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

Are you scared of Social Workers?

422 replies

JugsyMalone · 31/01/2012 18:44

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?

OP posts:
GoingForGoalWeight · 31/01/2012 22:30

after abuse/neglect are, ragged did you miss a bit out? :)

Original poster
JugsyMalone · 31/01/2012 22:30

Personally, I think the "powers that be" have too much power over us.

But take no action when required to.

OP posts:
Serendipity30 · 31/01/2012 22:31

I am a newly qualified S/W and these comments make me want to quit, people complain about S/W's and yet when a child is badly abused they point the finger back at us. This society needs to make its mind up, whether it wants us or not. It breaks my heart to see the cases i get, child after child who is being neglected willfully or not by their parents or carers:( . As for wanting to take peoples children. Why would we want that???? What exactly would we do with them. Your acting like we have nothing to do than take children out of homes where they are happy and safe. If you could read my cases your stomach would turn with horror . The power to remove a child is not based on the S/W alone , ultimately it is a decision made by a number of professionals involved with the child. Instead of blaming S/W's why not take an active role in protecting our children. Because they are OUR CHILDREN. And if a S/W is guilty then frankly so are you. Its a sad day for everybody when a defenceless child has not been protected from abuse.

Spero · 31/01/2012 22:32

I have never had a case based on vague allegations or rumours.

I have never had a case less than two lever arch files full of often horrible stuff. The more complicated cases are between 6-10 lever arch files. Each file has about 300 pages.

ReallyTired · 31/01/2012 22:32

"Does every child from SN parents have to be removed?"

Many parents with SN are excellent parents, even if they need more support than average. It is unfair to tar the child protection brush over all parents with special needs. It does not require a high IQ to be a satisfactory parent.

The parents on the programme were lazy. Their lack of intelligence was not the issue, it was their total refusal to get off their backside and do something about the mess. It was total refusal to follow instruction from authority. They were offered incredible support and couldn't be arsed.

GoingForGoalWeight · 31/01/2012 22:33

I didn't saythat iaint

Spero · 31/01/2012 22:33

So op, how does that work?

They have too much power but don't exercise it?

They chase after the slaggy housework mum but leave the killers to it?

Really???

Spero · 31/01/2012 22:35

I agree that a high IQ is not necessary nor sufficient to be a good parent. BUT if your IQ is below 75 you are going to struggle without a lot of support.

hiddenhome · 31/01/2012 22:37

iaintfromkansas give it a few years and find out that your colleagues aren't all sweetness and light then you might understand why people are so nervous and distrusting of the authorities.

Original poster
JugsyMalone · 31/01/2012 22:38

KANSAS- they are not your children, ever.

They are caseloads. It is your job.

SPERO - don't you think that the bill is irrelevent - what cost a child?

Do you think that unless a child is being cruelly treated they should be at home, no matter how pissy?

OP posts:
Spero · 31/01/2012 22:40

I repeat my earlier question, which may have been on another thread come to think of it.

In what world is money irrelevant?
What service would you cut to pay for it?>
How high would you like your taxes to go to pay for it?
Resources are finite.

Define 'cruelty'. If you limit it to broken bones only, I think you are very wrong.

Heswall · 31/01/2012 22:42

I think she means societies children, not hers personally, she probably has enough of her own to take care of.
I know what you mean about everyone having a duty of care towards children I just don't like the way it's done these days.
My mother's mother lived in glasgow in the 60's and hit her children too much and all the neighbors came around and told her to stop. So she did because they were all watching night and day, far more intrusive than SS could ever be.
I wonder if we rely so much on the authorities that we don't look out for each other as we ought to these days.

exoticfruits · 31/01/2012 22:48

I never understand why people are so frightened of them. If you mention leaving your 8yr old for 10 mins someone comes on and says 'you will be reported to SS'. It has never happened and I really don't care-I would tell them why, that DC was happy and all the safeguards and that they shouldn't be wasting their time.

Original poster
JugsyMalone · 31/01/2012 22:50

Spero - I have missed your earlier questions:

Money irrelevant - well I would say that money is not irrelevant but that with parents who are struggling to keep to parenting plans then they should not be on Jobseekers Allowance too.

What service - nursery schools. I think we are a culture that has done well without pre-schools in the past. We send our kids to school at 4.5 anyway.

How high - like Sweden 50%.

Cruelty - Hurting a child physically. Abusing or letting a child be abused sexually. Being mean emotionally to a child

OP posts:
perceptionreality · 31/01/2012 22:51

Does anyone know what social workers would have to gain from lying? I know that LA representatives lie but don't know much about SWs so don't know what the motivation is.

This thread has made me more wary though. I have a child who head bangs at night to soothe herself to sleep. If I take her out of her cot and put her in a bed, she gets out and head bangs the gate. If I remove the gate she runs around the house. It's a nightmare but a lot of people are so judgy about it 'You should stop her'. How exactly? I would love to know that!

Heswall · 31/01/2012 22:53

I guess a SW would lie for the same reason the police might or a nurse, to avoid getting themselves into trouble.
Or it could be a mistake that is then interpretted as a lie by the other party.
Either way the consequences are huge. I could live with the wrong limb being amputated before I could live with wrongly being accused of hurting my DC.

Original poster
JugsyMalone · 31/01/2012 22:53

I do know an EWO, not a friend, who has BPD. Think about that.

OP posts:
Original poster
JugsyMalone · 31/01/2012 22:54

I also knew a SW who said to me "all kids in foster care are just animals".

OP posts:
Original poster
JugsyMalone · 31/01/2012 22:58

hiddenhome - that story is for a 14 year old in charge of his 3 year old sibling. I would do that. My kids are 10 years apart - once DS1 was about 15/16 he could babysit DS2 who was 5/6/7.

I think it was legal.

OP posts:
ReallyTired · 31/01/2012 22:58

I got the impression that the couple both had moderate learning difficulties. I think the problem was their sheer laziness. Not everyone with an IQ below 75 is dirty and lazy. Every person with learning difficulties is an individual and some are prepared to try.

I know someone who went to special school who has a little boy. She does wash her son clothes, cleans her house and does send her son to school. She struggled with common sense. Ie. knowing what a safety hazard is, making up bottles and she cannot read. She has had a lot of support and I feel its right she has been allowed to be a mother.

Original poster
JugsyMalone · 31/01/2012 23:01

ReallyTired - does the boy have SN? Is it his "genetic legacy". It is probably all she can do to care for him. Does she also have to work?

OP posts:
GoingForGoalWeight · 31/01/2012 23:02

I was told that leaving my child in the petrol station forecourt in the car whilst i paid, was wrong by a SW. It is a teeny shop, extremly busy and the car is within full view whilst standing in the queue. It would really upset my son to be in that environment. During the chat i was also told by SS never ever to nip to the shop and leave him in the house for even 5 minutes as it is against the law, (i never have anyway?).

Original poster
JugsyMalone · 31/01/2012 23:04

Right - I will tell you what pisses me off.

There are people - I am not one of them - who have SN. It is ALL they can do to care for their kids.

Does the Jobcentre say they MUST look for work when they have SN and looking after their kids is the MOST they can do in life.

OP posts:
Serendipity30 · 31/01/2012 23:07

They are not case loads, and yes i do see them as my responsibility,a child is not simply a case. My colleagues are not my people. We are all individually responsible for our own practice. Therefore if someone is a bad social worker, that is because that is what they are. I am sorry that some of you have had a bad experience, as i see people who should not be practising myself, but that does not mean S/W's should except anything that is thrown at them. The majority of us are trying to do our jobs and trying to do it well. We do it because we are passionate about we do. I have had bad experiences with some police officers, but that does not mean i distrust all police officers. Even when a social worker feels strongly a child is neglectful, they have to present their case to the court , who question every step a s/w has taken up to that point. S/W's cannot just snap their fingers and take away children. We have to document everything we do, include contact and conversation. We have to explain what we are doing all the time, and why we have come to that decision. That is our job, and even then it does not mean a child can be removed just based on a whim.