Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2 ··· 6 7 8 ··· 17 18

Original poster

to be fuming at someone phoning ss on me

432 replies

AuntiePickleBottom · 18/04/2011 20:58

i have no idea whom has, i think i am a good mum.

the social worker was lovely, and i am glad they did come even if this was a malicious phone call.

but i am so paroniod that someone is watching me now, i can belive someone would phone the ss on me

OP posts:

SardineQueen · 19/04/2011 21:05

I'm not sure why you are bringing Baby Peter into this. It seems like an odd parallel to draw to people on this thread.

You are making the point that Baby Ps father made lots of reports to SS - yes - and as we know SS fucked up bigtime. It seems a strange choice to use to show that people should report things to SS. He was reported - it didn't help him one jot. What has this to do with people like xstich and I?

SardineQueen · 19/04/2011 21:06

Birds do you genuinely not understand what people fear through contact with SS?

This is the problem that I am talking about. How can you not know that it (basically) can fuck people right up? How can you do your job and not be aware of that?

mamatomany · 19/04/2011 21:07

Birds that is entirely different to a SW knocking the door and finding a perfectly well cared for family of children when there's been an allegation of neglect, where food is in the cupboards, the heating is on, the children clean and clothed, then it is bloody obvious that somebody is shit stirring.
There ought to be some come back on those people and whilst there isn't SW time will be diverted from those in need.
Of course there are borderline cases but those should be reported nobody's suggesting they should not.

fedupofnamechanging · 19/04/2011 21:10

Thing is, if you've got a nasty ex or inlaws who are making your life a misery and there are no penalties for making false accusations, then they will continue to do so. There need to be severe consequences to deter people from taking time away from those who really need it and to stop them from bullying innocent people.

Birdsgottafly · 19/04/2011 21:13

Part of the problem is that the public do not hear about the thousands of children that would have otherwise died if it had not been for SS involvement.

Karma- until an investigation has taken place you donot know if there is cause for concen. It is not about innocent or gulity, SW are not always trying to aportion blame.

SardineQueen · 19/04/2011 21:16

Birds please could you answer some of my questions? I think that you could be freaking some people out!

Can you confirm whether you are talking about people who have had "no further action" reports, when you say "The problem is that just because the investigation shows that the children are not 'in need' or 'significant harm' does not mean that there was no case to answer. " and your subsequent comments about cases being left on file etc?

Birdsgottafly · 19/04/2011 21:16

karma-as i said Baby P's dad was seen as 'a bully', family members have had restraining orders taken out against them and when the child has grown into an adult, they then bring charges of abuse against their parents. It is such 'a minefield'.

Unless you work in CP, you only see 'one side of the coin'. The public only get to hear about what hits the press.

SardineQueen · 19/04/2011 21:18

Are you drawing parallels between the Baby P case, and the people on this thread who have been investigated and given the all clear?

I can't believe that you are, but I don't understand why you keep bringing it up.

SardineQueen · 19/04/2011 21:19

The other "side of the coin" is being a good parent on the receiving end of an unfounded complaint, a "side of the coin" that some of us are coming from.

There is not just SS on one side and the press on the other. There are other people involved with these services who have experiences and opinions as well.

madmomma · 19/04/2011 21:20

You should hear about what foster parents go through at the hands of malicious complainants. My Mother fosters my nephew, and his (unfit) mother, who has two other children in care, is constantly making ludicrous complaints about the care her children receive. one of her sons is fostered by her own Mother, and she bears the brunt of most of the complaints. Unfortunately, every single sick, twisted allegation she makes has to be investigated. making her Mum's and my Mum's life a misery

xstitch · 19/04/2011 21:24

What do you think I fear? You are telling me even if you are told there is no case to answer the SWs still believe you to be guilty. So there are a lot of people out there who believe me to be guilty even though I am innocent there is independent evidence to back me up as described above. I could also lose my job as suspision is enough to chuck me out.

Yes there are children who do need to be saved and who are in danger but how exactly does that make me guilty. What support do I need? I have always fed her properly, I have never taken intoxicating substances legal or otherwise, I have always washed her and her clothes ( I admit she will get a little grubby on the climbing frame or spill something down her and I will usually go home from the park before sorting her properly. Is this now some heinous crime? If I were to change her clothes outside would that not get me into trouble too I can't win can I? What I need is to be able to live without looking over my shoulder to no longer have a panic attack if dd spills something, or I miss something when I am cleaning, find a sock I have dropped after starting the washing machine. The biggest question of all how can I ensure with 100% certainty that she will never fall at school?

If they do not continue to believe that I am guilty despite all the evidence to the contrary surely they would have even more time to investigate and to help those who are at risk. Or am I just being thick again?

xstitch · 19/04/2011 21:25

BTW I am disgusted and enraged to be considered to be in the same league as the mother of baby P. It is insulting in the extreme.

Birdsgottafly · 19/04/2011 21:26

Senario-SW knocks on the door in a deprived area, children are being neglected, but not at immediate risk. SW would love to be able to help, but that day she has knocked on three doors were the children are younger and at possible of immediate risk. So SW cannot offer services to last family, but does not close the case incase things worsten. Stays 'on file' so school safeguarding officer can 'keep an eye on things'.

Cases are closed, if you receive written conformation that they are, but surely you realise that they are going to br archived (this varies between LA's) incase there is further cause for concern. The child (as an adult) has the right to sue the LA if they were being abused so information cannot be destroyed. This does happen more than you would think.

Birdsgottafly · 19/04/2011 21:28

xstich- i am giving an example not comparing. Every post is not aimed at you. It is difficult for the general public to understand why the system has to work as it does. It has developed over time to prevent child deaths and abuse.

CheerfulYank · 19/04/2011 21:28

There have been times when DS has been throwing such a strop I'm surprised SS hasn't come to examine him. He genuinely sounds as though he's being beaten and all I'm trying to do is brush his teeth!

xstitch · 19/04/2011 21:28

'Karma- until an investigation has taken place you donot know if there is cause for concen. It is not about innocent or gulity, SW are not always trying to aportion blame.'

That is not what you said above you implied that those of us who had had cases closed were only closed because it would cost to much to charge us and take us through the courts rather than us being innocent. So you are saying we are all guilty even if we have proven ourselves to be innocent. I fully understand that complaints must be investigated before deciding they are malicious however to imply that the victim is in fact always guilty is completely wrong, insulting and imo very unprofessional.

xstitch · 19/04/2011 21:32

You didn't say they were just archived, I always thought they would be. Read your post back please it reads as though SW actually continue to believe that all the archived files relate to guilty parents. That is how it reads to me anyway. People are not offended by the archiving but by your insinuations that they are guilty.

SardineQueen · 19/04/2011 21:36

Birds you are not being at all clear what cases you are talking about.

The people on this thread have had letters saying "no further action". What does this mean for them in practical terms.

You say it "Stays 'on file' so school safeguarding officer can 'keep an eye on things'." Is that for people who have had "no further action" recorded? Are people like schools and GPs informed throughout the child's life until they are 16? What actually happens? To people who have had "no further action" recorded?

Birdsgottafly · 19/04/2011 21:36

People who have cases closed may have children who are 'on the cusp' of neglect, abuse. Not every one of them, but some. I am answering those that want penalties against those that make referrals. I am just pointing out why that is unworkable and will put children in danger.

Its like the police stop and search. Do you feel offended when a heat seeking helicoptor goes over your house? Life would be so easy for SW if abuse was as easy to spot as posters seem to think it is. Do you think SW's live in a vacumm, ofcourse we understand what those investigated (not accussed) go through (the OP has not been accussed).

Birdsgottafly · 19/04/2011 21:39

I am talking were there is cause for concern. Every thread on SS always says that posters know neglected children but SS do nothing, they are the cases. Unless things get worst, SS donot have the resources.

I am not talking about cases such as the OP's.

SardineQueen · 19/04/2011 21:40

So you are saying that as far as SS and other authorities are concerned, even families who have been investigated and had "no further action" recorded, could well be guilty. And that SS and other authorities view them as such. "No smoke without fire". And then you say you don't understand why people fear SS?

This is really worrying. I have been investigated and have a letter saying "no further action". However you are telling me that this is meaningless? When my children start school, will they be informed that we have been through this process?

Birdsgottafly · 19/04/2011 21:41

I am saying that just because 'no further action' is taking place, SS cannot reveal the source and charge the source with making a false allegation. The could not bring a charge because they would have to break confidentiality. I was just explaining.

SardineQueen · 19/04/2011 21:43

xposts

I am confused.

I would ring SS and ask them but for obvious reasons I don't want to draw myself further to their attention.

Not one SW on MN has been able to answer these questions for me. It makes you paranoid. That is not good for anyone.

fedupofnamechanging · 19/04/2011 21:44

Birds, I've had no dealings with SS, so am not coming at this from a personal bad experience. Obviously, allegations have to be investigated. But once it is clear that the allegation is entirely false, I think that fact should be recorded on all SS files and never referred to again. The person making the false allegation should be named and shamed (without naming the child or family) and they should be prosecuted. Their opinion should never carry any weight again with SS. To make a false allegation is such a dangerous thing to do and so damaging to an innocent family.

Wrt baby P, the failure there was on the part of SS and the doctors involved in that little boys care. If the father had gone to court accused of making continuous false allegations, perhaps the evidence he presented would have been looked at with fresh eyes and perhaps this child may have been saved.

SardineQueen · 19/04/2011 21:46

I think that sounds fair karma.

Flip

1 2 ··· 6 7 8 ··· 17 18