To think that there should be a lot more support offered for parents who lose their children through social services?

[FedupofbeingtoldIcantusemyname]

I've seen many articles about the fact that quite often parents who lose their children through social services (adoption) will go on to have more and more children, who are usually then removed again. This means the whole cycle goes on and on and more and more children end up in the care system.

I can understand this is often due to the parents trying to replace what they have lost, many of them may have either diagnosed or undiagnosed mental health problems that might have caused them to struggle with parenting in the first place.

IME, social services don't offer enough, or any, support to stop this cycle from being repeated over and over, parents have their children taken and then just left with no thought to what happens next.

I know that their focus is the children, as it should be, and that they have limited resources but Aibu to think that something should be done to help these parents rather than just removing any more children they have?

Bouquets I understand it is frustrating from your side, but from the side of the authorities - why should they be put in danger because of one person? It is not an unreasonable expectation (to expect someone to leave a violent or abusive partner) at all!

As for the original question, I agree with a previous poster who said that families are usually well aware of what they need to do before a child is removed - it really is a last resort and most SW would prefer to support a family and see improvements for all. But the family needs to want to change - the SW can help, but they can't do it for them.

I just don't know what you think should have happened. 'More understanding' doesn't protect the child.

This

ftw - SWs could have tried understanding how hard it was for the mother. They were older experienced adults and could not cope with it. I was younger at the time and it was awful. Perhaps though it had an influence on me in later times.
I think perhaps some radical rethink on what can be done for women caught up in such situations.
Ironically, the abused mother in this case had a go at me because I got out and stayed out. She thinks I was wrong as did others. I think she was wrong to stay and keep going back.

Bouquets im not sure I agree with what you are saying. Are you saying that social workers should be more sympathetic to why a woman doesn't stand up to an abusive man. But we are talking about why children are removed.

In the end a social worker can sympathise with a woman in this position but their duty if care is to the CHILD . So if the woman won't leave and they can't of course make her leave then sadly for her the children should be removed.

I've been present at the removal of a baby by SS at birth.

It was extremely traumatic for the Mother obviously but was such a distressing situation for everyone involved, I left afterwards (after staying with the Mum for a few hours to try and offer ineffectual support) and sobbed in the car and had noticed the Police officers had tears in their eyes while it was all happening.

On another occasion I was present through labour and baby was going to be removed. Mum wasn't present when that happened and neither was I. Mum had left the hospital almost immediately after birth to use heroin and baby was in SCBU unit for a while anyway due to Mums addictions and she could have visited and had a supervised goodbye etc but she didn't want to/didn't feel able to. She probably went back on the streets sex working that night. And if I'd just had yet another baby removed I'd probably want to achieve oblivion and do what it took to get the money.

Both women had obviously had previous children removed. Both had lots of support from multiple agencies but their MH problems were so great there was no way they would be able to parent. Everything had been tried with previous babies that went on to be removed.

I also worked with another woman with chronic schizophrenia who had had seven children removed in total. She was simply unable to parent which wasn't her fault and the damage and trauma caused by each pregnancy and each loss of her child obviously led to further and further deterioration in her mental health.

Having worked with her I began to think it was actually cruel that nothing could be done to prevent another pregnancy. The Fathers were always different men with huge problems of their own or simply abusive predators of a clearly vulnerable woman so would never be considered as being able to parent.

I feel guilty about thinking there should have been a way to intervene and prevent another pregnancy as that goes into dark moral and ethical territory which I am usually opposed to. But seeing the distress she was always in and how her losses influenced her delusions was just awful. As was the feeling that everyone involved in her care were helpless to stop it happening again.

I have no doubt that many women are not given enough support. I think in a lot of cases more could be done. But sometimes all the support/help in the world won't make a difference.

Social workers do offer support to parents before children are removed - lots of it. We also have to work hard with parents to get them to the point where they will even consider making an appointment for that support. Just offering it isn't enough. People honestly have no idea how hard we work and how much we do to help parents through the process.
If you have children on a child protection plan, it's almost better if the local authority goes to court because then expert, specialist help has to be provided. Children aren't removed without parents being supported to access all the help possible.

Regarding the young woman being expected to protect herself and her child from a violent man - she had a choice to go into refuge as every victim of dv has. There are systems in place. No social worker just says 'you need to protect yourself against this violent perpetrator' without doing robust safety planning, exploring all options and strongly encouraging the woman to flee the area if it is dangerous enough for that.

Social workers can't work with parents post adoption. It's not our role nor do we have capacity to do it. There are services that do - but they are voluntary and many parents don't want it.

The woman with 17 kids in care - you ask whether if she had had support early on would she have changed her parenting - she probably did have help, at least by child 5-6 she would have been known to services and that kind of reproducing is pathological I am sorry to say, so it's unlikely that any support would have diverted that path.

MyLove it's unclear what your role is (understably! I'm not asking you to out yourself!) but can you have 'what will happen if?' conversations with clients? Can you refer to the pause project or suggest that going on Larp would give them some space?!

Can you clarify whether you think parents are being failed AFTER they've lost children, i.e. not being given enough support to grieve lost children, or if you think they are not being given enough support to KEEP their children?

Because I find the latter very hard to believe. It's really really difficult to lose custody of a child in the UK today.

Sometimes I think losing custody of a child for women is like being falsely accused of rape for men. It's a kind of primal fear and people are always assuming that "one bad day" would lose them custody of a child in a way that men assume that one drunken night will lead to a false rape claim. So they want laws to reflect this idea that "it could happen to anyone". It really couldn't. It's basically impossible to lose custody of your children.

It's not about forcing and staying is rarely about choice, at least it's not a choice in the same way that someone who is free and hasn't been abused makes choices.

Correct me if I'm wrong but I think the poster whose talking about unreasonable expectations and SW's unable to do the things they expect of others is not saying that they should place themselves at risk.

She's saying that if they feel sufficiently intimidated they should understand that it's far more likely that the service user will.

Back in the days when I used to do improvement plans they had to be sensible measurable and achievable these days I see very strange things on plans and it irks me

Regarding the young woman being expected to protect herself and her child from a violent man - she had a choice to go into refuge as every victim of dv has. There are systems in place. No social worker just says 'you need to protect yourself against this violent perpetrator' without doing robust safety planning, exploring all options and strongly encouraging the woman to flee the area if it is dangerous enough for that

I have service users who were unable to even get their SW to refer to the service, ones who have no clue what their SW is asking them to do and that confusion is understandable given that usually a member of my staff or myself have sat in during the meeting and also listened to exactly the same conversation. Ive had service users whose contact visits have been aranged by their SW to coincide with the violent partners and then been criticised for being in the same place.ive had service users whose robust safety planning has consisted of things like here's a WA leaflet.

Understanding does protect children because understanding usually means that you make clearer offers of what you can do to help and how the service user can access real practical help not just now and not just to leave but gives a clear plan on what you can do to help protect her children in the future.

Someone who does not understand is far more likely to be dismissive of future risk from the violent parent (for example if a child arangements order is applied for) they are also far more likely to focus on unable to protect more than the actual perpetrator they are much more likely to be victim blaming which further limits ability to access and engage with support.

How you think and how you feel and how much you understand matters more than most people think

Most women who are at risk of having a child removed will not have a SW.

Children aren't removed without parents being supported to access all the help possible.

While this may often be true, as a blanket statement (and absolutely no offence intended), it's bollocks.

I think at the minimum counseling should be offered.

As I understand it there's nothing for the parents / mothers after the child has been taken.

What on earth do we expect to happen then?

While this may often be true, as a blanket statement (and absolutely no offence intended), it's bollocks

You think magistrates and judges agree to grant care orders without seeing that all appropriate support has been offered to parents? It's the LAW.

Children aren't removed without parents being supported to access all the help possible.

In an ideal world, maybe, but it just doesn't happen in every case.

There should be more support and counselling available for parents who have a child removed, but there simply aren't the resources - financially or staffing wise - to make it happen via SS. There is a lot of good work being done in the 3rd sector to offer support but as with many things, sadly it's a postcode lottery.

Support for families on the cusp of care is a postcode lottery too - some LAs have excellent provision and I've worked with a team who offer intensive, practical support to prevent children coming into care and support rehabilitation home from care to parents under Placement With Parents regs, and when it works it's amazing and incredibly rewarding. The frequent problem though, as coco says, is effecting sufficient change within timelines set by the court for proceedings to take place.

I can't speak for all SWs but personally my only 'agenda' has been the safety and wellbeing of a child, preferably within their birth family, if not then within their extended family, and only in the absence of viable options, in a foster or adoptive placement. Perhaps not all SWs get it, but I promise some of us do. The greatest experiences I've ever had professionally have been working positively with families whose children have been removed and overseeing their reunification.

Yanbu. Often it would make sense to look after the mother and the child, a foster-granny type thing, backed up with secure housing and psychotherapy. It would cost more up front but probably less long-term, and be less devastating for the children who, even if seized as newborns, usually get placed with temporary carers rather than a potential 'forever family'.

My children are in long term foster care and I get no support AT ALL. I have been pushed out of my children's lives almost completely. I have actually come from a meeting this afternoon which I have had to push for since the start of April. I have seen the social worker twice this year and both only coz I've put complaints in and have took it to management. My social worker is now leaving. There's nothing to help parents . Once they have our children that's virtually it . I haven't and won't go on to have more children partly because I couldn't cope again losing my child , it's almost killed me this time. I have gone 4 years and 1 month without my kids , I haven't missed a meeting, haven't missed a contact and still I'm ignored by ss. They tell me minimum about my children even though I still have PR . I sometimes wish I could walk away coz that's how they have made me feel , give up but it's not an option coz I love my kids . Everyone thinks every parent who have their kids in care are awful people, thick and stupid but I'm far from it . Ive been to hell and back with social services and I'm still here . I haven't got mental health problems and the anxiety and problems I have got are due to living without my kids .

Ive asked them to help me get my kids home. I'm. willing to jump through any hoop they want to give me but apparently it's not the local authorities plan to give me my kids back so they won't help me. Ive done everything they wanted in court but I haven't got the strength anymore to go back for the court to say no again. There's no help for us though ... nothing at all.... they have my kids and they ain't willing to work with me regardless how many times I beg for their help .

They've split my kids up , moved my 12 yr old Son into 7 foster placements and my 9 yr old Daughter into 4 . Numerous schools . My son they say has social anxiety ... no shit sherlock ! And the stuff they throw at me and blame me for why my kids need moving this many times coz I had them from birth !! Social Services don't help parents who's kids are in foster care hell they don't help Kids in foster care either!!

The system is very wrong.

During court proceedings I had the worst woman I have ever had to deal with in my life for a SS and she told me her words "It's ok .... you can move on and have more children with someone else "
surely that defeats the object because most cases apparently parents go on to have future kids took aswell ... Maybe if more support was given fewer kids would be in care.

And yes I know my case isn't across the board I'm aware not all parents experience the same as I have but I know regardless support or no support il never give up on my kids !

In the case that I'm aware of the family had years of support from loads of different professionals before their children were taken away from them.

mumgoingthrough I'm so so sorry. That is horrifying to hear about and must be unimaginably painful. Please forgive the question and overlook it if you want to, but how did this happen in the first place? I'm just trying to understand.

No LadyStark, I'm suggesting that if she had had more support for herself, to grieve the children she had already lost, and find a workable solution for how to move on, she may not have continued to have more and more.

A11, I feel that parents are being failed after children have been removed. Some have been failed before too but it's after that I'm talking about in this particular situation.

With respect, I think it is easier to lose children than you think and you are 100% wrong that it is impossible. SW's, as I said before, are not all created equal and they have a huge amount of say in what happens in a court case. Some will bend over backwards to help and give parents many chances and lots of time to change. Others will be judgemental, obstructive and almost deliberately unhelpful. Some will lie or exaggerate the truth to get the outcome they want. Not all obviously, but it does happen, SW are just as human as they rest of us and sometimes they do get it wrong.

mumgoingthrough

You think magistrates and judges agree to grant care orders without seeing that all appropriate support has been offered to parents?

Yes indeed.

mum are you not having regular LAC reviews with your childrens' SW? The IRO should be supporting you to get all the information you require about your children's placements and pushing for answers on SS' permanency plans. If LAC reviews aren't happening, they should be, and you should submit a complaint.

There isn't anywhere near enough support before it gets to the point removing children is even on the table. I don't mean in a 'all sw's are crap' way. I mean appropriate support that can be accessed by the parent before they are even on the radar, and appropriate help the sw can refer them for.

Not the excuse for mh services and practical support that is currently available. Everyone involved could be doingi their absolute best, but you can't refer someone to a service that doesn't exist.