Sir, your reflections on subtle differences in the meaning of words caught our attention (Naming names, Br Dent J 2015;219: 6). In recent conversations with colleagues we have also noticed the term 'safeguarding' used, as you describe, in place of 'child protection'. You suggest that this is a development of language occurring with the passage of time. In part that is correct, but changing language does bring with it the potential for misuse and misinterpretation, particularly within complex multi-professional fields.

'Child protection' and 'safeguarding' are not equivalent terms; there is an important distinction between the two, defined in the statutory guidance, Working together to safeguard children.1 Their meanings have remained largely unchanged from earlier versions of the document2 and since introduced to the dental profession in a widely-distributed Department of Health England commissioned learning resource in 2006.3 Both terms refer to actions and interventions taken to prevent or respond to child abuse or neglect, not to refer to the actual abuse or neglect per se.

'Child protection' refers to the activity that is undertaken to protect specific children who are suffering, or are likely to suffer, significant harm whereas 'safeguarding and promoting the welfare of children' is defined as:

  • Protecting children from maltreatment

  • Preventing impairment of children's health or development

  • Ensuring that children are growing up in circumstances consistent with the provision of safe and effective care

  • Taking action to enable all children to have the best life chances.

Therefore child protection is just one part of a much wider agenda to safeguard and promote children's welfare. Child protection is the bit at the sharp end, when action is needed to keep children safe. Safeguarding includes child protection but also encompasses measures such as providing early help to vulnerable families.

The child protection literature laments that the system fails children because different groups of professionals work in silos and do not communicate effectively.4,5 We wonder if we are developing a new dialect within our own silo rather than learning the nuances of the new language we need for effective inter-agency communication? If your readers have concerns that a child is at serious risk of harm because of abuse or neglect then we would urge them to use the term 'child protection' when they speak to social workers, otherwise there is a danger that their concerns will be lost in translation and result in an inadequate response. On the other hand, if they think a family needs further assessment to decide whether early help is needed for less serious concerns, then it would be entirely appropriate to talk about 'safeguarding' the child.

To the best of our knowledge this is currently the correct use of this language. It may of course change with the passage of time, as has related terminology: child abuse and neglect are increasingly referred to by the all-encompassing term 'child maltreatment'; social services are also now known as 'children's services' or 'children's social care'. In the meantime we hope the Journal will continue to publish pertinent papers on safeguarding children, both in its broader context, and more specifically around protecting children from abuse and neglect. This can only promote scholarship and debate in this important emerging field of dental practice, a field in which we all still have much to learn.