Sexual and physical abuse of a small sibling group over a two-and-a-half-year period. In 2020 the siblings were staying with their extended family and disclosed that their father had sexually and physically abused them, as well as subjected them to harsh and critical treatment. Father was found guilty of several offences for which he received a custodial sentence. Siblings' mother had died some years earlier and Father had taken responsibility for home educating the siblings as a single parent. Siblings were not registered with the local authority Elective Home Education Service. Siblings were seen by the GP for minor ailments and were not known to any other agencies. Housing department had concerns about Father's responses to requests for information and an investigation was started by the corporate anti-fraud team. Siblings are from a minority ethnic group. Learning relates to: the home education of children and young people; identification of home educated children; ensuring a stable education; safeguarding home educated children; social, pastoral and leisure needs as the foundation of child development; and bereavement support. Recommendations include: raise awareness of the importance of the identification of elected home educated children and the need for them to be registered across all agencies; make a recommendation to the National Panel to complete a thematic review of serious case reviews, rapid reviews and child safeguarding practice reviews (CSPRs) that relate to home educated children; consider the existing pathways to bereavement support for the children of terminally ill parents.
      
    Serious Case Review No:  2021/C8984  Published by the NSPCC On behalf of an unnamed local safeguarding children board      This report was written by an independent author and is owned by the commissioning LSCB.  This report is published by the NSPCC with the agreement of the National Panel of Independent Experts.  Publication of this report by the NSPCC does not constitute endorsement of the contents. Copyright of this report remains with the commissioning LSCB.   1  Child Safeguarding Practice Review Siblings from Family H Jane Wiffin   2   This review is dedicated to the bravery and courage of the group of siblings who experienced significant physical abuse, sexual abuse, neglect and cruelty at the hands of their father, but found a way to tell adults what was happening to them. This is not an easy thing for those who are being abused and harmed at home. It is also dedicated to the extended family members/friends who were there for the siblings and enabled action to be taken.   3  Contents Pages  1. Introduction 4-5 Why this Child Practice Safeguarding Review (CSPR)1 is being undertaken Process of the review Family involvement  2.  Narrative chronology of professional involvement and family background 6-9 3.  Analysis  10-15 The home education of children and young people Identification of home educated children  Safeguarding home educated children Ensuring a suitable education Social, pastoral and leisure needs as the foundation of child development  Bereavement support for the siblings 4.  Conclusions 16 5. Recommendations  17                                                              1 In England, child safeguarding practice reviews (previously known as serious case reviews) should be considered for serious child safeguarding cases where abuse or neglect of a child is known or suspected https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/942454/Working_together_to_safeguard_children_inter_agency_guidance.pdf (pg 84). 4  1. Introduction Why this Child Practice Safeguarding Review (CSPR)2 is being undertaken 1.1 This independently led Child Practice Safeguarding Review is about a small sibling group of school age children who are from a racially minoritized  ethnic community. For reason of confidentiality no further identifying details will be provided within the review. In 2020 the siblings were staying with their extended family and took the brave and courageous step to tell a trusted extended family member that their father had, for the last two and a half years, been sexually and physically abusing them, as well as subjecting them to harsh and critical treatment,. Immediate and appropriate safeguarding action was taken, and the siblings were placed with their extended family. Their mother had died some years earlier. A criminal investigation was started, and their father was found guilty of several offences for which he received a custodial sentence. The siblings are being well looked after within their family and are settled.  1.2 The local Safeguarding Children Partnership3 (SCP) undertook a Rapid Review4 of the contact agencies had with the siblings and agreed that their circumstances met the criteria for a local child safeguarding practice review (CSPR) as set out in Working Together 20185. It was noted that this was one of two sibling groups who were home educated and where there were concerns about abuse and neglect. The Safeguarding Children’s Partnership Learning Group agreed that the two CSPRs raised questions and concerns about the potential invisibility of home educated children, possibly leaving them without support or adults to talks to outside the home when they have worries or concerns and are experiencing abuse. Process of the review 1.3 The methodology adopted for this CSPR was a hybrid system approach with a focus on evaluating the practice response to the children, identifying improvements needed locally and nationally to safeguard and promote the welfare of children, and to consider whether there is a need for policy or practice changes in any identified area. This approach is consistent with the purpose of CSPRs as outlined in Working Together 2018.  1.4 All key agencies were asked to provide a chronology of their involvement with the siblings and their family over a two-year period from 2018 to 2020 and to                                                            2 In England, child safeguarding practice reviews (previously known as serious case reviews) should be considered for serious child safeguarding cases where abuse or neglect of a child is known or suspected https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/942454/Working_together_to_safeguard_children_inter_agency_guidance.pdf (pg 84).  3 The Children and Social Work Act 2017 introduced the requirement that local safeguarding children boards be replaced with new local safeguarding partnerships led by three safeguarding partners – the Local Authority, Clinical Commissioning Group and Police; this is called the Safeguarding Children Partnership. 4 The safeguarding partners should promptly undertake a rapid review of the case https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/942454/Working_together_to_safeguard_children_inter_agency_guidance.pdf (Chapter 4, pg 88). 5 Working Together 2018 https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/779401/Working_Together_to_Safeguard-Children.pdf (Chapter 4, pg81). 5  also consider any relevant historical information. This information was quite limited because the siblings had been home educated and had little involvement with services. Interviews were conducted with the few professionals who had contact with the siblings and they provided useful insights and reflections on the local practice landscape. I would like to thank for them for their time and thoughtful responses on what was a difficult set of circumstances. It has been hard for those who had regular contact with the siblings in their clubs not to worry that they somehow missed something or should have known what was happening. There is no evidence to suggest that this was possible given the presentation of the siblings and father. It is important to say that the person responsible for the harm to the siblings is their father.  1.5 The CSPR was overseen by a panel of local agency representatives (CSPR panel) who met regularly and who contributed to the analysis of the available information, helped consider practice themes, and provided appropriate, robust and sensitive challenge. The CSPR was chaired efficiently and compassionately by the Independent Chair of the SCP Learning and Thematic Review Group, managed very efficiently by the SCP Partnership Manager, and administered effectively. I would like to thank everyone for their hard work and commitment at what has been a challenging time, with all the restrictions and increased demands caused by the Covid-19 pandemic. The independent reviewer is Jane Wiffin; she is responsible for the writing of this overview report. Family involvement 1.6 The CSPR panel discussed the best way to include the siblings in this review. It has been a difficult and stressful time for them, with new educational arrangements and the trial of their father. This was also discussed with their current social worker. The siblings say they now want to get on with their lives and to focus on their future. This is of course their right and as such they do not want to talk further about what happened in the past. They are aware of the review taking place. During the trial of father, the siblings gave victim impact statements. These statements provided information about the siblings’ sense of distress during the time they were in the care of father, and how he prevented them from seeking help from others by limiting their contact with friends and family. They talked of being controlled constantly and harmed significantly by him. They also spoke of not being able to grieve for their mother and their lack of education.  1.7 The extended family members have contributed to the CSPR process. The background information they provided has been incorporated into the body of the report. No reflections on services were possible because they had no previous involvement with them. Father has not been asked for his views because these were also provided at the trial; he has not given any further insight to what happened.   6  2.  Narrative chronology of professional involvement and family background 2.1 The siblings lived with their mother for most of their lives who chose to home educate them (elective home education or EHE)6 and the available evidence suggests that she provided good quality opportunities for learning and an appropriate education. The children were not registered with the local authority Elective Home Education Service (EHES) and there is no legal requirement7 to do so. If they had been registered they would have had an annual visit from the local authority home education teacher in line with existing local and national guidance. Mother enabled the children to engage with extracurricular clubs to provide opportunities for them to socialise with other children. The people running these clubs have confirmed the siblings attended regularly, presented as engaged with activities and were part of wider social family activities. The siblings received all their health immunisations and were seen by the GP for minor ailments. They were not known to any other agencies. The siblings’ father did not live with them but did have contact and would visit mother and the siblings on a regular basis. Father returned to live with mother and the siblings when an extended family member was found to be terminally ill and mother provided care.  2.2 Sadly, soon after this Mother was also found to have a terminal illness; father attended medical appointments with her. Mother told her extended family that she wished for father to take over the care of the children and expressed no concerns about his capacity to do so. She also started correspondence with the local authority housing team about father succeeding the tenancy of the family home. Mother received appropriate end of life care until she sadly died, but there was no process in place for planning regarding the possible bereavement needs of the siblings and this gap in services is addressed in the analysis section of the report. After mother died, the GP checked on how the family were with father and offered to make a referral to counselling. Father reported that he and the siblings were coping with support from the extended family and did not need any further help. There was nothing to indicate that this was not the case. The GP was unaware that the siblings were being home educated and were therefore not routinely in contact with any other services.                                                               6 Elective home education (EHE) is a term used to describe a choice by parents to provide education for their children at home (or in some other way which they choose) instead of sending them to school full-time.  7 There is no legal duty on parents to inform the local authority that a child is being home educated. Elective home education: departmental guidance for local authorities (2019) https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/791527/Elective_home_education_gudiance_for_LAv2.0.pdf (pg 12).  7  2.3  After mother died, father was the full-time parent to the siblings, and he said that he had continued to home educate them. He took them to their club activities and had weekly contact with the extended family. The extended family and the people running the clubs had no concerns about the care he was providing, beyond some thoughts that he might benefit from additional support. Father was resistant to any support, saying he did not need it and those offering it (extended family and friends) thought he was being proud, rather than having anything to hide. They had no indication of the harm the siblings were experiencing. Father had previously had a job teaching overseas, but applied and got a teaching role locally.  2.4 Father continued with the process of becoming the tenant of the family home with the local authority housing department. There was a period when he was asked for various documents; father’s lack of responsiveness and evasions caused delays. Father was told he did not meet the criteria for succession to the property because he had not lived there for 12 months and he was told he would need to make an application to be re-housed. He sought legal advice and this dispute about succession continued until recently; it has now been appropriately resolved.  2.5 The housing department had concerns about father’s responses to requests for information and an investigation was started by the corporate anti-fraud team8. This took place over a four-week period, and although the concerns of fraud were unsubstantiated, the officer dealing with them became aware that the siblings were not in school and were not known to the Elective Home Education Service (EHES). She was concerned that when she attempted to visit father and the siblings at home, father would not allow her in, and despite it being during the day he said the siblings were asleep. It is effective practice that she contacted an extended family member to check on the siblings’ welfare and liaised with EHES and children missing from school service9 to express concerns. A discussion was held about whether contact should be made with the Multi-Agency Safeguarding Hub (MASH)10 to seek further information rather than to make a formal referral of concern. The EHE teacher11 had already been in contact with father and agreed a home visit in eight weeks’ time; it was concluded that a decision about next steps would be made after this visit.                                                            8 Local authorities have a responsibility to protect public funds and assets to which it has been entrusted. The work of the Corporate Anti-Fraud Team (CAFT) supports this by providing a specialist independent function which provides support, advice and assistance on all matters of fraud risks.  9 Local authorities in England have a legal duty under section 436A of the Education Act 1996 to make arrangements to identify children missing education (CME) and each area has a service responsible for this as outlined in national guidance. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/550416/Children_Missing_Education_-_statutory_guidance.pdf  10 The Multi Agency Safeguarding Hub (MASH) Team is the first point of entry for referrals about children and young people made by professionals, families and the public. The team is made up of different professionals who can consider the most appropriate next steps when there are concerns about a child.  11 The local authority should provide parents who home educate with a named contact who is familiar with home education policy and practice and has an understanding of a range of educational philosophies; in this case the EHE teacher. Elective home education: departmental guidance for local authorities (2019) https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/791527/Elective_home_education_gudiance_for_LAv2.0.pdf  8  2.6 Father then contacted the EHE teacher and asked that they meet in a coffee shop rather than at home. This is not an unusual request, and as such the EHE teacher agreed. The home visit was part of the plan to determine the siblings’ welfare and whether contact with other agencies was necessary. In this context the home visit should have been pursued. The most recent EHE guidance12 (2019) provides no duty to undertake a home visit or to meet children unless there are concerns about safeguarding or the quality of education provision. The EHE teacher felt that this threshold had not been met and quoted this as her reason for agreeing to father’s request. Ultimately, father also cancelled this meeting and provided written information about his approach to home education and the curriculum he was following instead. The EHE teacher followed up with requests for more information about the education programme; father was initially reluctant to provide this, suggesting that he had fully complied with EHE guidance. He eventually provided more information, and the EHE teacher concluded that he had provided evidence of a suitable education13. The EHE teacher said the progress of the plan would be reviewed in a year’s time, but this was subsequently rescheduled to 15 months and never took place because this was after the siblings’ disclosure of abuse. This meant an assessment of both the quality of education provision and wellbeing of the siblings was delayed by 15 months, despite some concerns.  2.7 The siblings told family members that they were being physically abused, neglected, treated cruelly and subject to sexual abuse. This was reported to the appropriate agencies; they were immediately safeguarded and placed with extended family where they remain.  2.8 There were concerns regarding father’s contact with other children through his work and the clubs attended by the siblings. A referral was made to the LADO14 in the area where these activities took place; an immediate strategy meeting was convened, and action taken regarding suspension of employment; father was in detention. During the process of this review, it has become clear that it was also necessary to consider the needs of children who might have been impacted by contact with father, but who had not come forward. This was a sensitive issue for which careful thought was needed. It was found that the clubs involved had in place general safety strategies for encouraging all children and young people to talk about concerns they had about inappropriate sexual behaviour and abuse without needing to share any information about the siblings’ circumstances.                                                            12 Elective home education: departmental guidance for local authorities (2019) https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/791527/Elective_home_education_gudiance_for_LAv2.0.pdf  13 This is defined in Elective home education: departmental guidance for local authorities (2019) https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/791527/Elective_home_education_gudiance_for_LAv2.0.pdf  14 The Local Authority Designated Officer (LADO) works within Children's Services and gives advice and guidance to employers, organisations and other individuals who have concerns about the behaviour of an adult who works with children and young people and agrees action to keep children safe. Working Together 2018 https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/942454/Working_together_to_safeguard_children_inter_agency_guidance.pdf  9  2.9 Appropriate criminal action was also undertaken and father received a custodial sentence. The siblings gave a clear picture of the significant harm, abuse and cruelty they had experienced at the hands of father over a two-year period.     10  3. Analysis  The home education of children and young people  3.1 At the heart of this CSPR are the needs and circumstances of children and young people (from this point I will use the term children, meaning all those age 18 and below) who are home educated. This is one of two reviews where children are home educated and have made disclosures of sexual abuse being undertaken by the same local safeguarding partnership.  3.2 In England parents have the right to educate their children at home. Section 7 of the Education Act 199615 makes clear the importance of children of compulsory school age receiving “efficient full-time education that is suitable to their age, ability and aptitude, and addresses any special educational needs they may have, either by regular attendance at school or otherwise”. The responsibility for children’s education rests with their parents; education is compulsory, schooling is not. When children are in school the quality of the education they receive is scrutinised and evaluated by external agencies. When children are educated at home this does not necessarily happen. This was a significant issue for the siblings. 3.3 The Children’s Commissioner’s review16 into the circumstances of home educated children commented that the phrase “home education” encompasses a wide range of reasons why parents home educate, including social and philosophical reasons, those who are unhappy with a secular education system, those who would like children to be in school but feel the schools which are available do not meet their child’s needs (particularly in the case of children with special educational and disability needs), and there are a small number of parents who choose to keep children out of the school system to avoid contact with public authorities for a number of reasons, including abuse and neglect.  3.4 The existing national home education guidance advocates a proportionate approach to monitoring the education provided to children in recognition of this wide continuum of reasons for choosing to home educate. The expectation is that individual home education arrangements are reviewed annually “local authorities should ordinarily make contact with home educated parents on at least an annual basis so the authority may reasonably inform itself of the current suitability of the education provided. In cases where there were no previous concerns about the education provided and no reason to think that has changed because the parents are continuing to do a good job, such contact would often be very brief”17.                                                               15 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/56/contents 16 The Office of the Children’s commissioner (2019) Skipping School: Invisible Children: https://www.childrenscommissioner.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/cco-skipping-school-invisible-children-feb-2019.pdf 17 Elective home education Departmental guidance for local authorities (2019) https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/791527/Elective_home_education_gudiance_for_LAv2.0.pdf 11  Identification of home educated children  3.5 There are growing numbers of parents who decide to home educate their children; the numbers have risen by about 20% in each of the last five years and has doubled nationally since 2013/201418. This rise in numbers has also been recognised by the local safeguarding children partnership, with Covid-19 having a significant impact on numbers19. However, these national and local figures are likely to be an underestimation because parents do not have to inform the local authority that they plan to home educate; children are only known about if the parent registers them with the home education service or the children have previously attended school.  3.6 Mother had not registered the siblings as being home educated and it is unclear whether this was an active choice, or if she was unaware of the existence of the register. The children had no contact with public services except the health visitor in the siblings’ younger years, who was happy with their progress, and the GP surgery where they were seen sporadically with routine childhood illnesses. They were well known to the voluntary sector through their use of clubs. The national elective home education guidance (2019) acknowledges that the identification of children as home educated is a significant challenge for local authorities and highlights the importance of “using agreements with health bodies, general practitioners and other agencies to increase their knowledge of children who are not attending school”20. This is addressed in recommendation 1.  Ensuring a suitable education 3.7 It is the responsibility of the local authority to ensure that home educated children are provided with a suitable education21. The national guidance suggests that the starting point for establishing this is to ask parents for detailed information about the education they are providing. Parents are under no duty to respond, but if information is not given it is justifiable for the local authority to conclude that the child is not receiving a suitable education and to take steps to address this22. This will be initially through informal inquiries and can include asking to see the child who is being home educated at home or in another suitable location. The parent is under no legal obligation to agree to this. Children are entitled to express their views about home education, but unless there are concerns about the quality of education provided or safeguarding matters, the parents’ decision on home education takes precedence. It is important that in any local approach to elective home education there is also a                                                            18 https://www.childrenscommissioner.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/cco-skipping-school-invisible-children-feb-2019.pdf (pg 5).  19 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-55004924  20 Section 4.4 Elective home education: departmental guidance for local authorities (2019) https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/791527/Elective_home_education_gudiance_for_LAv2.0.pdf  21 There is no specific definition of what this term means, but the concept is discussed in the national guidance (2019) https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/791527/Elective_home_education_gudiance_for_LAv2.0.pdf  22 This has been established through case law Phillips v Brown [1980] Lexis Citation 1003 12  focus on child-centred practice in line with co-existing legislation such as the Children Act 198923 and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC)24. This is not incompatible with the existing guidance and should be part of the approach to monitoring home education arrangements and the responsibility of the home education team in partnership with the wider local authority and other agencies.  3.8 As a result of the tenacity of the corporate anti-fraud officer, the local authority became aware that the siblings were being home educated and that they had never attended school. The home education teacher made appropriate contact with father and a home visit was agreed. This was subsequently changed to a meeting in another location, and then father said that he did not want to meet the home education teacher face to face and he said he would provide written evidence of his approach to education. There were several telephone conversations requesting this information, which was eventually provided. The home education teacher sought clarifying information and concluded from the written evidence that a suitable education was being provided.  3.9 A parent who home educates does not have to agree to a home visit, meet face to face with the home education team or allow their children to be seen unless there are concerns about the suitability of the education being provided and/or there are safeguarding concerns. Father’s response was not inconsistent with the response of many parents who home educate and the proportionate approach as laid out in the national guidance.  3.10 It is the view of this review that the home education service gave up too easily on the home visit. This was not just a monitoring visit, but an agreed plan to establish the circumstances of the siblings. There was a lack of recognition that this need was not fulfilled and therefore what should and could be done about it.  3.11 The home education service is well regarded and received positive endorsement of its approach in the two most recent inspection. It was, in this case, influenced by a pervasive belief that unless there were obvious safeguarding concerns, there was nothing that could be done because of what was perceived to be the limited powers within the guidance. This was opposed to thinking about what was possible and how to make it possible. Information sharing and professional discussion could have helped to make sense of the siblings’ circumstances and to establish if any further action was necessary. Since this time, the role of this service has been further strengthened.  3.12 In this local authority there are regular meetings to discuss concerns about children missing from education and home educated children. These children’s circumstances should have been discussed in this context. Not least because national guidance suggests that it is important to consider any change in children’s circumstances. For the siblings they had been home educated for                                                            23 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1989/41/contents  24 https://www.unicef.org.uk/what-we-do/un-convention-child-rights/  13  many years, their mother had died and their father had not been resident in the home. He had taken over their care and their home education.  3.13 There is emerging evidence that the siblings were not provided with any education by their father, despite him providing paper evidence that he was doing so. There is no doubt that the lack of effective home education by father over the last two years has had an impact on the siblings’ educational attainment. The schools they attend are working hard to help them catch up on what looks like at least a year’s delay. The siblings report being happy to be home educated by their mother, but the lack of any monitoring visits makes it hard to objectively evaluate this.  3.14 The DfE does not collect data on the educational attainment of known home educated children in England. This means no assessment can be made of the impact on educational attainment of being home schooled. In December 2009, the Parliamentary Children, Schools and Families Committee25 published an inquiry into elective home education. The inquiry found that out of the 74 responding LAs, 22% of known to be home educated 16-18-year-olds were not in education, employment or training. For comparison, the national average at this time was 5%. Carefully considering whether children are being provided with a suitable education is critical. Safeguarding home educated children 3.15 Sections 10 and 11 of the Children Act 200426 give local authorities duties for safeguarding and promoting the wellbeing and welfare of children in their areas. This includes children educated at home. Section 175 of the Education Act 200227 requires authorities to plan for ensuring that their education functions are exercised with a view to safeguarding and promoting children’s welfare. Therefore, the general duties of local authorities in relation to safeguarding are the same for all children, however they are educated. In some circumstances elective home education may make it more possible for parents to prevent the independent oversight by professionals of children who are being harmed and neglected.  3.16 There have been several serious case reviews nationally28, 29, 30 & 31 that have highlighted home education as a factor in the abuse and neglect of children, although not necessarily a causal one. The main consistent finding of these many reviews is the invisibility of home educated children and their lack of contact with agencies who could monitor their safety and wellbeing. Most of these reviews suggest that parents actively prevented this contact. This is an important issue. There is considerable research which suggests that children find it difficult to tell anyone when they have been abused, particularly when                                                            25 https://publications.parliament.ukpa/cm200910/cmselect/cmchilsch/39/39i.pdf  26 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2004/31/contents  27 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2002/32/contents  28 https://bbcdevwebfiles.blob.core.windows.net/webfiles/Files/case-reviews-home-education.pdf  29 http://www.northamptonshirescb.org.uk/scr/childab  30 https://www.cumbria.gov.uk/eLibrary/Content/Internet/537/6683/6687/17123/426059438.pdf  31 https://www.oscb.org.uk/practitioners-volunteers/serious-case-reviews/  14  they have been sexually abused. When they do tell, they usually choose a friend, a friend’s parent or family, someone trusted in their own family, a teacher or extra-curricular activity provider. For home educated children, there may be fewer opportunities for these contacts and therefore fewer opportunities to seek help about abuse. It is important that within the existing monitoring processes, there should be discussion about children’s friendship and leisure opportunities, and action agreed where these are lacking.  3.17 The siblings were not invisible; they were provided with leisure and friendship opportunities, established and maintained by their mother. This must have been no easy task on her own. She also took an active role in the clubs, recognising their important role. Father continued this commitment, and the evidence is that he actively facilitated and ensured the siblings’ attendance and contact with friends. The clubs had in place effective safeguarding policies, those running the clubs had safeguarding training, and there were regular sessions for all children on safeguarding matters and keeping safe. These clubs have reflected on whether there was any indication of harm when father took over the siblings’ care, and they had no concerns. The siblings have reported during the trial process that father had threatened them about telling anyone about his harsh, cruel and abusive behaviour.  3.18 The siblings also had regular contact with their extended family, though this was reduced over time by father. These adults had no idea that the siblings were being physical/sexually abused and neglected by their father and there were no indications of this. The siblings did eventually feel able to tell the extended family of their abuse. 3.19 The corporate anti-fraud officer was appropriately concerned about the circumstances of the siblings, and father’s attitude when discussing them. She went to considerable lengths to ascertain their circumstances and to ensure that they were known to the appropriate agencies, including the home education service and children missing from education service. She also contacted the wider family and established what was known about the family situation. Although no specific concerns were raised, the extended family shared that father might need more support. The corporate anti-fraud officer initiated a discussion between the home education teacher and the children missing from education officer. Contact with the children’s MASH team was discussed (MASH held no information about the family) but considering the forthcoming planned home visit by the home education teacher, it was agreed that this visit would be an opportunity to explore the siblings’ circumstances and consider next steps. Given the limited available information this was an appropriate response.  3.20 The home visit did not go ahead. As with the section on establishing the suitability of the education provided, the home education teacher believed that there were no grounds to seek a home visit or see the children. Given the home visit was part of a plan to establish these siblings’ circumstances where there 15  had been possible concerns and that the siblings’ circumstances had recently changed, a home visit should have been more robustly pursued.  Social, pastoral and leisure needs as the foundation of child development  3.21 It is important to note that many children who are home educated are being provided with social opportunities and care of their emotional needs, with positive outcomes. However, the Children’s Commissioner found that many of the home educated children she spoke to felt lonely, isolated and depressed. The existing national guidance does not explicitly spell out the importance for children of pastoral care, social and leisure opportunities for their wellbeing and the part that attendance at school plays within this. This raises questions about the potential invisibility of these children and whether their rights under the UN Convention of the Rights of the Child are being met, including the right to relax and play (Article 31), the right to freedom of expression (Article 13), the right to be heard (Article 12), the right to be safe from violence (Article 19), and the right to education (Article 28).  3.22 The siblings were afforded opportunities for leisure and friendship and the evidence available suggests they made good use of these, were happy and fulfilled by the clubs they attended, though more latterly did not feel able to speak about the abuse and neglect they were experiencing. They have subsequently spoken about being kept from the outside world by father, feeling trapped and controlled. It is important that the monitoring of home education includes a focus on how their pastoral needs and wellbeing needs might be met as well as their social and leisure needs.  Bereavement support for the siblings 3.23 A final key issue is that one consequence of the siblings being home educated was that there was no process for overseeing their needs for bereavement support in the immediate aftermath of mother’s death and over time. The GP offered father counselling for the siblings, but he said they did not need this support. The siblings had no contact with any other professional to discuss this. The siblings have since highlighted their need for support after the death of their mother. Their circumstances highlight the importance of pastoral care needs in the home education monitoring process and establishing whether in a hospital setting there is a need for a pathway more generally for planning bereavement care for the children of bereaved parents. This pathway does not currently exist.       16  4.  Conclusion 4.1 This CSPR has focused on the significant abuse, neglect and cruelty of these siblings by their father. He has appropriately received a custodial sentence and the police and justice services are to be congratulated on their hard work in achieving this. The bravery of the siblings was central to this and they are to be applauded for this. 4.2 The siblings were not known to many professionals because they were electively home educated. This was a successful arrangement for them when their mother was alive. This CSPR raises the importance of oversight of home educated children who may be at increased risk because they are not necessarily routinely seen by professionals. The national guidance proposes a proportionate approach to monitoring home education, considering the parents who make appropriate, child-centred decisions for their children and for whom good quality education is provided. The home education service interpreted this proportionate approach as limiting the ability of professionals to act. It is important that going forward the message is provided that the home education guidance needs to be viewed as co-existing with safeguarding guidance and legislation. This also requires existing systems to support staff to do this and existing systems to have the capacity to do so. There is now a system in place where home education teachers are able to access regular safeguarding supervision. This was not in place at the time and left the home education teacher role as one which was isolated. 4.3 The siblings were known to the voluntary sector who were not aware of the harm they were experiencing. It is effective practice that the corporate anti-fraud officer noticed these children and made sure they were known to appropriate agencies.  4.4 When the siblings told their extended family about the abuse, swift action was taken to safeguard them. This was effective practice. There was also appropriate action taken by the Local Authority Designated Officer (LADO) to consider whether father might pose a risk to other children   17  5. Recommendations 1. The local safeguarding children partnership should raise awareness of the importance of the identification of elected home educated children and the need for them to be registered across all agencies including education providers, the broader health economy, and private and voluntary sectors.   2. The local home education policy should be refreshed to explicitly focus on child-centred practices and taking account of the findings of the two recent local CSPRs, the 2019 national guidance, the interplay between elective home education and children missing from education. The refresh of this local guidance should consider the role of MASH for home educated children and a recognition of the possible impairment of needs or significant harm risks that arise from a lack of an appropriate education, social isolation, lack of pastoral care and little oversight by professionals.   3. The local safeguarding children partnership should make a recommendation to the National Panel to complete a thematic review of serious case reviews, rapid reviews and CSPRs that relate to home educated children. The local safeguarding children partnership should also recommend to the National Panel that a statutory register is created for electively home educated children.   4. Local partners should consider the existing pathways to bereavement support for the children of terminally ill parents, highlight any gaps and seek ways for them to be addressed.     