Why do social services take away the children instead of the violent man?

ok... so am I now needing to clarify that the specific part where I ‘got sidetracked’ was wheni replied to brandnewhouse’s point about whole family care, which was when I remembered about malarkey’s point in my head and intended to mention it. I didn’t because it flew out of my head again while writing that post... That often happens to me now and it stresses me out so when malarkey wrote the recent post I felt bad....

Honestly terf, it is very hard work this... I’m not sure how I am persecuting you seemingly in everything I say.

FFS Offred

Oh no malarkey I meant to but got sidetracked! It is a good one IMO and you may be pleased to hear it was in the recent govt consultation.

No one has commented on my tagging with a court order suggestion. Was it a bad one?

Iceweasel, yes, a woman can get a court order to remove a man from her home. But that's only if she wants to/can do/ has the ability to leave the house/instruct a solicitor etc etc.
In my experience, removal of the children really is the very last resort of the local authority in the majority of cases and the mother will have been warned/ given advice by a social worker.

Goodness! I’m not sure how I feel about a fan club!

But I am grateful for the feedback re what I write being clear. I get stressed and upset about the cognitive losses I have as a result of MS, my typing has gotten worse, I mix up words more often, I forget words and how to spell....

It’s really nice feedback for those reasons, so thank you for that!

I do like your posts Offred

It’s rare for me to post on this section but I do read and you have an admirer.

Please can I sign up for the Offred fan club too? It feels like every time I read a post and think 'I absolutely agree and this poster explained it far more accurately and concisely than I could' I then notice it is Offred who posted it. Thank you!

Terf - that post wasn’t an assumption about you... That was a comment regarding those things being important in ability to achieve civil orders re DA and saying that when you say ‘the appropriate recourse is’ about something that the ability to achieve is determined by the things listed you are doing so because you’ve failed to recognise that power dynamic.

Yes, thanks Off that’s exactly what I meant.

Coming in and telling a woman to leave obviously creates an atmosphere where women are more likely to have an adversarial relationship with SW.

You can't work with mums if your MO is to come in and frighten them. You also can't work with them if you are unaware of and unable to reflect on the sometimes unwarranted fears they have of your involvement.

I don’t hate you terf, nor was I telling you to go away. I would like to draw a line under the disagreement re that particular point and for you to continue in the discussion, if you want to.

I don’t think anyone is saying there are no women like that kokeshi.

I agree with others that the idea that SC will ‘take the children’ is exaggerated by fear and gossip but also by some aspects of SC practice.

There are failures which work both ways, children removed because of poor practice and children not removed because of poor practice.

Poor practice has increased because of austerity.

SW case loads have been problematic for many years and this has exacerbated compassion fatigue (as well as regular fatigue), staff turnover, inconsistency, delay, poor scrutiny, defensive practice etc etc which all lead to failures.

SW have been a whipping boy for funding failures for many years too.

I think too that authoritarianism doesn’t really help. Coming in and telling a woman to leave obviously creates an atmosphere where women are more likely to have an adversarial relationship with SW. This is more likely anyway because of the fears the already exist and the cognitive dissonance which is a survival strategy.

Taking families into care would be a vast improvement.

I did not sneer, why are you intent on making me out to be a callous bitch Offred? I dont understand why you seem to hate me as a poster so much. Ok Ill go away, Im obviously not the type of domestic violence victim whose welcome here.Thanks

Well if she's already left him that's different is this an imaginary friend as her circumstances keep changing! <

If you didn’t mean this in the way I interpreted (as a sneer) then I apologise.

Can we draw a line under this now? I don’t feel it is very productive.

Based on my experience? if they remove the violent man, there is a good chance that the woman in question will get angry, put her efforts into fighting the man's removal, and (if she does not succeed in getting back together with him), often ends up in another relationship with an equally violent man shortly afterward.

In these cases, the vile shitty guy is the biggest problem and it is he who bears most of the blame, but the woman is also an unfit parent.

And please quote my sentences which demonstrate my

sneering disbelief that women such as my friend even exist

Im well aware from the women I met on the Freedom Programme thanks that these women exist

I didn’t say that, it wasn’t even my comment terf. I was simply trying to explain the poster was not assuming anything about you but trying to point out a gap in your analysis re the power dynamic in the comment you made and the subsequent sneering.

Brandnewhouse - there have been a few projects re ‘whole family care’ I think.

There are lots of issues. I think SC is a polarising topic and what people think about cases seems to be very influenced by whether they trust ‘the system’ or not.

There are some real issues with the system IMO; too much political moralising has found it’s way into the bureaucracy, this mixes with unconscious biases leading to different standards being applied based on perceptions of economic class where there are safeguarding concerns, SC was already under resourced prior to austerity and has been almost completely destroyed now.

There are however things SC are leading the way on; I can see changes are happening re institutional attitudes - notably re DA.

It’s not SC’s fault that they correctly identify abuse more often than other agencies but it does put women in a very difficult position of trying to please a number of competing viewpoints.

because you’ve failed to recognise that power dynamic

Patronising!

Of course I know nothing about power dynamics do I? Living with an coercivelly controlling abusive man for 20 years.

I mentioned in my following threads that people might need help with these things it doesnt mean its not the appropriate course of action though does it? People who are very isolated and not very literate wouldnt be able to carry it out on their own but it's still the appropriate course of action. The domestic violence charity in my town specifically helps abused women to fill in these forms. Is that still a problem for you?

‘The appropriate recourse in this situation is to apply for an occupation order through the courts. Many women would be unaware of this of course but it is the best course of action in the absence of an arrestable offence.’

So this is the comment in question. I did not go on to be sneering that's just a fact that only I can know I suppose.

*You said; If things are going to be offered as ‘the solution’ then they a. Need to be effective and b. Need to be available to all.

What I said was the best course of action in the absence of an arrestable offence by the man is an occupation order. I stand by that for that group. For non violent abusers that is the best way to get them out (and change locks)

I dont see why this effective solution cant be recommended to such women just because it isnt an available solution for everyone (as I readily acknowledged at the start)

Terf - that post wasn’t an assumption about you... That was a comment regarding those things being important in ability to achieve civil orders re DA and saying that when you say ‘the appropriate recourse is’ about something that the ability to achieve is determined by the things listed you are doing so because you’ve failed to recognise that power dynamic.

@Terfulike just stop for a moment to consider the social capital, confidence, MC privilege, education and general dynamism you’re describing or quite unconsciously assuming there

I am appalled by this comment
What right have you to assume I am MC? Im from a WC background in northern industrial town. That I had social capital when my husband had distanced my friends and family from me? Confidence!? I have none. Education, yes.General dynamism? JC the stress of the three years after I left him, the undiagnosed hypothyroidism which nearly killed me, the loss of my job because of that, the poverty as a a single mother one of the first on UC, the having to move to a tiny 2bed house with 4 kids on my own when I was ill, nearly losing my son as I had nowhere for him to sleep, the food bank visits... how dare you make assumptions about me.

I didn’t.

I said; If things are going to be offered as ‘the solution’ then they a. Need to be effective and b. Need to be available to all.

Which was in response to your claim that ‘the appropriate recourse’ is an occupation order and your subsequent sneering disbelief that women such as my friend even exist or that an occupation order might not be the solution, which was deeply unpleasant.

I’m pretty sure removing children is very much a last resort. My own Dsis has had SS involvement for years due to DA and still non of her children have been removed (though they absolutely should be).

There needs to be a lot more money pumped into the system, better mental health provision etc the problem needs tackling from all sides.

I just said different solutions are best for different groups why do you insist that no solution is any kind of solution unless it works for everyone

The comment I clarified was to the whole thread