Not an AIBU, more of a 'what do you think'

[chaosisawayoflife]

Wasn't sure where the best place to put this was, so stuck it in here as I have a feeling it may create a bit of a debate. I was reading on another forum(NM) about a woman who had created an anonymous post to seek advice about her violent relationship. She is pregnant. The forum administrators contacted her midwife about her situation, without informing her, and she is now being seen by SS.

What is your opinion on this? Should they have contacted her midwife? Should they have told her that they were going to do so? Do forum owners have a duty of care to their users or should they simply offer advice as to the avenues of rl support?

barnsleybelle, so if you heard a woman was planning a termination, you'd do what...?

(I mean, a legal termination.) Would you protect the rights of the unborn child then?

second-you can search for her name on the other site.

barnsley- nice and reassuring to know that people like you who done give a f* what the law says have power over families.

This is the reason people are wary of SS or are you too ignorant to see that?

I'm guessing NM were probably concerned about contacting the poster prior to informing authorities in case the h saw the e-mails and it put her at greater risk.

I would hope that MN and NM would use common sense when deciding whether or not to do this and there would need to be very signigicant concerns. However, I do think it could be justified in some circumstances and I would like to see MN as a community, just like any rl community.

There are MNers on here who would probably be able to give authorities enough info to track me down if they put their minds to it, and if I came on saying my personal safety was at serious risk, I don't imagine they would leave me to it. It's no different in the NM case.

Don't think that Barnsley is being that unreasonable tbh. As I stated earlier, safeguarding of vulnerable adults is a significant component of my work and the fact is that safeguarding, from a professional perspective, is not a choice. It is drummed into everybody - usually by people doing jobs like Barnsley's - that ANY concern must be reported. Part of this is to avoid the 'should I or shouldn't I' agonising (in the case of this thread, 'should they or shouldn't they') because while that dialogue is going on, people can be getting hurt and - again, not trying to be sensationalist - killed. I think that this attitude probably informs the bluntness of Barnsleys posts. It is not an 'if you feel like it' issue. It is not an issue where people should feel they have a measure of choice. For a civilised society it should be an obligation.

Statistically, the majority of victims of abuse will not report the abuser, however they will state that they want to be out of the abusive relationship. Ultimately this means that often society needs to intervene, whether a professional or a concerned friend or - in this case - messageboard admin.

I don't have any power over families. I work for the NHS and not Social Care ( or services as it was once called ).

I'm not on a wind up whatsover, just feel extremely passionate about the welfare of children. Do you realise baby P and Victoria Climbie were seen by over 200 people who decided not to report. That is a fact.

When you have seen what i've seen and listened to the stories i've heard you would get it.

Sorry if i come across as abrasive, don't mean to, just feel amazed that anyone at all can think it wrong that they reported it.

Oh and i'm not going to get into the whole termination debate.

But, is it clear that reporting one woman will help the many others who are also in DV situations? My concern is that whilst it may help that one person (and we don't know if it has), it may stop others from posting honestly titled threads such as this, for fear of being tracked.

So, I don't think it's as simple as 'we must report', because reporting itself may have knock-on effects to other vulnerable posters.

But that's the thing, it's not about " reporting " the woman. Were she not pregnant its likely the information wouldn't have been shared. It's about the fact that Lord Laming in his report (following the serious case reviews after both baby P and Victoria Climbie ) advised that " every child matters ". The fact that she was pregnant with the possibility that a child would be born into an environment where domestic abuse has been disclosed, the information had to be shared. I could talk for hours about the harm to a childs well being witnessing domestic abuse does. Not just violence, dom abuse has many forms with violence being just one of them.

Even children who hear from bedrooms but don't see are victims.

I think Netmums were completely wrong in this case. I work for Women's Aid and there is no way that someone would be ready emotionally and practically to leave because they had been forced to do so by their HV.

I'm also in the position where I am also a qualified social worker and used to be a senor practitioner in children and family assessment.

DV is a very complex area and one that needs to be dealt with by professionals, not HV and SS. DV professionals are equipped to deal with situations like this and can work to protect children and women at he same time, not one at the expense of the other.

people should really realise mn/nm isnt a cosy anonymous wee chat.it is visible to many and may be reproduced,sent on without poster knowledge.

if netmums had sufficient cause for worry,yes right to contact sw and hv. practitioners have knowledge of statutory issues and psychological/social needs has happened on mumnet, posters have been reported to SS, and real life intervention happened

I'm sorry mrspnut but you havn't a clue what you are talking about.

For a start as the baby is not born yet, it's the midwife and not HV who is involved.

It's not about trying to force a person to leave another it's about the long term impact that domestic abuse/voilence can have on a child.

As part of my role as safeguarding children practioner I specialise in the impact dom abuse has on children.

By sharing the information that was disclosed with a relevant agency the child and it's situation is known about.

And as someone who claims to to have been a senior practitioner in children and family assessment I think it's appalling that you think they were wrong to share the information.

I take it it you don't know your thresholds, or the department of health's information sharing guidance, or even the 5 outcomes of every child matters. If you do know them, then i'm not surprised you " used to be " and are not anymore.

doubt it, some folk drag all their woes across it mn.in fact many could do with being more circumspect-less emotionally incontinence

mrs p,the professionals with statutory duty to act are sw and hv as part of safeguarding.they have mandatory policies and protocols to follow

No secrets act 2000, encourages mdt working,sharing and disclosure. the co-ordination and management of cases. a pg woman experiencing abuse is a vulnerable adult and no secrets is applicable

as a sw i would expect you to know that mrs p?

the mw and sw have statutory duty to act once concern is raised

nm did right thing

i would report any concern i saw on mn.without hesitstion

I know all about the impact that DV has upon children, what I am saying is that it is wrong for Netmums to have contacted the persons midwife/HV.

I am well aware of the need to share information but domestic violence is not your usual run of the mill child protection work. It cannot be clearly defined because every DV case is different which is why we have a number of different specialists working in the field.
I moved out of SW and into DV because I found that there weren't the skills in the DV practitioners to challenge the SW team. SW on the whole do not understand DV and simply see it as a black and white issue. Often threatening to remove children because of it, and I know the harm witnessing it does to children but being removed and losing every bit of stability they have known harms children much more.

I'm unclear - how does the woman know it was NM who contacted MW? Did they tell her or did SS?? Or it is it just it happened after the thread??

Have to agree strongly with Barnsley again here mrspnut. To suggest that NM shouldn't have escalated this matter I find worrying bearing in mind your work experience. Yes, DV professionals are excellent at what they do but I'm fairly sure that if you speak to one - and I work with both statutory and voluntary on a relatively frequent basis - they will express their sadness at the number of DV cases that go unreported. I do also feel that you undermine the work of SWs, midwives etc in your comment. Its very easy to have a go at these professions but the vast majority of practitioners are well trained, sensitive and have the best interests of mother and child (born or unborn at heart).

Maybe it would help this discussion to put the two options that the NM admin had in front of them:

DON'T REPORT: Basically, leave a woman suffering DV to continue her suffering and put her unborn child at risk (she may have had other children - I don't know), knowing that statistically she is not likely to report the issue herself but would love to get away from her horrible situation.

REPORT: Make professionals aware of the situation so that they can contact the lady and let her know her options (this is how i works by the way - they don't smuggle her away under a blanket to the middle of Wales), sources of help, support etc. There may be mandatory SS involvement as well, but this would most likely be done sensitively and with the wellbeing of the mother in mind.

I suppose there are alternatives. They could have emailed her with some helpline numbers but, to be honest, I'd imagine that if she's computer literate enough to go on a messageboard then she'd have known how to get those numbers anyway.

Ultimately, if you think it is wrong that the NM admin reported this case then you were basically expecting them to read the posts, sit back and do nothing. Just twiddle their thumbs and think about how sad it is. I certainly wouldn't be happy with that.

netmums got it right.reasonable to explore validity of alleged circumstances

dv is multi-faceted and still falls under remit of sw and statutory duties.imo, ability to draw upon range of staff experience and local authority expertise is a good thing.there is very much a place for wa etc but cannot exclude local authority. ideed wa support the Violent Crime Action Plan and liaison with SW

I think that while they may have had her and her baby's best interests at heart, they could also have put them both in more danger. But then that is exactly what ss are supposed to deal with.

Were it me, I would be apalled and would be thinking about litigation over the invasion of privacy however, I wouldn't be hanging around in a DV situation either so perhaps...

I think on balance it was probably the right call, not one I would like to have to make mind.

Agree with Onetoomanycornettos re putting others off posting.

The reason I say that NM were wrong is purely because they are a public forum.

If it was a school, a midwife, a GP or any other professional doing the reporting then I would have no problem with that.

Netmums are not a statutory body, they do not know anything about a person's circumstances other than what they have posted and their IP address.

They could have contacted the poster and given her the numbers of Women's Aid, they could also have contacted the poster's local women's aid but instead they chose to behave as judge and jury and invoke section 47 instead.

You are very very scary mrspnut, very scary. You keep calling it all DV and if you are as involved as you say, you would know is collectively called Domestic Abuse.

And actually, domestic abuse is very run of the mill in child protection conferences. I've attended 6 so far this week, and domestic abuse has played a part in every one. Oh, and Social Care ( for which I don't work ) have so far removed none of the children from the homes. Child protection is not simply about removing the children, that is always the last resort. Child protection is about identifying concern, and involving multi agencies to provide support to the whole family. To get to a child protection status means the situation has moved through all the thresholds. There is nothing to say the midwife felt it necessary to share the info with social care. She may well have provided advice as a universal service or instigated a CAF with mums consent and invited other agencies to assist.

We don't know the whole story, and neither did NM, but by sharing the information with the MW at least this child ( when it is born ) can be appropriately safeguarded. Oh yes, and safeguarding doesn't mean social care every time.

They have also shot themselves in the foot, because if I were suffering DV, I would never discuss it on NM now, knowing that they think it's ok to report you so statutory authorities.