Doubt on rules ends bid for sex abuse inquiry

Doubt on rules ends bid for sex abuse inquiry

(2) View gallery

8th May 2017 / Stephen Naysmith, Social affairs correspondent

SCOTLAND’S social care watchdog has refused to take action against a worker who failed to protect a child from abuse in the 1980s because it says it does not know what the rules were at the time.

The Scottish Social Services Council (SSSC), which registers and regulates social care workers, has told Richard Tracey it will not take his case further, because there is no record of how social workers employed by Strathclyde Regional Council were expected to respond to child abuse, while he was in care.

Officially, the SSSC says there is insufficient evidence to pursue 49-year-old Mr Tracey’s claims about the abuse he suffered from the age of five when he was placed in a large Ayrshire foster family by Kilmarnock social services.

This is despite evidence in notes by Hugh Quinn, the social worker responsible throughout his time in care. These show Mr Quinn regularly dismissed Mr Tracey’s complaints about abuse, described him as attention seeking, and apparently failed to investigate claims of sexual abuse.

The SSSC said it was required to prove not just the facts of an allegation against a worker but “that what the worker did or did not do fell short of the standard expected of a reasonable worker in the same circumstances”.

In a letter to Mr Tracey last week, SSSC solicitor Iain Martin told him the regulator would have to prove what the standard expected of social workers at the time was, and then that Mr Quinn’s actions fell below this. He added: “We have been unable to obtain policies or procedures in place during the period in question. There was no statutory or governmental child protection guidance available at the time either.”

In a separate letter to Mr Quinn, who still works as a social worker in Ayrshire, Mr Martin said “we have decided that your fitness to practise is not impaired”.

Mr Tracey said the decision had left him furious, adding: “It is all about protecting the establishment. It appears what happened to me is OK because there were no guidelines to say that it wasn’t.”

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: