment Model

Julie Healy and Madeleine Bell

No. 7

Policy and practice briefing

No. 7

Policy and practice briefing

Assessing the risks to childrenfrom domestic violenceFindings from two pilot studies using the Barnardo’s

Domestic Violence Risk Assessment ModelThis briefing paper highlights the findingsfrom two pilot studies conducted in2004 by Barnardo’s Northern Irelandwith three Health and Social ServicesTrusts in the Southern Health and SocialServices Board and the Ulster Community& Hospitals Trust. The two studiespiloted the use of a Domestic ViolenceRisk Assessment Model which has beendeveloped by Barnardo’s DomesticViolence Outreach Service1. The findingshighlight the need for a specific assessmenttool to assist practitioners assess the riskspresented by domestic violence forchildren and make decisions about thetypes of interventions needed.

There has been increasing recognition of the impact of domestic violencesituations on children and the need to assess these risks and plan effectiveinterventions. (McGee, 2000; Webster,2003). However in some Health andSocial Services Trusts, social workershave identified a gap in their knowledgeto assess the risks and identify supportsfor children in these situations. In 2004Barnardo’s was approached by the UlsterCommunity & Hospitals Trust (UCHT)and the Southern Health and Social 1 The model originates from Ontario, Canada and has been

adapted with their permission by Madeleine Bell,

Barnardo’s Northern Ireland Children’s Services Manager.

Services Board (SHSSB) with a requestfor training to facilitate decision-making in domestic violence situations wherechildren are present. Both agencies hadidentified a gap in their procedures toassess the risks posed to children bydomestic violence.

Domestic violence can take many differentforms and no two experiences are likelyto present in the same way. It is crucialthat social workers – who are very likelyto encounter the issue in their work –are competent in current practice andhave the essential knowledge base toidentify the risks and respondappropriately.

Assessment for domesticviolence situations wherechildren are presentThe Department of Health, SocialServices and Public Safety is in theprocess of establishing a multi-agencysingle assessment model for NorthernIreland. This is based on the ‘Frameworkfor the Assessment of Children in Needand their Families’ (DoH, 2000). Itprovides a generic framework forcollecting information about a family orsituation. However, as this is a generictool it is useful to have an additionalassessment tool to provide a robustassessment for situations where there isdomestic violence.

Based on extensive experience of usingand training others to use the DoHframework, Calder (2004) expressesconcern about the framework’srobustness for domestic violencesituations where children are present. Asthe assessment groups fathers and

mothers together when looking atparental capacity, this can lead to adescription of violence as ‘family violence’rather than labelling the abuse as‘domestic violence’. Jointly groupingparental capacity in this way can alsodetract from the very different rolesparents play (or fail to play) within afamily. In practice, the focus is all toooften on the mother’s capacity to parentand protect rather than the perpetrator’sabusive behaviour. This puts the onus ofthe child protection procedure on themother’s ability to protect and not onthe perpetrator taking responsibility for his abusive behaviour.

Current assessmentframeworks in useResearch and training needs analysiswithin SHSSB and UCHT highlighted theneed for a specific risk assessment toolfor domestic violence cases.

Ulster Community & Hospitals Trust

In particular, research (Nicholl, 2001)within UCHT highlighted the followingconcerns:

■ absence of clear policy and proceduresrelating to domestic violence

■ evidence of inconsistencies in decision-making and recording in domesticviolence cases

■ lack of clear categorisation into familysupport or child protection cases

■ need for research and training on theimpact of domestic violence onchildren.

Issues emerging from this research led to a number of recommendations for thefuture management of domestic violence

It is important to note that the modelhas been designed specifically withmale to female violence in mind. Maleto female violence provides the focusfor this report, although we are awarethat female to male violence andviolence within same sex relationshipsalso occurs. Our knowledge aroundthe impact of these risks to childrenand methods of assessing these risksmust be developed.

cases within the trust and training washighlighted as a priority for social workstaff dealing with domestic violence cases.The establishment of a set of criteriawhich would assist social workers in theirdecision making, particularly in regard to the classification of cases into familysupport or child protection, was alsorecommended. In response to this, fundingwas obtained from the Eastern Health andSocial Services Board to facilitate trainingand a six month pilot study.

Southern Health and Social

Services Board

The Southern Board has implemented amulti-disciplinary assessment of theneeds of children and their families. Thisis based on the ‘Framework for theAssessment of Children in Need andtheir Families’ (DoH, 2000). In caseswhere there are child protectionconcerns the board implements aseparate Risk Analysis Model2. Howeverthe board felt that staff would benefitfrom training on a specific tool to assessrisks and help inform decision-making oncases with children living in domesticviolence situations.

The impact of domesticviolence on children –policy and proceduresBoth SHSSB and UCHT use a policy andprocedure guide when presented withincidents of domestic violence in familieswith children. Within these policies socialworkers are responsible for assessing riskand making decisions about the childprotection issues presented by domesticviolence. However there are no explicitinstructions to guide ‘how’ these risks areassessed. At the outset of the two pilotstudies, it was hoped that the Risk

2 This Risk Analysis Model is the result of a collaboration

between the Southern Area Child Protection Committee

and Greg Kelly at the School of Social Work, Queens

University Belfast.

3 Newry & Mourne HSST, Armagh & Dungannon HSST

and Craigavon & Banbridge Community HSST

4 Reference, Policy and practice briefing, No.2: SupportingChildren in a Domestic Violence Situation, Summary of Issues

and Findings from the Domestic Violence Outreach

Service (DVOS).

Assessment Model would provide staffwith the tools and a framework to carryout assessments and implement supportin an informed and consistent manner.

Training and pilotprogrammesIn September 2003 Barnardo’s NorthernIreland Domestic Violence OutreachService provided two, two-day trainingsessions, one for four social work teamsfrom three Health and Social ServicesTrusts3 in the Southern Board area and

another for four teams in UCHT. Thiswas followed by a further day’s training on‘Safety Work’ for women and childrenexperiencing domestic violence4. Themain focus of the training was the use ofthe Domestic Violence Risk AssessmentModel and to examine the complexityand dynamics involved in domesticviolence situations and the impact of thison children. It was agreed that staff whohad participated in the training wouldimplement the model during a six monthperiod to pilot its use. From the threeSouthern Board Trusts, seven social

Domestic Violence RiskAssessment ModelThe model used by the Barnardo’sDomestic Violence Outreach Scheme(DVOS) originates from Ontario,Canada. Based on experience gainedfrom using the model in the DVOS, asystem of threshold scales, risk factors,potential vulnerabilities and protectivefactors have been added to the modelenabling comprehensive analysis ofrisk within the assessment process.

The model is used to assess theseverity of risk posed by domesticviolence within families where childrenare present. It aims to help practitionersmake decisions about the riskspresented for children and to planeffective interventions for the family.

The model is based on the followingprinciples:

■ protecting the children is the firstpriority

■ protecting the non-abusing parent –usually the mother – helps protectthe children

■ providing supportive resources tothe non-abusing parent will helpprotect and care for the children

■ holding the perpetrator responsiblefor the abusive behaviour

■ respecting non-abusing parents’right to direct her own life withoutplacing her children at increased

risk of further abuse from domesticviolence.

The Risk Assessment Model has nineassessment areas. These are the keyareas to assist social workers andother childcare professionals reachdecisions about when a child is ‘inneed’ or is ‘in need of protection’.

The nine assessmentareas are:■ nature of the abuse

■ risks to the children posed by theperpetrator

■ risks of lethality

■ perpetrators pattern of assault andcoercive behaviours

■ impact of the abuse on the women

■ impact of the abuse on the children

■ impact of the abuse on parentingroles

■ protective factors

■ the outcome of the women’s pasthelp-seeking.

Practitioners use these areas toidentify and collect information onwhich to base their decision-making.This information can then be used toidentify gaps in our knowledge aboutthe situation and also to begin aprocess of assessing the riskpresented.

workers, five team leaders, twoprofessional support and servicedevelopment officers and one principalsocial worker took part in the pilot. Fourteams participated in UCHT totalling 18social workers, four team leaders and twoassistant principal social workers and oneprogramme manager.

Threshold scalesThe model rates the severity of risk usinga threshold scale. This scale rates from 1(minimum risk) to 5 (serious risk).

Threshold scale 1 – assess minimum riskfrom domestic violence. Usually used forfamilies where there is verbal aggressionor the care giver has experiencedprevious abusive relationships. Familysupport may be offered.

Threshold scale 2 to 3 – assesses thedomestic violence risks as moderate andfamily support is deemed the appropriateintervention. These scales specificallyaddress the ‘grey areas’ in makingassessments and decisions around therisk presented by domestic violence.

Threshold scale 4 to 5 – assesses theseverity, nature and impact of thedomestic violence abuse as ‘high risk’.A threshold of significant harm is reachedand child protection procedures areimplemented.

The risk assessment process clearly sets

out any risk or potential risks posed tothe family as a result of domestic violencewhilst taking account of other issuesimpacting on the family. It provides acomprehensive and consistentframework to gather, analyse and ratethe level of risk presented. One of thestrengths of the model is the detailedrecording procedure which provides anup to date family history, highlights areasof concern and can be used by otherpractitioners working with the family in the future.

Feedback from staffparticipating in the pilotstudies Feedback from the two pilot studiesindicated that social workers had foundthe model useful to focus on the riskspresented to children by domesticviolence and to facilitate their subsequentdecision-making. The opportunity to takepart in a pilot study, with support in theform of monthly mentoring sessionsprovided by Barnardo’s, expanded theirknowledge of the dynamics of domesticviolence and enhanced confidence intheir skills to deal with the issue when it arose in their case load.

The following are quotes fromparticipants in the two pilot studies:

‘I felt that the model complimented ourassessment framework and can work wellalongside it. An extra tool to be used.’Social worker.

‘The model is good for identifying areas ofconcern that I would never have thought of before. It increased your own knowledgebase. One of the most helpful parts of thispilot was this increase in knowledge ondomestic violence.’ Social worker.

‘This model helps you to be very specificabout the risks posed and then decisionscan be made with more clarity and more specific information recorded.’Social worker.

‘For other social workers coming in to takeover a case it’s going to save them time.This is very important.’ Social worker.

‘The Risk Assessment Model helped inmaking decisions i.e. intervention andsupport provided to child and familydepending on severity.’ Social worker.

‘It was a specialist tool which takes time tocomplete, but I think that this could beused alongside the new assessmentframework.’ Social worker.

‘Greatly assisted decision-making process.Clearly outlines risk and reasons forassessment made. In the case conferencewhere I used the model, the RiskAssessment Model clearly outlined ‘highrisk.’ Social worker.

Implementing this model was an additionto an already busy case load. In theirfeedback social workers and other staffstressed the workload pressures, butindicated that it had been worth theextra time:

‘If I had cases involving domestic violence Iwould apply the model and take the extratime required.’ Social worker.

‘Absolutely, it informs practice and meansincidents/risks are detailed. However inpractice this has been extremely difficultdue to workload/staffing pressures.’Team leader.

Participants in the pilot studies were alsokeen that other agencies were informedabout the model to enhance a multi-agency approach:

‘[….]Domestic violence isn’t particular tofamily and childcare…I’m not exactly sureabout what level of training other agenciesshould get on this but I don’t see any harmin the model being shared. It is about multi-disciplinary working so people know wherewe are coming from and what we’re basingour decision-making on.’ Team leader.

The Risk Assessment Model was appliedfor one court report during the periodof the pilot. The threshold scales wereused within the report to clearly set outthe risks posed to the child and thejudge referred to these risks in hisjudgement:

‘It is therefore necessary for the court to apply the welfare checklist to thecircumstances of the case – to ask whetherthe fundamental emotional need of thischild to have an enduring relationship withher father is outweighed by the depth ofharm the child would be at risk fromsuffering.’

The judge found the nine assessmentareas ‘very useful and thought provoking’and stated that it informed hisjudgement. He was very positive aboutthe benefits of the Domestic ViolenceRisk Assessment Model in Court.

Key findings from thepilot studies:■ monthly mentoring sessions provided

the opportunity to discuss and shareexperiences and research findings with other team members and wasinstrumental to the pilot success

■ training and information about thedynamics of domestic violenceenhanced staff knowledge andconfidence to address domesticviolence when they encountered itwithin their work

■ use of the model assisted practitionersidentify the risks presented to childrenand adult victims from domesticviolence whilst maintaining a holisticview of other factors affecting thefamily

■ the model encouraged practitioners toidentify the protective strategiesemployed by the non-abusive parentand helped provide a focus on theabusive behaviour of the perpetrator

■ the threshold scales within the modeloffered a consistent framework toassess and rate the level of risk

■ the model aided decision-makingabout whether a child is ‘in need’ or is‘in need of protection’ by clarifying therisks presented

■ the model assisted practitionersidentify the types of interventionsuitable for children and their families

■ the model was particularly useful forchild protection cases where there isdomestic violence, especially to informdecision-making at case conference

■ the model facilitates a coherent recordof case history to be maintained, thisproved extremely useful to inform andprovide a structure for court reportsclearly illustrating the risks present

■ this recording system holdsinformation which should prove useful for any future work undertakenwith the family

■ the model takes extra time tocomplete but with practice becomesmore routine. Practitioners felt theextra time needed was worthwhile.

Staff safety messages Visiting families suffering fromdomestic violence is potentiallydangerous for social workers and itis important that clear guidelines and protocols are in place for staffprotection. The following are somepoints from the Barnardo’s DomesticViolence Outreach Service staffsafety planning and Barnardo’sgeneral guidance for assessing andmanaging home visits.

Team systems androutines:■ ensure that staff never have to

make potentially dangerous homevisits alone. Co-work or use apolice escort where necessary

■ have a clear framework to assesspotential risks to staff in individualcases

■ routinely record the timing and details of planned home visits

■ have clear protocols in place wheninterviewing alleged perpetrators

■ systematically record incidents andthreats of violence to staff fromclients.

Guidance for individualstaff members:■ report any incident. Not doing so

can put others at risk

■ always be alert, be aware of yoursurroundings and other people

■ develop skills, behaviour and ways of working to recognise and deal with anger

■ trust your intuition and act on any warning. Do not ignore it

■ strike a balance between sensiblecaution, awareness and confidence

■ keep reasonably fit. Good posture,stamina and strength aid protection

■ avoid meeting aggression withaggression.

Regi

ster

ed C

harit

y N

o.21

6250

7

169S

B05

542-544 Upper Newtownards Road, Belfast BT4 3HE Tel 028 9067 2366 www.barnardos.org.uk

Policy and practicerecommendationsDepartment of Health and SocialServices (and other agencies workingwith the victims of domestic violence)should provide regular training to updatestaff about the dynamics of domesticviolence and its impact on children.

Department of Health and SocialServices should implement specificassessment procedures for domesticviolence situations across boards andtrusts to facilitate a consistent approachto assessing domestic violence situations.

Department of Health and SocialServices should incorporate the modelas an additional tool to the multi-disciplinary assessment of children in need and their families.

Agencies working directly with victims ofdomestic violence should provide trainingon and implement ‘Safety Work’.

Area Child Protection Committeesshould consider offering training on thethreshold scales to other professionals to promote a multi-disciplinary approachto tackling domestic violence.

Children and young people should besupported to participate in assessmentand decision-making processes in asensitive and appropriate manner.

Child protection procedures mustprovide an increased focus on theperpetrator’s behaviour and implementinterventions which address this.

To facilitate this we need to increase ourknowledge base about ‘what works’ toaddress the abusive behaviour ofperpetrators and research and developnew and more effective programmes.

Practitioners should be encouraged and supported to keep abreast ofdevelopments in research and goodpractice relevant to their area of work.

Policy contextA multi-agency strategy to respond to,address and monitor domestic violence iscurrently being developed. This is basedon the Government Draft StrategyTackling Domestic Violence in the Homeand publication is scheduled for mid2005.

ReferencesCalder, M et al (2004) Children Living With

Domestic Violence:Towards a framework for

assessment and intervention. Russell

House Publishing: Dorset

Department of Health (2000) Framework

for the assessment of children in need and

their families.

McGee, C (2000) Childhood Experiences

of Domestic Violence. Jessica Kingsley:

London

Nicholl, P (2001) An exploration of the

social work response to police referred

cases of domestic violence within the four

community Health and Social Services

Trusts in the Eastern Health and Social

Services Board area. (unpublished)

Ontario Ministry of Community and

Social Services (2001) Women Abuse:

Increasing safety for abused women and

their children (CAS / VAW Joint Training

– Facilitator Manual). Ontario: Canada

Webster, A et al (2003) Bitter Legacy.

Barnardo’s: Barkingside