Council blasted over failures in protecting at-risk children

The four-month-old baby, who was left visually impaired by the assault, lived in a "chaotic" family environment, according to a serious case review carried out for Rotherham Safeguarding Children Board.

But while there were fears of potential violence against staff, workers did not consider the potential danger to the baby or his siblings.

In a statement Rotherham Council, which has been previously criticised for failures in its children's services, admitted that "there were times when professionals could have taken action".

The report says the baby, known as Child W, is "now making progress" though he is visually impaired and has weakness down his left side. His father was sentenced to three years and nine months in prison for the assault, while his mother was cleared of any involvement.

The report says at the time of the incident: "Child W and his two older siblings were the subjects of child protection plans in the category of neglect."

Serious concerns had already been expressed about both parents, after a health referral noted that when Child W's mother was pregnant, "no parental skills are evident".

Because both parents had experienced poor parenting and involvement with social care services while they were living in another local authority, they were "already recognised as vulnerable parents when they moved to Rotherham in January 2004".

The report notes concerns that "Child W's Father responded to frustration and difficulties in his life through violent behaviour", while there were worries about the conditions at his home, including a "lack of accurate information about who was actually living with the mother and her children".

In a damning passage it highlights that "professional fears about potential violence to staff from Child W's father were not linked to the potential risk of violence to the children.

"'There is evidence that (some) social workers 'warmed' to Child W's father because of his difficult history and evident vulnerability. However, professionals did not appear to have considered that this vulnerability might actually promote a risk of harm to his children."

A lack of co-ordination between agencies was also flagged in another report into the separate case of a "well cared-for" newborn baby, Child T, who died when her mother found her "pale, floppy and not breathing" in bed beside her.

A post mortem revealed the cause of death was sudden unexpected infant death and 25 board recommendations followed.

The baby's mother had a history of alcohol misuse and there was domestic violence in the family.

"There was inadequate information sharing between agencies involved with the family and child protection procedures should have been invoked earlier than they were," the report said, and added: "A number of serious incidents were not notified to Social Care and on occasions when referrals were received, they were not acted upon in a timely or appropriate manner."

Board chairman Alan Hazell aid: "These were difficult cases for professionals to work with but at the same time there were opportunities for action to be taken which may have helped both these children.

"Whilst we can never say that these types of cases will not happen again in Rotherham, with agencies working together more efficiently, supported by families and parents, we can all help ensure our children are as safe and well as they possibly can be."

Rotherham Council has been heavily criticised in the past for inadequately protecting vulnerable children.

In March this year it publicly apologised after a serious case review revealed social workers repeatedly failed properly to assess or monitor a Yorkshire foster father who subjected three young girls placed in his care to years of sexual abuse.