by Shameem Hussain (Operations Director at Muslim Women's Network UK)

Sara Sharif was 10 years old when she was tortured and murdered by the very people who should have loved and cared for her. Not only that, Sara was known to social services from birth. So, how does a 10-year-old slip through the net and her life tragically cut short?  

Well, the honest truth is she did not ‘slip through the net’. Sara had been placed in foster care twice, and removed from one abusive parent to another. This week, her father and step-mother were given life sentences for her murder. Urfan Sharif received 40 years, Beinash Batool, 33 years, and Faisal Malik, her uncle, received 16 years for causing or allowing the death of a child. Yet, this sentencing does not seem enough - is this justice served for the cruelty and abuse Sara suffered? 

As a former social worker with 15 years of experience in safeguarding vulnerable adults and children, I find it difficult to comprehend how key services tremendously failed a known vulnerable child. Although in 2023, Sara’s school did make a referral to social services after they found bruising to her face, this was inadequately investigated. No safeguarding strategy was put in place and social services decided to take no further action. My understanding is, if there are bruises on a child, you assess if they are accidental or not; establish truth of the explanation provided by the child, the parents and any other significant person. Knowing Sara’s history with social services, how could this not have merited further exploration and raised safeguarding concerns? 

Sara had been placed in foster care twice, and removed from one abusive parent to another.

Sara was never given the chance to have a normal life. Her childhood was one of violence and abuse. Following domestic abuse, her parents separated. When this should have marked the beginning of living an abuse free life, for Sara it was brief, as her mother started abusing her.  Being removed from her mother only to be placed into the care of her father, despite concerns around methods of physical discipline and history of abuse was another sentence. This imprisoned Sara to a cycle of abuse.

There are serious questions that need to be asked - why was a vulnerable child moved from one abusive parent to another. Was this resource driven? Poor decision-making? Incompetence? In my mind, this should not have been an option to explore, as Sara was at risk of significant harm from both parents. I find it uncomfortable to believe that in knowing the history of Sara’s life, the level of contact she had with social services, and safeguarding concerns, that the best option for her was to be placed with the ‘less abusive’ parent. This is unacceptable. 

Sara’s case once again exposes the response of key services in cases involving minoritised children is inadequate. Structural inequalities and lack of cultural understanding, including perception of ‘honour’ can act as barriers preventing disclosure.  Her case also highlights how continued exposure to abuse can potentially lead to accepted silence.

Living in a home where domestic abuse is frequent can normalise certain behaviours, so when a child is asked about how home life is, they may report it as ‘normal’. The abuse Sara suffered from the adults known to her became part of her daily life – she had known no other way of living. Batool regarded Sara, as a lesser person because she was not her biological child. She used her as a slave, abused her and allowed her to be abused. And, of the other children in that home who heard and witnessed Sara’s beatings and torture, what does this teach them about violence and harm? Sara saw no one come to her aid, no one to advocate for her and no one to say this is wrong. This is why the failings are unjustifiable.

Sara’s case once again exposes the response of key services in cases involving minoritised children is inadequate. Structural inequalities and lack of cultural understanding, including perception of ‘honour’ can act as barriers preventing disclosure. 

It is upsetting to learn how many missed opportunities there were in Sara’s case. I echo the NSPCC’s comments around a ‘substantial, nationwide reform’ to child protection services is urgently required. We cannot keep on highlighting in serious case reviews into child deaths, the lack of collaboration and joined-up working between agencies. This cannot be the excuse.

Front line services need to work in collaboration with, by and for services in supporting families from racially minoritised communities and utilise their expertise. As stated in a recent report on safeguarding services published by the Department of Education, the importance of “sharing information across agencies helps to piece together the “jigsaw pieces” of the child’s life and identify risks early.” Piecing nuggets of information across different agencies will provide overall, timely insights on what is happening in a child’s life. At Muslim Women's Network (MWN) Helpline, when referrals to front line services are made, we do not always receive an update on the outcome of those referrals; instead we are given a standard response - your referral is being dealt with. This is extremely frustrating, as we have built a good rapport with the families we support.

 I urge Rachel de Souza, England’s children commissioner to personally ensure that the current child protection system is reviewed and an overall review of child protective services to be independently and meticulously scrutinised and reformed, so children like Sara can grow up in a safe home, where they can thrive in.