Those who work with or in Social Services

[Penguinshame]

Inspired by another thread, can someone kind of summarise why parents might make choices which involve them losing custody of their children? Especially when it has been spelled out to them what they have to do?

There must be a rationale - even if not logical it must make sense somewhere?

Or is this just the product of a society which protects men over children?

When I had my daughter, and was still in hospital my then partner & her father was verbally aggressive towards me, the midwife spoke to me & explained that wasn't normal for, and my reply was 'oh that was nothing' I was totally use to it. This raised alarm bells and SS were called in, they told me to leave my partner or have my baby put on the child protection register. I had become immune to the abuse, it had become normal to me. I left the hospital as a single mum, with the support of my parents, I chose my baby.
I come from very caring parents and had never witnessed any abuse or violence in my childhood. I remember leaving hospital being absolutely devastated, but felt massive relief also, that I could have my phone not on silent, have friends again & go out to the shops.

A few years ago i remember a lovely post from a child protection social worker and she said that in her career she had only met one set of parents who didn't love their child. The rest were (as someone else mentioned) doing the best they could in the circumstances they were in with the resources they had. And that unfortunately that wasn't always enough.

She also said not to presume in the same circumstances you would do any better.

Not ideal obviously but not a huge, intolerable thing because in their world going into care is not the worst thing in the world I'm not boasting about my professional experience. I'm pointing out that your comment made me feel quite uncomfortable as it's an unfair bias to say it's not an intolerable thing for care leavers to lose their DC. I'm not sure why with your experience you cannot see that. If you've worked within social services surely you can recognise that.

I know from my experience what you have said is absolutely not true. Care leavers are just like any other people. They're not part of a humongous group of parents who have babies taken away that feel like that's not an intolerable situation to be in.

And I wasn't digging at you, like you seem to be doing to me. I think you're feeling defensive as what I've said is correct. I'm not silly or boastful. I pointed out quite nicely that what you said isn't very nice for care leavers to read and is quite biased.

Some really good comments on here but what DialANumber said has really resonated with me and is what I’ve found to be the case all too often as a social worker

There tends to be a big focus in a lot of cases on making women make all the changes, at a time when they may be highly vulnerable, whilst abusive men are in no way held accountable for their actions. There is a lot more agencies could and should do to hold perpetrators of abuse to account. This includes social workers and police.

Children need to be protected and in some extreme cases that includes removing them from their parents, but there is a lot more early on could be done to support parents . There needs to be a greater understanding of why women don't leave abusive relationships, not least the fact that leaving is when they are the most likely to be murdered.

@FrancesHaHa I couldn't agree more. It really isn't as simple as saying "choose the man or the child/ren".

Of the cases I know where children have been removed it's be a combination of a traumatic childhood so the mother knows no better, a belief that the children won't really be removed even when stood in court, and a complete lack of "resources" to parent adequately.

The poster that mentioned not having a proper bond due to trauma is on the money. In all of the cases I've seen it could be most likely assumed that the child is a result of rape and that has impacted on the bond.

One case I'm thinking of in particular, as professionals we're 99% sure her children were the result of rape. SS placed them with the perpetrator and she fled. She is allowed to see them but has chosen not to. I think she loves them but sees this as her chance to have a totally new life far away from the abuse and anything that reminds her of it.

It's such a sad, complex thing.

I know a mother who loves her children to bits, who would take a bullet for them. I’ve never seen her raise her voice to them let alone her hand . These children were being raised in a beautiful home with pets, nice toys and lovely days out. Went to after school classes.

She Has had them removed from her and given to her ex the abusive dad and she’s been classed as an emotional abuser.

It’s absolutely shocking what’s gone on with the children.
I can’t say too much as it’s very outing.
The children are heartbroken . They just want to go home where they belong not hit by their dad.
That’s the reason they didn’t want to see him. It has nothing to do with emotional abuse at all.

There’s more to this story...but SS are fully aware and yet they are not doing anything to protect the children.They know they are getting hit. They know they’ve reverted to bed wetting.
They know they aren’t going to school.

Yet this terrible situation is just being allowed to roll on.

I work in children's services. Cases in which children have been removed (in my experience) tend to be either a mother refusing to leave an abusive relationship, or parents with learning disabilities not being able to cope. Of course there's the odd case of physical or sexual abuse against a child. I try to be of the belief that no one has children with the intention of harming them - there's always a reason behind the negatives, it can just be extremely difficult to get to the bottom of and try to sort out quickly enough for the sake of the child.