Professionals failed to prevent two-year-old Keanu Williams’ death, review finds

Child protection agencies failed to communicate and missed opportunities to protect a two-year-old boy from injuries that eventually led to his death.

Keanu Williams died on January 9, 2011, from multiple injuries to different parts of the body sustained over a number of days, including a fractured skull and damage to his bowel either of which could have been fatal.

Keanu’s mother, Rebecca Shuttleworth, was convicted of Keanu’s murder despite warning signs and agencies having numerous previous dealings with her over the neglect and injuries to his older siblings.

A Serious Case Review found that “professionals in the various agencies had collectively failed to prevent Keanu’s death as they missed a significant number of opportunities to intervene and take action”.

“They did not meet the standards of basic good practice when they should have reported their concerns, shared and analysed information and followed established procedures for Section 47 Enquiries (child protection investigations) and a range of assessments including medical assessments and Child Protection Conferences,” the review concluded.

The review panel agreed that Keanu’s death could not have been predicted. However, it could have been predicted that Keanu was likely to suffer significant harm and should have been subject of a Child Protection Plan on at least two occasions to address issues of neglect and physical harm.

Child protection processes were followed on three occasions; twice with the older siblings as they underwent medical assessments, were the subjects of Child Protection Conferences and were placed on the Child Protection Register under the categories of neglect and physical abuse.

They were under the age of two at the time and one sibling had injuries including a burn from a radiator.

The third occasion saw Keanu the subject of a Core Assessment in November 2009. However, the conference concluded that Keanu did not require a Child Protection Plan.

Keanu experienced a number of presentations to hospital and to the GP, which were all explained by Shuttleworth as “bumps and falls due to unsteadiness”.

Just before Christmas 2010, Keanu was referred by the hospital to the Children’s Social Care Emergency Duty Team and the police as there were concerns about the explanation given by Shuttleworth about the injuries and the previous attendance two days earlier, including a burn to the foot.

According to Shuttleworth, the injury was caused by a hot radiator at her partner’s flat that had burnt his foot while sleeping. The radiator and site were examined by a police officer and a social worker the following day.

The finding in the Health Overview Report said their conclusion was mistaken and therefore Shuttleworth’s description of the ‘accident’ was not deemed ‘credible’.

The police did not consult with the GP, health visitor, Family Support Worker or nursery for information or feedback in relation to this child protection medical. The Social Worker referred the police officer to information from his nursery of October and November 2010, stating that ‘there were no concerns’. No attempt was made to reassess or update information about Keanu.

“This was a not only a missed opportunity but a significant failure by all the agencies involved to act to protect Keanu,” the report states.

Keanu was seen by staff in the nursery early in the New Year 2011 with a number of marks and bruises on his body and was described as ‘distressed’. No referral was made and clear guidelines and procedures were not followed as staff believed the explanations put forward by Shuttleworth.

Keanu died four days later.

The review said: “Throughout the lives of the three children the picture has emerged of a lack of focus on children and their welfare. A number of the issues which have arisen in this review are also familiar themes in Serious Case Reviews nationally, such as: poor communications between and within agencies; a lack of analysis of information as well as a lack of professional curiosity in questioning the inf