To think if i call social services ...

[IsThisForTheBest]

Then they will support someone in need rather than remove their child?

I ve name changed for this as this is going to be very identifying.

Last week me and dh went to bil house and we got a shock!

Bil has learning difficulties and a brain injury (water on the brain as a baby and has had over 20 operations on his brain)

He has sole custody of his pre teenage son (mother estranded from them)

We have always know his house to be filthy. Dh and his brother was brought up like that and his brother thinks his house is clean. Last week im sure it was worse!

I wouldnt even go to the toilet there or have a brew and i didnt even want to lean back on the sofa! I refuse to take my dd there as he is a heavy smoker too.

He has always been volatile and has behavioural issues. He has an obsession with calling people cunts, twats, faggots etc.

He is forcing his child to call people a faggot in the street etc.

His son has no social skills and has poor speech.

His son has gained approx 2 stone in weight in the last year and when we saw him last week he was very clearly very over weight. He had always been very very slim.

He openly admits to allowing his son to buy big bags of crisps every day after school and only drink cola. No water or anything else.

He doesnt have a social worker. Last week when dh went to the shop with bil, bil was shouting to people in the street calling them a MILF.

He is extremerly vulnerable with money and will offer his bank card out to his neighbours so they can use it!

He has been taken advantage of a few times.

When he was driving he used to drive very irratic around the street and used to think it was funny.

He has since had his licence revoked due to health reasons but did mention he may be getting it back.

I think bil could do with some support (we are 2.5hours away) and im thinking if social services pay him a visit they could put some support in place for him, maybe send him on some courses etc and assign him a social worker.

Dh has gone mad at this idea as he feels ss will just take his son away and he doesnt want that on his conscience. He feels that any stress towards his brother will result in him needing brain surgery again (this does tend to happen when he is under enormous pressure ) and he doesnt want to be responsible for that.

I dont think its wise dh speak to him about the way he behaves and the state of the house as he will be very defensive and volatile towards dh and he just wouldnt get anywhere with him.

Aibu to think he needs social services help and they will give him support rather than take his son away from him?

Have you tried looking him up in the phone book? It's online these days...

Hes only been in his new flat 3 months so i dont think the online phone book would be up to date

Anyway i know there is a system were people are easily traceable as i was found through the school records over an incident as a child were someone only knew my full name and area.

You need your husband to divulge the address to you really. That or do you have it in an address book somewhere?

Are they in Wales perchance?

Definitely report. Will depend on the thresholds in your LA - In ours the state of the house wouldn't have him removed but the combination of factors might. You need to put the welfare of the child above everything else.

You dont need the address, you've been to the house so you know the area.
Its your BIL so you know the surname.
The kid goes to school so he's in the system.

Just phone SS and tell them that he is seriously neglected. Then describe the dirt and smell, the weight issue, and the behaviour.
Its scary doing it, but when you do you'll realise its straightforwards.

I used to work with SS and I taught at schools.

You must call SS OP and you need to do it now,this is not normal and it's not fair on the poor child neither OP!If he's allowed to carry on living like this,if you can call it living it sounds more like surviving then if your DN goes onto have DC the cycle will start all over again and that could go on for generation after generation after generation,you would'nt just be saving him you could be saving tons of future generations of DC going through the same ordeal.

You don't have to give your name and you don't have to tell anyone in RL that you've spoke to SS but you do have a responsibility towards this child,he needs someone to speak up for him,he can't do that for himself.
I'd do it now before something awful happens,the way you've said he drives for a start he could end up crashing that car,killing himself your DN and any other family that's on the road as the same time as him!

Have you tried googling the fathers name? Even if the current address doesn't come up on 192 then at least you will get a district. If you know the town and vague area then look on google maps to see the nearby schools. Seeing the name might help you remember it.

Good idea waist

I give in - I'm accused of being out of date amongst other things. I really don't care who is a social worker and who isn't and who works in a school or is a checkout supervisor. But I do care about being misquoted. I have never said that it is all right for this boy to stay at home or not, I have simply tried to explain the law, because all social work activity is underpinned by law. Apple thinks the threshold differs in different LAs - sorry but the threshold conditions are part of legislation and so will stay the same wherever. It's a bit like saying "it's ok to assault someone in Cornwall, but it might be different in Yorkshire."

Many posters have urged the OP to report to Children's Services NOW and when I look at the date and time, it's over the weekend and one was 2.00 a.m. The "lay person" wouldn't understand that any such call out of office hours would go to EDT (Emergency Duty Team) and as the name suggests they deal with emergencies (babies with fractured skulls in A & E) adults with mental health issues having a psychotic breakdown and a danger to himself and others...............get the idea? They are NOT going to go out on a situation that has been going on for years on end! I'm surprised some of the SWs on this thread have not pointed that out! Incidentally I find it very patronising that SWs are claiming that they didn't want to confuse "lay people" - I think it's important that we credit people with enough sense to be able to understand the legalities of this situation.

Everyone wants the OP to phone Children's Services to tell them the boy is "seriously neglected" - it's actually the task of social workers in safeguarding teams to make that assessment. It's a bit like phoning a GP and saying "I'm seriously ill...." Then "describe the dirt, the smell and the weight issues" - are you on Plant Earth? If SWs intervened for those reasons there would be thousands of children not living in their own families. I tried to explain that before a child can be removed from their parent the SWs have to have evidence to present to the court that the child is being significantly harmed and I can assure you dirt, smells and weight are very wide of the mark of significant harm.

Ontheholidaysanother who wants the OP to report on Sunday morning to the EDT. It's quite touching in a way that so many of you believe SWs are going to rush in, remove the child, get the house cleaned and got knows what else. If only you knew the truth. I agree about the cycle of deprivation that you outline and sadly I've seen it through 3 generations of the same family. The problem is at aged 11 it's way too late for the boy not to be adversely affected - sad but true. A child can suffer emotional harm at 11 days, never mind 11 years! There is now evidence that a foetus in utero can be adversely affected if the mother is tense, anxious and there is DV in the family, and if children don't receive the love and care they need to thrive, from their earliest hours, days, weeks, months etc they will be adversely affected to a greater or lesser extent. No one knows how to break into the cycle of deprivation, and even if children are removed at a young age, and adopted, those early weeks, months of deprivation/neglect/abuse will in many case continue to cause problems for them, throughout the lifespan.

Someone else on the last page has a lot to say about me and I think is critical because I only read the first sentence, telling me "I was always saying nothing could be done" - I couldn't be bothered to read anymore to be honest. I am trying to be realistic because I know that all public services are in dire straits because of the tory government slashing the budgets because they want them privatised. YES there were times I can recall in the early days of my career when it would have been possible to have offered support to this man, and then move on to the state of the house, but more importantly the welfare of the child. We used to try to "gain access" to the family (as they don't have to let SWs in - a point none of you seem to grasp) by offering material things, new bedding, beds, and other household items, and then we could get talking and find out what was going on (other than dirt and smell!) and it usually worked. In that way we could assess the situation relating to the children because even in those far-off days you couldn't just barge in and remove the children! But sadly those days have gone - we called it preventative work. I doubt new SWs have ever heard the term. Now it's fire fighting - SWs struggling with 30 cases, and at least half will be children on the Child Protection Register and they dread the day when a child on their caseload dies, and society will heap blame upon the SW. Small wonder that so many want to leave and recruitment and retention are a huge problem. One poster explains S20 to me - I am conversant with S20 of the Children Act 1989 and mentioned it when I outlined the salient points of the legislation relating to safeguarding. I also agree with barristers and Judges who are critical of the way S20 is used by SWs. And I think I gave my reasons, but obviously that fell on stony ground.

I doubt many of you have read this, but before I go I would like to say that I think that it is arrogant to give such categoric advice to posters without any knowledge, or scant knowledge of these matters. I wouldn't dream of giving advice about teachers, nurses, doctors, lawyers, or indeed any professional or unprofessional occupation, and yet SO many people think nothing of dishing out advice in ignorance.

OP I have no idea where this leaves you!

Many posters have urged the OP to report to Children's Services NOW and when I look at the date and time, it's over the weekend and one was 2.00 a.m.

I don't think anyone means that the OP should pick up her phone there and then.
More that she should report it as soon as she can rather than sit on it and worry about what her DHs thinks etc.

I'm bemused Nanna - thresholds are interpreted so differently between authorities - I can't see how you have worked for SS for 30 years and not seen this? It is pretty common for women to move to more lax LAs as they will be allowed to keep their babies for instance. Some LAs manage UASC by putting them in B&B, others use foster placements etc. But not to make referrals on the basis nothing will be done is wrong and potentially dangerous. No, it isn't an EDT job, but it's definitely worth a referral, and this family may get help because they could qualify under a number of criteria, whivh in itself increases their chance of meeting threshold.
I don't get the argument that people need to understand the system in order to make a referral. If someone is concerned about a child, they should act - be it direct, through school, HV or social services. They do not need to understand procedure or law, that is for the professionals to do.

Surely nana you'll know a man in his position with a learning disability/acquired brain injury should be supported in his own right by adult services outside of children's services and part of that support will be to build routines and structure and support him to be a parent.

I don't pretned to know exactly what SS will or won't do..However I would want my concerns logged in the case..Even if they do nothing it is logged any further issues will add to case..

I did report someone to SS..Knowing it wasn't serve enough to really have any action but knowing it will be logged and any further incidents will add to it.

Also I don't claim to be a SW however I am sure intervention varies from area to area..I have been posting on a CAHMS thread and I have got far mroe support that others with far more serious issues.

NanaNina

I have read all your posts and you have echoed alot of what dh says.

• there are plenty of children in this situation
• ss are overworked and wont be interested in this case
• they wont be interested in supporting the family due to resources etc.

I will ring them tomorrow and see what happens.

This situation has not only been going on for years but generations in dhs family which i think is why he is downplaying it

Well you're bemused Queen you and me both. OK I'll try again - S.31 of the Children Act 1989 set out the conditions or threshold criteria that need to be proved before a court will consider the permanent removal of a child from his family. So it doesn't matter whether I have 30 years experience or 3 years - it's the law - it doesn't differ on a geographical basis! And yes it's open to interpretation but it shouldn't be - but then we don't live in a perfect world.
Your statement that "it is pretty common for women to move to more lax authorities so they can keep their babies is I'm sorry to say patent nonsense

OK let me try to evidence why I have made that comment.

If a woman (as you've used the term) is being investigated by Children's Services, and let's just say for the sake of argument, the baby hasn't been removed, but the mother is being assessed, and it's looking like the LA are going to court to request an Interim Care Order to keep the child safe...............do you honestly believe that the mother can think "Oh I don't like the way things are going - I might lose my baby - I'll pop off to another LA that I think is more lax" - do you- really? The LA that deals with the case is the one in which the child lives.

There have been cases where mothers have fled to Ireland and other European countries (on the advice of some very dangerous men) but they have been found and returned to the UK.

You say "some LAs manage UASC by putting them in B & B or foster placements???" Well you've scored point here because believe it or not I don't know what UASC means!! I'm never worried about not knowing something, but I do get suspicious of people who like to drop in phrases and initials as you have done, as I think it's often to impress! I think it is the job of Housing Departments to provide B & B to people who are homeless but in priority need and there is no other accommodation available. Foster placements are only used obviously when a child has been removed and when a S20 has been agreed or the Court have made an Order for the child to be removed, but do enlighten me as to the meaning of your statement.

Are you the foster carer? I don't really understand how you claim to know the practices of different LAs because a foster carer can only be registered with 1 Local Authority, did you not know this? For what it's worth I worked for the same LA for 25 years and worked independently for 5 years before I retired in 2009, and it was only when I was working independently for other LAs that I was able to compare and contrast the difference in practice. Although by 2004 the "writing was on the wall" in terms of the problems of recruitment and retention, high vacancy rates, reliance on agency workers, high sickness rates with staff off with stress related illnesses. Obviously that all affected practice.

I wasn't suggesting people need to understand the law before they made a referral, that would be ridiculous, like saying you had to understand how the central nervous system works before making an appointment with a GP. The point of my outlining the law was because so many posters were advising the OP to do this, that and the next thing, and I was trying to help the OP to understand the basics of child care law and correct the misinformation contained in so many posts from people who have no understanding of child care law, but were nonetheless making categoric statements which I thought would confuse the OP.

I can see you are trying to score points, but you'll need to be a bit better informed I'm afraid!

Confuscious YES I absolutely agree that this man needs help and support in all aspects of his life. All I am trying (unsuccessfully) because people are more interested in proving me wrong) is to point out that it isn't so simple as knocking on his door and saying "we've come to assess you, or even we've come to support you." FWIW I think the best way of supporting this man and his son in the first instance is by his brother or the OP (preferably the former) as they won't have problem in "getting in" to his house. I have a hunch that this man won't be willing to deal with those who he perceives to be in authority - I could be wrong of course and hope I am. It's a tricky one because his GP isn't going to discuss this man with his brother because of patient confidentiality, and I'm not sure if he has contact with anyone else (may be in the OP but I don't recall) I sincerely hope this man and his son can be supported to enable them to have a better standard of living etc., or IF the child is suffering significant harm and that evidence can be brought before a court and a Judge is convinced enough to make a Care Order, that will provide the boy with the stability that he deserves.

I honestly don't know why so many posters have got hold of the idea that I don't think this man and his son don't need support etc when all I am doing is trying to point out the complexities of these case.

Nana

I do see were you are coming from when you imply that support would be more beneficial coming from family rather than ss.

Im not sure whether he would let the place be cleaned up tbh. He would be very defensive about there being nothing wrong with it.

He complains when we go down that we dont bring dd. We have never told him the reasons why.

NANA in my local authority we don't have EDT, we have CDT, central duty team. They take over from us after five, during week and all day weekend.

They are not only for emergencies. They will process referral and then insure its waiting for us. Not everyone can make a referral Monday to Friday 9-5.

I do find most of your comments patronising. I could sit and quote Children Act all day long but what is important is that a referral is made, the rest will be up to SS!

Nana if you had been on any recent safeguarding traing you would know that this is a referral that should be made.

OP - I was picking up that your BIL is a man who wouldn't welcome any kind of intervention and you've confirmed this, and if he won't accept help from family he's certainly not going to accept it from people in authority. It might be worth a try though - maybe you have to visit a little more often, as I think you said you don't see him that often, and build up a relationship with him, and then maybe talk to him about support, from elsewhere. What age is he btw?

Things well there's a thing CDT and not EDT how is that relevant - some LAs have OOH (Out of hours) what is the point you are making? Incidentally it's ensure not insure It's of little interest to me what you make of my posts.

Restless - yawn - NO I haven't been on any recent safeguarding training. What would I have learned - that the particulars that the OP has relayed merit immediate intervention. I don't think so. I retired in 2009 and my time is my own - I do nice things, look after my grandchildren, swim, meet up with friends, read, paint etc so why would I want to go on safeguarding training. I actually enjoyed every day of my working life and feel privileged to have had such an interesting job and such committed colleagues. I feel sorry for those that are employed in social care now because I think they are having a really hard time, battling with overwhelming caseloads and trying to cope with such a stressful job with little or no support. I must have said in one of my posts that I heard on the news only last week that many LAs are struggling with 25% vacancy rates in CSs.

You and others are determined to try to discredit me but you really are wasting your time - water off a duck's back. The only thing that annoys me is when people post absolute tosh, in case someone believes it.

We had family in a similar situation and no one called ss. Now they children are in their 40s and ask us why we didn't

Oh another point please can someone point me in the direction of any of my posts where I have said that this referral should not be made .............I have not made such a comment. I have merely been trying to point out the reality of the situation, and to challenge people who are misinformed, so that the OP (or anyone else who reads the thread) is confused.

Of course OP should make a referral - nothing ventured nothing gained.
Happy now? No I thought not

There is now evidence that a foetus in utero can be adversely affected if the mother is tense, anxious and there is DV in the family

Sorry, can't let this lie... No. No there's not. The foetus in utero is pretty well protected and stress/anxiety alone is NOT going to damage the foetus. The only effects that have been seen in replicated/high quality research are of women in war zones under intolerable Physical and mental strain.

Any associated physical violence on the mother, alcohol or substance abuse can of course cause damage but stress and anxiety pre birth does not.

I've already seen (and supported) one poster on here in a real state because they believed this (now has a gorgeous happy healthy baby.)

Credentials: scientist with background in the genetics and biochemistry of development

Op: make the call. Poor kid.

Skiptonlass - really? I'm sure I've read numerous times that it is harmful? Confused to hear otherwise!