This following report will analyse two serious case reviews one being an adult case and one being a child case. The reviews will then be compared however focusing on the adult case in more detail. Common issues between both cases will be then be discussed and media coverage will also be researched. A serious case review must be carried out in the event of a death or reported serious harm to a child or vulnerable adult in England stated by (Garboden M 2011). Serious case reviews establish what lessons should be learnt from the case and discusses the way in which local professionals and organisations work individually and together to safeguard individuals. They also make an important contribution to understanding what happens in circumstances of significant harm. The lessons learnt from the serious case reviews should then be acted on quickly and consideration of how to disseminate the learning should be looked at from the start stated on (Pams lecture notes). Although the cases are set out quite similar the reasons for both cases are completely different. The child case was carried out because the “Islington Safeguarding Children Board (the LSCB)” conducted a serious case review of the services provided to two primary school children who died as a result of knife wounds during a weekend contact visit to their father stated by (Mokades et al 2011). However the adult case was a result of “mate crime”. The definition of “mate crime” is when vulnerable people are befriended by members of the community who go on to exploit and take advantage of them according to (Williams R 2010). This serious case review examines how opportunities where missed and why they believe Gemma was a victim of “mate crime” then goes on to state recommendations for future practice.
Quality of reports;
The quality of the reports overall are very detailed however Gemma’s adult report is more specific. It comes with a contents page and