Talk

Advanced search

Would you believe that the police would

(19 Posts)
portaloo Fri 25-Mar-11 22:46:54

advise a NRP not to comply with a court directed contact order for a particular period of time (3 missed contacts now) if the NRP explained this was why he had not seen his DC during this time?

And if you do think this is feasible, for what reasons would the police advise this?

Also, NRP mentioned this in a meeting where I was present along with SW's too. Do you think they believe him, or would this be followed up and checked out?

GypsyMoth Fri 25-Mar-11 23:02:28

er,i dont quite understand your post....sorry,i'm tired! police have told him not to turn up for contact?

Snorbs Fri 25-Mar-11 23:05:23

It's hard to say as it depends entirely on the situation.

For example it could be that the NRP told the police that there is the risk that someone at the DC's house becoming abusive and/or violent if the NRP turned up there. In that case the police might recommend that the NRP stays away for now and, instead, goes back to court to get the contact order modified so that risk is minimised.

Or, if someone living where the DCs are has taken out an injunction against the NRP excluding him/her from being at the house then, again, the police would likely recommend the NRP stays away.

But I do think it would take something of that significance for the police to make such a recommendation. And there is also a difference between an official "I'm a police officer and I am advising you to..." and "My mate down the pub's a copper and he reckons..."

Whether the SWs would bother checking that out would depend on how important that allegation was to the overall case. SWs in my experience tend to be very over-worked so if it doesn't really make that much difference to why the SWs are involved then they may not bother checking.

In summary, I think the only realistic answer to your questions are "it depends". Is it likely to make a big difference to how the SWs view the situation? Why are they involved?

Spero Fri 25-Mar-11 23:06:40

Well, I suppose it could happen if it was to avoid a criminal offence being committed, but I struggle to understand what that could be. In my experience, police usually don't want anything to do with family court orders; their job is to prevent and/or detect crime and keep the peace.

If you are in a situation where SW are questioning you, I am sure that they will be checking with the police. Police and SW have a duty to cooperate with each other and share info about child protection.

portaloo Fri 25-Mar-11 23:08:45

XP and myself had to go to a meeting this week with social workers. During the meeting, I asked XP why he hadn't seen DD for almost 6 weeks, when court order states he has contact every other fortnight. He had missed 2 contact sessions by the time we had the meeting.

XP replied that the police had advised him not to turn up for contact with DD, although he didn't stipulate why or for how long the police advised him not to turn up for contact for.

I'm having alot of difficulty in believing the police would override a contact order, unless they had serious concerns about his conduct, which apparently they dont...and I haven't heard anything from the police wrt this, so I assume if the police had advised this, they would inform me?

XP has a habit of not bothering turning up whenever it suits him, but to use this excuse in front of social workers has left me confused.

Spero Fri 25-Mar-11 23:10:25

Easy answer: ask him why the police gave him this advice. If he can't or won't answer, its llikely to be bollox and he just couldn't be bothered. Why didn't the SW ask him?

portaloo Fri 25-Mar-11 23:20:30

Social workers are involved alot now because XP makes lots and lots of reports to them, alleging DD is being neglected/abused etc etc. I have had extensive assessments done, and none of his allegations have been substantiated.
XP will ring police/SS if DD has a bruise anywhere, a cut anywhere, complains of any sort of pain whilst she is with him, is in his opinion, not dressed appropriately for the weather (dress, woolly tights, coat and shoes in autumn for example instead of jeans and socks), the list goes on.

The meeting was to establish why XP felt DD was at such risk of harm, when all allegations have been thoroughly investigated and unsubstantiated and the outcome of the meeting was to tell XP and I that they are treating the situation of constant allegations as emotional abuse of DD. (This was directed at XP rather than me, I have made no allegations towards XP.)

XP also stated during the meeting that DD has used foul and inappropriate language in front of XP, which she must have picked up from me.
When asked what the inappropriate words were, he said DD says 'Shut up, Daddy bollocks dont believe that , fuck never heard DD say that either

I do not have an injunction against XP I wish and he does not come to my house for pick ups/drop offs.

portaloo Fri 25-Mar-11 23:23:00

Spero I have no idea why they didn't follow it up and ask him why the police apparently said this. The meeting had run over it's allotted time and there were people waiting for the use of the room, so maybe that is why.

Snorbs Fri 25-Mar-11 23:51:37

That must be an absolute nightmare situation for you and DD. You have my sympathies because I really do understand how much of a horror-show this kind of crap can be.

On the positive side, though, it sounds like the SWs have seen through your ex's bluster and have identified his behaviour for what it is - abuse. It's very sad that he is doing this to your DD but it's good that you've got the SWs on your side as it were.

From where I'm sitting (and, obviously, I don't know anything about this case other than what you've written here) his claims about the police telling him to stay away are probably not going to make the slightest difference to the situation. The situation is that he's repeatedly making false allegations and he's doing it deliberately to cause trouble. They're on to his game. Whether he turns up or not for contact, and the excuses he gives for why he doesn't, doesn't have any bearing on him making false allegations.

I have experience of a somewhat similar situation, albeit SS was already involved due to my ex's problems before the grotesque false allegations occurred. Luckily by then the SW was already suspecting that my ex was full of shit so the impact on my DCs and me wasn't nearly as severe as it could've been. Nevertheless the SW was still duty-bound to investigate but, thankfully, quickly realised that my ex was trying to cause trouble rather than there being any substance to the allegations. I think my ex was lucky to get away without being charged for wasting police time.

But, my god, I don't think I've ever been as shocked, angry and flat-out appalled as I was when I heard the vicious lies my ex had told the police and SS. That was just one incident and I was on the verge of committing murder. How you have managed to keep it together over these repeated allegations is amazing.

If you have any further conversations with the SW then it might be worth asking, in passing, what they think about what he said but I really don't think it will make any real difference to what SS is going to do. This now hinges on what's best for your DD and the excuses he gives for not seeing her don't matter. They've seen through him now. Just keep on doing your best for DD and, hopefully, things will start to improve for you quite soon.

portaloo Sat 26-Mar-11 09:27:08

Thanks Snorbs.

Some of the allegations are just awful, too awful to even write on here, and yes, the SW's do see it for what it is, which is a relief.
I cannot be in the same space as XP without getting very angry at him. He knows it is all malicious, but sat in the meeting with a deadpan face, repeating all his lies, going back over historical events he claims took place, even though they have already been addressed and found to be unsubstantiated in previous assessments.

He makes a fresh allegation about a bump/bruise, then when SS/police ask him for information relating to latest incident, he briefly covers the particular bruise/bump, then goes on to repeat historical allegations again, his favourites go back 2 years and have been thoroughly covered by 3 different assessments now.

DD is now being monitored due to the emotional abuse of all these allegations.

I don't want to show XP how angry I am though, since this fuels his behaviour.

Spero Sat 26-Mar-11 20:35:22

O dear, what a twat. Thank goodness the SW seemed to have sussed this out. If he can't or won't stop then I think you need to seriously think about hs contact being supervised and it sounds like you'd get back up from Soc Services.

portaloo Wed 06-Jul-11 09:05:43

Sorry to bump, but seemed like a good idea to post further on this thread, since there's some background on this thread.

At the last meeting with SS, (as detailed in this thread) the decision was made to put DD on a 'child in need' plan.
My SW explained that this was to monitor the situation wrt how many allegations my XP made whilst DD was on the child in need plan. SW's thoughts were that XP would not make further allegations whilst DD was on the child in need plan.

Anyhow, from this meeting onwards, apart from having 2 pointless home visits from my HV, I have heard nothing. No SW have phoned me, nor visited.

Yesterday, my HV came for a home visit (the 2nd) and asked me how DD is getting on etc etc.
Now imo, the HV is rubbish. If I have any concerns, HV asks me to see the GP about them. I cannot remember a single time she has given me any advice. I have asked her various things, and every single time, her advice is to go and ask someone else.
She will ask me about DD's development and behaviour, and I answer her questions as best I know how, and that's as far as her role in DD's life goes.
She collects all of this information, then leaves.

Anyhow, I have been concerned about a particular issue with DD for a while (2 years) which I have been to the GP about, and have been told to wait until DD is 3.
HV asked whether this issue is still ongoing, and I said yes, it is. I got the 'You need to see your GP' talk, then my mother, who was visiting at the time said to the HV 'Why do you come and do these home visits? You cannot help Portaloo's DD, you can only advise her to go to the GP's, so what exactly is the point apart from to collect more and more information on Portaloo's DD, which the health professionals and SW's use as they wish. How does any of this benefit Portaloo's DD?'

HV then makes a phonecall to arrange for DD to be referred to a paediatrician, something I have been asking for for at least 2 years.
An appt is made and I will get the letter with appt on in next few weeks.

All so far, so good. smile

HV leaves, after saying that there is no need to continue the home visits if I don't want to. I said I don't mind, but I have lost faith in the social services and health professionals now.

Sometime later, completely unexpected, 2 SW's I've never seen before arrived at my door. They told me the case had been passed over to them now. I have not seen hide nor hair of SS since March, and suddenly they are at my door, saying the HV had called them, and they made me feel very uncomfortable.

cestlavielife Wed 06-Jul-11 10:36:30

it sounds like you have nothing to hide - just answer all questions politely etc.

has dd been sseeing xp?

portaloo Wed 06-Jul-11 10:49:11

They wanted to go over the same stuff all over again, look round the house, ask me lots of questions I've been asked umpteen times before. They also wanted to warn me that I must answer my phone to them (their number shows up as withheld) since I cannot avoid their intervention by not answering confused. I explained I was not trying to avoid SS. They demanded I put a nappy on DD (to be fair, she was running round in just a T shirt grin) because it isn't appropriate for children to be undressed at any time at home unless it is bath time. confused They also asked when DD last saw XP. I said XP hadn't bothered for a while. I then got the talk on how he has parental responsibility!! (WTF!!! Maybe he should be a bit more bloody responsible then!!!)
I was told I must answer my door immediately to them and then just kept asking me questions and mentioning about answering the phone.

I asked the SW what would happen now? 'You'll be contacted in due course'
Will you be visiting regularly now? 'We'll let you know in due course'
How long will DD be on the 'child in need' plan? We'll let you know in due course.

Eventually the male SW said that yes, there would be regular visits now, but they wouldn't say anymore, and left.

Anyone know what a 'child in need' plan entails? I'm confused. I hear nothing, then have 2 SW's barraging me with questions saying I can't refuse to answer my phone or answer my door, when I don't even know who the hell they are, I've never seen them before!!!!!

portaloo Wed 06-Jul-11 10:51:47

cestla XP hasn't seen DD since April, and that was only for a few hrs during the day. He says he can't cope with her alone. sad

He has now moved quite a distance away and doesn't bother at all.
I told the SW's I am okay with this, even though DD clearly isn't.

My opinion is that XP is either in DD's life or he isn't. Dipping in and out as and when it suits him isn't fair on DD. sad

Riakin Wed 06-Jul-11 11:09:35

Police wouldn't advise that, i've had previous dealings regarding an officer advising a mother that all contact should have been stopped following an incident.

The outcome was viewed very seriously by the Sergeant who (as it turned out was actually advising in on the particular situation) and said no such advice had been given.

Upon speaking to the Mother she admitted the Police hadn't advised her of that at all however she said they advised her to make sure the child is safe, which she took to mean "don't let Dad see baby"...

blackeyedsusan Wed 06-Jul-11 12:35:31

sounds rubbish situation to be honest...

should you answer the door wwhen dd is in the bath, especially in winter? NO!

should you answer the door in the middle of a nappy change? NO!

and answering the phone... when the number is withheld, quite normal not to.

I guess it is all about jumping through hoops and covering your back.

you have my sympathy.

PinkCarBlueCar Wed 06-Jul-11 22:16:01

Oh dear. Sounds like your HV took against what your mother (quite understandably) said to her.

I would write a short, factual letter to both these SW's and the original SW's to cover the main points of what occurred (including the long awaited paediatrician referral) , and to clarify that as ever, you will remain engaged with SS / CYPS. I would also make it clear that the original SW's are the ones you have been involved with for some time, and that you expect that relationship to continue.

I'd be tempted to make that last line quite scathing, so don't ask me how to write it. Pair of twats - always answer our withheld number, answer us at the door immediately, that child's inappropriately dressed - she was dressed just fine till you two jokers bullied your way in.

PinkCarBlueCar Wed 06-Jul-11 22:16:41

err, that's what your mother said was understandable, the HV totally over-reacted.

Join the discussion

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

Register now »

Already registered? Log in with: