Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think this is a terrible message to send to this girl (sensitive subject)

36 replies

Namechangerooonie · 27/09/2011 18:05

Social Services are allowing a convicted child abuser access to his children as they're boys and he 'only' abused his step daughter.

I think this is really wrong and a dreadful message to send to this young girl.

How is it fair that he is deemed not a risk to them but only to her?

what about when they grow up and know he did that to their sister and that it was ok for him to have a normal relationship with them? Sad

OP posts:
TidyDancer · 27/09/2011 18:08

YANBU. But I can't help thinking this is a tad dependant on the type of abuse. Are we talking physical beatings, emotional or sexual?

LilQueenie · 27/09/2011 18:10

much like a story I read recently. a man groomed the 14y old babysitter and was banned access to children....except his own!

Original poster
Namechangerooonie · 27/09/2011 18:11

sexual. And has been convicted of it and now has unrestricted access to his boys (at least 4 of them).

I am shocked tbh, apparently it's quite common for children to be treated differently in one family if one parent is convicted of hurting only one of them. I would have thought it would count him out of being allowed to be around all of them.

OP posts:
shineynewthings · 27/09/2011 18:19

I despair with the way the law and child protection services work in this country. I really do.

bochead · 27/09/2011 18:28

worse than the message it sends the girl what on earth do they think it's the boys?

Kids learn from the example set by role models - are they trying to protect their own jobs for another generation or summat?

I sadly predict a teen convicted of abusing a younger kid a few years down the line as a direct result of this stupidity. I feel so sorry for the lads this man will be able to influence as they grow. Young males need to be sent very clear messages about appropriate sexual conduct as they develop, in order to help them form healthy adult relationships. In this case a clear message would have been sent by telling them "society finds this kind of behavior so abhorrent that this man is not fit to be around nice kids like you".

Have they never heard of the concept of "breaking the cycle of dysfunction".

Not sure I articulated my thoughts clearly but hopefully you'll see that I feel that this is damaging to the boys as well as the direct female victim over the long term.

itisnearlysummer · 27/09/2011 18:31

I don't think it's about it 'only' being his step daughter. It's about the risk and who is at risk from him.

If his predilection is teenage girls, he's not going to be a risk to young boys; if he is a risk to babies, he might not be a risk to older children.

IYKWIM.

pearlym · 27/09/2011 18:33

How old was step d? was it a situation where she was mid teens and he hasa thing for young irls or was she a child? know it makes no difference but in the eyes of SS it will make a difference to the risk they think he poses to his sons.
I thinkhe sounds like a scumbag who shouild not be near kids, but if they are not likely to be harmed sexually or at all by him, difficult to see how he can be banned from seeing them

dottyspotty · 27/09/2011 18:37

I think the difficulty comes when the boys get older I was abused by my so called brother and am just in the process of getting something done about him. His son is grown up and married and my biggest worry is if he has daughters his wife and son don't know what he did YET.

shineynewthings · 27/09/2011 18:55

I don't buy this argument that if sexual abuser is only into young girls, then its safe for boys to be around them. I think that is an extremely naive point of view.

How do you think generational abuse comes about? I know of cases where sexual abuse has been perpetrated by all the men in the family: uncles, brothers, fathers. Sexual grooming takes many forms.

A lot of boys are groomed i.e. exposed to sexually explicit material featuring abuse via a sexually perverted father (or actually witnessing the abuse first-hand) and then go on to become abusers themselves. Although they are themselves never directly physically abused.

This is a very irresponsible decision im my view on the part of social services.

Masterchief · 27/09/2011 19:25

Yanbu my grandfather abused my mum and my uncle when they were kids. Cos it was kids he was after. So you can never say those boys would be safe. Scumbags.

Pendeen · 27/09/2011 19:31

YANBU / YABU - how can we offer any rational opinion with the information you have given us?

Is this a story you have read in the papers / Net / gossip in the nursery or do you know the individuals mentioned?

blaaahh · 27/09/2011 19:32

YADNBU

Original poster
Namechangerooonie · 27/09/2011 19:48

They live in my street. The girl was 10 when he started abusing her. The boys are a little younger.

I'm not sure what information is missing Confused

I think that anyone who abuses the trust of a child or exploits them and thinks that's ok should not be around other children. I dont think anyone can say definitively that he's not a danger to boys just because he shows sexual interest in girls.

I think child abuse can equally be about power and exploitation and not just about sex.

OP posts:
Birdland · 27/09/2011 19:51

I'm a social worker and amazed by this. Are you saying that he has both unrestricted and unsupervised contact with children? I'm also suprised that social services can dictate access issues in such a way-are you sure it was solely their decision or possibly the Courts were involved?.

Not enough information to offer a useful opinion really.

Original poster
Namechangerooonie · 27/09/2011 20:28

Yes, unrestricted. Unsupervised.

Courts not involved presumably because mother is facilitating the access (she has no problem with it, doesn't seem to care about the daughter much)

Is there any other information missing, I really don't want to drip feed.

OP posts:
SexualHarrassmentPandaPop · 27/09/2011 20:39

There was a case in the news not long ago where a teacher who had sexually abused children of one sex was allowed to work in a single sex school of the opposite sex (can't remember which way round). It does seem odd that they can be so certain of specific risk.

Birdsgottafly · 27/09/2011 20:42

The SW would do a risk assessment, this would involve other professionals including the probation service. It won't be as simple as you are describing.

Previously he would have been known as a 'schedule 1' offender which would automatically generate a parenting assessment and a plan. Ex offenders are now risk assessed and the erisk must be stated. Any court order preventing contact must be based on the risk posed to the child.

I can only assume that the mother is sneeking contact and lying to the neighbours/family, to cover this up.

Birdsgottafly · 27/09/2011 20:44

Op i would voice concern to the local police, they will check it out.

Sexual- it must have been a private school as he couldn't have been employed by the LA.

These stories are never as they are portrayed.

SnapesMistress · 27/09/2011 20:45

The mother is facilitating? Shock :(

Is she still with him then?

troisgarcons · 27/09/2011 20:49

Courts not involved presumably because mother is facilitating the access

How do you know hes an abuser if not convicted and a matter of public record? sounds like nasty gossip to me. And a bit of presumption about the mother.

Birdsgottafly · 27/09/2011 20:50

OP so where is the girl now?

How long has he been out of prison?

On his release the police/probation service are duty bound to inform SS that he may be returning to the family home, this doesn't ring true on based on the account that you have given.

Original poster
Namechangerooonie · 27/09/2011 20:53

No, he's been convicted and got probation. Absolutely not gossip.

No, she's not taking him back (though she wants to) and she just sends her daughter out round her friends when he comes round.

OP posts:
Birdsgottafly · 27/09/2011 20:56

Then SS don't know that he is visiting.

His and hers parenting will be assessed.

They will have to engage with a range of services.

The children would be on a CP plan whilst this is happening.

If she facilitates contact without permisiion then the children would be removed via an EPO or PPO.

Contact would be supervised and watched, only for quite a while.

You need to make a phone call to the police.

Birdsgottafly · 27/09/2011 20:58

No one walks back into a the family home, or any home with children in it, with the permission of SS, after a sex offence, without a lengthy investigation process, sometimes never again.

Children are removed if the mothers (usually) safeguarding ability is under question.

Birdsgottafly · 27/09/2011 21:01

Just to add the people who are failing these children are the family and the neighbours, including you, OP, if you don't make a phone call.

Swipe left for the next trending thread