Are you scared of Social Workers?

[JugsyMalone]

I watched something on TV last night about social workers. I thought they were perfectly reasonable people trying to do a hard job. However, there was this nagging voice in my head saying "if they saw the house right now...." Laundry overflowing (far too much school uniform, a one use towel habit in the house and the dog's muddy paws in winter), mucky carpet (dog/winter/hoover needs replaced), we are all messy people and the toilet seat is broken, again. I desperately need to redecorate.

We sometimes have takeaways or good M&S ready meals and I smoke fags now and then in the garden. Sometimes I get pissed on a Friday with my mates. Sometimes their kids and mine are upstairs playing on xbox and eating chocolate and pizza whilst we get pissed and do kaeroke (sp?) dowstairs. I also hate getting up early on the weekend and let the kids watch (slightly) over age films, with me.

I have had 2 contacts with SWs ever, one to get DS2 into a special nursery (years ago). They were really kind and nice. Another (even more years ago) to get help with points to get a council house due to poor living conditions in a horrible flat, again really helpful.

But an unscheduled visit? OMG - have done laundry and kitchen and hoovering after watching TV.

I know IABU but wondered if anyone else felt this way?

Sorry I have not read all the posts as I still find the subject far too distressing. However I need to let people know that child protection accusations can be levelled at anyone. To the poster saying it should not matter if a few middle class people are falsely accused as long as the children are not taken in the end I would argue that their involvement can destroy lives and marriages and certainly trust in all professionals and can later prevent parents seeking further medical help for their children which in itself is very dangerous.

I accessed all our records once the accusations were dropped and there were pages and pages of outright lies. We were positive at the start but very quickly realized that everything we said was being twisted therefore we taped all conversations and videoed all home visits. The comparison between what actually happened and what was documented is incredible. They have even written down mum says and quoted things that we never even discussed. Absolutely everything was distorted even to the point of not mentioning that my husband was present at every meeting. If I didnt think we would be in trouble for taping I would put all their notes and the tapes on the internet for anyone who does not believe that a whole team of people could all be lying to see for themselves.

The sad thing is that I really dont think they realize they were lying. I think they made a diagnosis possibly based on the referral before meeting the family and then tried to make anything fit to prove their diagnosis. In our case they had decided that i was mentally ill and was starving our child and tried to evidence with lies. My DS was later found to have a medical condition! I had no signs of illness not even depression although was stressed dealing with people who I found very unprofessional ie not turning up for appointments, cancelling at the last minute etc.

We were lucky that we got a diagnosis and a legal team involved the day before the professionals meeting which we were not invited to. Who knows what the outcome would have been without this intervention. We were lucky that we had the money to fight everything but it was made incredibly difficult. Aside from legal fees it cost nearly £1k just to access medical records across all agencies and all the children and took 9 months of fighting to get everything that they were trying to withhold. Having seen the records I am not surprised that everyone was so reluctant to release them!!

We are a happily married couple with professional backgrounds living a very wealthy life with 3 other children who have no issues. Many of my friends work in the caring professions so I would never have believed this type of thing could happen to us.
I was lucky that my friend knew sally clark and knew that these miscarriages of justice can occur and prompted us to prepare properly and luckily to prevent it going any further.

However I can never regain trust and will always be wary of any professional. I would never even attend a GP appointment now without another adult!

social workers WILL take you children away if your home is messy, and deemed a danger to them

If your home is a danger to your children and is not put right within time limits, then your children shouldn't continue to live there, unless you think it is ok for children to live in dangerous conditions?

Social workers DO take children away if the house is a mess (read my earlier posts) My DC went to live at my Mums for a week, then SS said they were allowed home. The house was ready after 4 days, but SW couldn't get to me sooner.

Had I come into my house as an outsider I would have taken my children away too, I just couldn't see the mess iyswim

The sad thing is that I really dont think they realize they were lying. I think they made a diagnosis possibly based on the referral before meeting the family and then tried to make anything fit to prove their diagnosis.

I think this hits the nail on the head. Also, reports tend not to be very rounded. They report every tiny thing that might be "wrong" and barely mention what is "right" so as a standalone piece of reading it can be very damning. I noticed in my report the best compliment there was on our home was that a room was "adequate", not "very clean" or "nicely decorated (that may seem silly but it went into the report where a room was in need of fresh decoration), not "plenty of toys available" or "organised system for child's personal care", just "adequate". Anything that was not sparkling clean was "soiled", whether it was in need of a dust, or had a couple of fresh crumbs on it, which makes it sound squalid, rather than lived in by a normal family . Any mess was "clutter" whether it was toys in the middle of being played with or a discarded overcoat.

Then there are bits that made me think she was confusing us with another house (I didn't see a lot of writing going on during the visit, and it took a few days for the report to come through, how well would she have recalled the situation?).

I don't think it was malicious lying, I think there is bias, and interpreting things to fit a preconceived notion.

I've had a mixed bag of encounters with SWs in my 7 years in the police. Like any job some are brilliant, dedicated professionals and some have been absolutely awful and I ended up having a standoff with one over taking an elderly lady in under the mental health act (I won)

I was involved in several cases involving this woman news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/4797631.stm. For obvious reasons I will not go into details of the things I saw at her house and things she said to me but all I can say is that SS did absolutely everything they could to keep them together (too much in imho) and if they were deemed suitable to keep together for as long as they were the vast majority of mumsnetters have nothing to worry about

i am scared of social workers and i have never even met one i don't have any need to have them in my life, my house is clean, my child is well cared for but i am still so very wary of them.

it took me 12months + to trust the health visitor and she is probably the most supportive person we have in our lives but when you hear about children being taken away, thats my worst fear

When my dc were still under the CP team - I received a report that stated that although the rest of the house was in a neat, tidy and hygenic state, because I had 'faces' (I assume the SW meant faeces) in the toilet, they were going to take the case to court. Now, this was a planned visit. I had cleaned the toilets 20 minutes before the SW arrived, and WHILE the SW was here, my DD went to the toilet. As she had a tummy bug at the time, the toilet obviously wasn't clean - because how could I clean the toilet at the same time as I was having a discussion with the SW. Who refused to accept that the mess had been caused WHILE she was present. Despite the fact that her report stated that my DD had been to the toilet while she was here.

OK, THAT one got thrown out, as even the SW's own notes showed that the mess had been caused WHILE the SW was present, but it was scary nonetheless.

And to the poster who asked if I took it higher when I was told to withdraw my complaint - no, I didn't. I withdrew the complaint. Because a) I was told I would lose my DD if I didn't withdraw the complaint, b) I was never told that I could take it higher, and c) I was 17yo. How was I meant to know, at the time, that there WAS a way of taking it higher, without being told!

Now, I know better, and certainly wouldn't put up with even a fraction of what I did back then, without complaints further up the chain, and involving my MP if necessary, but back then, I 'put up and shut up' because I didn't want to lose custody of my DD. THAT was far more important to me than fighting the SW's lies.

And I admit, I try my best to be as balanced as possible wrt SW's, despite the fact that most of the ones I came across were not the best SW's, and some were outright liars, or obstructive. I still know that there HAS to be a fair amount of GOOD SW's out there, and THEY would be best placed to make decisions on whether someone is being abused or not.

I DO think that each SW has to take on too many cases, and can't devote as much time and attention to each case as they should, and I also feel that the whole process needs to become MORE transparent, which would go a long way towards allaying people's fears, or reversing their attitudes that have been based on previous contact with not-so-good SW's.

It also NEEDS to be easier to request a different SW, because as a parent, it is a fact that you will not gel with, and be able to work effectively with ALL SW's. You need a SW that you CAN work with, and if you find that you feel your SW is predjudiced against, say, teenage mothers, and YOU are a teenage mother, that you CAN request a change of SW without it either being refused, or being refused AND being told that you are obstructive and are going to lose your dc if you don't work with THAT allocated SW. Ditto if you are allocated a SW that is predjudiced against Lone Parents (and some ARE, just like people in ALL walks of life, some SW's - not all - carry their predjudices into their work).

I had the misfortune, with my DD to get allocated quite an 'old school' SW, who happened to be of the opinion that both teenage mothers AND Lone Parents should have their dc taken away at birth, and she took great delight in frequently telling me that she wished I had given birth 30 years earlier, because then she could have found a nice COUPLE in their 30's, who deserved to have my DD soooo much more than I did...

There ARE bad SW's out there, just as there are outstanding SW's out there. But if you are the unlucky one who has the misfortune to be allocated the one 'bad egg', it's of scant consolation to you that the other 98% of SW's are good or outstanding.

I don't know all the ins and outs of Tiffany and Mike's case, as obviously I was not party to the case meetings and the notes, but having watched the programme, and my own experiences as both a child AND an adult with CP services, I feel that much more SHOULD have been done to help Tiffany access WA - it was OBVIOUS she was fearful of Mike, and that SHOULD have rung warning bells for the SW, who I feel should have supported her more to make an earlier 'break' from Mike, and explaining that she would get a LOT of support if she was no longer in that situation. I think that had Tiffany been allowed to have her dc back after she left Mike, in a supervised environment like a residential unit, that she may well have got back on track and been able to be TAUGHT how to be a better parent, just as I was.

I think that THAT is the part that saddens me most. Because, from what I saw on the programme, all the unecessary things in that flat that had been bought at the expense of things like bedding for the young boy, had been bought by MIKE. Dog? Mike. Laptop? Mike. I think that Tiffany SHOULD have been given a chance.

And I also think that her severe pre-eclampsia SHOULD have been taken into consideration. At the time of this programme, she was at risk of her baby dying AND losing her own life. So she was in a time of EXTREME stress already. If there had been more, targetted, short-term support put in place, I think that she would have been a good-enough mother, without Mike on the scene. She was MUCH better in the observed session at the end of the programme, when she was NO LONGER PREGNANT AND AT RISK OF HER BABY AND/OR HERSELF DYING. Sitting on the floor, playing with her son, chatting to him. Who here would say that they wouldn't shove their dc in front of cbeebies more often than usual if they were ill? There's been enough threads where everyone runs in shouting that it won't matter for a few days. OK, if it is a few MONTHS, like it is with pre-eclampsia, it IS a problem - but surely, as she had NO family support (which TIFFANY wouldn't ask for as SHE thought her family wasn't suitable to be around her son - NOT the actions of a neglectful mother IMO), Social Services could have helped her out more intensively until after the birth of her baby and Tiffany's recovery from the C-section?

THAT is what I found totally wrong with SS's approach to Tiffany. And they obviously failed to recognise that you can get 'early warning signs' of pre-eclampsia, one of which is extreme exhaustion, long before your diagnosis. And her pre-eclampsia must have been reasonably severe, as she was hospitalised at just 26 weeks with it - which is long before most people GET a diagnosis of pre-eclampsia, unless it is one of the more severe cases. I should know. My DD was born preemie DUE to severe pre-eclampsia.

I have had good experiences of SWs- if I was to be scared of anyone it would be headteachers and hospital consultants: the SWs always stood out as beacons of sanity in comparison.

(though dcs' current headteacher is lovely)

I believe Tiffany was hospitalised to get her out of harms way not pre-eclampsia. I also believe that at some point Tiffany needed to take some responsibility for her actions and where she went wrong was getting pregnant again. They ran out of time to put in all the support, Toby needed urgent help and Tiffany took herself out of the game by being pregnant. She even said she felt punished for being ill, it wasn't like she suddenly came down with an illness, it wasn't like she had had straight forward pregnancies in the past either. She knew the situation and went ahead and got pregnant anyway to the determent of her existing child.

Spero Tue 31-Jan-12 23:34:17
"I have never encountered malicious lying from a SW. It would be very difficult for them to maintain and sustain a lie that I couldn't discover from my very careful investigation of ALL the paperwork I receive. A contested care case takes a minimum of six hours to prepare, probably double that if I prepare a detailed chronology.

I have never met a SW who maliciously lied. However, I have met many many parents who could not face up to what they had done and wanted it to be anyone else's fault but their own."

Is there not a risk though that a SW (or doctor or headteacher) who genuinely believed that a parent was lying/abusive might make a note on the paperwork worded in a certain way which would then influence how subsequent workers dealing with the case to interpret everything they see in a certain light? And is there not a risk that this will lead to further statements on the paperwork leading to further misinterpretation.

I am asking this not because I have any bad experiences of SWs, but because of experiences in the NHS.

Some remarks made on dd's medical notes by her first paediatrician- a man who was convinced dd was imagining her joint pains because of abusive parenting- have very clearly influenced the kind of questions we get asked by doctors ever since, despite the fact that a physical diagnosis is now firmly in place and no evidence of abuse has ever been forthcoming.

New doctors all tend to read that first page, which hints at an over-anxious mother and a child who enjoys the attention of being ill, whilst the actual diagnosis is tucked away somewhere towards the middle. This obviously influences how they react when dd explains that she has trouble with a new joint and thinks it needs investigating.

I wouldn't for a moment suggest that the paed was deliberately lying but when he questioned dd he heard what he expected to hear (dd never said she enjoyed the attention of being in a wheelchair- she hates being different, but his whole interpretation was based around the idea that she must love the attention, so therefore he thought he heard that).

Unfortunately, this is not a problem I can solve by owning up to anything I have done or admitting that anything is my fault. I know the situation is not my fault, and if I claimed it was when it isn't then I would do untold damage to dd, who is already messed up by the whole situation.

Spero - re the following comment "I have never encountered malicious lying from a SW".

Would you like to compare my tapes and videos to the notes to see evidence of extensive and widespread lying. I cant prove if it was malicious in retaliation for a complaint about a HCP or not but either way it is still LIES.

Socialworknamechange - I would be happy tp help you any way I could but looking at docs or videos from another case probably raises all kinds of issues of data protection and confidentiality which might put me in Comtempt of court.

I do not doubt for a moment that all of us can get things wrong, make crass and insensitive comments and hold on to perceptions for a long time which are unfair.

But what I reject is that professionals gang up to tell malicious lies and that muppet judges let it all through on a nod and a wink.

This does not happen.

I did my first care case in 1999. I have since acted in cases which have gone on for weeks. I have cross examined all kinds of experts. Cory, the situation you worry about is far from unusual: doctors can be arrogant shit heads who don't like to back down and sometimes they get the bit between the teeth and are very very wrong. But I still maintain it would be extremely difficult to sustain deliberate and malicious lies in a contested hearing. It would require everyone present to be part of the conspiracy.

I know that's what some people genuinely believe, because they have had such a bad experience, that is the only thing that makes sense for them.

SW working in child protection teams have an almost impossible task. They have to develop a trusting and professional relationship with a parent whilst at the same time investigating those parents for possibly causing serious harm to a child. Most parents, quite understandably, are not in an emotional state to react well to suggestions that they change their lifestyle, clean up their house etc.

Tiffany had been with Mike for SIX years. I am sure she was give lots of help and encouragement to leave him. But paternalism can only go far. You can't force people to do the right thing.

Although I think all professionals have their weaker members of the group, surely the difference is that SW have a massive amount of influence in the closed family court system which is not open to scrutiny.

If I am a rubbish lecturer, I'm not really harming anyone, it's a bit of a waste of money having paid to be educated by me, but nothing bad will occur to those around me (unless I do something actually unethical like sleep with my students). However, if you get a rubbish SW or, worse, an unethical one, the consequences could be far more drastic in terms of being accused of abuse or having your children removed.

I was struck in the Protecting Children programme (not that I want to have the whole discussion here) that it would be impossible to resist/complain/ask for another social worker without looking unreasonable and non-compliant. This is backed up by a few stories on this thread. So, for those of you who are SW's, how could that be changed? Is it a mentality (how dare anyone challenge us?) Or is it just lack of man power (we can't change every SW that people don't like?)

I'm not a social worker - but I work with them nerly every day. I'd say it's lack of staff that means that they can't be changed. But one young person I've been working with recently who is in the care system has had 3 social workers since May 2011. They good ones get jobs elsewhere, or leave, or go sick because of stress.

Hardgoing- you are lucky or unlucky if you have the same social worker, there is a four month turn over in CP. In the programme the family had three different social workers. When achild goes off a CP plan and is transferred in to the Looked After Child system, a new SW is awarded from that team.

Most people who havechildren removed blaim the professionals, because they are in denial about the issues so seek to find blaim. At the last CP review i was in the GP took the time to attend becuase of his concern about the child, he also was called a liar and the parent wanted tochange GP,also(the child was under weight and losing weight).

Family support workers have the most contact with the family, they can be the most insramental in providing the 'evidence'and HV are also heavily involved with the families. The SW can often have the least contact.

My 'e' is sticking.

If you are dealing with child protection issues, you have got to have power and influence, otherwise what is the bloody point? You need to be able to intervene, sometimes very quickly.

If you want a higher standard of people joining the profession, you will need to offer much higher wages and much less stressful working conditions.

I appreciate that court hearings are closed but there are hundreds of judgments published every year which everyone can read. That might reassure some people about the way judges at least approach it.

I don't beleive that higher wages would attrach better applicants. Stressful working conditions goes with the territory.

I think that now most Uni don't allow under 25 on to BA in socialwork is a good thing. Most younger SW that i know see a disagreement as a personal slight, even from other professionals, you need good mult-agency working skills. On average 500 people compete for 25 places to go onto a BA.

On paper some of my cases haven't looked that bad to an untrained eye, so seeing the paperwork may not be helpful. You have to highlight what can be proven,but often it is the emotionaldamage going on behind the dirt and the self esteem issues that you cannot put on paper.

I would also like to make clear that different LA work slightly differently, i have worked across 3, my sister across 7, manager in 2, (same with friends and some abroad) so what you see on any television show, isn't how it works everywhere. In my LA Toby would be getting daily visits from Family Support Workers, whowould attend the conferences. Parenting assessments are done by multi-professionals, it isn't the one opinion of the SW.

Can i point out that Toby was on CP from just after birth, so a year before the pregnancy.

There would have been parenting courses offered in that time (with full creche facilities). We saw the flat once a claen up had been done.

While I agree that all the goods seemed to be Mikes eg laptop, dog, very large toolbox I also noticed that Tiffany had very nice professionally manicured nails that surely cost more than the price of a sheet and duvet

Most SW seem to have huge case loads caused by lack of staff. Surely that can't be an acceptable stress that just goes with the territory? It leads to mistakes and errors of judgment and massive rates of burn out. In a care case lasting a year I will usually see at least three SW. Sometimes it is due to a change to a new team but often they have left due to illness and end up on long time sick leave. I am not surprised.

I think the lack of public defense of SW's has caused the short staffing, they don't see how it affects them, so no protest.

They undervalue the work, so no great loss to society.

If police, fire service, even binmen are facing joc losses there is a massive outcry. It is very different when a cut in SW's is announced.

Some of the stresses will never be removed and i see more SW's leave because they are not cut out for CP, unfortunately that is were the jobs are.

The cuts across the board, Children Centres, services etc will make CP even more stressful.

I don't like to say it but there is a attitude of me and mine are ok, so all's well with the world.

How many on here would give Tiffany their new born prem baby and toddler to look after for a week? Or allow her to come in to their home and dictate how clean the kitchen/bed (if there is one) is going to be for them to sleep in? and they must sit in silence all day?

It's ok for a lot of children (other peoples), though.

I asked for some respite via the duty social worker when my son was six. I looked after my 24 week born son all alone after he came home after six months in hospital when he weighed 4lb. I nursed him through lots of life threatening illnesses and sat up night after night and sometimes hyad my own room in the childrens hospital in birmingham. I got the respite and never heard anything from the social worker again until my son was ten. They came just after my ex left us (we never lived together and he is my childs father). The house was messy and they came via an anonymous call - it was the 5th one i'd had, all malicious - the social worker was ok and asked me to tidy up a bit and hed be back after the weekend on Monday. They closed the case but i have asked for more respite and have been allocated a new social worker. The respite we applied for fell through and she rang me yesterday after months to tell me she was concerned that i might be fed up with her and shewanted to bring a male social worker with her next Wednesday. I objected and she said ok. I wonder whether she is checking up on me after the programme on channel 4? I hate the intrusiveness, saw is nice enough but patronising and judgy. i'm worried now as to the rea;l reason she is coming. Even though i know it is about the ongoing saga of respite issues i feel there might be more judging. ~This kind of life i lead is very lonely and this on top makes my life even more intolerable at times. Wonder at times if i should still be torturing myself with it all. I hate being told what to do and hearing the obvious statements from her. School realise i'm a good Mummy. cannot be bothered to spell check, feel down.