Talk

Advanced search

To think that social services are soulless thoughtless C***S!

(143 Posts)
Kneehighinnappies Tue 09-Sep-08 14:10:42

I am appalled if not sickened at the way social services are treating close friends of mine.
This may be long winded as I need to vent!

9 years ago a friends of the family was sent to prison for child abuse.
He smacked his SD round the back of the legs with a cane.
There were many other things that all led to this point, but I'm not going to go I'm not that as it isn't really what this is about.

I don't condone what he did one bit, but he served his time a built a new life for himself.
He married a lovely woman and they had a DS 4 months ago.
All the time his DW was pregnant social services were poking their noses in, which I can understand given the conviction he has, but things have now got to the point that they are trying to take is DS away!
Even though they have done NOTHING wrong!!!!

He already had a DS with his previous girlfriend and he was taken into care along with his SD.

The thing that I really don't understand is how the hell can social services think that taking a baby away from a woman who has never done anything, or even been involved in things that went on in the past is a good idea.
It's bad enough that they have said that he has to move out, which he has done, but they are still not happy enough with that and are now after the poor womans child!
All she has done is fallen in love with a man and had a child with him, surely there is no crime in that and the child should remain with her!

As for him, he served his time 9 years ago surely that is enough?
I mean I could understand if he had had previous convictions etc or had done something recently, but it has been 9 years he knows what he did was wrong and he has paid for it, why are they going after him like this!?!

Apparently they think that he is going to influence his wife into abusing their child when it is older!
As if! The woman has a brain she is a deputy head at a private school so is not the type of person who would be influenced easily, if at all.

They are even going to his employers and telling them that they should fire him and telling them all about the case they have as he works at a school (in the evenings teaching adults) and he 'may' come into contact with children!!!!
The poor bloke won't even be able to stack shelves in a supermarket by the time social services have finished with him.

They have already told his DW school all about him, even though he doesn't work there, and can't get onto the site through all the security there.

They are destroying this couples life and they will end up broke as they can't even have the same solicitor.

I think this whole case is DISGUSTING it make me feel sick that an innocent woman,mother can be treated like this!

Twiglett Tue 09-Sep-08 14:12:50

of course you know ALL the facts of this case don't you?

andiem Tue 09-Sep-08 14:14:28

tbh I think you probably have only heard one side of the story ss cannot and do not take children into care for no reason
they usually leave them with families for too long in my opinion
they have to show that there is a very strong possibility that the child will come to harm or has been harmed and they do not make the decision in isolation other professionals are involved

Twiglett Tue 09-Sep-08 14:15:36

I know some SWs and they work extremely hard under difficult conditions for little pay. They sweat blood over families and trying to keep them together and get the support they need. They are moral, generous and caring individuals working in an uphill struggle.

There are bad appes in every institution I agree but not always are they interfering and policies these days are to keep families together wherever possible.

A

nervousal Tue 09-Sep-08 14:15:56

their first concern is for the child - and ss don't take children off their parents without good reason.

If it had been sexual abuse he was convicted off would you still think they were being unreasonable??

Sidge Tue 09-Sep-08 14:17:26

I find it hard to believe that SS would remove a baby from it's mother without very good cause. Surely they must have huge concerns for the child's safety?

It is very sad for the new mum, but as other children of the man have been taken into care before then there must be more to it than you know about. They must think he is still a risk to children.

I feel (and this is just my opinion) that 'doing time' for child abuse (whether sexual, physical or emotional harm) is a token gesture and there is often repeated abuse. Spending time in prison doesn't fundamentally change many people who abuse children.

Peachy Tue 09-Sep-08 14:17:31

standard procedure is (or was in my day, not ex ss- ex allied charity):

where a convicted abuser has a child or moves into a family where there is one:

ss visits offender and set time limit for him to tell partner; after time lmit ss visit and assess.

If a case has reached taking - away stage there is a cort order in the offing; usually there is good reason (mistakes happen)

She need to get a solicitor but imo it doesn't look great that she had kids with a child abuser. Sorry, but there you go.

donnie Tue 09-Sep-08 14:17:49

what do you mean they are "going to his employers and telling them that they should fire him"?

I doubt this very much.

Is this a genuine concern or are you a troll?

edam Tue 09-Sep-08 14:18:19

It does sound very extreme. Sadly there are cases where men who harm their children go on to have children with new partners and hurt them, too. But SS should be handling it very sensitively. And there equally cases where SWs get carried away to ridiculous lengths.

Assuming that you are right and this lady is being unjustly treated, suggest she contacts John Hemmings, MP, who has taken up several cases of parents have been victims of miscarriages of justice.

Snaf Tue 09-Sep-08 14:19:41

I would have very serious concerns about the safety and welfare of any child born to a man who had been to prison for child abuse, no matter how long ago (and nine years isn't that long).

Without knowing all the real facts, from what you have said, YABU.

edam Tue 09-Sep-08 14:20:53

Sidge, did you see any of the coverage of the Fran Lyons case? There have been dozens of cases where SS behaviour has been, at best, questionable.

onepieceoflollipop Tue 09-Sep-08 14:23:36

Agree with one of the first posters who queried if you do indeed have all the facts.

Yes ss on occasion make mistakes, but ime (I work in health care not ss)as andiem said children (imo) are often left too long rather than the other way round.

combustiblemelon Tue 09-Sep-08 14:23:58

If she cuts off contact with him SS can't touch her child.

andiem Tue 09-Sep-08 14:24:22

ol I work in hc too wink

Quattrocento Tue 09-Sep-08 14:24:24

You've only heard one side of the case. The side of the case that you've shared with us is troubling though, and I am really very glad there is a close SS involvement.

You've told us about a man who was convicted of child abuse, and sent to prison and somehow his two children by (what happened to the mothers I wonder?) ended up in the care system.

He gets released and is required to stay away from children. That's good isn't it? I wouldn't want him setting foot inside my DC's school gates.

He goes and gets shacked up again and has another child. I wonder, rather unforgivingly, what sort of person is prepared to have a child with a convicted child abuser. I'd worry if I were the social services. I'm glad they're all over it.

Kneehighinnappies Tue 09-Sep-08 14:24:40

Obviously I'm not saying all social workers are C*S but the ones dealing with case are just so wrong.
They have never liked this man as his x's cousin was and still IS a social worker in the area.
There are so many circumstances to this case on his side as it's been going on over 9years.
He has how ever said that they'll take any type of parenting courses or anything they can to keep their baby, should he not be aloud a chance to be rehabilitated through one of their courses if that's what they think he needs??

But as for his DW, the only reason they have to want to take the baby off her is she was 'defensive' towards her health visitor and the socail worker who was assigned to her during her pregnancy, not being funny but who wouldn't be, she was so scared of what was happening.

edam Tue 09-Sep-08 14:26:11

Hang on, why is anyone judging the mother here? Perhaps she didn't know about his history when she got pregnant?

Snaf Tue 09-Sep-08 14:27:31

Children don't get taken into care simply because the mother is 'defensive' when talking to SS. I do have some experience of this.

nervousal Tue 09-Sep-08 14:27:32

ss don't take babies off their mums because the Mums are defensive. I think this is a troll too.

PinkTulips Tue 09-Sep-08 14:27:57

if she's as intelligent as you claim then surely she was aware before getting pregnant that ss would be involved if 2 other children had been removed from their parents due to this mans behaviour.

it sounds like he did alot more than simply hit the child that once...... sadly i've never once heard of a conviction for a single incident, rarely even for repeated incidents. usually it's long sustained serious abuse that results in a conviction.

there is also the issue of if he has snapped to that extent in the past then no amount of feeling bad about it will change his personality into that of a person who would never snap again. ss are probably concerned that if the child stays with the mother and she still has feelings for and a relationship with this man then she will not be able to protect herself or the child if/when he snaps again.

i;m glad that for once we're hearing a story of ss doing what they should instead of a story about ss standing back and remaining uninvolved well past the point at which they should intervene.

this woman knew who she was having a child with, the fact that she thinks this man can be a good father doesn't say alot for her ability to protect her child really.

Kneehighinnappies Tue 09-Sep-08 14:28:02

She knew what he had done.
He has never tried to hide what he did, nor is he proud of it.

ephrinedaily Tue 09-Sep-08 14:28:33

YABU. Social services don't decide to take a child in to care - if the parents don't agree to the child being taken into care, the case goes to Court and its the judge's decision.

The Judge will have to be satisfied on a balance of probabilities that is suffering or is likely to suffer significant harm. The parents will be entitled to legal represenation which will be publicly funded if necessary.

When I think of the size of social worker's caseloads - and the children who haven't been taken into care who bloody well should have been - god.

Think of it this way - this woman is living with a man who has violently offended against a child. I'm afraid you sound like the sort of person who'd be the first down at the school gates to complain if he was teaching your child.

edam Tue 09-Sep-08 14:29:52

kneehigh, do suggest they contact John Hemmings MP.

For everyone saying SS are doing the right thing, yes, it is possible. But there have been cases where SS have behaved very unreasonably.

NotDoingTheHousework Tue 09-Sep-08 14:30:24

Message withdrawn

KVC Tue 09-Sep-08 14:30:28

Message withdrawn

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now