When the church hits the headlines these days it is most likely to be for all the wrong reasons - a convicted sex offender allowed to work with children or as in a recent case, a child badly abused as a result of highly questionable practices associated with the beliefs of a faith group. It seems 'good news is no news' despite the exemplary standards of many churches that make child protection and good working practice a top priority, and work tirelessly to enhance the lives of children and young people in positive and creative ways. We even find that when CCPAS issues a press release, quotes in the newspapers are often selective and do not accurately reflect what we are saying.

So what is the true picture? Two years ago we decided to find out, and commissioned Christian Research to carry out the first ever survey across England. Unfortunately we had to limit our research to one country because of incomplete data, but we believe the situation in England is likely to be representative of churches and groups throughout the UK.

The publication of the first set of results came at the beginning of 2004 and coincided with the closing days of the Bichard Inquiry into the Soham murders. Due to the nature of the Inquiry, our findings became headline news, with the revelation that there were serious shortcomings in recruitment procedures within some churches.

We felt it was extremely important to continue to monitor and record child protection practice and related issues within churches and groups, so in 2005 CCPAS commissioned Dr Peter Brierley (Executive Director of Christian Research) to undertake a repeat survey. As previously, a substantial sample of churches was carefully selected to reflect the full spectrum of denominations, churches, churchmanship (or leadership), geographical location (urban/rural) and congregational size. Information was sought separately from both the church leadership (ministers and clergy) and those working directly with children and young people from 0 - 18 years.

Altogether, 884 completed questionnaires were returned. Somewhat surprisingly a number of church leaders asked Christian Research to refer to their denomination's policy for information (does this mean they are unaware of or attach little priority to it?), but more worryingly others replied saying that the research was not relevant to their church because there were no children in their congregation. Although this trend is backed up by the 1998 English Church Attendance Survey and a recent report by the Church of England, it is of concern that many of the leaders of these churches feel that child protection issues are not relevant to them. They failed to consider that children could easily start attending with church-going parents or grandparents as visitors or regulars, and does this also mean they are writing themselves out of a future children's ministry?

So what has changed over this period? There has been positive improvement in practices related to the recruitment of workers, responding to issues of possible abuse, pastoral care and support and in training. There's good news, too, for CCPAS, with more churches than ever using the range of services we provide. However, with every statistic there is a downside. If 94% of churches have child protection policies, 85% carry out criminal records checks, and 67% of workers have received training, what about the remainder, the thousands of churches where it is quite possible none of this is happening? They set a dangerous precedent in not following 'Safe from Harm' recommendations laid down by the government in 1993 as well as Charity Commission and insurance company expectations. As mentioned in the news section, insurance companies are becoming quite jittery about granting churches insurance, particularly where child protection policies are either ignored or introduced half-heartedly with no real commitment.

Of course, any survey can only be of known churches. New worshipping congregations are springing up all the time and most are unlikely to have established child protection policies, training and the like. This is the challenge being faced by Congolese churches, as reported in our news section. However, the expectations of the Charity Commission and insurance companies make it more likely that these issues will be addressed by churches sooner rather than later. Certainly many such groups contact CCPAS for advice.

The work of CCPAS in monitoring the implementation of policies, good practice and training in child protection is probably quite unique. I certainly know of no other group who are involved in such exercises and it is worth bearing this in mind when the negatives from this research are highlighted by the media and others. For example, anecdotal information would suggest that churches are doing much better in regard to training than some other groups working with children. Teachers and doctors attending CCPAS training events regularly bemoan the lack of child protection training within their own profession and regard what is available in the church through CCPAS and others as far superior. A few months ago a senior official from a county education authority (which will remain nameless) wrote to me and said that in a survey of child protection training carried out amongst teachers in the county, more had been trained by CCPAS because of their work in the church than by his authority!

The most recent survey sought much more information in regard to the attitudes of leaders and children's workers to physical punishment by parents. We felt it was important to know more about this issue given the fierce debates nationally about the legitimacy of physical punishment. Some say 'smacking never did me any harm' and assert the right of a parent to exercise control over their children in this way. Others argue that 'hitting' is never right because it amounts to physical assault on a child, which cannot be justified. Various surveys have been carried out, reporting a range of responses, dependent upon the questions asked. What seems to be lacking is an understanding of what is meant by 'smacking' or 'hitting', and CCPAS was interested in unpacking people's understanding in order to see whether views were as polarised as it often seemed. This produced some interesting responses.

While both leaders and children's workers agreed that the church should encourage parents not to smack their children, they nevertheless felt that an occasional smack by a loving parent was quite acceptable and only 11% agreed that it should be made illegal. The reintroduction of physical punishment to schools, however, was strongly opposed with only 15% of respondents in support.

Over three quarters of children's workers disagreed with physical punishment that left a mark. The same proportion agreed it was not acceptable to use an object to inflict a punishment though two thirds felt a light tap on the hand, leg or bottom using a person's hand was permissible. Church leaders were in agreement with children's workers that many forms of physical punishment were unacceptable and that a light tap using a person's hand was acceptable (67%). The results from this survey suggest that over the past few years there has been a considerable shift in opinion away from many forms of physical punishment.

CCPAS will continue to monitor the 'state of the nation' in terms of the church's response to the on-going child protection issues This article draws attention to some significant areas of the full report but a booklet containing the main results of the research is now available from CCPAS.

‘Survey Highlights’

• An average church has 84 in its congregation, with 12 children's workers.
• Three quarters of churches interview all volunteer applicants and ask them to complete an application form, up from two fifths in 2003. Slightly fewer take up written references.
• Virtually all church leaders showed an awareness of their denomination's policy on child protection.
• An impressive 73% of churches in England said they were familiar with the CCPAS 'Guidance to Churches' manual.
• The key publication least well known about (32%) was the 'Churches Together in Britain and Ireland' publication 'A time for action' report.
• The numbers of churches with no child protection policy had reduced from 9% in 2003 to 4% in 2005.
• Smaller churches were less likely to have a policy than larger churches and evangelicals less than non-evangelical.
• Over 90% of churches take the precaution of asking other people n the church about a person who has volunteered, up from half in 2003.
• One in 7 workers had reason to be concerned about possible abuse and everybody who responded to this had shared those concerns with the child protection officer or minister.
• Some 12% of leaders were aware of individuals in the congregation who could present a risk to a child and in 88% of these cases were adopting special measures to support the individual and at the same time ensure the safety of children.
• Virtually all (97%) of church leaders and 98% of children's workers consider child protection issues to be important.

Click here to return to the Articles menu.