Male Families SA carers fear being wrongly accused by children in wake of Shannon McCoole case

MEN working for Families SA fear they will be targeted by children in state care who make false accusations against them, in the wake of the Shannon McCoole abuse revelations.

• Inquiry: Children must get chance to give their version of events
• Inquiry: McCoole promoted after bringing R-rated film into care house
• Inquiry: Testing revealed McCoole had potential to abuse authority
• Inquiry: McCoole was identified as ‘high risk’ but still hired
• SENTENCED: McCoole jailed for 35 years for horrific sexual abuse

MEN working for Families SA fear they will be targeted by children in state care who make false accusations against them, in the wake of the Shannon McCoole abuse revelations.

McCoole was convicted last year of sexually abusing young children in his care while working for Families SA and NannySA.

A Royal Commission into the state’s child protection system, prompted by McCoole’s actions, heard evidence on Thursday from a male Families SA youth worker who said he and his male colleagues now had a heightened fear of being accused of inappropriate behaviour by vulnerable children in their care.

“It’s a real fear now,” said the man, who cannot be named because of a non-publication order.

“It’s scary for all the males. It’s unfortunate that this monster (McCoole) got in.

“Shannon McCoole has become a wildcard. A young person can say ‘This person is like Shannon McCoole’ and that’s enough for your whole career to be tainted.

“I’m scared that this is the future of my profession and it upsets me.”

Male Families SA carers fear they will be targeted by children who make false accusations against them, in the wake of the Shannon McCoole abuse revelations.

When McCoole was arrested in June 2014, there were calls to consider outlawing male carers working alone with children in state-run homes.

Today, the youth worker told the commission he was currently stood down from work with Families SA, with pay, while he was investigated over a care concern made about him.

He told the commission he had not been given any information about the nature of the concern or who reported it.

The man was the subject of an earlier care concern, lodged mid last year, which was deemed “unfounded”.

A teenage boy in his care had alleged the man made inappropriate sexual jokes and was “like Shannon McCoole”.

The man said he was told by superiors that such allegations being made by children in state care “happens all the time”.

He said children should always be able to lodge complaints but “if they are making up lies ... they need to know that there are consequences”.

A number of carers, working for Families SA or NannySA, also gave evidence to the commission about concerning behaviour exhibited by an 18-month-old girl who McCoole was later convicted of sexually abusing.

The toddler was seen on two separate occasions with her pants down and pushing a “lifelike” baby doll between her legs.

One of the carers asked the toddler’s social worker to have her assessed by a psychologist. Instead, the social worker said he consulted a psychologist who deemed it “appropriate behaviour for her age”.

The toddler had also been seen playing violently with dolls, including “stomping” on their heads.

A NannySA worker reported the toddler “screaming and thrashing her head” during a nappy change.

“She covered her vagina with both hands ... screaming ‘No, no, no, no’,” she said.

A Families SA worker who changed the toddler’s nappy found what could have been a pubic hair stuck to the skin near her groin.

However, she assumed it was a head hair from another worker at that house who had dark, curly hair.

The commission also heard:

A YOUNG girl who had been in McCoole’s care regularly woke during the night screaming and complaining that her vagina hurt.

McCOOLE took his personal mobile phone and laptop computer to work in state-run homes.

A CONCERN was raised about a NannySA carer who allegedly kissed a young boy in her care on the mouth. However, the carer, who gave evidence, rejected the report.