Multiple lapses, shortcomings in how agencies handled Megan Khung abuse case, review panel finds

The panel noted that the existing child protection case management agencies are not resourced to take on this responsibility fully, and thus recommended that these agencies are adequately resourced.

Responding to queries from CNA, an MSF spokesperson said that the recommendation “does not remove the responsibility” that other agencies have in detecting and reporting abuse. 

Other community agencies will continue to have a role to play, such as in detecting and reporting suspected child abuse cases. 

“With timely reporting by these agencies, child protection case management agencies will be able to intervene swiftly, as these agencies have legal powers to obtain information, or enter into a voluntary care agreement with the parents,” said MSF.

2. An appeals mechanism should be established to address cases where there are differing views on risk levels and case management.

The agency assessing a case must do so with a critical eye. Attention should also be paid to the experience level, as well as the training and professional development needs of those engaged in frontline triage work, said the report.

“In addition, factors such as drug use, which should raise the risk level of a case, should be taken into account even where such information is not confirmed.”

Triage decisions should be recorded, reviewed and audited to ensure consistency in practice, and feedback from referring parties and triage agencies should be gathered, with regular engagements between them. The system must also be flexible to accommodate the dynamic changes in risk status of cases.

The panel noted there can be differing judgments over whether cases meet referral and escalation thresholds and there should be a way for these differences to be resolved “expediently and conclusively”, so that all cases receive appropriate attention due to them.

In situations where there are differing views on the risk levels and management of cases with the reporting agencies, there should be an objective mechanism to review the decisions, regardless of the parties involved.

3. MSF should review ECDA’s role in triaging potential intra-family child protection cases

ECDA’s code of practice states that when there is a case of suspected child abuse that happened outside the preschool, preschools must conduct an assessment using a screening guide.

The current workflow for preschools’ referrals of such child abuse cases specifies that:

• When the screening guide outcome is “red”, and there are noticeable injuries or signs of immediate threat to the child’s safety, preschools are to call National Anti-Violence and Sexual Harassment helpline within two hours.
• For other cases when the outcome is “red”, preschools are to consult their ECDA licensing officer within two hours.
• When the SSSG outcome is “yellow”, which indicates moderate-risk cases, preschools are to consult their ECDA licensing officer within 24 hours.

The panel noted that ECDA licensing officers are not trained child protection specialists and may not have the expertise to guide preschools on how to manage suspected abuse cases in the interim.

Having ECDA be the middleman for moderate-risk “yellow cases” and “red cases” with no noticeable injury or signs of immediate threat to the child’s safety, and where the injury reported may not have been sustained in a preschool in the first place, “could lead to delays in right-siting cases that require urgent intervention in the family setting”, said the report.

The panel therefore recommended that MSF review how the moderate-risk cases with no noticeable injury or signs of immediate threat to the child’s safety should best be managed to safeguard the welfare of the children.