Sara Sharif was only 10 years’ old when she was murdered by her father Urfan Sharif and stepmother Beinash Batool. When her body was found, she was covered in bruises, she had many broken bones, she had bite marks and burn marks. She also had severe head injuries probably inflicted with a cricket bat and a metal bar. An independent safeguarding review will now take place. 

Now that her killers have been convicted, it is striking to see that Sara Sharif had been known to social services since before birth. Sara was taken into foster care on two occasions following care proceedings due to violence in the family. Press reports suggest that she was allowed to live with both parents (although one sibling was removed). After they separated she lived with her mother until her mother tried to drown and burn her. 

The father sought ‘custody’ of Sara (a child arrangements order under s.8 of the Children Act 1989) in private law proceedings. Under such proceedings the judge does not have the power to take a child into care but will request a welfare report from the local authority (s.7 of the Act) or a deeper investigation (s.37 of the Act). It is up to the local authority to decide if care proceedings should be issued. 

We do not know what the local authority said in its report, but Sara was returned to her father despite the previous allegations of violence and controlling behaviour against him. We also note that Sara’s school made referrals to social services after spotting bruises (which were difficult to see due to Sara wearing a hijab) but social services concluded their investigation after six days. They asked the school to monitor the situation but did not take any further action. Sara was then removed from school and home-educated. She was out of sight.

This case has a tragically familiar feel. Although it is rare for parents to murder their own children, it happens regularly and provokes intense revulsion. We have in mind the cases of Maria Colwell, Victoria Climbié, Baby P, Ellie Butler, Alfie Steele or Alfie Philips for instance. 

On average at least one child (under 15) is killed every week in the UK. Child homicides are most commonly perpetrated by the child’s parent or step-parent. According to the NSPCC, children under one year have the highest rate of homicide. 

How can we better protect children from harm and death inflicted by their parents?

It was almost three years to this day that I wrote on the tragic death of Arthur Labinjo-Hughes, a six-year old boy who was beaten, tortured and killed by his father Thomas Hughes and his father’s partner Emma Tustin. Arthur was subjected to extreme cruelty (forced to stand for hours, deprived of food, force-fed salt), assaulted and killed by those meant to care for him. Between April and May 2020 many reports were made by relatives to social services and the police, but none led to in-depth child protection investigations. Arthur never went back to school when his school reopened in June 2020 since his father kept him away. He died on 16 June 2020 by which time he was skeletal, had more than 130 bruises on his body and had sustained fatal brain injuries.

That case put into sharp focus the issue of child protection during successive lockdowns, and the protective role played by universal services (schools, GPs, childcare facilities) in detecting, monitoring and reporting child protection concerns. 

Around the same time Star Hobson – who was only 16 months old when she died in September 2020 – suffered many injuries (caused by repeated punching, kicking or stamping) which led to her death. These were inflicted by her mother Frankie Smith and her mother’s partner Savannah Brockhill. Star was too young to attend school but her relatives had made numerous safeguarding referrals to social services. Despite bruising observed on her face Star was not removed because a Child Protection Medical concluded it was consistent with the mother’s explanation. Social services accepted the mother’s account that relatives were motivated by malice, despite photographic and video evidence. They promptly closed the case. 

In both cases the killers were persistent and determined. They did everything they could to hide their actions. But the children could have been saved: they were known to the police and to social services, and relatives had provided photographic and video evidence of their injuries. 

In May 2022 the National review into their murders flagged up weaknesses in information-sharing, lack of critical thinking and the need for sharper child protection skills. Once again it showed that agencies work in silos despite practitioners’ best intentions. This had been identified in previous inquiries (e.g. Victoria Climbié, ‘Baby P’). The National review’s main recommendation was the creation of Multi-Agency Child Protection Units in every local authority area. 

A few months later the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA) issued 20 recommendations, one of which was the creation of a Child Protection Authority for England and one for Wales. It is now two years since these recommendations were made. There is no sign of either being implemented. Following Sara’s death the government now seems intent to set up a register of home-educated children. This would provide further protection for children at risk of being out of sight of the authorities.

Child protection is complex and challenging, the stakes are incredibly high. It requires cooperation between many agencies, is resource-intensive, and needs to be sensitive and responsive to rapid changes in children’s circumstances. Decisions need to be made without fear of possible civil claims arising. When the independent safeguarding review is published its recommendations are likely to be similar to those previously made – they need to be acted upon.