I don't think it's the case Scarlet5 that children are being left in vulnerable enviroments because of lack of funding. There is no doubt that the huge cuts that this govt is forcing LAs to make all sorts of cut backs, and there will be protestations from whoever is affected by the cuts, naturally. Thing is applications for Care Orders have increased by 50% since the Baby P case, as social workers have been loathe to continue to try to support families (as was the case with Baby P) and are getting these cases before the courts.
The business about the sw not wanting to wake a sleeping baby, sounds to me like an EDT worker, hoping to pass it on to the duty social worker next morning. Should have been a priority though.
Quite why Baby P hit the headlines in the way it did, I have no idea, because at least 20 other babies had been killed by their parents/step-fathers etc in the year that Baby P was being abused and none of these got into the media. I recall a child dying in the LA in which I worked and the parents pushed the child around in a push chair for an hour before taking her to hospital and she was dead on arrival. It was mother's boyfriend who has caused the death, as is so often the case.
Yes, there will be another Baby P case, and Baby XY and Z - because so long as there are people out there who have been too abused, neglected and emotionally damaged in their own childhoods to be able to provide a good quality of parenting, sadly this will be the case. I have never met a parent who has abused/neglected their child that has not had a very dysfunctional childhood him/herself. Violence breeds violence and we parent in the way that we were parented, with the odd exception. These abusing parents are simply too emotionally immature to care for a child's needs, as their own needs have never been met. There will almost always be a big gap betweem their chronological age and their emotional age, so in lots of cases, you are seeing mothers functioning around the 11/12 year old mark, and putting their own needs before the child.
Very often it is mother's boyfriend who is the abuser, and a mother who fails to protect because she too is afraid of the violent boyfriend.
Social Services are "on their knees" at the moment with huge caseloads, 20- 30% vacancy rates (more in the inner cities) and high sickness rates with stress related illnesses. They are having to spend around 70% of their working day in front of a computer screen, filling out forms for the children on their caseload, which is really a box ticking exercise. However even if none of this was the case, and SSDs were fully staffed etc, did not have to make cuts, it would not prevent children dying at the hands of their parents or step parents etc.
Sorry I am going off on a bit of a rant but I think there is still the issue that social workers are "damned if they do, an damned if they don't" and their first duty is to keep families together wherever possible, but it's a fine line between supporting the family in the hope that their parenting will improve and removing a child.