ABSTRACT
Part 4 opens by discussing what has been learnt about ‘thresholds’ for state intervention in cases of extra-familial harm – and what this might mean for child protection systems in the future. The author outlines how dip-sampling in test sites and workshops as well as training activities with network members more broadly has surfaced a fundamental question about child protection systems: are they there to respond to (and prevent) abuse, or to intervene with ‘poor or abusive parenting?’ If it is the latter then Contextual Safeguarding will often have no place within a child protection system. This is illustrated further by detailing four ways in which child protection systems have deprioritised cases of extra-familial harm – each in their own way revolving around a focus on parenting as opposed to the location and nature of abuse; before reflecting on the importance of thresholds for limiting the nature of state intervention in communities as well as familial settings. Concluding the chapter, Firmin points to a series of questions that require resolution for Contextual Safeguarding to flourish – questioning whether responses to extra-familial harm which are legal and aligned to statutory frameworks, but make little impact on safety, are sufficient..
