Child Protection Supervision Policy

Child Protection Supervision provides a reflective, supportive space focused on developing professional judgement, promoting critical thinking and learning, and strengthening safe and effective child protection practice.

Child Protection Supervision is integral to practitioners taking care of themselves and enabling them to reflect on their practice and involvement with children and families (Hawkins & Shohet, 2012).

Child Protection Supervision should provide a safe and confidential environment for discussion and reflection on the knowledge and skills informing the task, the teamwork required, and the impact of the work and engagement of the practitioner with their role (National Guidance for Child Protection in Scotland 2021; updated 2023).

Child protection supervision may be delivered on an individual (1:1) basis or within a group setting. Group supervision is intended to complement, not replace, individual supervision and both can contribute to fulfilling child protection supervision requirements. Multi-agency support and review can also provide valuable input when working with complex protection issues. In addition, informal peer supervision and support can play an important supplementary role alongside formal supervision structures.

Child Protection Supervision can help to review the understanding of a child’s situation in the light of new information, shifting circumstances or challenges to the current assessment.

Child Protection Supervision is not:

A process for managing caseloads, reviewing performance, auditing record‑keeping, or undertaking managerial oversight. It is a reflective practice space and should not be used for performance management, operational decision‑making, or administrative quality assurance

Effective Child Protection Supervision should ensure that the following standards are met:

• Supervision is provided by supervisors who have received additional training on the context, theory and practical application of
• Practitioners have the opportunity for reflection within a safe and supportive
• Supervision analyses and assesses the evidence base for decision making and actions.
• Supervision should maintain objectivity; identifying patterns, considering counter view’ and
• Practitioners are accountable and take responsibility for actions and
• Supervision should ensure that practitioners fully understand their roles, responsibilities and the scope of their professional discretion and
• Supervision can help to identify the training and development needs of practitioners, ensuring that they have the skills to provide an effective
• Practice is consistent with legislation and national and local child protection policies, procedures and guidance.
• Practice is underpinned by the values and core principles of GIRFEC

Practitioners who work regularly with children, young people, and their families, particularly where there are child protection concerns, must have opportunities to access Child Protection Supervision. All other NHS Borders practitioners involved in care or contact with children and families should also be able to access supervision when it is required (see Appendix 2).

Access to Child Protection Supervision is available through the NHS Borders

• Access to Child Protection Supervision can be established via the NHS Borders Public Protection Team (Public Protection Nurses or the Nurse Consultant for Public Protection).
  They maintain an up‑to‑date list of Child Protection Supervisors and their current capacity to provide either regular or one‑off sessions.
• Child Protection Supervision will be offered at least every four months, either individually or in group formats, to support reflective practice.
• More frequent supervision can be arranged where needed, through discussion between the supervisor and supervisee, or through agreement with the Public Protection Nursing team.

Supervisor Responsibilities

• Child Protection Supervisors are also expected to access supervision for themselves, recognising the importance of reflective support in safeguarding practice.
• Supervisors should agree the maximum number of supervisees they can support with their line manager. This should take account of their role, responsibilities, experience, and available time.
• All Child Protection Supervisors will receive initial training, along with ongoing opportunities for development, reflection, and updates to maintain safe and effective practice.

When considering whether to bring a case for Child Protection Supervision, staff should be guided by reflective practice and professional judgement. The following principles are recommended:

• Adopt a stance of professional curiosity – remain open-minded and avoid making assumptions; seek to understand the child’s lived experience.
• Identify patterns over time – consider whether concerns form part of a wider pattern, rather than viewing incidents in isolation.
• Consider the impact of trauma, adversity, and unmet need – reflect on how these factors may influence the child’s presentation, behaviour, and wellbeing.
• Reflect on your own professional response – feelings of uncertainty, discomfort, or worry can be important indicators that further reflection is required.
• Bring cases even when risk is unclear – supervision is a supportive space for exploration and reflection, not solely for high-risk or crisis situations.

Risk indicators are factors within a child’s circumstances, relationships, or environment that may signal increased vulnerability or potential harm.

The examples below outline situations where it may be helpful to bring a case to Child Protection Supervision for reflection, support, and shared decision‑making (is not exhaustive see Appendix 3 for further examples)

• Children who are currently subject to a Child Protection Plan, or who are Care‑Experienced / Looked After, particularly where there continues to be worry about their safety, wellbeing, or progress
• Children living in a household where domestic abuse, problematic substance use, or other forms of harmful conflict are present, recognising the impact this can have on emotional and physical safety
• Children living with a parent, carer, or significant adult who has a physical or mental health condition, learning difference, or disability that may affect their capacity to meet the child’s needs consistently
• Situations where a family may appear reluctant, unsure, or unable to engage with support, and where the child’s health and wellbeing needs remain unmet or outcomes are not improving
• Circumstances where there are differences of professional opinion regarding thresholds, risk, or next steps, and supervision can support shared understanding, reflection, and collaborative decision‑making
• Any indicators that a child may be at risk of exploitation, including criminal, sexual, financial, or other forms of coercion and control
• Instances where a practitioner feels a sense of concern or uncertainty about a child or young person, even if they cannot fully articulate the source of unease, and would benefit from a safe reflective space to explore and clarify these feelings

It is important not to select cases for discussion solely on Child Protection Status as this is too static a view of risk of harm.

Further guidance to support the analysis and assessment of risk can be found in the National Risk Framework to Support the Assessment of Children and Young People (2012) and Scottish Borders Keeping Children Safe and Well Tool; these documents would also be helpful to use in preparation Child Protection Supervision.

Child Protection Supervision is grounded in the principle that practitioners bring valuable skills, experience, and professional judgement to their work. Supervision supports staff to build on these strengths while maintaining clear accountability for their own practice and decisions. Practitioners continue to work in line with their professional standards, codes of conduct, and organisational responsibilities.

Staff who have regular involvement with children and young people where child protection concerns are present, or may emerge, are encouraged to participate in Child Protection Supervision at least every four months. This provides an opportunity to reflect, seek support, and strengthen safe and effective practice.

Practitioners should also complete Scottish Borders Public Protection training that aligns with their role and responsibilities to ensure they remain skilled and well‑supported in safeguarding work (including Adult Support and Protection).

Child Protection Supervision does not replace or delay an individual practitioner’s responsibility to make a child protection referral to police or social work if they have a concern that a child or young person may be suffering or likely to suffer significant harm. In such cases staff should refer to Scottish Borders Child Protection Procedures (via NHSB intranet).

Line managers are responsible for:

• Ensuring practitioners understand their responsibilities to protect children and young people, and are aware of relevant policies, procedures, and professional expectations.
• Identifying which staff require Child Protection Supervision as a mandatory element of their role, based on the level and frequency of child protection involvement.
• Providing protected time for staff to participate in Child Protection Supervision and ensuring that supervision is prioritised within workload planning.
• Supporting trained supervisors, including enabling them to deliver supervision, attend peer‑support groups, and access training updates needed to maintain competence and confidence.
• Monitoring and evidencing that Child Protection Supervision is taking place, in line with organisational standards and governance requirements.

Child Protection Supervisors are responsible for;

Child Protection Supervisors are responsible for creating a safe, reflective, and supportive supervision environment that promotes high‑quality, child‑centred practice. Their responsibilities include:

• Agreeing and completing a Child Protection Supervision contract with the supervisee, outlining shared expectations and ways of working (Appendix 4)
• Providing supervision in a calm, private, and uninterrupted space, whether meeting in person or via Microsoft Teams, to ensure psychological safety and meaningful reflection.
• Facilitating thoughtful, reflective discussions that help the supervisee develop a deeper understanding of the child’s circumstances, consider risk and resilience, and identify clear, achievable plans or actions. This includes using curious, open, and non‑judgemental questions
• Maintaining a strong child‑centred focus throughout the session, ensuring the child’s voice, lived experience, and wellbeing remain central to exploration and planning.
• Offering clear, accountable advice and guidance, grounded in legislation, policy, best practice, and professional experience.
• Addressing any concerns about competence or practice openly and supportively, discussing these with the supervisee during the session and, where significant or unresolved issues remain, bringing them to the attention of the supervisee’s line manager.
• Encouraging supervisees to discuss workload pressures, wellbeing concerns, or system issues that may be affecting their ability to deliver safe, effective care, and supporting them to raise these with their line manager.
• Recognising and reinforcing good practice, highlighting strengths, professional growth, and effective decision‑making.
• Accessing regular Child Protection Supervision for themselves, and seeking additional guidance or consultation when needed, in recognition of the emotional and cognitive demands of safeguarding work.
• Maintaining and developing their own knowledge and skills related to Child Protection Supervision, including attending required training, updates, and ongoing professional learning opportunities (Appendix 3).

Supervisees are responsible for;

Supervisees play an active role in creating a meaningful, reflective, and child‑centred supervision process. Their responsibilities include:

• Arranging Child Protection Supervision within the required timescales, ensuring regular opportunities for reflection and support.
• Agreeing and signing a Child Protection Supervision Contract (Appendix 4), clarifying expectations, roles, and shared commitments to safe practice.
• Preparing for supervision by identifying relevant cases and completing the Record of Discussion template in advance (Appendix 5), to support thoughtful and structured reflection.
• Recording in the child’s health record that Child Protection Supervision has taken place, including any agreed actions, plans, or considerations arising from the session.
• Informing their line manager that they are participating in Child Protection Supervision.
• Discussing workload pressures, wellbeing concerns, or other factors that may affect service delivery with their team leader or line manager, recognising the importance of practitioner wellbeing in safeguarding children.
• Practising in accordance with all relevant national and local child protection policies, procedures, training and guidance, and ensuring that supervision informs safe, consistent, and child‑centred decision‑making.

Section 2: Process for Child Protection Supervision

Introduction

Child Protection Supervision will use a guided reflective model, such as Kolb’s experiential learning cycle (as adapted by Morrison, 2005) or the Hackett (2003) model, to support practitioners and supervisors in thinking deeply about the child’s circumstances, the family context, and professional decision making.

These models help to create a structured space that promotes understanding, curiosity, and safe planning. Other models that can be used are available in Appendix 4.

Reflective supervision will support practitioners to explore:

• Clarity around the presenting information and key issues, ensuring a shared understanding of what is known, what is unclear, and what requires further exploration.
• Identification of the child’s health and wellbeing needs, with a strong emphasis on the child’s lived experience and voice.
• Consideration of parental or carer health factors—including physical health, mental health, substance use, and learning needs—that may influence their capacity to parent safely and consistently.
• Analysis of strengths, protective factors, adversities, and risks, including their actual or potential impact on the unborn baby, child, or young person.
• Development of clear, proportionate, and achievable action plans, alongside monitoring arrangements to support effective intervention.
• Reflection on good practice, identifying professional strengths, decision making, and areas for further development
• Learning from colleagues in group supervision settings, recognising the value of shared perspectives and collective expertise.

Effective Child Protection Supervision depends on open, respectful, and honest communication between supervisor and supervisee. Both parties share responsibility for building a safe, reflective environment that supports:

• Joint planning of the supervision process
• Thoughtful implementation of agreed actions
• Ongoing evaluation of the supervision experience

To enable this, both supervisor and supervisee should prepare in advance, and sessions should be held in a setting virtual or face to face, that is private, calm, and free from interruptions.

A contract should be established between the supervisor and supervisee (individual and group) (see Appendix 4).

Three elements of the supervisory agreement include;

• Administrative
• Professional
• Psychological

                            (Wonnacott 2009)

This will provide a secure framework to support the relationship between supervisor/supervisee(s) to progress in an open and honest way. It will enable the supervisor and supervisee to achieve mutual understanding and responsibility.

• Supervision meetings should be arranged in
• The session should be mutually agreed between supervisor and supervisee(s).
• The agenda may include:
  • Case Discussions of children and families causing concern (ensure a realistic number of cases discussed within the time permitted).
  • Issues related to the workplace involving child protection
  • Issues related to partnership working with staff involved in child protection
  • Formulation of plans
  • Outcome
  • Agreeing date, time, and venue for next session

Child Protection Supervision, including any outcomes and agreed actions relating to ongoing and future work with the child, carer, or family, must be recorded in the child’s EMIS record using the “Significant Event” function.

Child Protection case supervision is a confidential process between the health practitioner and the supervisor. However, confidentiality is not a barrier if it is considered, after discussion, that the threshold for significant harm has been reached. In these cases staff must follow NHS Borders Child Protection Procedures and a referral must be made to Children and Families social work.

There should be regular review by both supervisor and supervisee of the extent to which sessions are continuing to achieve the objectives of child protection supervision.

There may be times when a supervisee feels they would benefit from working with a different supervisor. This can happen for a range of professional or personal reasons and should be understood as a normal part of reflective practice. When a change is requested, this should be acknowledged without judgement and facilitated in a timely and supportive way.

If the supervisor has concerns about the supervisee’s competence and practice that could increase the risks for the child and family then the supervisor has the responsibility to raise their concerns with the supervisee. The decision whether the supervisee’s line manager should be involved should be discussed between supervisor and supervisee. If the matter cannot be resolved the difficulties must be discussed with a member of the NHSB Public Protection Team who will have the responsibility to seek a resolution.

If there is concern about the supervisee’s competence and practice and the line manager is involved, then issues such as development of knowledge and skills or handover of the case to an appropriate practitioner might be considered.

Potential involvement of the supervisee’s line manager should be negotiated between the supervisor and supervisee when the Child Protection Supervision Contract (Appendix 3) is completed.

Team Leaders have an essential role in monitoring compliance with Child Protection Supervision requirements, ensuring that practitioners are accessing supervision within agreed timescales and that supervision adherence records are completed appropriately.

They are responsible for providing local oversight, supporting practitioners to engage in child protection supervision, and addressing any barriers to participation, including workload pressures or wellbeing concerns.

Team Leaders should regularly review supervision activity of their team.

The Child Protection Supervisors Group will meet on a six monthly basis to provide collective oversight, shared learning, and continued development of the supervision framework.

The group will:

• Explore themes and patterns emerging from supervision practice, including strengths, areas of concern, and opportunities for service improvement.
• Identify training and development needs for supervisors, helping to ensure consistent, confident, and high‑quality child protection supervision across NHS Borders.
• Monitor compliance with Child Protection Supervision policy, supporting assurance, governance, and the ongoing refinement of processes to promote safe and effective practice

The NHS Public Protection Team will include information on Child Protection Supervision compliance within the annual Public Protection report to the NHS Executive Board.

This supports assurance and governance arrangements, ensuring that organisational responsibilities for safe and effective child protection practice are met.

Sources of advice, information, support and supervision in relation to child protection activities

• Informal discussion/peer support with colleagues
• Formal, planned group meetings with colleagues
• NHSB Public Protection Team (01896 664580)
• Contact with colleagues from partner agencies
• One-to-one clinical supervision
• One-to-one child protection supervision
• Group Supervision

Provision of Child Protection Supervision

Considering a Case for Discussion within Child Protection Supervision

Purpose

This guide is designed to support clinical staff in identifying when it may be helpful to bring a child or family to Child Protection supervision. It is not an exhaustive list, but it reflects current legislation, research, and good practice to support reflective, safe, and consistent decision‑making.

It is good practice for any child or case linked to the areas below is considered for discussion.

This does not mean a discussion must take place—only that reflective consideration has occurred.

When to Consider a Case for Discussion

 A case may benefit from being discussed in Child Protection supervision when there are concerns related to the child’s safety, wellbeing, development, or the family’s ability to engage with support. The following indicators can help guide decision‑making.

Concerns relating to potential harm

• Indicators of possible abuse or neglect, including concerns linked to extra‑familial harm
• Situations where a child may be at increased risk due to exploitation, trafficking, radicalisation, or harmful cultural practices (e.g., FGM, forced marriage, honour‑based violence)
• Children who frequently go missing from home or care

Patterns of engagement and interaction

• Limited or inconsistent engagement with services, including missed appointments or frequent cancellations
• Behaviour that may suggest superficial compliance, avoidance, or resistance that makes assessment difficult
• The young person showing reduced motivation or ability to engage with support

Health‑related concerns

• Challenges in following medical advice or treatment plans, including the use of equipment or medication
• Health needs that remain unmet or where there is no clear improvement in outcomes
• A child presenting with symptoms or needs that appear unexplained or inconsistent (perplexing presentations)
• Concerns related to developmental or health neglect

Education and developmental needs

• Indicators of educational neglect, including poor attendance or lack of engagement with learning
• Persistent concerns where developmental or wellbeing outcomes remain static

Complex presentations and uncertainty

• Cases that feel complex, confusing, or difficult to assess
• Situations where there is “drift,” meaning limited progress despite ongoing support or actions
• Children who experience multiple changes in caregivers, addresses, or living arrangements
• Children privately fostered or cared for by a range of adults

Family, environmental and contextual factors

• Family circumstances that may impact on a child’s emotional or physical safety, such as:
  • parental mental health challenges
  • problematic alcohol or substance use
  • parental learning difficulties
  • involvement in criminal activity
• Children living with or regularly seeing someone linked to domestic abuse (as victim or perpetrator)
• Families experiencing poverty or significant social stressors
• Children who have recently returned to parental care or whose social work involvement has recently ended

Young carers

• Children carrying caring responsibilities that may affect their wellbeing, safety, development, or access to opportunities

Behavioural or risk indicators

• Children showing signs of being drawn into anti‑social or criminal behaviour, including gang involvement
• Children using drugs or alcohol in ways that could increase their vulnerability
• Noticeable changes in the child’s behaviour, mood, self‑presentation, or interactions that raise concern

Models to support Child Protection Supervision

Applying the Cognitive Continuum to safeguarding supervision (adapted from Hammond, 1996).

• The environment in which Child Protection professionals make decisions can be dynamic and unpredictable. Additionally, the information available can be incomplete and/or assumptive.
  
  
• Practitioners and their supervisors cannot either solely rely upon their intuitive judgement or their analytical judgement to inform decision making.
  
  
• They may be more likely to oscillate between the two ends at different stages of the decision-making process.
  
  
• The decision-making process itself will be influenced by (i) the situation at hand, (ii) the cues and patterns recognised, (iii) the time and resources available, and (iv) the availability and reliability of information.
  
  
• Supervisors, with their supervisees, to consider is the mode of thinking commensurate with the nature of the task. For example, if a decision needs to be made about a threshold (of harm to a child) is the supervisee too reliant upon intuitive/quasi-intuitive reasoning and therefore needing to spend more time in the rational/analytical areas?

Kolb Supervisory Cycle Exercise

Focusing on Experience

Here the emphasis is on facilitating an accurate and detailed recall of events since a partial description of the situation will undermine the rest of the cycle. We can be assisted to recall more than we think we know if the right questions are asked.

• How do you see your role in this case?
• How do you think others (professionals and family) see your role?
• What did you expect to happen when you visited?
• What happened?
• What reactions did you notice to what you said/did?
• What surprised or puzzled you?
• What struck you? What were the key moments?
• What words, non-verbal communication, smells, sounds, images struck you?
• What did you notice about yourself/the service user/your co-worker?
• What was hard to observe?
• What went according to plan? What didn’t happen?
• What changes or choices did you make?
• What did you say, notice or do immediately after the event?

These questions can be enhanced by using other methods, such as video or audio recording, observation, live supervision, learning diaries, incident logs or process recordings. Genograms might also be helpful at this point.

Focusing on Reflection

Here the emphasis is on eliciting feelings, partly because they bring out further information, or may reveal our underlying attitudes and assumptions. They may also give clues to other personal factors complicating the worker’s experience. Reflection helps the worker make links between the current situation and his/her prior experiences, skills and knowledge.

• What feelings did you bring into the session?
• What is your gut feeling about this family?
• Describe the range of feelings you had in the session.
• What did the session/your feelings/this family remind you of?
• What previous work, processes, skills, knowledge are relevant here?
• Where have you encountered similar processes?

• What assumptions might you be making? For example assumptions related to race, age, gender, sexuality.
• Does this situation challenge your feelings about acceptable/unacceptable behaviour?

• Where and when did you feel most or least comfortable?
• What feelings were you left with – does this always happen after seeing these kinds of cases?
• What metaphor or analogy would you describe your experiences of working with this situation?
• What was left unfinished?

Other methods to assist reflection include role play, sculpting, art work to draw out feelings and perceptions, further reflection on genograms and eco-maps to draw out context, roles and patterns.

Focusing on Analysis

Here the emphasis is on analysis, probing the meanings that the supervisee and the service user attribute to the situation, consideration of other explanations, the identification of what is known or understood, and the areas for further assessment.

• Taking account of your feelings – what does this tell us about what the service user may be feeling in this situation?
• How do you explain or understand what happened in the session?
• How would the session have been different if: the family had been female/black/disabled, etc.?
• Did power relations shift during the session – if so how and why?
• What went well, or not well, and why?
• How far did this session confirm or challenge your previous understanding or hypothesis?
• What new information emerged?
• What theory, training, research, policy, values might help you make sense of what happened in this session?
• How else might you have managed the session?
• What are the current needs, risks, strengths in this situation?
• What is unknown?
• What conclusions are you drawing from this work so far?
• How do you now define your role in this situation?
• How would the service user define your role?
• What expectations does your agency have of your role?

Other methods to assist analysis include sharing articles, references, case presentations, external speakers, attending training as a team, group supervision and action learning sets.

Focusing on Action Plans

The focus here is on translating the analysis into planning, preparation and action. This includes the identification of outcomes and success criteria as well as consideration of potential complications and contingency plans.

• In light of the reflection and analysis we have done, what is your overall summary of where things are at, and what needs to be done next?
• Can you identify what you are, and what you are not responsible for in managing this case?
• What training, supervisory, co-work and support needs have been raised for you?
• What information needs to be obtained from others before proceeding?
• What are your aims in the next phase of work?
• What is urgent and essential?
• What would be desirable?
• What is negotiable and what is non-negotiable in this situation?
• What would be a successful outcome from your perspective/family/other key agencies?
• What might be your strategy for the next contact with the family and other professionals?
• What are the possible best or worst responses from the family?
• What contingency plans do you need – what is the bottom line?
• Where do you feel more or less confident?
• How can you prepare for the next steps – mental rehearsal, flip chart map, reading, co-worker discussion?
• What can I do that would be helpful at this stage?
• When does feedback and debriefing need to take place?
• Are there any safety issues for you/others?
• What can be done to minimise any dangers?

Other methods may include role play, co-work planning, case planning, contacting other agencies involved.

Discrepancy Matrix (Information adapted from Research in Practice 12 Developing Supervision Program March 2021)

This tool encourages practitioners to reflect on what is known about a case and what is unknown or not yet known- – a vital aspect of working with uncertainty. It supports the practitioner to tease out the information they hold into four types: evidence, ambiguous, assumption, and missing.

 Can be used as a standalone activity or in combination with, for example, the Systemic Reflective Space group supervision model) or other critical thinking and analysis tools, such as De Bono’s Six Hats (the white hat), which ask participants to critique the information they hold about a case.

 Follow the steps below and record key evidence of reflection and the outcomes of the discussion in the matrix.

 Step one: Telling the story

 The practitioner briefly outlines the situation.
The supervisor or group then helps organise the information using reflective, curious questions such as:

• How do you know that…?
• What other evidence do you have that this is true?
• How often have you felt like that even though you have no evidence it is true?
• When do you feel that most strongly? Why?
• If you had this piece of information what might it make you do differently

  Step Two: Sorting the Information

 The information is arranged into four categories: 

1. What do I know?
   Verified facts from reliable sources, including knowledge of legislation, roles, responsibilities, and relevant research. This is the strongest foundation for analysis.
2. What is ambiguous?
   Information that is unclear, unverified, contradictory, or based on hearsay/hinted at
3. This category highlights areas needing clarification or further exploration.
4. What I think I know
   Practice wisdom, professional judgement, and personal interpretations. This section includes acknowledging values, emotions, biases, or assumptions influencing decision‑making.
5. What is missing?
   Gaps identified through reflection or questions from others. Missing information should be examined to determine whether it may affect risk, assessment, or decision‑making—and whether it requires follow‑up.

Step Three: Reflections

After organising the information in the matrix, the practitioner reflects on the learning and next steps. The supervisor or group supports this by asking:

1. What has changed about what you know?
   – Exploring how the reflection has clarified, strengthened, or reshaped understanding.
2. What do you still need to know?
   – Identifying remaining gaps, uncertainties, or areas requiring further enquiry.
3. What does this mean for the child, parent/carer, or family?
   – Considering the impact of new insights on safety, wellbeing, risk, resilience, and lived experience.
4. What do you want to do next?
   – Agreeing clear, proportionate actions to take forward, supported by supervision.

Integrative approach to group supervision

 Six Thinking Hats Model

 The Six Thinking Hats model (de Bono, 2008) can be applied to group supervision. The technique is a metaphorical way to view a workplace or client-based problem or a around six different viewpoints following a certain colour scheme and using the theme of thinking hats.

The process of the Six Thinking Hats was developed to escape adversarial thinking, avoid confusion, generate focus and synergy, and to achieve powerful results (de Bono, 1999). The concept is typically used in business settings; however, applying the same concept in group supervision can help facilitate and balance diverse viewpoints and polarities. The respective hats in the Six Thinking Hats technique are described by de Bono in the following manner:

1. The White Hat represents pure knowledge gathering, data collection, and historical account. It asks, “What do we know?” It addresses cognition. The process involves exploring facts rather than personal opinions. “First class” facts consist of ones that are checked and proven, while “second class” facts include information believed to be true. Information that is missing is also included here. The white hat covers facts, figures, information needs, and gaps. (Similar to Discrepancy Matrix).
2. The Red Hat represents feelings and hunches. This hat legitimises emotions and explores fears, likes, dislikes, loves, and hates. This hat legitimises emotions and feeling by focusing on “This is how I feel.” It addresses affect by focusing on hunches, intuition, and signal. The red hat is the opposite of neutral, objective information (White Hat). Here there is no need to give reasons or justification for the subjective feelings.
3. The Black Hat focuses on critical judgments, a risk analysis. It identifies cautions, dangers and potential problems. It is the logical and addresses possible negative effects and what may potentially happen. It can be used to determine weakness in an idea. It also addresses why it does not fit – facts, experience, policy, system and ethics. It asks, “What may be hazardous?” The Black Hat Thinker is a gatekeeper, not a dream breaker.

Learning and Development for Child Protection Supervisors

Aim: To improve knowledge and skills in the area of child protection supervision, in order that practitioners can feel more confident and be more effective, and that children and young people can be better protected.

Menu of training/support

Examples of Supervisory Questions that underpin the GIRFEC five key questions

Supervision Contract

Confidential

Child Protection Supervision Contract

Child Protection Supervision - Record of Discussion