Response to consultation on media reporting on child homicide victims

1. Please share any thoughts you have on how the media currently reports on child homicides.

Scottish Association of Social Work is the professional association for social work in Scotland, part of the British Association of Social Work our aims are:-

SASW’s key aims are:   Improved professional support, recognition and rights at work for social workers,  better social work for the benefit of people who need our services, and,  a fairer society

SASW believes there needs to be a fine balance struck between open, transparent reporting on criminal behaviours and preserving the privacy and dignity of families who are bereaved through traumatic circumstances. All families are different and the circumstances of bereavement are also unique to each family therefore there needs to be a flexible, person centred approach to loss through child homicide.

2. Please share any thoughts you have on any action that could be taken to amend the current position on media reporting of child homicides.

The principle of anonymity may help families who do not want their private circumstances publicly known. However, in practice this can present challenges in an age of social media which is largely unregulated. There is a precedent in mainstream media of sensitivity around reporting issues that may have an impact on wider society, such as reporting on suicide, which could be used to inform reporting on child homicide. 

It may be more appropriate to use the circumstances of the loss, rather than age of siblings, to inform whether anonymity is appropriate in a particular instances. Age of children is not the defining indicator of their capacity to understand. More important is the support they have from their parents, other caregivers, schools and peer group. Withholding information from children due to perceptions of age can cause long term harm, affecting relationships in the years to come. Children need honest information that they can trust, digest and emotionally process.  Parents and siblings should get the professional support they need to navigate this very difficult stage within their loss and grief. 

Research shows that children are most likely to be killed by a parent, step parent or close family member leaving families struggling with the loss of a child and the impact of the alleged offender being in their close circle. In such circumstances it may be appropriate to enable anonymity. This would need to be balanced with the need to openly report so as to hold public services to account where there has been a failure to protect a child at risk.  The needs of each family may be different and should be taken into account in making decisions around anonymity.

3. To what extent do you think an extension of anonymity to deceased child victims would affect family and friends wanting to talk publicly about their loss?

It can be important for bereaved families to be able to speak publicly about a loss, particularly in traumatic circumstances such as homicide. Talking publicly can engender valuable support for the family and enable a sense of purpose after loss eg in campaigning for systems or legislative change. 

In these types of circumstances it would be appropriate to have the means to offer anonymity which the family can chose to avail themselves of rather than having an automatic assumption of anonymity.  The needs of each family may be different and should be taken into account in making decisions around anonymity.

4. Do you consider that an extension to anonymity would have an impact on the ability of the police to investigate a crime?

The extension to anonymity may impact the ability of police to investigate a crime. However, in making information public, the potential benefit for any investigation should be balanced with the potential impact on family and friends. 

Learning from recent high profile investigations which were reported in mainstream media shows us the impact of social media activity consisting of rumours and assumptions/speculation which is likely to cause great distress to family members. Any extension of anonymity would need to have the protection of family members as the primary consideration and a balance struck between potential impact on the investigation process and potential harm particularly to family members.

5. Do you consider that an extension to anonymity would have an impact on freedom of expression?

Anonymity is extended in other legal arenas such as to victims of rape due to the impact on victims and their families.   Children who have been murdered and their families are likewise victims. Restrictions on freedom of expression can be justified in the face of potential harm to others, but should be carefully balanced decision taken by skilled and experienced professionals. In our view, this is not a simple tick list decision however.  It requires skilled and experienced risk assessment as to the risks of harm and thoughtful liaison with the families of the victim.

6. Do you consider that an extension to anonymity would have an impact on open justice?

An extension to anonymity could have an impact on open justice, as it would restrict reporting on investigations into persons suspected of causing a child death if their identity could lead to the child being identified. This may be justifiable on occasions where the public interest is outweighed by potential harm to wider family members were the circumstances of the child death to become public knowledge. Each case will be different and require a nuanced and skilled approach to making these decision which is why we think blanket legislation is not the answer that families need.

7. To what extent do you agree that a media toolkit could support journalists and editors to report on child homicides in a trauma-informed way?

Strongly agree Agree Neither agree or disagree Disagree Strongly disagree

There are already good examples of the media reporting sensitively on challenging issues, eg reporting death by suicide. A reporting toolkit can give guidance which still respects the professionalism of reporters while supporting them to report in a sensitive way. A comprehensive toolkit coupled with strong guidance for journalists can support a nuanced approach to reporting which can balance privacy, safeguarding and issues of public interest.

8. What should such a toolkit cover?

A toolkit might include reporting factual information in a sensitive way, avoiding reporting bias and reducing sensationalism in reporting and respecting the families privacy and dignity.

9. Are there any other non-legislative means of improving how child homicides are reported and information published?

Strengthening the Journalistic Codes of Conduct to reflect the need to respect the individuality of families and circumstances of loss, with a duty to balance public interest with impact on families and communities would support nuanced reporting while protecting freedom of the press.  

10 . To what extent do you agree that the Scottish Government should work with the criminal justice agencies to explore non-legislative options to help reduce the trauma of reporting on bereaved families of child homicide victims?

Strongly agree

It is always better to gain agreement and work with professions in a consensual, collaborative way, legislative options should be a last resort where voluntary agreements have failed to produce a desired outcome. While steps should be taken to reduce the trauma on bereaved families, it should also be recognised that, in the traumatic circumstances of a child's death, any reporting is likely to prove traumatic. As well as trying to reduce the impact of reporting, full support should be given to families to help them cope at a very difficult time including support from police, victim support, social work and associated services. This will require investment in services to ensure they have both time and appropriate training to effectively support families bereaved through homicide.

11. If anonymity for deceased child victims was introduced, at what point do you think it should start?

 Other - please provide details below

It is SASWs view that anonymity should be offered to families at the point of a child's death regardless of criminality, with families having the option to waive this without the need to go to court. Bereaved families should not be expected to go to court either to secure anonymity or to waive this. In complex cases there can be a long investigative period between a child's death and the start of criminal proceedings during which time the family can find themselves subject to intense scrutiny and public speculation. An assumption of anonymity would enable families to grieve in private unless they decided to share details of their loss. Where it was considered anonymity would hamper any police investigation or unduly impact freedom of expression application could be made to court to lift anonymity, as currently is the case with child offenders and rape victims.

12. CHECK THE BUTTON ON THIS ONE!

If anonymity is automatic, how should a waiver process operate?

Family members must apply to court to waive anonymity 

Family members are allowed to waive anonymity without requiring a court order and all restrictions fall when anonymity is waived 

Family members are allowed to waive anonymity without requiring a court order but restrictions do not fall when they do so and those wishing to publish identifying information must seek permission from the family before doing so 

Other – please provide details below

If anonymity is assumed at the point of a child’s death, SASW considers that family members should be allowed to waive anonymity and that those wishing to publish identifying information should require a court order to do so. Placing responsibility on family members to permit publishing of identifying information may impose an undue administrative burden on them at a time of grieving, and may lead to inconsistencies in decision making. The family having waived anonymity can be used by the court to inform their decision to waive anonymity more widely, the court is likely to take a more objective stance and it places the burden of court process on publishing organisations rather than private individuals.

Families should not be prevented from speaking openly about their loss if they chose to do so, and should not have to go through legal process to gain the right to share their families story. They should be able to speak about their loss without the worry that their story will then be reported in mainstream media without their knowledge or consent. A court process for journalists to gain a waiver for anonymity would ensure families were both informed and had the opportunity to have their views represented and considered. 

13. Who should be allowed to waive anonymity/apply for a waiver?

We believe family members should be able to waive anonymity without a court order, journalists and publishing organisations should be able to seek to waive anonymity through the courts.

14. What do you think are the main challenges to enforcing anonymity restrictions?

Any legislation which covers Scotland would also need to cover the rest of the UK, which sits outwith the devolved powers of the Scottish Government. Enforcement will be difficult for the reasons outlined in the consultation document eg the advent of social media, bloggers and discussion forums whereby private individuals can self publish information and where they are not bound by journalistic codes of conduct or have knowledge of relevant legislation.

Given the worldwide nature of both mainstream and social media, it is impossible to guarantee anonymity or to enforce Scotland/UK based legislation. This needs to be considered when exploring the issue of anonymity, in order to reach a reasonable and proportionate decision.

15. To what extent do you think it is important that the wider public understand anonymity provisions?

In general it is important that the wider public understand anonymity provisions however, this is a complex area which private individuals may not associate with their own use of social media, for example, believing that posting as a private individual to a group of friends and acquaintances does not present a breach of anonymity. If the intention is to criminalise breaches of anonymity, it is essential that the wider public have easily available, easily understood explanations of anonymity provisions.

16. What can be done to increase public understanding of anonymity provisions?

A fully resourced public information campaign, including information in social media sites outlining anonymity provisions when posting online. This will be difficult to achieve given the international nature of social media, whereby outlining the provisions in a particular country may be prohibitive.

17. What group of people do you think it would be hardest to educate about anonymity provisions?

While people may be grouped into categories using age, sex, gender or other personal characteristics, no group acts in a homogenous way. It is impossible therefore to determine which group of people might be harder to educate about anonymity provisions. 

By way of example, while children and young people use social media and may inadvertently share information covered by anonymity provisions, it should not be assumed they would be most difficult to educate. Young people are used to working within the boundaries of social media and are very skilled at communicating within permitted boundaries on various social media platforms, perhaps more so than some adults.  Education and information may be more appropriately targeted at adults who use social media but have not developed an understanding of the public nature of social media or that it may constitute publication in relation to anonymity provisions. Adults are also in a role to guide and support children and young people in their online activity and therefore need a good understanding of any extension to anonymity provisions. 

18. How might this group be accessed and educated?

There are well evidenced processes for public information and education which can be useful when considering this question. 

19. What do you think would be an appropriate penalty for breaching an anonymity restriction?

SASW believes that people should not be criminalised for breaching anonymity provisions, that these should be preserved through collaborative working with journalists and through civil process if necessary.  Where harm is caused through reporting of child homicide, existing legislation should be used where appropriate rather than introducing new legislation with new offences.

20. To what extent do you agree that any extension of anonymity to deceased child victims in Scotland would need to apply to the rest of the UK to be effective?

Given the worldwide nature of both mainstream and social media, it is impossible to guarantee anonymity or to enforce Scotland/UK based legislation. While extension of legislation to the rest of the UK may be desirable, this is outwith the powers of the Scottish Government. Effectiveness of any legislation will be limited in any event due to the worldwide nature of mainstream and social media reach.

21. To what extent do you support the options discussed in this paper?

22. To what extent do you think that the legislative options proposed are proportionate and enforceable?

23. Are there other options you think we should explore?

24. Do you have any other comments on this issue that you would like to share with us?