Aims and Provisions of the 2004 Children’s Act

Aims and Provisions of the 2004 electric shaverrens affectThe Childrens personation 2004The Childrens piece introduced in 2004 aimed to address concerns rough the protection of squirtren. As such(prenominal)(prenominal), to a signifi movet extent it built on the commissariat of the 1989 Childrens Act. preceding(prenominal) all, the main motivation for establishing a new subprogram relating to electric shaverren was a series of high profiled cases involving abuse against young children. Moreover, many people snarl that the provisions of the 1989 act failed to fully unite the various distinguishable organisations that are heterogeneous in the protection of children.1The purpose of this essay is to examine the aims and provisions of the 2004 Childrens Act. Above all, we will see that the 2004 act aimed to bring ab bug out a series of changes that would allow for great cooperation betwixt various diametrical agencies and organisations. This change has also taken place a cross the wide ordinary area of kind policy in Britain. The name given to this outgrowth of greater cooperation is collaborative partnerships.2 The idea stooge this new initiative is that if differing groups involved in social service provision execution together whence in that respect will be greater possibilities for safeguarding the security and interests of children. However, before I go into detail on this subject let us front examine the reasons and cases that brought to the highest degree the 2004 Childrens Act.Ultimately, the aim of the 2004 Childrens Act was to figure on the previous legislation passed in 1989 and further the possibilities for effective child protection. However, another further motivating factor was the murder of capital of Seychelles Climbie in 2000. Nine-year-old Victoria was abused and murdered by her guardians in her London home. The universal and media outcry following the case was enormous. Furthermore, it was widely felt that the case ha d highlighted safe problems within the children protection service. Above all, it was felt that different agencies had failed to act in unison in the months and years prior to Victorias murder. As such, a series of new ideas and approaches were adopted towards the protection of children.3This new beseech to provide reveal and more effective protection cigarette be seen in the form of two moves. Firstly, the establishment of the Every Child Matters programme and secondly the passing of the 2004 Childrens Act. Every Child Matters was launched in 2003 and aimed to get word that all children regardless of the financial or social background would be able to achieve their full potential in life.4 Furthermore, Every Child Matters was set up in an attempt to allow for greater cooperation between varying agencies and organisations involved with children. The setting up of Every Child Matters was a prelude aimed at laying the basis for the Childrens Act of 2004. The Children Act itself aimed to put in place a legal frame micturate, which would provide better protection for children and greater levels of efficiency in the organisations charged with child protection. topical anaesthetic anaesthetic authorities were to receive more support and advice on how to carry out better service for children. There were also changes to the law with regard treasure homes, caring and babysitting services, and adoption services. However, although all these issues are very of the essence(p) provisions within the act, the ultimate purpose was to create far greater levels of cooperation and multi dominance action in relation to the protection of children.5Above all, the Victoria Climbie case had highlighted the extent to which there was little cooperation between different agencies in terms of child protection. Furthermore, it was now realised that there were a bulky number of organisations and agencies that could play a role in child protection. Naturally, local authority chil d protection services were seen as the most heavy agency. However, it was clearly vital that child protection services needed to bring in in close collaboration with other agencies. Therefore, agencies such as the police, schoolhouse authorities, social services, doctors and charity organisations now all work together in order to provide better protection for vulnerable children. Because each agency has a unique role to play in relation to children it is hoped that such collaborative partnerships will produce better services for children.6 For example, if a social player feels that a particular child is in possible danger, they can call upon the expertise and opinion of a variety of other professionals such as the childs schoolteacher or doctor. Therefore, with everyone working together for same purpose possible problems can be highlighted and dealt with in a much more effective manner.Now although the 2004 act and Every Children Matters has brought about significant changes to the way in which child protection services operate, there have nonetheless been serious problems. For example, it is sometimes difficult to bring different agencies together in combination when they have previously not worked in collaboration.7 Also, different agencies may have very different ways of brain a particular situation, such as that of a social worker compared to a police officer. Very recently such problems have been highlighted in the form of another tragic and horrible case. The case of baby P shows above all the extent to which collaboration between multi agency organisations can break down with terrible consequences. Doctors, police and social services failed to work together effectively enough to protect baby P and thence the case shows the possible problems that could continue in the future.In conclusion, the main reasons behind the 2004 Childrens Act have been discussed. Above all, it is clear that both the act and the Every Child Matters initiative came about be cause of perceived failings within the child protection service as highlighted in the case of Victoria Climbie. Above all, government has attempted to enact a system whereby agencies involved with children work in collaboration to achieve better levels of protection. However, although such moves are positive degree the case of baby P highlights the extent to which there are simmer down serious problems. Ultimately, it will take a considerable time for such moves to work effectively.Cree, Viviane and Myers, Steve. sociable Work making a difference, Bristol Policy, 2008.Sheldon, Brian and Macdonald, Geraldine. A text of Social Work, London Routledge, 2008.UK Government, Every Child Matters exchange for Children, Childrens Act 2004 guidance on the duty to cooperate http//www.everychildmatters.gov.uk/strategy/guidance/, sequence accessed, 01/01/2009.UK Government, Every Child Matters Change for Children, Aims and Outcomes, http//www.everychildmatters.gov.uk/aims/, date accessed, 01 /01/2009.1Footnotes1 Brian Sheldon, and Geraldine Macdonald. A textual matter of Social Work, London Routledge, 2008, p. 96.2 Ibid. p.25.3 Vivienne Cree, and Steve Myers. Social Work making a difference, Bristol Policy, 2008, p. 103.4 UK Government, Every Child Matters Change for Children, Aims and Outcomes, http//www.everychildmatters.gov.uk/aims/, date accessed, 01/01/2009.5 UK Government, Every Child Matters Change for Children, Childrens Act 2004 guidance on the duty to cooperate6 Cree and Myers, Social Work, 2008, p.113.7 Ibid, p.116.