Practitioners who work with young children are being scared off physical contact with them, believes John Powell, though it's something that all children need
It seems so natural and important to be able to give a child a hug when they are upset and need the reassurance that words alone cannot give. But many of the assumptions that are taken for granted about the benefits of touch are now being questioned. A sense of unease, sometimes verging on panic, has entered this area of professional practice.
In a discussion during a session concerned with child protection issues, one of my students, a male early years trainee teacher, commented that he was worried when young children sat on his lap, especially when he was on his own with the class. He added that even when he had explained to the children that he preferred not touching, 'they seemed to make physical contact naturally, no matter how many times they were reminded not to'.
In another seminar a nursery nurse told the group how there had been concern when a male colleague accompanied her when she attended to a young boy who had hurt himself in his groin. She said, 'We have a no-touch policy and it was important not to touch a child in an area where it might have been misconstrued.'
The spectre of child abuse has cast a long shadow into all sectors of private and professional life and left people suspicious that even the most seemingly innocent contact may harbour more sinister intentions. This sense of anxiety is particularly felt by men attempting to break from traditional roles by working in early years settings. It is unfortunate that they are being actively encouraged to do such work just at a time when public awareness of the existence of child sexual abuse has never been higher.
As a result of this, 'no touch' policies are being pursued in some education and care settings, while in others practitioners are having to rely on their own common sense for what is appropriate touch in their daily interactions with children. The time has surely come for practitioners working with young children in different settings, be they nursery nurses, teachers, social or health workers, to begin to discuss what has usually been taken for granted - the benefits of touch.
While everyone needs to be aware of child abuse, we need to reintroduce some balance into the discussion by considering the positive outcomes of appropriate touch and developing guidance for practice. Young children have strong needs to bond with significant adults and touch is clearly significant in helping them to develop such relationships.
Impact on practice
The way that practitioners express their concerns about physical contact with young children is often through asking 'what will people think?' The question of interpretation is always in the air. Because of this, practitioners may appear to be distant and uncaring towards the children they are working with.
But this is simply a self-protective policy to ensure as far as possible that their actions are not likely to be misunderstood.
In some situations this means following a policy resulting in 'no touch'. But is this a less abusive way of interacting or not? Some children may interpret a 'no touch policy' as not being liked and it may affect their personal self-esteem and confidence.
An informed way forward may be to consider the type of touch that may take place between a carer and a child. The authors Gale and Hegarty, for example (see below), discuss the importance of touch in caring for people with a learning disability and point out that 'how one person interprets the touch of another depends on each person's cultural background, the nature of the relationship and each individual's feelings at the time'.
They identified a number of different kinds of touch that took place in their research:
1. Instrumental touch that was purposeful and included the use of an instrument or piece of equipment.
2. Procedural touch that was purposeful and followed a set of nursing guidelines, such as dressing a wound.
3. Functional touch that was purposeful and helped with everyday functions, such as washing, dressing or feeding.
4. Expressive touch that was spontaneous with 'emotional intent to express feelings' - such as hugging.
5. Accidental touch that came about by accident, such as bumping into someone. These are helpful ways of considering how touch may take place. However, the issue remains about the ways that touch may be interpreted, despite its apparent benefits.
Towards the future
If the current trend of developing policies that discourage touch become the norm, what will be the implications for professionals? Practitioners could become distanced from the children they work with, who may experience touch as a natural occurrence at home but not outside it, in nurseries, schools, social work or health settings.
The role of touch when caring for young children is so natural that it is a bit like asking why we should smile. Imagine what it might be like if you weren't allowed to smile? How would we communicate the things that are often impossible to put into words and where words alone just won't do?
What all practitioners urgently need is a pro-active discussion to develop a set of official guidelines on touch that could inform practice across the professional boundaries of education, social care and health.
A conference this month will set out to initiate just such a process. 'To Touch or Not To Touch?', a multi-professional conference exploring this area of practice, will be held on Saturday, 28 April. Contact the Professional Development Centre, Manchester Metropolitan University, Institute of Education, 799 Wilmslow Road, Didsbury, Manchester M20 2RR (tel 0161 247 6425/2043, fax 0161 247 6814, internet www.dids.stu.mmu.ac.uk/(then click on conferences).
Further reading
Gale, E and Hegarty, J R, 'The Use of Touch in Caring for People With Learning Disability', British Journal of Developmental Disabilities, vol. 46, part 2, 2000, no 91, pp97-108.
Johnson, R, Hands Off the Disappearance of Touch in the Care of Children, New York, Peter Lang Publishing, 2000.
Silin, J (in Johnson above), 'What can we know? Advocating for young children', presented at the American Educational Research Association meeting, New Orleans, 1994.
John Powell is senior lecturer in early childhood studies at Manchester Metropolitan University
Appropriate touch
What is appropriate touch? When considering this question practitioners could reflect on the followingconcerns. Is the touch offered: n Welcomed by the child n Offering a sense of emotional well-being and security n Reinforcing a sense of positive self- identity and esteem n Supporting social interaction n Encouraging confidence and empowerment n In response to a health or welfare concern If the offered touch meets these requirements, then it is a practice that may be appropriate in that it is offering an environment in which young children feel secure and able to develop socially and emotionally.
