A range of safeguards to protect children's homes workers from false accusations of abuse have been recommended by the Commons home affairs committee.

For its inquiry, MPs received many letters from people claiming to be victims of such problems.

Here are two of the case studies said to be examples of what is happening across the UK.

---

A woman who used to work in a children's home was accused of physical abuse in the 1980s by a former female resident.

She was told an allegation had been made early last year when her work duties were restricted.

The woman was interviewed last autumn and no further action was taken. She told the committee:

The whole experience was horrendous. My professional reputation is tarnished and my private life has been turned upside down.

The police left me in limbo from March to September without even knowing what I was supposed to have done.

After the police decided not to proceed with any charges against me they were also unable to provide any paperwork for my employers as to the nature of their investigations.

So what did they have to go on in the first place apart from one child making one unsubstantiated claim that I had punched her three times?

---

A man was prosecuted on 83 counts of abuse, including sexual abuse of children at the home where he used to work.

At the court trial, the judge directed the jury to acquit him on 77 counts and permanently stayed the other six counts because he said the man could not receive a fair trial.

The man told the committee:

The vast majority of complaints made against me were dated some years after the inquiry began.

The witnesses' description of me and their accusations were remarkably similar in language, suggesting that the "trawling method" was supplemented by leading questions during interviews with former residents.

The documentation from which my defence team proved my innocence was available to Operation (X) for at least two, possibly three years.

There were apparent contradictions in witnesses' statements. One complainant described in depth an incident involving another member of staff, accusing him of sexual abuse.

By checking dates, it was evident that he had lied in his statement, a matter the investigating officers from Operation (X) were aware of when they interviewed me.