The best way to make this make sense is to quote a real child protection case where an abuser (now found guilty and convicted and imprisoned) was found to be abusing children when changing nappies.
The abuser would always volunteer to change nappies and take children to the toilet. In the nursery where the abuser worked the rest of the staff were happy to let the abuser carry out all of the nappy/toileting tasks. Therefore when a child cried or became upset during a nappy change the abuser would explain away the cries that the staff heard by saying that the child had nappy rash or simply didn't like having his/her nappy changed.
What could have prevented this happening?
Shared responsibilities for nappy/toileting duties would have enabled other staff to note injuries etc.
Recently there has been a well publicized case of a nursery officer photographing children for child pornography.
What could have prevented this?
Banning camera phones within the nursery
Staff being vigilant and being willing to think the unthinkable: i.e. that another member of staff within their setting might be abusing a child.
Obviously strict vetting procedures CRBs , references etc help but these are not infallable; sometimes it just means that an abuser has never been caught. Abusers are very good at hiding what they do and gaining the trust of others.
Hope this helps
|
& 
Linear Mode
