When communication needs are mistaken for lack of insight

A parent does not have to communicate in the same way as a professional to demonstrate understanding, reflection or capacity to change.

Communication is an important part of any parenting assessment. We need to understand what a parent thinks, what they understand about concerns, how they make decisions and whether they can recognise the impact of their actions on their child. However, there is an important distinction between not being able to communicate something in the way we expect and not understanding it.

This distinction can be particularly important when assessing parents with learning disabilities, learning difficulties, neurodivergence or communication needs. A parent may need more time to answer a question, find abstract questions difficult, struggle when several questions are asked at once, or understand something when it is explained using an example from their own life but struggle to explain the same concept using professional language. None of these things, on their own, tell us whether a parent has insight.

Insight can sometimes become a shorthand in assessments. A parent may be described as having “limited insight” because they have not given the answer an assessor was expecting, because they disagree with a professional view, or because they cannot immediately explain a complex issue in professional language. But disagreement is not necessarily a lack of understanding. Neither is an awkward answer, needing something explained differently, or taking longer to process a question.

The more useful question is what the parent actually understands when they have been given a fair opportunity to demonstrate it. That might mean breaking a question down, using concrete examples, checking understanding, returning to a subject later or asking the parent to explain something in their own words. It may also mean paying close attention to what happens in practice.

A parent might struggle to explain why a particular routine is important but consistently follow it. Another parent might give an excellent verbal explanation but struggle to put that understanding into practice. Both pieces of information matter. Good assessment requires us to look beyond how convincingly someone can talk about parenting and consider whether their understanding is reflected in their behaviour.

This is one of the principles behind accessible assessment. As we have explored in Accessible assessment isn't a lower standard, adapting the assessment process should not mean changing the standard against which parenting is considered. It means giving a parent a fair opportunity to demonstrate their abilities and understanding.

Adapting the way we communicate does not mean changing what we are assessing. The questions remain the same. Can this parent understand their child's needs? Can they recognise risks? Can they respond appropriately? Can they learn from experience? Can they make safe decisions? Can they accept support and make changes where necessary?

What may need to change is how we give the parent an opportunity to demonstrate the answer. That might involve simpler language, shorter questions, visual information, repetition, additional processing time or practical examples. It might mean checking back rather than assuming that silence means agreement. It might mean recognising that a parent who says “I don't know” may need the question presented differently before they can properly engage with it.

This is not about making an assessment easier. It is about making the evidence more reliable. Making an assessment accessible should be about removing unnecessary barriers to participation, not removing the difficult questions that need to be answered.

Social workers are familiar with concepts such as emotional availability, reflective capacity, protective capacity, attunement and insight. These concepts can be useful, but they are professional concepts. Parents do not need to use the terminology themselves for the underlying understanding to be present.

A parent might never say that they need to prioritise their child's emotional regulation, but may be able to explain that when their child becomes overwhelmed, they know they need to stop, give them some space and avoid making the situation worse. That may tell us considerably more than whether they can use the language of professional practice.

There is also a need to be curious about the evidence we generate through our own assessment process. If we do not adapt our approach, we can sometimes end up drawing conclusions about a parent based partly on the barriers created by the assessment itself. A parent may appear disengaged when they are overwhelmed. They may appear evasive when they are still processing the question. They may appear to lack insight when they have understood the issue but disagree with the professional interpretation.

That does not mean every difficulty should be explained by additional needs, and accessible assessment should never become a way of avoiding difficult conclusions. Sometimes a parent genuinely does not understand. Sometimes they genuinely lack insight. Sometimes they are avoiding difficult questions or choosing not to change. The purpose of adapting the assessment is not to remove those possibilities. It is to give us greater confidence about which explanation is actually supported by the evidence.

This is also why strengths matter in assessment. Recognising strengths does not mean overlooking areas of difficulty. It means making sure the assessment considers the whole picture, including what a parent can already do, where difficulties arise and what may realistically help them develop.

Accessibility and professional curiosity therefore belong together. The more carefully we consider how a parent communicates, processes information and demonstrates their understanding, the more confident we can be that our conclusions are based on parenting capacity rather than presentation.

The standard for safe parenting does not change because a parent has additional needs. What should change is our willingness to consider whether the assessment process gives that parent a meaningful opportunity to demonstrate whether they can meet that standard.

A good assessment should not ask whether a parent can communicate like a professional. It should ask what the evidence tells us about their parenting capacity.

At S&G Assessments, we believe accessibility should improve the quality of an assessment, not dilute it. Our approach is to adapt the process where necessary while remaining focused on the same professional questions, evidence and expectations.