Social Services are not the Childcatcher (FFS)

[LoopyLoopsPussInBoots]

(Thread about so many threads)

AIBU to think that if you have concerns for the welfare of a child, you don't assess the situation yourself, you let the professionals know so they can evaluate the situation?

I know contact from SS can be daunting and worrying for a parent, but the fear of upsetting an adult, or the fear of repercussions on yourself can NEVER trump the fear of welfare for a child.

Social Services will not just wade in and take children away without very compelling reasons to do so. Please don't be scared of calling them if you think a child is at risk of abuse, whatever form this may take. Don't 'wait and see', don't try to sort it out yourself, don't ask a million people for advice and do nothing, ask the trained and experienced professionals to do their job and assess the situation properly.

FFS!

That's my point. What is 'balanced'? How can we have 'balanced'? Or do you mean that people with abusive backgrounds are too unbalanced?

^ That was to Oblomov, btw)

I was on the end of a malicious allegation to social services while I was pregnant. It was horrendous. They put me under so much stress I had to be taken from their offices by ambulance and the paramedics were clear it was not the first time they'd taken very distressed pregnant women from those offices. They wanted to know everything and basically made it clear they believed this unknown source and not me and there was nothing I could do. They lied about me and DP in reports, dragged us to nasty formal meetings and even turned up when I was in labour threatening to take my child (which they didn't they just seemed to enjoy winding me up). when daughter was 3 months hold they finally decided that the allegations were unfounded and that they were going to leave us alone. we never got an apology they never acknowledged the immense distress they caused us at such a sensitive time.

I would have to be CONVINCED a child was in serious danger before I'd release these nasty power crazed "people" on anybody. I wouldn't wish them on my worst enemy. They lie. They torment. They seem to be staffed by a heartless callous strand of the population

(disclaimer this is my personal experience, I accept there may be some good SWs out there but I sure as hell did not meet them)

shecutofftheirtails well said 14:02

That's terrible soandso, but my point remains.

If you thought something might be up, but you weren't fully convinced, did nothing, then that child died, would you think differently perhaps?

On the one hand, I have had very good experiences of Social Services and think they do a great job. And that it would be a tragedy if people stopped reporting child abuse.

On the other hand, I think it is horrendously naive to suggest that wanting to avoid false allegations is entirely a matter of the parent's rights and of protecting the parent. As if living in a family that was falsely suspected of child abuse would not in any way affect the child!

Having been the subject of unfounded suspicions from other professionals (medical rather than SS) it is clear to me that noone has been more damaged by it than dd. I picked myself up and got on with it, she mistrusted adults for years. And she wasn't even removed from her family.

Some people really do discuss these questions as if you could remove a child from the family- or even investigate a family- without having any effect on that child.

Of course that doesn't mean investigations shouldn't happen. But SS should be trained to recognise that damage may ensue even from a well founded and necessary action and to learn how to minimise that damage.

"I know contact from SS can be daunting and worrying for a parent, but the fear of upsetting an adult, or the fear of repercussions on yourself can NEVER trump the fear of welfare for a child."

This is the kind of attitude I'm talking about. Not a word about it being daunting or worrying for the child, too.

Fantastic post Hunty [hsmile]

And to you.

I'm a serial name-changer and have been reading your posts for a good while. Keep on keeping on sweetheart; you're doing so bloody well in the face of so many difficulties.

If only we had leaders and policy-makers in government with your strength, experience and fortitude

cory good point but still, daunting for a child vs. abuse of a child...

Well said, Cory. There's a balance of risks here - the risk of false allegations damaging the family (both children and adults) and the risk of harm to children if the allegations are true. It is the job of social services to tell one from the other - looking at evidence, rather thank making snap judgments.

Just as doctors can harm patients by over-diagnosis or over-treatment as well as by missed diagnosis and failure to treat, so social workers can harm their clients by unnecessary intervention or by not intervening when it is justified. Society educates and trains professional people to use their judgment - to know when they need to act and avoid acting when it's unnecessary or harmful. "First do no harm" as the doctors say.

I get the impression that there aren't the same quality controls in social services as there are in health care, particularly around assessing evidence.

Yes, Loopy, I am absolutely not saying that being abused is not being worse than being investigated. I think what I am saying is:

an unjustified investigation can cause harm that is out of proportion to any potential good

even a justified investigation can cause harm and SWs need to be trained in how to do as little damage as possible and to offer support with any damage afterwards

(I noticed that when we had been suspected of child abuse because dd had a rare medical condition, nobody asked us afterwards if we were ok. They should have done. We were not. There should have been a procedure for dealing with that).

edam's doctor analogy is good

When dd had her knee op there is not doubt that it was a justified and even necessary operation. But that did not prevent the surgeon who carried it out to recognise that there were after-effects and to have a programme for dealing with those.

LoopyLoopsPussInBoots a few things to consider though:
Once you make a referal you change your relationship with that family forever.
Referals do have a huge inpact on the child involved.....even more so when false. A stranger coming into a childs home and questionning is not a nice experience.
SS are over loaded and too many 'just in case' referals are not helpful. For example refering a child as they have a bruise you are not happy about without asking the child or parents how it occured is maddness, yet happens all to offen. The time taken away from real cases is shocking.
IMO not enough common sense is used, far more discussion between agencies is need and being open and honest with parents is a must.

There is no such thing as SS, as such, as SW's are individuals and the provision and guidance differs between Local Authorities.

What happened in HCIAWH, would not happen now or previously in any of the LA's that i have worked under. I have worked across 3 in the North West, but there are particular problems in some areas.

SS do have a bugdet for practical help, it is how the threaseholds have been set depending on the problems in that L.A, which is wrong, it should be national.

Unlike educational attainment and standards, things have to get veruy bad until they are addressed generally in Social Care.

Some of the posts that i read and challenge, only happen because individual LA's are not sticking to the guidelines that they have and using the law.

Many people don't realise how damaging neglect is, most of my cases have ongoing medical needs because simple appointments haven't been kept. It is the accumalation of 'contacts' that get a plan in place, for both the child and family.

I think that Childrens Centers/Surestart did alot to raise childcare standards and sadly now their budgets are being cut. The classes that you would have sent parents to are no longer going to exsist. The way the law is written, you make a plan based on what is available, you are not allowed to identify what is needed. At times SW's hands are tied because of this. I don't know of any SW who wouldn't like MH services extending.

I think one thing that serves to create fear of SS is,as Starlight mentions, that some other authorities are not above using them as a threat to get out of providing what they are legally bound to do.

When I complained about the appalling SN provision for my disabled dd, the headteacher's response was to make a complaint about my parenting to SS. Not once but repeatedly. To their credit, they dealt with him robustly (and went sky high in my esteem )- but then we had a very firm diagnosis by that time. If it had happened in all the years before diagnosis it might have been a different situation. Tbh I don't think those particular sw's were overjoyed at being used as a disciplinary force though.

Every area should have an 'aiming high for disabled children' strategy, although there is still not enough provision. There are different branches of SS and SW's don't set budgets.

I have enjoyed watching head teachers squirm when asked why they haven't done what they are supposed to, in terms of educational provision or assessment, as we know what they should do, but they cannot question us (very petty i know), during meetings.

In our case, I thought it was absolutely revolting the way the HT was prepared to use SW's on the assumption that we would believe all the horror stories and never have the nerve to call his bluff.

In his case it wasn't even a question of budgets- it was things like "why don't you let her use the disabled toilet that is already there?", "why is her set timetabled to have their lessons upstairs while the other sets are being taught downstairs?" But he was so sure that he could use that threat of the ogre to keep us in check

Very good points cory and trying. Sorry to not have a full reply, will come back...

I think also if you have a child with a certain type of condition you are likely to have come across more negative experiences.

My dcs' condition is notorious for misdiagnosis and can easily be mistaken for abuse (or hypochondria, or MunchausenBP). I had to give up on the support forum because there were just too many depressing stories there; it was reliving my own misery over and over again.

So, really, a whole PR campaign is needed, alongside a massive shift in the way SWs do their jobs.

I do sometimes wonder if people get the SS and The SS confused!

"There is no such thing as SS, as such, as SW's are individuals"

Sayeth a social worker. And one of the good ones too I have no doubt.

Now there is the crux of the problem. No cohesive policy and differences between LAs.

I apologise for "sayeth" by the way. I am a wanker a bit tired.

We have many hard-working front-line professionals in this community whom I respect and admire. But there is also so much that needs to be done at another level to make their efforts, the hours they put in, and their utter commitment count.

I will admit, this was over 12 years ago that my case happened - and maybe things have changed since then - but I am not willing to take the risk, to be perfectly honest.

I HAVE had more recent issues with SS - My DD was referred to the children with disabilities team. Who refused to help me AT ALL because I had been involved with the Child Protection Department in the past - so despite the fact that my DD has a disability, the only part of SS that can / will visit me is child protection...who, given my past experiences, I refuse to have any unnecessary involvement with. Therefore I get NO help with my DD's Autism from SS. Child protection told me they couldn't help me ANYWAY as they don't have the access to the help that the Children with Disabilities team do.

I was referred myself to the ADULTS with disabilities team - who came out 3 years ago, assessed my care needs - then disappeared. They have never provided any help other than the original care assessment, and in the end I gave up. They refused to refer me to the OT (I need a wet room), as 'all their funding goes on OAP's in care homes, come back when you are 60'. . That was 3 years ago - I still have another 30 years to go until I'm 60...

I am in Essex BTW. Not an area with the greatest SS records...

And people wonder why I would think twice, and even three or four times before reporting someone to SS rather than trying to help them...

I mean, so anyone who has, say, had the Child Protection Department involved, at any point in their dc's childhood - even for ONE unfounded allegation - can NEVER access help from the children with disabilities team, simply because of their previous involvlement with Child Protection?! Does that REALLY make sense to SS?