To wonder about all the press on Social Services taking children away?

[goldbracelet]

From good families and parents for no good reason. It is media hype or is there truth in it?

Talking with friends recently, some say they are careful about what they say to the GP for fear of what goes down on record. For example, they would think twice before saying something along the lines of, "I'm finding it hard to cope with my young children while sick with flu (or whatever illness)".

Amy social workers out there who could comment? Is it true that 95% of children are never returned to their parents once removed?

Scary. I can't believe this could happen.

I am very glad you managed to get your grandson back and i hope your daughter has managed to rebuild her life. Violence in the home is shocking and it is true that it is emotionally damaging for young children to hear or see this no matter how young they are.

mysecretworld There is a MASSIVE post on the UKIP foster carers. Go and read it if you care so much.

I hate people who purposely scaremonger worried parents.

As a student social worker, I believe that terrible mistakes do happen. However, I cannot think of one single profession where terrible mistakes do not happen. We are humans, not robots. I am not excusing poor practice. There are some crap social workers. There are also crap doctors, nurses, firemen, receptionists, care workers, vets etc.

it shows that the ss dont think of the children as the children were very settled with the family but were taken from them all because the ss found they were members of UKIP.

thats why mt daughter got out within the first few months of my grandson being born.

But there could have been a risk if your daughter had chosen to go back to her ex, as many abused women do. I don't know why you are stating that as something they were wrong to say.

The UKIP foster parents may have been all over the news, hat doesn't mean everyone has read every detail of it. I haven't. But from the little I do know, I think the children should have stayed put. But I would be easily swayed the other way if I knew more detail to support that.

Erik's did answer you. Reread.

The only person I know who has had their children taken away from them (they have been placed with another family member fortunately) was reported by their own family. They are a drug addict who funds their habit through prostitution (she told me this herself) and was caught using the baby's feeding utensils to mix up drugs. I suspect her version of events would be rather different to the way everyone else saw it.

but the ss said in reports that my daughter was on drugs and had mental health problems..... both of which were proved to be false.

she had 2 drugs test which both came up clean

she also had a mental health assessment when gave her a clean bill of health. it stated she DID NOT have ANY mental health problems

so th ss lied in reports which they then subbmitted to court.

Tell you what, when your DS goes to school with a child a full head smaller than him with rickets due to malnutrition, who is still living with his chaotic family you really find it hard to believe that ss take children too quickly or too easily.

mysecretworld
In the case I am talking about the drug user is a drug user no question. SS didn't need to say it because the drug user said it herself.

I can't comment on your daughter's case.

i do admit their are children out there still living with their parents that do need ss intervention and should be taken away from their parents but in my daughers case and alot that i have spoken to the ss should not have taken the children.

as i have said everything the ss put into the case files for court about my daughter was false and it was proven to be false

does anyone think that its right for the ss to put false accusation into reports that they then present to the judge in the family courts during the case ???

www.sociallyserviced.co.uk/?fb_action_ids=386956501384810&fb_action_types=og.likes&fb_source=aggregation&fb_aggregation_id=246965925417366

if you want to read a blog frm a mother who is fighting for her children please read this one.

Are you an experience, trained child protection social worker? If no, then you are in no position to judge. Not to mention that you do not know the outs and ins of every person's history.

Ugh experienced and ins and outs

i know my own daughters history and i know the whole case as i was involved in it and read every single thing that was put into court.

I think, secret, that your family was in a horrendous situation. However, from your threads at the time, I also think you minimised the risk your grandson was under - not from you or dd, but from her x.

Yes and let me guess, you were able to be completely subjective too!

You're not a professional, you do not know how to recognise or assess risk in the same way as a trained, competent practitioner.

im not a sw and would not want to be one but i know of a afew who have been struck off for things they have done that they shouldnt have done.

there was a social worker who was found with child porn on his computer and his defence in court was it was in research for his job.

do you think that that is ok ???

mysecretworld what often happens is that at the beginning of a case you might find a parent who is using drugs, has mental health problems, being subjected to domestic violence and at that point the decision is made to remove the child. Then the parent decides to fight for their child and accepts support and really turns things round so at the point where it might be going to court these things are no longer true - but they have to put all this into the report to give a history.

Social services are not baby snatchers. By perpetuating such dangerous myths, you put parents off seeking support. It is dangerous. I won't comment on your case because I do not know the facts.

I have clearly said that it is not ok. Where the fuck do you get off suggesting I think bad practice is in any way acceptable? I posted that at the start!

wilson frickett are you saying that my grandson was at risk from my daughter ??? cause if you are then your sooooooo wrong. she left his father and took the child with her to protect him from his father and in the hostel the staff had no concerns with regards to the care that my daughter was giving her son and they had no concerns with regard to her being able to protect him.

the statements from the hostel were put into court but the ss tried to have them removed from the evidence but the judge in our case said no they stay

As a social worker i absolutely accept that some are better than others and there is no excuse for poor practice. I think someone already commented that there are bad doctors, teachers, etc etc out there and social work is no different.

I'm going out but I wanted to clarify, I don't have an issue with people sharing their own stories. I have a massive issue with scaremongering, lying and perpetuating the 'baby stealers' myth as it will put parents off seeking support when they need it.

my daughter has never used drugs and has never had mental health problems. BOTH THESE THINGS WERE PROVEN BY 2 DRUGS TEST 8 WEEKS APART AND A MENTAL HEALTH ASSESSMENT LASTING FOR 3 HOURS.

No my secret world that is not what I said. At all. What I said was I remember from your threads at the time that I felt you minimised the risk your GS was at from the EX.

there was a social worker who was found with child porn on his computer and his defence in court was it was in research for his job

do you think that that is ok ???

What a ridiculous question.

Actually, parents can do a lot of harm to their children without consequence. The threshold for court proceedings is significant harm. So to get to the point of removal there must have been significant harm proven. It's almost impossible nowadays to remove a child without evidence of significant harm.

In your daughter's case, that evidence was not forthcoming eventually. Although there must have been some evidence at some point.

I did answer your question about the UKIP carers. I think it was the right decision.