Use of Social Media Sites by Social Care and Safeguarding Staff
Scope of this chapter
NOTE
The use of social media in a social care and safeguarding environment is a developing area. Cases and reviews have discussed the use of social media in social work practice. There is, however, currently no specific government guidance on the issue. This chapter is designed to highlight some of the issues to be considered, with links to additional information. It is not intended to provide any legal advice, and legal advice must be sought as appropriate. Local Authorities and Courts may have local protocols in place on the use of social media/service of documents.
This chapter will continue to be updated as the body of case-law develops.
It is important to remember that principles of data protection and confidentiality apply equally when working in a home environment as they do when working in an office environment.
Remember that you are still working, and appropriate standards of professionalism should be maintained at all times. Do not post anything on personal social media accounts that could inadvertently disclose any confidential work material/issues/identifying information in relation to service-users.
Amendment
In November 2024, this chapter was updated in line with local practice.
Developments in online facilities such as social media sites are fast-changing. This can impact on many aspects of daily life, including in a social care and safeguarding environment. It is important that professionals keep up to date with and harness useful technology, whilst ensuring that this is done in a safe and appropriate manner.
Social Work England Professional Standard 3.10 provides that social workers will:
'Establish and maintain skills in information and communication technology and adapt .. practice to new ways of working, as appropriate'.
Social media can be a useful tool. It can be used by professionals to develop skills and knowledge, and to network with others nationally and internationally. It offers new ways of working. For example:
- Checking the social media accounts of missing children/young people, where they are public, as part of efforts to trace them;
- Tracing/serving birth parents during court proceedings;
- As part of assessments, to ascertain the veracity of information provided by parents and others.
Court cases and case reviews have advocated the use of social media checks during assessments and court proceedings. However, this is a developing area and caution must be exercised.
The increasing use of social media sites brings with it additional considerations. These include:
- Confidentiality and consent of service users;
- The need to process personal data in accordance with data protection principles;
- Professionals' own right to privacy and private life;
- The need for caution and corroboration – social media accounts can be infiltrated/faked. Service users may have more than one online persona;
Appropriate arrangements need to be made for setting up dedicated social media accounts. It is not appropriate to use professionals' personal accounts. A social media presence must be requested in accordance with the Council’s Social Media Policy, Procedure and Guidance. Where a social media presence is agreed, if the social media presence is such that a member of the public may not identify it as being operated by the Council, a CHIS authorisation needs to be considered and this would need to be approved by one of Durham’s authorising officers. Please refer to the Council’s Corporate Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA) Guidance for further details.
- Depending on the circumstances, the viewing of service-users' social media accounts may constitute overt or covert surveillance requiring appropriate authorisation. Legal advice must always be sought before any parent/carer’s social media is viewed. Please contact Legal & Democratic Services, Commercial and Corporate Services Team.
Information gleaned from searches of social media sites will constitute 'personal data' which must be processed in accordance with data processing principles. It must be:
- Processed in a way that is lawful and fair and transparent in relation to the data subject;
- For specified, explicit and legitimate purposes;
- Adequate, relevant and limited to what is necessary;
- Accurate and kept up to date;
- Kept for no longer than is necessary;
- Processed in a secure and confidential manner;
- The controller must demonstrate compliance (accountability).
It is good practice, where enquiries are likely to include searches of social media sites, to seek explicit consent and record this on the child’s file.
In specific circumstances, social media searches, as with other forms of information-gathering for Assessment purposes, should generally take place with the consent of the subject, unless there are valid reasons to the contrary. There may be an 'overriding public interest' in obtaining and sharing information without explicit consent. This will depend on the circumstances of each case.
Viewing a service-user's social media content without their specific consent is not necessarily, of itself, unlawful.
However, consideration must be given, in all circumstances, as to whether viewing the sites constitutes 'directed surveillance' under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 ('RIPA') (as amended) and so requires authorisation under that Act. This is a complex area.
Whilst the following general principles apply, each situation must be treated on its own facts, and where directed surveillance is being undertaken, this must be authorised by one of the Council’s RIPA authorising officers:
- If the consent of the service-user is obtained, or the Council has taken reasonable steps to inform particular individuals that the surveillance is or may be taking place then the activity may be regarded as overt and authorisation for direct surveillance may not be required;
- Simple reconnaissance of social media sites (i.e. preliminary examination with a view to establishing whether the site or its contents are of interest) is unlikely to interfere with a person’s reasonably held expectation of privacy and therefore is not likely to require a directed surveillance authorisation. But where a public authority is systematically collecting and recording information about a particular person or group, a directed surveillance authorisation should be considered. These considerations apply regardless of when the information was shared online;
- Factors to be considered include whether the information obtained will be recorded and retained, whether there will be repeated viewing of the subject, whether the information provides a pattern of lifestyle, and whether there is collateral intrusion into the privacy of friends and family members. If these factors are present, this may require authorisation under the Act. It is for the employer to ensure that any covert surveillance is properly authorised, recorded and, most importantly, legally justifiable.
What constitutes 'repeat viewing' is not set out and will depend on the facts of each situation.
See also the Covert Surveillance Code of Practice.
Please refer to Personal Use of Social Media Policy. In particular, this provides “Do not publicise any colleagues’ or customers’ personal or confidential information such as contact details or photographs”.
Social media can be a useful learning and networking tool. However, caution must be exercised. It is important to act in a way that does not compromise either the confidentiality of service-users or the safety and security of the staff and their families.
Social media can blur the boundaries between the personal and the professional, which staff should be wary of when communicating with service users.
Social Work England Professional Standard 2.6 requires Social Workers to treat information about people with sensitivity and handle confidential information in line with the law.
Professionals should be mindful of the implications for their own right to privacy and private life. Staff need to be vigilant to keep their own identity safe and that of friends and families. They need to consider the implications and risks of putting personal information on social media sites such as work, contact details and photographs of work colleagues and family members, and should not do so if they think their privacy and safety will be compromised. They may want to ask family and friends to bear this in mind when posting information, as for example inappropriate pictures could open them up to criticism or pictures of their family online could create difficulties.
It should not be assumed that privacy settings will prevent information reaching a wider audience than that intended.
Social Work England's current Professional Standards (Standard 5.6) state that a social worker will not 'Use technology, social media or other forms of electronic communication unlawfully, unethically, or in a way that brings the profession into disrepute'.
In the regulator's Professional Standards Guidance on this standard, the following is also stated specifically in relation to social media:
'Confidentiality also applies to the use of technology and social media. Social workers should not make reference to anyone they support or disclose personal or professional information about colleagues, managers, or employers on social media, an online forum or blog. Even if the references are anonymised, the identity of the person may be recognisable to others…
'Social media can be a supportive tool to facilitate communication in an online community. However, social networking sites such as Facebook, X (formerly Twitter), blogs and others are public places.
When communicating online people often have little control over who sees comments or where they end up, even if they are later deleted. Social workers should be cautious about posting information about themselves on social media if it is something that they would prefer the people they work with did not know about.
They should refrain from posting anything that may damage confidence in their work, or the work of the profession. This may include political, religious, or moral beliefs, social activities or personal relationships.
Social workers should also be mindful of their organisation's policies and should not post anything that breaches their employer's code of conduct. At all times, they should uphold the confidentiality of the people they support, as well as their colleagues and the people their colleagues' support.
It is important to apply stringent privacy settings and review them regularly. Privacy settings can be reset by the social networking site to a default which may not be as stringent as personal settings, so it is important to check these regularly'.
These are considered best practice principles for all staff in Children and Young People’s Services and Adult Care Services. Professionals registered with other regulatory bodies are encouraged to familiarise themselves with their own regulator's standards regarding use of social media.
See also: Personal Use of Social Media Policy.
Please refer to the Council’s Social Media Policy, Procedure and Guidance. In particular, this requires that confidential or sensitive information is never shared.
Searches of the social media activity of service-users and their associates can offer a useful means of information-gathering as part of the Assessment process. However, parents, service users and carers need to be fully aware that such directed surveillance may be undertaken in relation to their social media accounts and asked to provide written consent to such searches. Where such consent is not obtained, directed surveillance will need to be authorised as explained in Section 2.3, Covert Surveillance and the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000.
For example, it can be used to check some aspects of a service user's and/or their family's/associate's account of current or recent events which might affect the safety of a child or children, such as:
- Possible presence within the family environment of a Person Posing a Risk to Children;
- Presence of known risky behaviour, such as drug and alcohol abuse;
- Where there are reasonable grounds to believe that information given by a family as part of the assessment is misleading or untrue e.g. the claimed separation of a couple where domestic abuse is known to be a significant risk factor.
This approach has been advocated recently in court cases and a serious case review.
In the 2017 Serious Case Review in relation to Child G, the following learning was identified (para 1.3):
'When conducting assessments and reassessments of vulnerable families, practitioners may find that including internet and social media checks would enhance and triangulate information given by parents'.
The rationale stated to underpin this learning is that:
'Checks on the internet and social media can provide publicly available information about lifestyle and relationships to inform assessments'.
The review report also noted that:
'…Such checks, including on social media, in other cases could, for example, contradict denials of contact with dangerous ex-partners'.
The Review included a Recommendation that the safeguarding boards involved:
'Consider how best to enable practitioners to access and use relevant internet and public facing social media content to enhance their assessments. This should include policy and practice guidance'.
The Cafcass Social Media Policy counsels that 'practitioners should be aware of the complexities around authenticating online information. Screenshots and printouts can be manipulated by editing the information, and practitioners should also question the trail of how and where the information was found'.
The Honourable Mr Justice Holman, in the case of Re: T (A Child) [2017] EWFC 19 said he wanted the judgment to highlight that social media may be a useful tool for tracing parents who are being served with notice of an adoption hearing.
'So I do wish to highlight by this short judgment that, in the modern era, Facebook may well be a route to somebody such as a birth parent whose whereabouts are unknown and who requires to be served with notice of adoption proceedings. I do not for one moment suggest that Facebook should be the first method used, but it does seem to be a useful tool in the armoury which can certainly be resorted to long before a conclusion is reached that it is impossible to locate the whereabouts of a birth parent. Of course, not everyone is on Facebook but, in this particular case, a relatively socially disadvantaged young mother …. has been found very rapidly by that means'. (paragraph 21)
Courts and local authorities may have local protocols regarding the use of social media for service of court documentation. Legal advice must be sought before trying to trace parents using social media.
The Cafcass Social Media Policy states that 'Cafcass will only make contact with parties or other relevant individuals by social media when this is court ordered'.
N.B. whilst the above case law highlights the use of Facebook, the principle should be applied to all forms of social media.
Last Updated: November 14, 2024
v32
