to be fuming at the "protecting our children" programme on BBC2 tonight?

[runtybunty]

I do not understand how a young child can be filmed like this. They stated at the start of the programme that they could not identify the 3 year old boy for his own protection. So how can they show his house, his parents and every other view of "toby" other than face-on? You would have to be a complete dimwit not to recognise the child if you knew him in real life.

Birdsgottafly - if you personally have helped parents to give a house a deep clean, then you are more hands on than any of the 60+ SW's I came across both as a child that was LEFT in an abusive home, AND as a very young parent. I have NEVER had that. Even when I BEGGED for it. Because I KNEW that the house was a mess, and I was struggling to tidy it, as I was recovering from miscarrying twins, depressed because I had lost the twins, and newly single. And I ended up being put into the same position as the father in this story - having to put my DD into 'voluntary' FC. There's more to my story, and birdsgottafly and I have tangled over this issue before, but IMO SS do NOT work to try to keep the family together.

They work to a different agenda, and it DOESN'T include ensuring that ALL of their service users get ADEQUATE support to improve their parenting.

Oh - My DD was returned to me after 3 weeks, and is still with me today. At the time I was also dealing with her SN's, which were at that time, undiagnosed. The only good thing to come out of that period WAS her diagnosis, which enabled me to understand that her behaviour WASN'T as a result of something I had done. And it enabled me to be able to know WHAT to do to help her development and become a better parent to an SN dc. With bugger all additional input from SS. Who closed the case the day she was returned to me (which is, BTW, very unusual).

The system has changed alot. I was a child left in an abusive home also, alot of SW's are.

No doubt you all would have defended my parents to the hilt, it has took a lot of hard work to get over my childhood.

Hunty- you did have you DD returned, though.

I deal with more disability through neglect than anything else, it would shock many that in the UK there are children with health conditions that should not be seen outside of the streets of Bangladesh. You have to see it to realise. I know how my practice is, and all i can do is whistleblow if i see bad practice, but having worked across three LA i havent seen any, unfortunatly there has been child deaths, though.

The one thing that pisses me off the most about sw and the whole child protection process is that there seems to be no way to disagree with what a social worker says or recommends, without being labelled as obstructive.

You seem to have to lay down and follow any recommendations to the letter, do whatever they say, no matter that it may be unreasonable, or not appropriate to get them off your back. This isn't just from this programme but from real life and other stories I have read.

Not every social worker is good, or even sensible. It's the whole holding you under threat and you cannot possibly complain or disagree that gets my goat.

Birds - she DIDN'T stay with the father after he hit her. Which is more than can be said of MOST people in a DV situation. I DO think that with the CORRECT support, the mother could have been given much more of a chance to learn how to parent a lot better.

And, if you watch the play scenes near the end of it, AFTER she has had the baby, she IS sitting on the floor, and playing with, and chatting to her son. Has anybody thought that due to the SEVERE pre-eclampsia, she was feeling run down, exhausted, trying to cope with a child that HAS GOT SN. Which they LIED ABOUT IN THE CASE MEETING. At the end of the programme, it stated that Toby hadn't been placed with adoptive parents due to his SN. Yet earlier in the programme, at a case meeting, they were justifying the removal by saying that all the tests for SN had come back negative when talking to the parents. . So which is true? The dc has SN so they have been unable to find suitable adoptive parents, or that the dc DOESN'T have SN, and the 'lack' of SN was used as justification for removal, unnecessarily?

A tired pregnant mother with severe pre-eclampsia, and a partner that is unsupportive for WHATEVER REASON, without family support is NOT going to be at her best wrt childrearing, no matter WHAT her background. OK, I am willing to admit that support workers may not have been allowed access - but from what I could see, they tried their best to go to the appointments with things like play therapists etc, so why would they have refused access to people to help with housework - especially if it was made clear to them that they could lose their children if they didn't? Why was no-one offering PRACTICAL help? Christ, I KNOW that anyone who has pre-eclampsia and is discharged from hospital on a watch-and-wait basis is told to basically stay in bed. Yet she didn't, and couldn't, as she had to look after her 3yo WHO HAS SN. WITHOUT ANY PRACTICAL SUPPORT. Of course she wasn't bloody sitting on the floor playing with him 24/7. But she was able to do that once she had recovered from her EMCS, which says to me that things only deteriorated when she was suffering from an additional preganancy complication without support.

and it gets the goat of the parents who are under CP's terrifying glare.

With all due respect birds - and I am truly sorry for what you experienced in your childhood - it could be argued that you may see the whole CP issue through a particular lens. I'm sorry to say it.

The SN could be environmental, it can take years to overcome the neglect. I see alot of 'problems', that appear to be SN, but are not, they are down to a lack of appropriate parenting. Toby at least has a chance of a future, which he didn't The mother probably is vulnerable in her own right. She may have made the genuine decision to give her children up, the pregnanciesmay not have been her choice, he came across as a bully. I work with mums who make the decision. Not every woman wants to parent the children that they have and accept sometimes that they cannot.

You only think she could have been a good mum, it isn't worth argueing about because neither of us know her.

Springy- i have been through counselling etc. What my childhood has given me is an understanding how dangerous it is to live in a household were there is no secure loving attactment. I beleive in keeping families together but not at the expense of the children.

Living- the parents can take the services offered then at the reviews (there would have been many) put there objections to any plans drawn. This started on CIN and after two years went to CP, we saw it in it's last 6 months. We didn't see everyone around the tableintroduce themselves, there would have been MW and HV as well as an advocate, if the parents had of accepted it. An IRO (Chair) has to ask why the parents are not independantly represented, it goes into the minutes and if it isn't in there the case gets put back by the judge. A copy of all this is sent to the parents and their solicitor.

Quite honestly knowing that the father can get violent and Toby has 'problems' which the father cannot handle, would you have left him in his care for up to a week?

That poor child had no bed, no proper interaction with people and no toothbrush. These are basic needs. Even after his parents were provided with a bed for him they couldn't be bothered to unwrap it and put it together and provide some bedding for him. The bloody dog got more love.

I think the SW did all she could. The parents had every opportunity to engage and to try and learn how to parent and they didn't. SN parents or no, that kid deserves a bed, proper human interaction with an adult that cares and a bloody toothbrush - and to be taught the basics of personal care - at the very least.

I did very much feel for the mum though. I think she may have been doing what she thought was best because she was lacking the confidence and education to make a proper go of it on her own.

I don't think that was the SW fault though. I've met a few girls like that before.

But if the parents have LD's and no advocate - what objections would they be able to put? And WHY weren't the parents independantly represented? They SHOULD have been. There should be no reason put in the minutes, because it just shouldn't happen.

And 'environmental SN' is a cop-out. In my DD's case, her Autism WASN'T environmental. She is now nearly 14yo. Her partial deafness that was causing her speech delay CERTAINLY wasn't environmental. It improved when she finally got speech therapy. Hereditory EDS type II certainly wasn't environmental - and didn't get tested for and diagnosed until she was 10yo when my BROTHER was diagnosed with EDS type II. There are SN that aren't going to be diagnosed at 3yo. SS tried to use that phrase with me. It has since been PROVEN unequivically that my DD's SN are not, and were not 'environmental SN'.

I can attest to the fact that although they may have REQUESTED representation, they may not have got it. As a very young parent, still technically a minor, I SHOULD have had my own SW. I was repeatedly told that they were 'short-staffed' and they would allocate one soon. I NEVER got one allocated. I never ONCE had an advocate with me. EVER. It ISN'T always because the parents have refused an advocate. Sorry, but that is just UNTRUE. It may be a rare occurence - but I have seen it happen MORE than once in my local SW dept. I was LUCKY. I was able to fight SS with my own intelligence. If you don't have that, then unfortunately, you are often screwed.

I don't think that has much bearing on this case though. The father was heavy handed even in front of the camera - who puts an arm lock restraint? They didn't unwrap a bed they were given, they didn't clean, they didn't do the basics they put the dog before that poor little boy. The kid has to come first.

I didn't brush my teeth at ALL until I was 17yo, and being shown by a lady in the mother and baby unit that I secured a place in how to brush my DD's teeth. My DD is now 13yo and has never had a filling. All it took was someone taking the time to SHOW me what to do. It wasn't MY fault that no-one had taken the time to do that for me when I was a child. SS didn't want me to go into supported accommodation, they wanted me to stay in the bedsit I was living alone in, I thought it would be best for me and my DD given my useless upbringing, I thought it would give me the chance to develop my parenting skills with support. Which it did. I had never seen a dentist, been registered with a dentist, owned a toothbrush or been shown how to use a toothbrush up to that point. My dc have, since then, gone to the dentists every 6 months since then, and been registered at a new dentist at the first possible opportunity after each time I have moved house.

WHY would SS have wanted me to stay in a scummy bedsit with NO support (I had no family support) rather than be placed in a mother and baby unit that I had found a place in? I got my GP to refer us to the M&B unit for the placement in the end, as SS refused. I'll leave it up to everyone what the motives were that SS had.

Fair enough, I apologise. I come from my point of view, had a hard life, seen women neglect kids in the refuge I was in with my children and ended up looking after them too.

I'm sorry, that's a point of view I didn't even know existed, never mind considered.

The mother admitted that she didn't have the best of starts herself. All it took with me was someone writing down EXACTLY what needed to be done to care PROPERLY for a child, and to show me certain things that I hadn't come across as a child. Sheets on a bed, for one thing. I knew that you could BUY sheets. I didn't know that you HAD to. As I had never had sheets on MY bed. At the M&B unit, I got told ALL these things. And my dc are well cared for, and have been ever since I was TOLD what was expected of me. I didn't expect it because I hadn't had it as a child IYSWIM. It comes naturally to YOU because YOU weren't brought up like that. To break that cycle, it takes just ONE person putting in the time and effort to EDUCATE that person, rather than just saying "This is wrong, that's wrong the other is wrong". TELL them to put a sheet on the bed. HELP them to put a sheet on the bed. TELL them how often to wash the bedding. SHOW them how to wash and dry laundry properly.

It can make a hopeless parent into a GOOD parent, one who passes a CRB check and helps out in the local primary school, who listens to your child reading, there ARE ways to fix many more situations than SS DO fix.

Note - I know not ALL situations can be fixed. Like SS removing me from my mother when her boyfriend raped me when I was 4yo, and them SENDING ME BACK TO HER CARE when my dad died when I was 10yo. THAT was monumentally idiotic of SS.

No, not all situations can be fixed. I've met women that have been irreparably broken by abuse and seen the damage that's done to their kids. I may not have dealt with it very well, I ended up mothering a million kids and berating a lot of mums but that's probably more to do with staffing levels in the refuge than anything.

I was brought up like that btw. I was the stinky kid, I never had underwear that fitted right up til I left home, and I ended up being the abused mother. I broke the cycle myself because I'm an argumentative bitch and got in a million rows, but I've ended up living in isolation myself now so that my kids have a nice life. It's all a bit fucked up. I'm sorry you went through what you did, it sounds awful.

My ex grew up a house like this, with abuse and neglect. He also never had his own bed or toothbrush and had to witness his granddad abusing his mother physically and sexually. There was no ss involvement and there should have been. His only toy was a football and he had never celebrated Christmas. Never had one. He didn't have a clue how to parent. I remember his ex telling me that they had to show him how to do everything from sleeping with sheets on a bed to cleaning and washing. To this day he still does not know how to play with his dc, he cuddles them and cooks and makes sure they are clothed and clean but he had to be taught all that.

I haven't seen this programme yet but I intend to

I agree with Birds. I know many social workers through teaching and as friends, and I wouldn't do their job for all the tea in China.

Hunty all of your posts are about you, sometimes you need to adopt an open mind. There are abusive, neglectful parents that don't want to change, you won't accept that. As i said, you have to witness it to beleive it.

The parents are not represented independantly because if they don't allow representation they have that right to refuse. Thats why it has to go into the minutes, because the IRO (chair) will ask the parents if they have been offered advocacy and why they have not taken up that offer, once again the IRO, will advise that they do. You cannot force adults into behaving in certain ways, so then you have to protect the children.

We put in hour after hour trying to teach these skills, very often after removal during the parentinh assessments, carried out by ourselves and other professionals/independant the parents will admit a lot more than wwe ever knew was happening. They will also say that they were stubbon,out of stubbonese they won't meet basic needs/take clothes/bedding offered. I have got parents cots/beds and bedding but because the parents haven't had it,they don't see why the children should.

The house was probably brought up to the level that you saw because they were taught how to do it, but in the fathers case, he wouldn't. There are people with personality disorders and MH problems (not all just certain conditions) which prevents them from parenting without close supervision. If they won't accept that supervision then that is when the plan breaks down and removal happens.

You can live ok without bedding though, it's the lack of communication and that causes speech delay. The lack of stimulation which causes anger and the lack of bounderies that causes bed and dangerous behavour for the child.

This little boy is the child we see so many posts on, the bully, the 'thug' etc. I have three cases at the moment were slight blindness has been caused because the parent won't have anyone telling them how to deal with their childs eye conditions. It's been only slight because services have 'clicked' in and a SW has taken the parent and child to the appointments or threatened to go to removal, so the child could be treated medically.

Without services involved,doctors appoitments are not kept, the child isn't taken to hoospital if he hurts himself. THe child is left to wander, not taken to school. Some people get pregnant because they haven't got the capabilities to rationalise using contraceptive. but they don't WANT to parent,they don't want to be taught how to. Some parents don't have that bond with their children. Some parents come tocontact for a bit then drift they haven't got an attachment at all.

Sw's don't have much power to 'remove' children..... That lies with the courts

Actually ( as a former police officer) I have seen many many worse scenarios. Worse houses etc. But in this case they had to act quick as the ' 6 month window' to turn toby's behaviour round was closing in quickly

The parents had failed previously to get him to any speech therapy appointments!! Neglect

They had stopped taking him to nursery! Neglect

He had no bed covers. Wet carpets... The housework wasn't happening...neglect

I'm adopted and I hate the thought of people vein given chance after chance to improve and better themselves but who don't take it to the very detriment of their children.

Where and when do you draw the line? At some point you need to have a frank discussion about options and that will include removing a child. It's actually a shame in a lot of cases that it takes so long as it reduces chance of them being adopted as it increases the child's risk of having emotional issues

It's sad. Sorry but if you don't even give enough of a shit to brush your child's teeth or play and interact with them they are going to be looking at options

The parents in the programme will have almost certainly been offered a family support worker, parenting support (there was an agreed list of things the SW and the family had compiled together to make changes - we saw the paper - but none of the things had been put into practice). We were told that the parents refused help and did not engage with support - that is their right. But it is also that little boy's right to have his emotional and other needs met, and they just were not. The parents were not criminal, or wicked, just incapable, prob because of their own upbringing.

There was dog shit trodden into and smeared across the carpet. The house, we were told, had not been cleaned for ages, including the toilet. The little boy had no bed and when a bed was bought and delivered, it stayed unused.

None of this would matter quite so much if it was a happy home full of laughter, play and love - but that father was scary (he scared me - imagine being 3 and in that atmosphere) and the mother was just ineffectual. Neither parent was inarticulate, and they did not appear to have severe LDs. But for whatever reason, they were unable to accept the help on offer to them, and small children don't have time to wait until a change of heart or mind, which might never come.

I did feel sorry for Tiffany and even the dad. They just did not have it in them to parent in a way that was safe. She did the right thing in agreeing to adoption. When Toby and his sister grow up, if they see the programme, they will see they were loved and wanted.

God yes they did say there was no underlying developmental disorder even after days of assessment and a paed. Until the child was removed.

And wasn't the baby lovely? So little and adoptable beautiful.

That is why what Tiffany has done is brave (as described) and a credit to her.

I would never put judgement on someone who cannot parent, i have never done a parenting assessment on a parent that has had a 'normal' background or does not have a condition/psychological condition. People don't realise that there are some very dangerous personality disorders were the person does what they want, to the point that i have seen new borns being fed chocolate mouse (only) because 'it is soft' or a three year old not toilet trained and fed on baby jars (through wanting a perpetual baby).

The 'evidence' of SN is whether the child thrives in foster care (manages to be toilet trained/speaks/loses aggression;puts on weight). A SW will always consider a medical reason, that has gotten better and so will doctors/GP's before giving their opinion that the child fails to thrive because of environment.

We don't know the extent of the diagnosis in this parents case, there will have been reports gathered and past reports obtained. It would be lovely if we could offer things and the offer was taken up,but it isn't. The majority of parent to ger "de-planned" though and go on to live successful lives with their children, after taking up help, most have at least some family support, though. There is a danger of leaving a child when you know that there is no-one else acceot SW's seeing the child, we feel more reassured when there is family popping in and out who we know will safeguard that child.

We have a lot of true referals from concerned family members.

That programme was a snap shot, only. Does it not occur toanyone that this case willbe scrutinised because of the filming.