Aibu to expect people to help themselves in their own lives?

[Lazymazy1]

Have wanted to be a social worker for many years, have a degree and was looking to do a MSc.
However, doing voluntary work with a family who are in a very chaotic position, who won't help themselves, ie getting pregnant again whilst effectively homeless. Not taking control of things which will make a big difference in their current situation.

It isn't a case of can't, but won't help themselves, perhaps ingrained.

Am I being unreasonable ? Or are there good reasons why people just won't help themselves?

"aury I don't quite know what to say apart from making assumptions and judging someone you do not know personally is how your post comes across ( again, sorry if I'm reading it wrong. I'm perfectly happy ( apart from career wise) but we go off topic."

Yes, I was trying to make that point exactly by showing you how it feels when somebody judges your life without knowing all the facts (or in my case, any). I hoped that would would understand how you are doing it with the families you worked with.

*that would help you understand

Graphista - So your response seems to suggest that you wouldn't leave your child with someone who didn't have their sobriety is that correct?

No I wouldn't - but the difference is I have a choice. There's another better option there. Foster care isn't always a better option - each case is different.

Graphista - That's where I struggle you see, because if it's not good enough for your children, you shouldn't consider it good enough for any children IMO.

Yy user.

But where choices are limited hard decisions need to be made, the right decision might not necessarily be placing the child in the care system.

Why do you want to be a social worker ?

Excellent post by user1471.
Sums up one recommendation from every serious case review.
The focus has to be on the child.
The original OP - that sounds like the tip of the iceberg, that scenario will probably be one of your 'good' cases if you become a social worker
Unfortunately even if you've grafted your bollocks off to make a difference to a families life and for whatever reason it hasn't been pulled off, not only have you got the sheer frustration, but pressure from management to achieve outcome after outcome when lots of families just want to coast.
Example - months of work making sure a parent had the best chance At the Final hearing. Going up early to pick them up for classes to make sure they went. Counselling in place that we more or less had to beg for. And about 5 million other things. And parent doesn't even turn up to the hearing.
That scenario has happened lots of times.
There are some positive stories, and you do feel like your getting somewhere with some families, but it's mainly managing chaos.

user1471 I'm not sure I get your point about it being about the parent. Of course it's about the parent because understanding what underlies their behaviour is crucial for breaking the cycle. In order to protect the child, you have to focus on assessing the capacity to parent. It is for the child's benefit.

I'm not sure if you have a social work background or not but theory underpins all that we do. We need to work with parents whether we use a task based approach, crisis management or psychoanalysis type work. My experience lies in adult social work but I have some experience of child protection.

user welcome to the world of 'good enough' parenting.

I don't imagine I would leave my own children to be babysat by many of the service users I worked with. Some, maybe, and not always the ones you think, because it's all so subjective isn't it? But that didn't necessarily mean their own children should be removed. There are a whole host of other issues at play - legal issues, where a risk of 'significant harm' must be evidenced, and the principle of The Children Act needs to be followed. Welfare issues, balancing the risks of staying with mum versus the known negative impacts of the care system. Attachment issues, where a parent can be struggling with various issues or a crisis and not be doing a 100% sterling stand up job right now, but has a strong attachment between themselves and the baby and there's hope those issues can be resolved without causing trauma to the child by breaking that attachment.

You look at the past as a future indicator, the resources a parent has, heir resilience, their willingness to engage - and sometimes they might not be doing a perfect job but it's good enough. It's the reality of social work.

June I think you're missing the point. Of course it's about the child. If you (as in one) are an adult with the mental capacity to make unwise decisions (e.g. substance abuse or staying with a violent partner) knock yourself out. When you have a child, that's when the intervention will start. It is for the child's benefit. Research has demonstrated that children are, generally, better off in their own families if this is possible and safe.

crashdoll - but my point is that the damage done to the child, whilst the adult is supported to help themselves, is often irreversible and permanent. Too many SW get caught up in the adults issues and don't fully consider the impact on the child. It comes up time and time again in SCR.

You 'support' an alcoholic in an abusive relationship for 4 years and at the end of it no improvements have been made so the child is removed. By that point the damage is done, so no wonder the outcomes in care will be poor. remove that child at birth and they might have a fighting chance.

welsh - I am well familiar with the 'good enough' concept, I just think the bar for 'good enough' is set at a level that lets far too many children down. It's one of the many reasons I would not be able to be a CP SW!

I've been a foster carer and teacher and reeled at the inability some people display to take responsibility for and change their lives.

However:
poverty seriously impacts people's IQ. Research shows that your ability to make calculations is severely affected;
many outwardly normal looking adults have undiagnosed AD ASD ADHD FASD, in some cases (FASD, AD) their brain would look like a Swiss cheese due to all the non functioning areas;
Add in addiction, PTSD, DV.

Forgive the alphabet soup, I think they are reasonably well known.

Most people want to live well. They are doing the best they can. Trauma and chaos in early years causes people to seek out more trauma and chaos, when the rest of us would avoid it like the plague. If I see a fight outside a pub, I move away ASAP. My friend's adopted daughter goes to see what is happening and inevitably ends up involved.

You may well make a good social worker, when you know a bit more. Certainly saccharine 'think about the poor kiddies' 'that poor, poor woman' achieves nothing. You need hard headed common sense, but recognise that it isn't that common where you will be working.

user, the problem with your approach is that it seems you would be taking far more children away from parents, when a childhood in care is often very much worse for the child. And the SCRs for the children you mentioned almost always pointed to disconnect between different agencies (schools, doctors, police, SW, etc) as a huge contributing factor. Which is why we now have procedures in place to address that. Of course there are instances where children need to be placed in care. But these aren't as common as you would think, and they are rightly a last resort.

Take a look at the Stately Homes thread and see how much damage naice parents can do. But that would all go under the radar because the children were clean and well fed. Mental wellbeing (including proper attachment) is massively overlooked by judgemental people who only offer a cursory glance. Being an adequate parent is no substitute for real love.

it's interesting Amelia that you think when I am talking about adequate parenting I am not also talking about emotionally adequate parenting. For me adequate parenting would of course include the emotional aspect and not be simply confined to the physical.

I would argue that one of the major factors that contributes to the poor outcomes for children in care is that in general children are only in the care system after we leave them long enough with parents who are inadequate, that the damage is done already. An eight your old with disordered attachment and behaviour difficulties due to eight years with inadequate parenting is very unlikely to have good outcomes no matter how good or bad the care system is. Might we have a different story if that child was adopted from birth?

User can I just clarify something? Have you ever actually BEEN a CP SW?

Helena: Absolutely! A lot of people would assume the way out of honelessness would be work. That family would absolutely be better off not working (in the short term).

User, I was a little shocked by this:

"Do you know that your intervention and judgment are increasing her anxiety?
This also shouldn't be a priority for the child protection SW"

I can see that intervention might change a situation for the better. But I can also well imagine that intervention is an added pressure and worry, which in itself might cause the situation to deteriorate. Surely the possibility should be a considerartion?

"While I agree the child is the priority I don't think those elements are 'irrelevant' because big picture view it will and does affect the child."

I agree with Graphista here. I once worked as a welfare rights officer for a large social work department. Despite our significant efforts to make ourselves available, in the whole time I worked there, we were never asked to do a benefit check by the child protection team.
They must have been visiting homes and noticing whether food, clothes and toys were available.
But they weren't exercising any curiosity about why these things might be absent.
To me there is all the difference in the world between a mother who doesn't have the money to feed her kids and one who is not prioritsing it. Not to the child in that instant, of course not.
But certainly to the appropriate course of action to fix the problem.
I don't believe for a secound that all those deeply "chaotic" families had the correct benefits coming in. And I don't believe that a little extra money couldn't have helped.

I agree with you OP and it's why I could never become a social worker.

That's where I struggle you see, because if it's not good enough for your children, you shouldn't consider it good enough for any children IMO.

I think this is missing the point. I am blind. I would not expect to get a job as a nanny or childcare worker - I expect many parents would be concerned about leaving their small children in my care. However, to take my children away from me would be absolutely wrong. Though I did/do need assistance with some aspects of looking after them.

elfing - I am guessing though that you aren't one of those people who won't/can't help themselves. Of course some people need help, there is no issue with that, it's more about those that won't take any actions to improve their own situation.

Give social work swerve! I'm in that line of work - trust me, its not for you.

How are people meant to help themselves ever, if they have people rallying around them picking up the pieces , the consequences do not seem to affect the service users only society?

Social workers don't 'pick up the pieces'. Child protection social workers protect children. That may mean supporting the adults in the family (or in some cases, ordering them) to access services that will improve things for their children - ie. mental health services, drug and alcohol services etc. But by no means are social workers do gooders' holding up society's feckless. Social services thresholds are incredibly high in most areas. SS exists to protect children at significant risk of harm. Its not that hard to understand, surely?

If you want to help people with less complex severe, go into a different line of work.