Justice: therapeutic support in court proceedings codes of practice – short life working group minutes - October 2024

Attendees and apologies

• Lynne Taylor, Dr, Principal Psychology Advisor, Scottish Government
• Sandra Ferguson, NHS Education for Scotland
• Zuzanna Kostka, Scottish Government, Bairns Hoose
• Angela Latta, Scottish Government: Child Protection
• Anna Johnston, Detective Inspector, Police Scotland
• Anthony Nevin, Scottish Government, Violence Against Women and Girls (VAWG), Justice (Secretariat)
• Carole Robinson, Scottish Government, Violence Against Women and Girls (VAWG), Justice (Secretariat)

Apologies 

• Chantelle Lalli, Scottish Government, Bairns Hoose
• Emma Thomson, Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service
• Tony Lenehan K.C, Faculty of Advocates
• Rachael Smith, Dr, Chair Child Heads of Psychology Services (CHOPS)
• Ruth Stocks, Dr, Director of Psychology member of Heads of Psychology Scotland (HOPS)
• Gordon Bell, Scottish Children’s Reporter Administration
• Jennifer Morrison, Team Manager at the National Joint Investigative Interviewing Training & Practice Development Team, Social Work Scotland

Items and actions

Welcome & Introductions – Chair

Lynne Taylor (LT) welcomed members of the Short Life Working Group (SLWG) and outlined the focus of the meeting which would be to agree the terms of reference and general approach to drafting. 

LT reminded the membership that the subject matter we are working with may at times be sensitive and emotionally upsetting, and wellbeing services were highlighted.  

The minutes of the first meeting (29 August 2024) were agreed. 

The secretariat provided an update on the previously agreed action points:

• members were reminded to submit any relevant research/evidence to the secretariat 
• the secretariat planned to publish the minutes from the SLWG on the Scottish Government website 

Further action points:

• secretariat to progress the publication of the SLWG minutes
• secretariat to remind SLWG members to share relevant information, evidence, and research which will be collated to inform the drafting process

Revised Terms of Reference & Approach – Secretariat

Terms of reference

LT reflected on the individual conversations with members, ahead of the meeting, and noted that they were informative and helpful in considering the terms of reference. 

Carole Robinson (CR) provided a summary of discussions: 

• there was agreement on the value of updating the codes of practice to provide clarity for practitioners on what can and cannot be done when providing therapeutic support
• we have an opportunity to highlight the benefits of therapeutic support such as giving witnesses agency and the choice to undergo therapy or not, increasing confidence in the justice/children’s hearing processes and providing more successful outcomes in terms of proceedings
• it is important to ensure that the updated material takes account of more recent developments, such as UNCRC and future developments, noting the development of Bairns Hoose
• it was noted that publication should be supported with awareness raising and potentially training
• from the meeting with SCRA, SWS and COPFS members agreed that it was important to ensure the revisions to the codes incorporate children’s hearings and family court.  Members had raised that witnesses do not make the distinction between what type of proceedings they attend: it’s about offering them the support needed to give their views effectively

As a result of the discussions, the following changes were proposed to the terms of reference: 

• the working title should be “Code of Practice to Facilitate the Provision of Therapeutic Support to Witnesses in Court Proceedings”.   It was important that this was a “Code of Practice” as this would focus on best practice, benefits, and reasons to adhere to agreed principles.  (“Guidance” suggested covering operational practice and addressing particular scenarios which was not the purpose here)
• the “Code of Practice” was not limited to criminal “trials”: SCRA were thanked for the helpful wording to indicate that the revised material would not just inform updates to COPFS guidance but would equally apply to SCRA updates too

There was discussion about the longevity of the support being given. It was noted that “pre-trial” provided a definitive start point for the code, and that this would need to be considered as part of scope and drafting. It was agreed that the code would be applicable until such times as any proceedings concluded. The Chair reminded members that we should take care to stick to the scope of this SLWG: there could be a danger that we begin to creep into wider territory (for example trying to influence timescales for therapeutic provision).      

The code of practice will need to be clear on what constitutes “therapeutic support”. LT agreed to take these considerations forward as part of the drafting process. 

There was a discussion on the importance of ensuring that those who commission therapeutic services are included in the development of the code. The Secretariat explained that to ensure that those with interest in this work are sighted on its development, they intend to form a reference group. This group will include a range of stakeholders from across justice, health, children and young people and victim support organisations. As well as receiving our agreed minutes the reference group would be asked to give views on the draft code ahead of publication as part of a targeted consultation exercise. The reference group may be able to help disseminate the code when available. CR explained that she was keen that to identify those who commission therapeutic support and ensure they were included in the reference group.  

• action point - secretariat to circulate proposed membership of the reference group and ask for further suggestions.    

Approach

LT reiterated the proposed approach to drafting the revised codes. She proposed that the codes be consolidated into a single document setting out fundamental principles and key information. Noting there may be specific requirements to consider in relation to children and young people, those with hidden disabilities, vulnerable adults etc., these issues would be provided as annexes to supplement the core code.    

LT noted changes to the sub-group tasked with re-drafting the code, with Jennifer Morrison agreeing to support the work, alongside Dr Ruth Stocks and Dr Rachael Smith. COPFS had been asked to take part in the drafting process. The Chair expressed her gratitude to Dr Caroline Bruce (NES) who would provide assistance in reviewing the current codes and practice.   

Members agreed the revised terms of reference and were content with the drafting approach outlined by the Chair.  

Agreed actions and next steps – Chair

The Chair thanked members for their insightful comments and invited any other business. 

LT noted that the drafting sub-group would be meeting later in the month. This would be an initial planning session, aimed at better understanding capacity and agreeing roles and timescales. An update would follow for SLWG members.  

• action point – secretariat to circulate a schedule for future meeting dates.  

Summary of agreed actions:

• secretariat to progress the publication of the SLWG minutes
• secretariat to remind SLWG members to share relevant information, evidence, and research which will be collated to inform the drafting process
• secretariat to circulate proposed membership of the reference group and ask for further suggestions
• secretariat to circulate a schedule for future meeting dates