Perceived barriers to full participation by general practitioners in the child protection process: preliminary conclusions from focus group discussions in West Midlands, UK

Abstract

of Birmingham, UK S u m m a r y Focus group discussions were undertaken amongst five primay health care teams in the West Midlands in order to explore and define issues relevant to the participation by general practitioners in the child protection process. It was found thar general practitbners were uncertain of what was prekdy required of them in this respect and that child protection work was a source of significant anxiety for them. It would appear that in many instances, the lead role for child protection work within the team was delegated by default to health nniiron who fiequendy represented the views of general pracritioners at child proteerion case conferences. General pactithers acknowledged their unmet training nee& in child protection and expressed a preference for practice based, multidisciplina y, clinicd!'entated seminars. It is recommended that the role of g w a l practitioners in this area is more accurately defined and that fresh approaches to their training are initiated Commitment on the part of general practitioners to the guiding prinCipleJ of the child pmtection process is essenrial to ensure the protection of children from abuse. The importance of child protection as an essential issue for primay care must be recognised by all those who have a responsibility for the training and continual medical education of general practitioners.

Child protection issues: An audit of general practitioners in a primary care trust

“…It is possible that the responders included GPs with relatively better knowledge and awareness of child protection issues than nonresponders. Taking this potential bias into consideration, it is alarming that the results indicate that GP knowledge of child protection has improved little since Bannon et al's surveys and training needs analysis of GPs in vocational training programmes, which identified unmet child protection training needs (Bannon et al, 1999a(Bannon et al, , 1999bBannon and Carter, 2001). These authors commented that training in child abuse and neglect was not considered to represent a priority in general practice vocational training schemes.…”

Teams in Child Welfare Settings: Interprofessional and Collaborative Processes

“…Clarity in team roles and expectations has also been suggested as contributing to effectiveness (Bannon, Carter, & Ross, 1999;Hardy & Conway, 1988;Lowe & Herranen, 1978, 1981Mellor & Lindeman, 1998;Miller, Fein, Bishop, & Murray, 1985;Schofield & Amodeo, 1999;Taylor & Tilley, 1990;Temkin-Greener, 1983). Abramson (1990) points out that role competition is an often discussed obstacle to effective teamwork, and suggests that team members may have reduced motivation for team participation because performance evaluation and continuing professional education are located in each profession, rather than within the team.…”

A Matter of Professional Status: The Impact of Medical Hierarchies on Child Maltreatment Work

“…It has also been shown that nurses and physicians feel unsure when identifying child maltreatment [4][5][6][7][8][9] and feel unsure about the level of evidence required and fear making a report [3,9,10]. Other barriers to reporting have been linked to emotions such as anxiety, uncertainty and stress [4,9,[11][12][13]. A lack of education and training among health care professionals is a repeated concern [3,6,7], and one study [11] found that general practitioners had received little training in child abuse issues compared with social workers.…”

“…Other barriers to reporting have been linked to emotions such as anxiety, uncertainty and stress [4,9,[11][12][13]. A lack of education and training among health care professionals is a repeated concern [3,6,7], and one study [11] found that general practitioners had received little training in child abuse issues compared with social workers.…”