Television often plays an important role in bringing difficult and often uncomfortable subjects into the public discussion. Two recent storylines in Hollyoaks and EastEnders have done exactly that, exploring the grooming of young girls by adults who have been placed in positions of trust and authority.

Although the storylines are very different, both highlight how perpetrators can exploit their positions of trust to manipulate young, vulnerable children and gradually establish a level of control over their lives.

For those of us working with survivors of abuse, these are sadly not unfamiliar scenarios, and we know that grooming is rarely as straightforward as it might initially appear. It can involve a gradual process of building trust, exploiting vulnerability, creating emotional dependency and using various different tactics to make a child feel that they are the only person they can rely upon.

But from a legal perspective, there is another important question that these scenarios raise, posing the question, what responsibility do the organisations which employ or these perpetrators have when abuse is committed by someone acting in a position of trust?

This is particularly relevant when considering potential civil compensation claims for abuse, including claims based on the principle of vicarious liability.

Hollyoaks: Dee Dee and Abigail, exploring a teacher's abuse of trust

The Hollyoaks storyline centres on teenager Dee Dee Hutchinson and her relationship with teacher Abigail Matthews.

Following the death of her mother, Dee Dee, the programme explores how she is understandably very vulnerable and looking for support and stability. Abigail initially enters her life as a drug counsellor before becoming her teacher.

What initially appears to be a supportive relationship gradually takes a much darker turn, when Abigail begins to exploit Dee Dee's vulnerability, developing an inappropriate relationship with her and manipulating her into believing that they share a special connection, a common tactic often used by groomers of children. As the storyline develops, Abigail increasingly seeks to isolate Dee Dee and establish emotional control over her.

One of the particularly disturbing aspects of this storyline is how Abigail uses her position as a teacher to establish trust and influence. Dee Dee is a young person who, as all children should, be able to rely on the adults around her for support and protection. Instead, someone entrusted with those responsibilities is exploiting that position for her own purposes, and we see this develop throughout the storyline as the episodes progress.

What stands out about this particular storyline is that it challenges some of the assumptions people may have about perpetrators of abuse. Firstly, Abigail is a female teacher grooming a female pupil. Although frequently seen in real life scenarios, a common misconception is that a perpetrator of grooming is always a male seeking out to exploit young girls. This is not the case, and we sadly know all too well through our work that abuse and grooming knows no gender and can take any form of dynamic. We know that there is also no stereotypical victim or perpetrator of grooming. Young people from all backgrounds can be targeted, and no matter the circumstances will often not recognise that they are being manipulated or controlled.

Furthermore, there is a real centre on how the circumstances of Dee Dee's life which make her particular vulnerable is not mistaken for responsibility. Of course, we know that all children are vulnerable, but we must recognise that grooming is a deliberate process of manipulation by the perpetrator, and a young person's attachment to a perpetrators behaviour does not make the behaviour acceptable. It is never a child’s fault when an adult is exploiting their position of trust.

I see all too often feelings of shame and embarrassment from survivors of this kind of abuse, and countless times have had conversations with clients who seem to blame themselves, questioning why they trusted the perpetrator, why they did not recognise what was happening or why they did not speak out sooner. Some even describe themselves as having been stupid or believe that, in some way, they were responsible for what happened to them. These feelings can be incredibly difficult to overcome, but it is important to be clear that the responsibility lies entirely with the adult who chose to manipulate and exploit a child and never with the child. Children are entitled, and deserve to trust the adults around them. They are not responsible for recognising, preventing or stopping abuse, and nothing about their circumstances, behaviour or relationship with the perpetrator makes what happened their fault, in any case where a child has been abused.

Impressively, Hollyoaks has worked with safeguarding organisations, including the NSPCC and The Derwent Initiative, in developing this storyline which is really important to ensure that the portrayal of the grooming is accurately reflect to help audiences understand. It is also positive for perhaps children and parents that are watching in helping to recognise the warning signs, particularly where a young person may not recognise that the relationship is abusive without watching.

I also think Hollyoaks deserve praise for the way they have handled this storyline, particularly their decision to desensualise the portrayal of the relationship, keeping the focus to remain on the manipulation, abuse of power and exploitation of trust, rather than romanticising or sexualising the relationship. This is, in my view, extremely important when portraying abuse involving a child, as it helps reinforce that grooming is abuse, not a relationship or romance. We know how influential television and the media can be, particularly for younger audiences, so it is important that storylines involving child grooming are portrayed responsibly and send a clear message that this behaviour is abusive, not romantic or acceptable.

EastEnders: Amy Mitchell and DC Craig Ingram exploring grooming by a police officer

A similarly disturbing storyline has recently been developing another soap, namely EastEnders, involving the grooming of 17-year-old Amy Mitchell and adult Detective Constable Craig Ingram.

Craig is a police officer and a colleague of Amy's father. He initially gains Amy's confidence after she admits that she was responsible for a criminal offence. Craig agrees to keep her confession secret, putting himself in a position where Amy believes she can rely on him, and that he owes her something. What Amy is unaware of however, is that Craig has been suspended from public police duties following a number of complaints about his conduct.

As the storyline develops, we see Craig use her fear of the consequences of her actions to establish control, gradually manipulating her and making her increasingly dependent on him. Notably, and similar to that in Hollyoaks, Craig works to isolate Amy from those around her and create the impression that he is the only person she can trust.

Not only does this storyline explore the grooming of an adult and child abuse of trust, it involves someone who is supposed to uphold the law and protect the public. A police officer holds a position of considerable authority and the trust placed in that role can make it particularly difficult for a young person to recognise when that authority is being abused.

EastEnders has too worked alongside leading charities Barnardo's and the End Violence Against Women Coalition as well as other experts to develop the storyline and ensure that the subject of grooming is handled sensitively and accurately.

What do these storylines have in common?

Although one storyline involves a teacher and the other a police officer, there are some striking similarities.

Both Abigail and Craig occupy positions which give them authority, influence and access to young people; both exploit the trust associated with their professional roles and pastoral duties over children to develop inappropriate relationships; both gradually manipulate them to create emotional dependency and make it increasingly difficult for them to recognise or challenge what is happening.

These are important features of grooming, but they also raise wider questions about the responsibilities of the organisations behind these professional roles, and this is particular significant when we look to pursue legal recourse through the civil courts as opposed to the criminal courts.

Teachers are entrusted with the education, welfare and supervision of children. Police officers are entrusted with protecting the public and exercising considerable powers of authority, and these are both positions which carry significant responsibilities.

When an individual abuses the trust placed in them, it is right to ask whether the organisation which employed or engaged them should also be held accountable.

Vicarious liability: can an organisation be held responsible for abuse?

It is a common misconception that a civil claim can only be brought against the individual who abused them, but in many circumstances, there may also be a legal basis for bringing a claim against the organisation responsible for employing or engaging the perpetrator. As I have explored in previous blogs, this is where the principle of vicarious liability becomes relevant.

Vicarious liability is a legal principle which can make an employer or other organisation legally responsible for wrongful acts committed by an individual in circumstances where the law considers there to be a sufficiently close connection between the wrongdoing and the individual's role.

There are essentially two stages to this legal test:

1. The relationship between the parties: the courts will consider, was the perpetrator an employee, or was their relationship with the defendant sufficiently akin to employment?
2. The connection with the wrongdoing: Judges will look as to the proximity of the abuse and their role, namely, was there a sufficiently close connection between the role entrusted to the perpetrator and the abuse committed?

The second stage is particularly important in abuse claims and often the one that can be most tricky to overcome in cases, and so this is why each case must be considered on its own facts, and so discussing your scenario with a specialist abuse lawyer is an important first step when considering what legal avenues are available to you.

Schools, police forces and other organisations: who could face a claim?

It is crucial to note that these issues are not confined to schools and police forces. Cases can be brought against many different types of organisations and institutions including, but not limited to:

• Children's homes and residential care settings.
• Religious organisations.
• Sports clubs and coaching organisations.
• Charities and youth organisations.
• Hospitals and other healthcare settings.
• Foster care and other care arrangements/settings.
• Organisations providing support and supervision to vulnerable children.

Of course, it is important to note too that these types of claims are not limited to just child survivors, adults and vulnerable people can become subject to this horrific kind of abuse too.

The importance of holding organisations accountable

For many survivors, pursuing a civil claim is about more than financial compensation, and it can often more be about having the wrongdoing acknowledged, obtaining answers about how the abuse was able to happen, an apology or simply holding those responsible to account.

In some cases, the individual perpetrator may have died, or otherwise be untraceable or perhaps not have the financial means to be sued and meet a compensation claim. Pursuing an organisation which may be vicariously liable therefore can be particularly important in these circumstances.

Sometimes, it can also be difficult for survivors to accept that an institution they trusted, or which they believed was responsible for protecting them, may have failed them, and understanding that there may be a claim against an organisation can open up an avenue which survivors may not previously have considered.

Importantly, a criminal conviction is not always required before a civil claim can be pursued. The criminal and civil justice systems operate separately, and a survivor may be able to bring a civil claim even where the perpetrator has never been convicted. This is something again which will need to be considered on a case by case basis considering the facts of the case.

Survivors should also be aware that it may also be possible to pursue claims relating to abuse which happened many years ago. Although limitation is a complex area in abuse cases, the fact that abuse happened to you in childhood or some considerable time ago does not necessarily mean that a claim is impossible, and this is something you can consider with a specialist abuse lawyer.

Switalskis experience

This is not an issue confined to television storylines. Switalskis currently represent survivors of childhood sexual abuse by teachers, including cases involving former teachers at Junior King's School in Kent and a preparatory school in Hertfordshire. These include survivors of abuse by Dennis Fletcher, the former resident boarding master at Junior King's School, and Deborah Franklin, a former teacher and home tutor in Radlett who was jailed in October 2026. These cases demonstrate that the abuse of trust by teachers is not simply a television storyline, but a very real experience for survivors, often with devastating consequences lasting decades.

Abuse of trust should never be ignored

Our specialist abuse claims team at Switalskis has considerable experience in supporting and advising survivors of abuse, including cases involving grooming, institutional abuse and vicarious liability.

We understand how difficult it can be to take the first step and speak about what happened. You do not need to have reported the abuse to the police to seek legal advice, and we will approach any enquiry with sensitivity and understanding.

If you would like to discuss your circumstance and understand whether you have a claim, please contact Hannah Hodgson at hannah.hodgson@switalskis.com or Danielle Vincent at danielle.vincent@switalskis.com for a free, non-obligatory and confidential chat.