4A.1: Initial response considerations

Guidance

The “Guidelines for the Professional Conduct of the Clergy” specify that:

"There is no separation between the public and home life of the clergy: at all times and in all places they should manifest the highest standards of personal conduct.”

Where the allegation refers to matters in a member of clergy’s personal life, Safeguarding Officers should exercise their professional judgement and decide whether to act on that information. This involves considering whether referrals need to be made to the relevant statutory services and assessing whether the information received presents a risk that has any bearing on the member of clergy’s ministry, particularly any work with children, young people or vulnerable adults. Advice on the level of transferrable risk in such cases may also be sought from statutory authorities. Where the Safeguarding Officer decides to initiate the relevant safeguarding processes, a clear rationale must be recorded in the case notes which details which aspects of the information received are relevant for safeguarding purposes, how and why they are relevant.

When managing such cases, the Safeguarding Officer should work closely with any statutory services involved and take their advice. The Safeguarding Officer’s assessment of the case should be proportionate and should not lead to an unnecessary and intrusive collection of information about someone’s personal life. There should be a clear rationale for each question and action, linking back to an aspect of the respondent’s work within the Church.

The above advice also applies to situations in which an allegation is made about someone in a member of clergy’s immediate family. Generally, these situations will not trigger a safeguarding process under this Code, unless there is a rationale to justify that a member of clergy has displayed concerning behaviours in how they dealt with that matter, for example where they actively covered up abuse inflicted by a member of their family, or where they appear to believe that abuse inflicted by a member of their family is acceptable. This does not apply to situations in which the family member is directly involved in the life the Church, as an employee, volunteer or otherwise, in which case they are a Church Officer, and the relevant section of this Code will apply to them.

Position of Trust/Person in a Position of Trust

‘Position of trust’ is a legal term defined in the Sexual Offences Act 2003. It is explained as an adult “caring for, training, supervising or being in sole charge” of a child under the age of 18. The Act defines settings in which adults would have a position of trust e.g. hospital or an educational institution, examples of such roles would include Teachers, Care Workers, Youth Justice Workers, Social Workers and Doctors. The Act was updated in 2022 to include sports coaches and faith leadership positions.

It is against the law for someone in a ‘Position of trust’ to engage in sexual activity with a child in their care, even if that child is over the age of consent. This means that even though the child may be 16 or over, it is still illegal to engage in sexual activity with them if you hold a ‘Position of trust’.  This includes young people up until the age of 18.

This is not to be confused with the Care Act 2014 definition of a Person in a Position of Trust (PIPOT), which is anyone who works or volunteers with adults with care and support needs. People can be considered to be in a ‘position of trust’ where they are likely to have contact with adults with care and support needs as part of their employment or voluntary work, and:

• Where the role carries an expectation of Trust and
• The person is in a position to exercise authority, power, or control over an adult(s) with care and support needs (as perceived by the adult).

If a safeguarding allegation is made against a Church Officer who is in such a position, then Adult Social Care and, where there is also a perceived risk to children, Children’s Social Care, must be informed.  

Employment or volunteering

A member of clergy is a trusted individual who, by the nature of their work, will come into contact with children, young people and vulnerable adults. Because of this, higher standards of conduct are expected from members of clergy than might be expected from other persons.  As a result, if information about an allegation involving a member of clergy becomes available that relates to their conduct in a secular role the processes set out in this Code should still be followed - even if the allegation has already been investigated / assessed as part of the respondent’s other role. The reasons for following these dual processes are:

• the need to consider the implications for the member of clergy’s continued ministry within the Church, including any risks to children, young people and vulnerable adults, how these will be managed under the Clergy Risk assessment Regulations; and
• the need to consider any allegation against the Church’s own conduct standards which, in some cases, may be higher than the standards of other external bodies / employers, and is relevant if a CDM is being considered.

The above is particularly relevant for:

• chaplains, who may also be subject to disciplinary processes linked to their role as an employee, for example in a prison or hospital;
• members of clergy employed in a TEI or elsewhere, who may also be subject to the TEI’s or a different employer’s own disciplinary processes; and
• members of clergy who hold PTO or a licence, but are also employed elsewhere, who may be subject to an employer’s own disciplinary processes.

Where the member of clergy is employed by a church body, for example in a diocesan or national role, consideration first needs to be given as to whether the allegation has arisen in their role as an “employee” or as an ordained member of clergy. If it is in relation to their employed role, then Section 4E - employment pathway must be followed in the first instance. This is because employees have certain rights under employment law as to how discipline and misconduct is dealt with. However, at every stage of the process, consideration must be given as to whether and when processes such as CDM and risk assessment should commence, which will by default require the involvement of the DSO.

The Church Body receiving information about an allegation in a second role should seek to understand: the nature of the allegation, the nature and outcomes of any processes already undertaken, and whether a risk assessment regarding the respondent has already been undertaken and can be shared.

If a Church Body is managing an allegation regarding a member of clergy and has information that they hold a second role elsewhere, the Church Body will need to consider if that information needs to be shared with the second body. This will generally be done via the police, LADO, or other relevant statutory authority. The key questions that should be asked in these cases are:

• Are statutory services involved? Have they been informed? If yes, follow their advice.
• Does the individual’s second role involve work with children, young people and vulnerable adults?
• What is the nature of the allegation? Based on the records and information gathered, if the allegation is substantiated, is there be a continued risk of harm to children, young people or vulnerable adults?
• Would children, young people or vulnerable adults potentially be at risk if information is not shared?
• Have the Diocesan Registrar or relevant legal advisor and the relevant Data Protection Officer provided advice whether the information about the allegation should be shared? If not, seek their advice.

Any information shared needs to be necessary, accurate and proportionate, with a clear rationale and aim, and should meet data protection obligations. Please note that the Internal Information Sharing Plan covers information sharing within the Church of England and with the Church in Wales, but does not cover information sharing with other religious organisations or Christian denominations. Information sharing with other religious organisations is permitted as necessary to manage risks to children, young people and vulnerable adults, but must be carried out with care and close attention to the data protection principles.

Responding to allegations involving non-recent events where the respondent has left the Church Body

For guidance on managing safeguarding allegations involving respondents who are now deceased, please refer to Section 4D within this Code.

Complainants who come forward to disclose non-recent abuse will have varied reasons for doing so: it might have taken them a long time to look at the events that they have experienced and see them as abuse, they might have felt afraid to disclose whilst the respondent was still in active ministry, they may express a need or desire to achieve closure on past traumatic experiences, and / or they may wish to prevent others from becoming victims of abuse.

Regardless of when the events disclosed are alleged to have taken place, complainants should be taken seriously, and their disclosures should not be ignored. A trauma-informed approach should be applied, and support must be offered in line with the “Responding Well to Victims and Survivors of Abuse” guidance. Specific care should be given to the fact that the complainant might feel a sense of disappointment and / or frustration in situations in which limited action can be undertaken regarding the respondent, e.g. when a disciplinary process cannot be followed. Being open and clear about what processes can and cannot be followed from the start will help manage the complainant’s expectations.

Assessing and managing any ongoing risk

Where an allegation refers to non-recent events and the respondent is alive, a Safeguarding Officer may be faced with different scenarios, including if the member of clergy:

1. continues to be in active ministry in the Church of England, but has moved to a different diocese or Church Body;
2. is retired;
3. has been removed from their clerical role as a result of disciplinary procedures;
4. has left the Church of England entirely and moved to a role in a different denomination or a role outside of the Church.

If a member of clergy has left the Church Body but continues to be in active ministry in a different diocese or Church Body, then the Safeguarding Officer should seek to identify the diocese or Church Body in which the respondent currently exercises their ministry. The Safeguarding Officer should then share the allegation with the Safeguarding Officer in that diocese (in line with the Internal Information Sharing Plan) and agree how the allegation will be taken forward and by whom. The requirements, advice and procedures set out in this Code would then apply. This also applies to situations where a member of clergy has retired, but continues to have a role in the Church, e.g. if they have PTO.

If information is held or becomes available about a respondent’s current role, then the need to share information about the allegation with the new employer or the new religious organisation should be considered. This will generally be done only in very limited circumstances where the statutory threshold is met, usually via the police, LADO or other relevant statutory authority. The key questions that should be asked in these cases are:

• Are statutory services involved? Have they been informed? If yes, follow their advice.
• Does the individual’s new role involve work with children, young people and vulnerable adults?
• What is the nature of the allegation? Based on the records and information gathered, if the allegation is substantiated, is there be a continued risk of harm to children, young people and vulnerable adults?
• Would children, young people and vulnerable adults potentially be at risk if information is not shared?
• Have the Diocesan Registrar or relevant legal advisor and the relevant Data Protection Officer provided advice whether the information about the allegation should be shared? If not, seek their advice.

Any information shared needs to be necessary, accurate and proportionate, with a clear rationale and aim, and should meet the requirements under data protection legislation. The Internal Information Sharing Plan covers information sharing with the Church in Wales, for other organisations or denominations, the information should be shared in line with the data protection principles as set out above.