Schools which report violence-obsessed children ‘met with closed doorways and lifeless ends’
Children’s Commissioner Rachel de Souza raised the alarm about the Prevent counter-terror programme, saying cases end up being referred back to the organisation that flagged concerns in the first place
Axel Rudakubana has been accused of trying to ‘retraumatise’ his victim’s families (Image: PA)
Schools which report concerns about kids obsessed with violence are met with “closed doors and dead ends,” a damning report warns.
Children’s Commissioner Dame Rachel de Souza voiced her alarm about referrals to the anti-terror Prevent programme, which was heavily criticised following the Southport attack.
She called for a new national database detailing cases where authorities have identified and supported children at risk of causing harm – including those fixated on violence with no clear ideology.
Dame Rachel said that in many cases children referred to Prevent are then directed back to the service that raised the alarm in the first place. In the year to March 2025, she pointed out, 60% of referrals came from education, followed by 20% from police and 11% from local authorities.
She wrote: “This highlights that there is a group of children which professionals are greatly concerned about, and seeking support for, but are finding closed doors and dead ends.”
The Prevent programme is designed to intervene and direct people away from terrorism. Referrals involving children have rocketed in the past decade – from 2,918 in 2016-17 to 4,715 in 2024-25.
Dame Rachel argued that children feared to be fixated with violence or at risk of becoming terrorists should be referred to local authority safeguarding teams alongside Prevent. This should identify the support they need, she said.
Her analysis found 71% of referrals did not relate to a clear ideology – with many linked to harmful online content such as videos of violence and extreme pornography. Between April 2024 and March 2025, 79% of cases involving children were closed without progressing through the programme.
The Prevent programme was heavily criticised after it emerged Southport killer Axel Rudakubana had been referred three times due to alarming behaviour at school. But because he did not have a clear ideology, his case was not escalated.
He went on to kill three girls at a dance class and tried to murder eight others as well as two adults in July 2024.
Dame Rachel said: “A referral should be the start of understanding a child’s individual circumstances, not the end of the process. When a child does not progress through Prevent, we must be confident other services are there to understand and meet their needs.
“Simply returning children to services that made the referral, without a clear understanding of what is driving their behaviour or who will be responsible for meeting their needs, risks missing opportunities to provide the right support children desperately need. We need a stronger safeguarding response particularly for children who are fixated with violence but have no identified extremist ideology.
“Professionals working with children need the expertise and support to identify children’s needs and behaviours, intervene early and provide appropriate interventions.”
Currently the second phase of the Southport Inquiry, which opened in July, is looking at how to deal with people who pose a risk of extreme violence, but where ideology is not the primary driver. It is also looking at the influence the internet has on them.
Dame Rachel has also recommended that online platforms should be required to complete a risk assessment for the risk of radicalisation or violence fixation. She said ministers should restrict technology companies from accessing children, until they are able to prove that they have measures in place to protect them from harm,
A government spokesperson said: “We are committed to ensuring all children are safe from radicalisation and Prevent plays a crucial role in this, moving more than 6,000 people away from violent ideologies since 2015.
“Every Prevent referral is assessed thoroughly by experts. If it’s determined a person is not at risk of being drawn into terrorism, it is right they are supported by other, more appropriate services.” And they said of the report: “We are reviewing it alongside our work in response to the Southport Inquiry – including developing further options to manage those fascinated with extreme violence.”
