Social work and social workers often receive shoddy treatment from the media. The reality of the job and the issues it tackles are fascinating, complex and eminently newsworthy – so why don't we hear more about them? It would be too simplistic for me to say that social workers are only featured in the news when a child has died, I think there is more to it than that. In my experience, there are two other important factors at play.

First, social workers are largely employed by local authorities and the press offices of local authorities are very risk averse. They see only negative portrayals of the profession in the media and are therefore very wary of any requests for stories or comments from journalists about this area of work. Local authorities often refuse social workers permission to speak to the media so, when reported, stories are often one-sided. The perceived secrecy of the family courts is also cited by the press as a barrier to detailed reporting.

Social workers need to be allowed to engage with the media; the BBC/Open University documentary Protecting Our Children following the work of child protection officers in Bristol showed what can be achieved.

Which leads us to the second problem: the rules of news. I am regularly contacted by the media, and almost without fail, the journalist has the same refrain. They are interested in child trafficking, female genital mutilation, illegal adoption, private fostering or families fleeing UK social services by going abroad. They are always keen to focus on these difficult issues and to understand the background. But when it comes to broadcast or publication, we are told the journalist requires to speak to a child or victim and have them appear or be interviewed.

It is depressing that social work issues are treated solely as human interest stories and that an assumption is made by editors that the general public will neither engage nor understand the topic unless a victim tells their story directly. I have two issues with this: it is extremely patronising of journalists to assume their audience cannot engage with complex issues; and, victims have been through major trauma.

Social workers also have a duty of care towards victims. Many child abuse prosecutions founder as the UK court system demands that the child victim must appear in court and be cross examined by defence counsel. This is often beyond the emotional capacity of the child and – as we have seen in the recent Oxford paedophile grooming gang trial – the young people were put through extremely upsetting cross examinations. It is hardly ever in a child victim's best interest to be asked to repeat their trauma for the benefit of the media. Journalists may argue it is for the audience, but I think they are deciding on behalf of the audience.

I am certainly not saying that it is never appropriate for child victims to tell their stories. I have had the privilege of working with some astonishing young people who have transcended their trauma and a few have given brave and heartfelt testimony for press, TV and radio. But the present situation, where stories simply will not appear without their testimony, has to be addressed.

It is not acceptable for journalists to bemoan the secrecy of family courts and reluctance of local authorities to engage when they themselves are equally responsible for the poor coverage of social work issues in the media. Setting an arbitrary rule that issues will not be covered without victim testimony makes serious news programs appear little better than the Jeremy Kyle Show. These issues and child abuse victims deserve better from our media organisations.

Andy Elvin is chief executive of Children and Families Across Borders

Why not join our social care community? Become a member of the Guardian social care network and receive weekly updates on policy and best practice in your sector, as well as exclusive offers.