TO BE REALLY UPSET BY RUN IN WITH DD'S HEAD TEACHER?

[cheekychirpy]

Can't stop shaking - I parked in the school car park and left DD2 in the car while I collected DD1 from school. Got back to the car to be met by the head teacher and given a right blasting: DD "could let the handbrake off and the car could roll back".

DD can't get the handbrake off AND the car was in gear so couldn't roll back in any case.

Just feel like shit - am I such a CRAP mother? DD2 is ill and I didn't want to get her out as it's bloody freezing at the mo.

Just want some rationalisation really; and feel maybe that the facts could have been established before I was judged.

TooHasty - you don't have to pull all handbrakes up before releasing. Normally depressing the button and letting it down is required.
The HT is responsible for H+S on site as said before. She had every right to say something.

I object to SeeminglySo insinuating that we are all so stupid and think that all SS mistakes are because we only read the DailyFail.

But a telegraph link was supplied.
The Tim Haines was a case where resources were mis-directed and the case went on for a lot longer than it should have - wasting resources. SS who are over-stretched by terrible cuts, and by box ticking, to protect themselves after Baby P, has got into this unfortunate vicious circle, where due to over-zealousness petty cases are taking up too much time, so real serious cases of neglect and abuse are not being given the time required.

Many people in schools have very limited SEN training, very limited CPO training. And because there is no clear definition of Significant Harm, people are over-reporting petty stuff.

We had a case locally, teacher reported to SS - girls told the teacher, after the weekend that : playing in paddling pool, getting dried, ran back out to paddling pool, and dad joked 'cheeky bum' and the 2 girls had to stay with family friends while SS investigated, but that took over 3 weeks, because of a lack of trained professionals to interview the girls, with the necessary abuse training. Frightening.

SS contains many people who work very hard with the focus always being on the child. We know this. But if anyone thinks that SS don't make mistakes then they are just being naieve.

Have you been onto the MN SN's boards to see people fighting for years, LEA, SS, lies and falsifications, leading to tribunals that go on for years?

Miscarriages of justice happen all the time ; did you see the FGM doctor yesterday? do you remember Solicitor Sally Clarke and her Cot Death Roy Meadows miscarriage of justice - SS were heavily involved in that.

There needs to be a lot more training for police, SS , teachers, people involved in childcare. So that these petty insignificant concerns aren't reported, and don't prevent real child abuse and neglect cases being missed.

''Have you been onto the MN SN's boards to see people fighting for years, LEA, SS, lies and falsifications, leading to tribunals that go on for years?''

And all you hear and will ever hear is there side of the story..... so it must be true

Well, Seemingly, it would at least be kind of you to think that it isn't necessarily false just because it's a deluded abusive parent saying it.

Been there.

The pearl clutchers would have a field day at our school
It's a rural school surrounded by fields and a car park for parents. Lots of parents (especially if raining ) will sit in car until you see the doors opening, leave younger child in car and run down and pick up the school child
Everyone know everyone so if a child was distressed it would take 2 seconds to shout down/find parent. There are teachers by the edge of car park sorting out the kids for minibus and car park can be seen from playground )literally a few Mtrs away seperated by a small waist high wooden fence.
Ds2 who is 4 will quite happily sit and play on iPad while I pop down but other times I take him with me to play on plauground.

Early 70's as well.My feral children rolled the car down a hill(toddlers to 8 years old).I ran to 'catch the car' ,was run over and had broken ribs and an arm.Car eventually rolled into a stop into a pavement.

Nowadays I would be in prison or childless.Times change.

Op don't feel bad,it was only concern.

I have been on the SN boards for years. I've had to fight. Not at tribunal, but in other ways. There have been lies, some things are completely factitious, some twisted, or just not recorded verbatim.
Why do you think there are literally 1000's of us on the SN boards, all with similar experiences?

Your sustain is offensive.

It's SW'ers like you that give SS a bad name. So intrangient that you just can't see any other option.

Do you think that we are believe everything we read? Do you think we don't have the intelligence to read between the lines.
But certain things are facts. Factual. And those are harder for you to disprove or deny.

Sorry to return to the issue from upthread, I wasn't trying to prove what the surgery does, I was only repeating what the midwife told me the surgery does. At that point the truth of what she was saying was not really in issue, as we were not in a hostile conversation. Just to be clear she did not say 'I must report you for being a feckless single mother' she said something about single mothers being more susceptible to PND and the surgery flags them to ss so they can be aware of them and offer help and make sure both mother and baby are safe. It was pitched as 'help' and part of the worry in saying 'no' to help is that this in itself is a flag for ss (refusing to follow medical advice, and refusing to cooperate).

So, obviously, having spent too much time reading the Daily Mail, I smiled and nodded, offered my thanks, and never darkened the door of that surgery again. Overweening health and safety does cause families to suffer when mistakes were made, and as a number off pps have said, mistakes do happen (even outside Daily Mail pages).

Have any of you seen the other thread? Where boy was ill in school and parents didn't collect.
Now obviously this is not ok. Head would need to deal with it.

But OP asked if it was neglect - and she works in a school. She clearly has no idea what the definition of Neglect is. She clearly has never ben trained or shown the paragraph in say the Children's Act 2004.

Others are suggesting that SS are called.
Or, That is is a safeguarding issue.

I challenge anyone to disagree that more training is required and education of the general public as well.

Chaiselounger - my 'sustain is offensive' what?

I am actually a clinical psychologist working predominatley in family law. I feel for social workers, damned if they do damned if they don't!

I'm gobsmacked at some posters on this thread, especially MrsDevere. For someone who works with families not to know guidelines on child protection is frightening.

I work with families and make it my job to try and keep as up to date as I can. It is important that my families understand what is happening to them and I am able to support them.

If you work with families you should have been given training to do so as well as have regular refresher training on current legislation. Given your posts clearly you have not had relevant training nor much training on CP. You are giving families the wrong information given your posts on this thread. My advice to you is go and seek (or ask for) appropriate training. The families you work with need to be able to access ACCURATE information. You have displayed to me on this thread the information you are giving these families is not accurate.

We don't allow parents to use the school car park at all. Too many issues, kids could get run over etc.

a 2 yr old can take off a hand break. I was in a car when my 2yr old brother did exactly that. I was 5 I remember it well. It rolled to the edge of drop and luckily stick on the kerb

LittleBrownRabbit - I was also uncomfortable with this conversation and found comments by MrsDevere such as purpose of CP referrals to support as incredibly misinformed.

I suspect Kawliga had her baby in 1958

fluffy if your car rolls when you've left it in gear, you ought to see a mechanic.

We leave young kids in the car alone whilst shopping, doctors appts. all the time in rural Ireland.
Kids get collected from school in tractors. No child seats let alone seatbelts.

So glad I moved. No batty Mr & Mrs Judgypants haranguing folk.
Just a caring community who look after each other. grin

I do know of an awful accident that happened because a toddler was left in a car in a school car park. It was about 11 years ago, it was my sisters DS's school and she was there.

It was common practice at the school for parents to park in the car park and leave the little ones in the car whilst dropping off the older kids. One toddler did get out of her seat and played with the handbreak. The car was on a slight hill and rolled forward towards other parents and kids. One little girl got crushed by the car against the school railings. She was in hospital for weeks with quite severe internal injuries. My sister said it was absolutely awful and was very distressing for the whole school community.

No one blamed the mother of the toddler, they just saw it as an awful accident.

Maybe this is where your Head Teacher was coming from, not a child protection issue, but an accident avoidance issue. Not sure where you are based in the UK, but maybe the HT knew about this accident.

Pretty sure to pass your driving test now you have to leave the car in neutral misses point of thread

Seeminglyso- nursery managers have a best a level 3? Really? That could be considered really quite insulting- I know several with degrees, masters etc.

I was also uncomfortable with this conversation and found comments by MrsDevere such as purpose of CP referrals to support as incredibly misinformed.

It's very worrying that families that may have been referred to SS are being told SS need to let them know (which isn't the case at all). I am 100% in support of non professionals who work with families however those individuals do need to be giving accurate information to them.

Can I just understand what is the truth? Should families be informed before referral to SS or not? I'm not planning on being in that situation or anything it's just curiosity and I've got a bit confused with all the people who claim to know best.

"Informing parents of the need to make a referral

It is good practice to be open and honest at the outset with the parents/carers about concerns, the need for a referral, information sharing between agencies and the accompanying need for making an enquiry in respect of whether a child is subject to a Child Protection Plan.

All reasonable efforts should be made to inform parents/carers prior to making the referral; however, a referral should not be delayed if you are unable to discuss the concerns with the parents.

Where the child expresses a wish for his or her parents not to be informed, their views should be taken seriously and a judgement made based on the child’s age and understanding, as to whether the child’s wishes should be followed.

Concerns must not be discussed with parents/carers before making a referral where:

Discussion would put a child at risk of significant harm
Discussion would impede a Police investigation or social work enquiry
Sexual abuse is suspected
Organised or multiple abuse is suspected
Fictitious illness or induced illness is suspected
Contact with the parents/carers would place you or others at risk
It is not possible to contact parents/carers without causing undue delay in making the referral

In such cases advice should be sought from Children’s Social Care/Disabled Children’s Service and/or the Police’s Protecting Vulnerable People Unit.

www.safeguardingchildren.co.uk/section-5-procedures.html

LittleBrown are you a child protection SW?

^ To be fair, that is the local policy for Yorkshire but it also applies to our LA so I would assume that most/all areas adhere to a similar policy re: informing parents.

Stockport:

"You should inform parents of your concerns and about a referral to Children’s Social Care except where the concerns relate to sexual abuse, or fabricated or induced illness."

Herts:

"The child and family should be informed and parents' permission should generally be sought by Children's Servie before discussing a referral about them with other agencies. Permission is not required if any criteria below apply.

If parent(s) have not been informed prior to referral, the professional referrer should be asked to inform them unless it is considered to do so might place the child at an increased likelihood of suffering significant harm by:

The behavioural response it prompts e.g. a child being subjected to abuse, maltreatment or threats / forced to remain silent if alleged abuser informed;
Leading to an unreasonable delay;
Leading to the risk of loss of evidential material;
Placing a member of staff from any agency at risk. "

Sheffield:

"Practitioners should, in general, discuss concerns with the family and, where possible inform them that they are making a referral unless this may, either by delay or the behavioural response it prompts or for any other reason, place the child at increased risk of Significant Harm.

Situations where it would not be appropriate to inform family members prior to referral include where:

Discussion would put a child at risk of Significant Harm;
There is evidence to suggest that involving the parents / caregivers would impede the police investigation and / or Children and Families Services enquiry;
Sexual abuse is suspected;
Where there are concerns that a child may have been conceived as a result of an incestuous relationship or intra-familial sexual abuse;
Complex (multiple or organised) abuse is suspected;
Fabricated or induced illness is suspected;
To contact parents / caregivers would place you or others at risk;
Discussion would place one parent at risk of harm, for example. in cases of domestic abuse;
It is not possible to contact parents / caregivers without causing undue delay in making the referral;
Where there are concerns about a possible forced marriage or honour based violence;
An allegation is made that a child under 13 has been involved in penetrative sex or other intimate sexual activity;
Where young people under the age of 18 are engaged in sexual activity and there are concerns around Significant Harm.