NYSCP

Managing Different Professional Perspectives and Mutual Challenge

(Including Professionals Resolution Guide)

Practice guidance

Introduction

This practice guidance is for all professionals, practitioners and volunteers working with children, young people, parents, carers, and adults with care and support needs. It should be read in conjunction with Professional Curiosity Practice Guidance

This guide aims to support practitioners, professionals, and volunteers with an effective means of exploring different professional perspectives, addressing differing opinions and is supportive of professional and respectful challenge. Respectful challenge should be viewed by all agencies as a positive activity that places the primary focus on the safety and well being of children and adults. In doing this, the child and adult remain at the centre of effective safeguarding practice

Working Together to Safeguard Children (2023) references that strong multi-agency and multi-disciplinary working is vital to identifying and responding to the needs of children and families. Highlighted in the expectations developed to underpin this muti-agency working the document calls on those who are involved with direct practice demonstrate ‘Mutual challenge’ where practitioners challenge themselves and each other, question each other’s assumptions, and seek to resolve differences of opinion in a restorative and respectful way.

When working in the safeguarding arena, all professionals are encouraged to explore and remain curious to different professional perspectives, whilst listening to the view and opinions of the children, young people, families and adults that are being supported. This provides the opportunity to develop rich conversations and relationships based on seeing and developing strengths whilst gaining a full and deep understating of the lives of the people we are working with.

There may be times where, through exploring different professional perspectives, there are differences of opinion, disagreements and levels of challenge. Embedding a ‘positive culture of mutual challenge’ within and between professionals provides opportunities to learn from one another, and often take a wider view of multiple perspectives, which is fundamental to effective partnership working .

The safety and wellbeing of anyone who is being supported by an agency or organisation (be that a child, young person, family or adult with care and support needs) must be always the paramount consideration and professional differences of perspectives must not detract from timely and clear decision making.

It is the responsibility of all practitioners to act assertively and proactively to initiate a challenge to actions, inaction or the decisions made by other agencies where they believe there is evidence to suggest that the health, development, well-being, safety or rights of a child or adult may be compromised.

When might disagreements or difference of opinion arise?

• Where professionals disagree with the action of another in relation to a particular course of action, such as ending involvement with a child, their family or adult with care and support needs.
• Where one worker or agency considers that another worker or agency has not completed an agreed action for no understandable or acceptable reason.

• Where one agency considers that the threshold for action is inappropriate to support the needs of a child or adult with care and support needs and /or places an individual at further risk.

• A disagreement as to whether a particular agency needs to be involved in the safeguarding process.

• Where a member of staff or an agency considers that the safeguarding needs of the child or adult with care and support needs are better met by a Child Protection Plan/Adult Safeguarding Plan and have requested that a Child Protection Conference/Safeguarding Meeting be called and feel that this has been refused.

• Where a range of professionals have concerns about an agency’s response to safeguarding concerns relating to a specific child or adult with care and support needs.

• There is disagreement over the sharing of information and/or provision of services.

Sometimes in Adults Services, there are disagreements about whether a person has the capacity to make a particular decision. Where there are disagreements about the capacity assessment these can be undertaken jointly; undertaken again by someone who is more experienced at capacity assessments; and ultimately referred to the court of protection to make a decision. All efforts must be made to help the person make the decision for themselves e.g., via education programmes, using different tools etc. Only after establishing that a person lacks capacity should a “best interest” decision be made.

This is not an exhaustive list and disagreements or differences of opinion can arise for any number of reasons.

Key Principles

Professionals working with children, families and adults with care and support needs should work together across all agencies. Information must be shared appropriately in line with national and local guidance (for NYSCP follow: NYSCP (safeguardingchildren.co.uk), for NYSAB follow: NYSAB (safeguardingadults.co.uk).

All partner agencies must adopt a proactive approach towards exploring multiple perspectives, sharing disagreements or difference of opinion which enables professional conversations to take place as quickly as possible.

Actions should always be based on a robust assessment of the risk of harm and the impact of the given situation on the persons wellbeing. The assessment should be based on a clear understanding of what is happening, using skills of professional curiosity and taking into account the opinions of all involved (in particular the person themselves).

The timescales identified within this document are practice guidance and refer to the maximum timescale’s agencies should follow. In some cases, it may be necessary for action to be taken sooner to protect a child, young person or adult with care and support needs. Timescales should not be a reason for delaying action.

If a person is thought to be at immediate risk of harm the designated safeguarding lead within the agency identifying the concern should be informed immediately and the appropriate safeguarding procedures are followed.

For a child: NYSCP (safeguardingchildren.co.uk)

For any adult with care or support needs: NYSAB (safeguardingadults.co.uk)

Raising disagreements and sharing differences of opinion

In the first instance if a professional feels there is a disagreement or difference of opinion that requires further exploration this should be shared and discussed between the professionals concerned. It is helpful to consider the following:

Before the conversation:

Plan the discussion in advance to ensure there is enough time to cover the essential elements of the conversation.
Review the information you have, is it complete and accurate? Can you find out more to develop a deeper understanding?
Be clear and unambiguous about what you would like to discuss, with a clear agenda of what topics you would like to cover.
Consider what you would like the outcome of the conversation to be? What would you like to achieve? Don’t think of the people involved in the conversation being ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ but of having different perspectives that need to be explored in order to achieve the best outcome for the person being supported.
Build evidence to support your line of reasoning.
Be prepared to listen to the views and opinions of the person you are having the conversation with, consider why they have a different perspective; form what context this has come from, and what evidence that have gathered to build it.
Be prepared to challenge and be reflective your own thinking throughout the context of the conversation.

During the conversation

Ensure that the focus and outcomes of the conversation remains solely on the best outcome for the child or adult with support needs.
Be mindful of language – remain non-confrontational and do not lay blame or consider different perspectives to be ‘right’ or ‘wrong’.
Show empathy, consideration and compassion, be real and honest and share any ‘gut feelings’ you may have and why you feel you may have them.
Demonstrate ‘congruence’ and make sure your tone, body language and speech are consistent and empathic.
Have empathy and ‘walk in the shoes’ of the person to consider the situation from their experience. Be prepared to listen and be open to viewing the information from a different lens.
Don’t be afraid to ‘ask the obvious’ to gain a deeper understanding of the perspectives of the person you are speaking with.
Remember that you both share the same aims and goals to seek the best welfare outcomes for the child or adult with care and support needs.
Remain professionally curious is the conversation; is there more you both need to find out to support your thinking? Could there be an alternative perspective or ‘hypotheses’ to consider.
Consider the conversation as an opportunity to learn, explore other ideas and hypothesis and develop the best plan in partnership to support the child or adult.
Ensure that you are considering the views of the child and adult with care and support needs as part of your conversation.
Agree on an outcome or actions. It may be that this is to agree to disagree at this time and progress the conversation through the professional resolutions process further.

After the conversation

Record your discussion and conclusions.
Follow up on any actions or information you need to gather as a result of the conversation.
Take some time to reflect on the conversation and what you have learned and take forward into further practice.

Process for Professional Resolutions

The people involved in the disagreement should see the professional challenge as an opportunity for learning and increasing understanding to ensure the child or adult receives the best response, thereby viewing this as a positive process. It is therefore vital that disagreements are not allowed to adversely affect the outcomes for children or adults at risk/in need of services. Professional disagreement is only dysfunctional if it is not resolved in a constructive and timely way. Difficulties at practitioner level between agencies should be resolved as simply and quickly as possible between the practitioners concerned. If this is unsuccessful, the challenging agency should communicate that this protocol will be implemented.

The below protocol provides a process for resolving professional disagreements between agencies.

The NYSCP and NYSAB Professional Resolutions process is set within seven stages. The table below identifies the actions at each stage of the process, who is responsible at each stage and timescales for completing actions. Please note that the process should be taken in accordance with individual organisational managerial structure.

Stage	Action	Owner	Timescale
1	A professional from an agency involved with the child or adult is unhappy with a decision, response, action or inaction from any agency and this has been discussed between the agencies concerned. All potential informal steps to resolve this should have been attempted prior to implementing this escalation policy.	Professional from referring agency	Seek to resolve within 24 to 96 hrs.
2	The professional discusses the decision with their Line Manager. The line manager ensures that these conversations are recorded in line with their own supervision/ information sharing policies this will ensure a clear record of the original dispute is held which may support the ongoing resolution process.	Professional from the concerned agency and Line Manager	Immediate once discussion has taken place
3	The Line Manager in the agency raising the concern liaises with the named or Designated Safeguarding Lead within their agency who will discuss the concern with the Line Manager of the decision maker in the receiving agency.	Line Manager in agency raising a concern. Named or Designated Safeguarding Lead Line Manager of Decision Maker in Receiving Agency	Within a maximum of 10 working days from the date of referral or the disputed decision or action or in a timescale which keeps the child safe, whichever is the sooner.
4	If the Designated Safeguarding Lead is unable to resolve the matter with the Line Manager of the receiving agency, the matter should be escalated to the next most senior person in the line management hierarchy (for both agencies concerned).	Designated Safeguarding Lead of Referring Agency	The timescale for resolution should still be within 10 working days.
5	Step 5 should only be initiated when there has been no resolution using steps 1-4 The Designated Safeguarding Lead for the concerned agency makes a referral directly to: For Children’s Cases: The Independent Chair of the North Yorkshire Safeguarding Children Partnership (NYSCP) via the NYSCP Business Manager For Adult’s Cases: The North Yorkshire Safeguarding Adult’s Board (NYSAB) Manager	Designated Safeguarding Lead of Referring Agency	Within one working day of the discussion detailed in step 4.
6	A multi-agency panel convened	NYSCP Business Unit Manager / NYSAB Business Unit Manager	Within 3 working days of the issue being raised with the NYSCP Chair or NYSAB Business Manager (no longer than 13 working days from the point of disagreement being raised)
7	The panel will consider all information gathered in the course of the dispute and make recommendations about how the matter can be resolved.	Escalation Panel	Within Meeting (no longer than 13 working days from the point of disagreement being raised) and take no more than 48 hours.

Following Resolution

To avoid similar professional conflicts arising again, amendments may be required to local protocols and procedures. For NYSCP this would be reported and considered in the Practice and Learning Subgroup, for NYSAB this would be reported and considered in the Learning and Review Subgroup.

Updated 16 September 2024