AIBU to want to carry on this interesting discussion about the Child Protection System?

[Spero]

Following on from this www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/2792849-AIBU-to-be-horrified-by-the-Stolen-Children-of-England?

I thought it was interesting. Some people didn't agree with me and said they would tell me why. I would like to hear their views.

Thankyou for your sympathy for my parents Haystack.

Luckily for them, one is dead and the other demented so they are no longer shamed or embarrassed by my activities.

You may quote me wherever you like so long as you do it accurately. If I find you online quoting me inaccurately you can be sure I will do something about it.

Someone thinks they are in a Saw movie or something.

Fer-LOUNCE!

I'm ill and in bed but I wanted to raise the issue of parents with learning disabilities. I'm curious to know, statistically, how likely they are to have a child removed compared to parents without LDs. In my line of social work, I come across very few parents (mainly older people but some younger adults with physical disabilities) but I'm looking at moving into an LD team and I need to scrub up on my knowledge.

I've worked in mental health and addiction and I have serious concerns about the impact of these poorly managed, poorly funded services on parents. It's easy for a social worker to say "you must engage with " but when it's totally unfit for purpose, it's not overly surprising that these parents fail to deal with their issue and thus, cannot improve their parenting abilities.

Ugh sorry for my lousy SPAG.

I wasn't meaning you spero I was making that nobody ever starts none personal discussion threads on that.

Crashdoll, I have gathered some information here which I hope is relevant to your question about parents with learning difficulties or disabilities. It's not a very happy picture.
childprotectionresource.online/parents-with-learning-difficulties/

Thanks sock for clarification.

Crashdoll - One particular case reported here
suesspiciousminds.com/?s=learning+disability

Hope you have all had a good Christmas. I spent mine avoiding my UKIP dad and typing up a transcript of the documentary that initially sparked this discussion - England's Stolen Children.

I thought you might be interested

www.transparencyproject.org.uk/englands-stolen-children-another-missed-opportunity/

I did find that interesting.

One of the things that stands out to me a lot is you and a lot of other people (I have said it as well myself) ask what about/where were the parents solisiters.

It is my understanding that legal aid is not acceptable until such time as a threshold meeting letter has been recieved and I inow of several families who have had these letters provided to them something like 2 days before the meeting often hand delivered on a Friday afternoon.

Over the Christmas week I spent much of my time attempting to assist a person who without a doubt falls into the financial bracket for entitlement (I know this is exempt for children's social care cases but it's a useful thought, I think) and IMO without a doubt for fills the merit DA criteria the person has provided the correct letter for LA signed by me also one from the nhs GP and relevant documents from the police yet his Solisitor refused to even submit the application for LA and told them (later confirmed to me) that unless he paid £600 then they would not be apply to assist him and even if LA was later granted they would not get the £600 back.

I have had CO service users who have been given 48 hours notice managed to see what they thought was a Solisitor under LA yet all their meetings have been with a paralegal and when it came to the hearing a barrister they had never met never spoken to rocked on up having only had a cursory glance at a 700 page file.

A mother who IMO put the best leg work in I have ever seen a parent do (evidence gathering,irrefutably challenging all of the things the local authority relied on) a very competant and educated mother be floored by the lack of legal support despite engaging fully with a very reputable firm to the point that the partner of the firm commended her actions as did the judge, still lose any chance of any future relationship with her child caused by nothing other than the local authority's failures, the best legal mind in the country wouldn't have stopped that happening. No finding of any abuse or risk of future abuse at all just a lengthy process with a huge amount of parental alienation going on in the background meaning that the situation is at this time deemed unrecoverable and this is not likely to change. Currently the LA cannot even manage to cooperate with a contact order between the siblings despite saying they could and now the mother is no longer entitled to LA (for reasons that may make the case identifiable so you may need to have a think about under what circumstances LA would not be accessible after it had been issued for one aspect of a case,involving no fraud or wrong doing on the reciepiants behalf).

I cannot accept that the issues with finding a firm that does LA in the time frames required (especially when related to very shortly after birth removals) the problems with being forced to rely on paralegals and the limitations of barristers who may not be as diligent as others are limited to the counties I have known it happen in because the financial issues with LA are nationwide.

I know there is a thought process in amongst that somewhere but ive actually lost track of what I'm trying to say mainly because ive got incredibly sore boobs and a teething baby

Accesable not acceptable

Needasock - sorry but I can't follow all of your post - maybe due to heavy cold and bunged up head! I think Spero will be along soon to respond as I think it's more her "bag" if you see what I mean.

The last thread which I think started off about adoption targets took many twists and turns as has this one, and that of course is the nature of this kind of forum. Before Christmas I met up with ex colleagues/friends and we briefly discussed what was happening in the shire county where I worked for 23 years. Some were still working there, 2 were retiring, and a few were working independently carrying out fostering/adoption/SGO assessments for neighbouring authorities. Obviously we didn't want to talk "shop" all evening but I asked if they would e mail me with some of their thoughts/experiences of working as a LA social worker/manager in this political climate. Most of them have done that and it's not good - not good at all - their frustration comes through loud and clear. I will edit the replies and post on here but didn't want to go off on a tangent until you post had been answered Needasock

I've also been thinking about this whole issue and for me I can't really perceive social care as an individual public service because so many of the problems inherent in the service are the same as those seen in other public services. 70% of the work of the Probation Service has been privatised. The NHS is "on it's knees" - in the round, be it shortage of beds, waiting times in A & E, ambulance response times, and now today I read in the Guardian that GPs surgeries are on the point of collapse with patients having to wait 3 to 4 weeks for an appointment. Care of the elderly is at breaking point as LAs can only afford to pay agencies to provide 15 mins of care to an elderly person. The staff are exploited as they are not paid for travelling time. The elderly people are left with their needs unmet. The police force is struggling with huge job losses on the front line, the prisons are full to capacity and in the G4S ones there is rioting and bad management. Education is being privatised on a mammoth scale - Academies were meant to be for failing schools but that was just a sop - a secondary school where my kids went, had an Outstanding Ofsted report last year but got turned into an Academy. Almost all primary schools in Birmingham are Academies - the terms and conditions of staff can be changed in a way that wouldn't have been possible under the control of the LEA.

I blame this and previous governments for this appalling state of affairs. It's not just Tories although they are running amok with privatisation of public services but it was Labour under Blair that introduced Academies and Foundation Hospitals - and the seed was sown...............I'd better stop now!

I hope you feel better soon magic I'm pretty much just rambeling on the limits of the legal aid system, I know there have always been limits but it's got far worse

Thanks Sock - this is why it is so important to come out of our silos whenever we can and get the bigger picture.

I come from a place where I am lucky to be instructed by hardworking, dedicated solicitors who always go an extra mile for their clients - delivering papers by hand when they don't get a response to phone messages for example. Even if I don't get a long time with the papers I know I will get a full set and proper instructions. So it is very frustrating for me to see parents refuse to engage with those kind of lawyers.

What however I am missing is a proper understanding of what goes on before those solicitors are instructed. It does seem that the rot sets in very early in the process and parents get the opportunity relatively late in the day to get legal help.

I would really like to know what exactly happened to Colin and Clare in that documentary. It was heartbreaking to listen to Colin describe how he had tried to prove he would be a good dad, by being professional and shaking everyone's hands.... but the only person 'advising' him was Ian Bloody Josephs who clearly did not have the first clue about what was going on.

I have raised with the British Association of Social Workers via Twitter about one of their members using their name in the documentary and I hope they are going to do something about it.

Magic - sad but not surprised to hear of the reports you are getting back.

It is evident mrs.sock does not fully understand the emotional need of baby X. Mrs.sock spends some of her time online on a social chat site. This could, in my professional opinion, cause disassociation issues or attachment disorder to baby X. Moreover mrs. sock is unable to recognise not only that breastfeeding does cause sore breasts but the risk imposed on baby X by being mentioned on social media. The psychological evaluation to be carried out by dr.nod will further explore these issues and the psychological damage caused to date. On closer inspection of the home I found it to be reasonably clean but quite untidy. However, mrs.sock insists this is due to it being the xmas period and claims all homes will be the same at this time of year. In conclusion I would recommend an interim care order be considered until further assessments are made. Signed a.s.w. How does that feel sock, magic et al? Isn't it absolute rubbish? But these are the kind of reports normal parents are having to put up with! It then gets added to and added to until the parents are at the point of despair. But there is always the glimmer of hope it will all be sorted out in court, but in many cases of course it isn't.

Disclaimer: everything in the above post about sock is rubbish.It is simply to demonstrate what is happening to some families.

Well Vapours. Let me give you two different responses to that situation.

1 - Sock goes to her lawyers. They draft a statement. The lawyer robustly cross examines the social worker in court. The guardian agrees that the LA haven't made out their case. the Judge refuses to make in interim care order.

1. Sock, after reading some of the crap on the internet decides to visit Ian Josephs at Forced Adoption .com. She decides that his advice to refuse to co-operate with social workers sounds tip top, so she also sacks her solicitor for good measure. That legal aid loser was no good anyhow. She goes to court, is very nervous, can't remember all that she wanted to say and there is no written statement because she had sacked her solicitor. The Judge makes an interim care order.

I have seen both scenarios 1 and 2. 2 is getting horribly more familiar.

and the above is why I think all meetings with SW's should be recorded ideally camera but as a minimum audio.

I think it should be encouraged and expected and shouldn't be allowed to be treated as hostile or none engagement

vapours

I understand what you getting at and I have also seen reports that make me go a bit hmm towards the professionalso I don't wish to invalidate what your saying at all.

I would deal with something like that fairly robustly because I am in a position to do so and do so promptly so the likelyhood of it even getting to court would be low, but given that someone whose not well off is unlikely to be able to access legal support until months after that report has been written (and usually been copied to lots of people who will also appear in your life) as 'a problem' then will be repeated as one by everyone, it's not great.

Parents are not entitled to legal aid until they have been given a intention of threshold notification, this usually happens right before a threshold meeting which is just before court stuff gets triggered. Untill that point a Solisitor has no voice in any meetings and no role and is parent funded.

Whilst I am aware there are a fairly high amount of unsuccessful la applications one school of thought is these shouldn't get as far as court in the first place.

It's still something people shouldn't have to be dealing with, it damages the very children we are trying to protect. Often a fair few of these children are on section 20's when they shouldn't be

Thanks for your understanding Sock, Happy New Year.

As someone who has adopted two children I would really like people to stop going on about supporting birth parents

When the reailty is they had that support often for years odds on its not there first child removed and often they are removed for the same reason my oldest was 1 of 7 all removed one after the other

People have this illusion that with the right support that we can all have a Happyending the reailty is that parenting is a skill like any other and NOT EVERY ONE CAN PARENT even with support its not a popular view but it's the truth

And my question is I guess to those who want support is while the suppor is being given the children are still being neglected so how long should a child wait for there birth parents to get there shit together

If you know a birth parent is not able to parent to go through the show that they may be able to with the correct support is not only crule to the brith parent witch gives them false hope is also harmful to the child whose being abused in the mean time when the managed neglect is taking place

Why should a child suffer a single day of neglect or abuse if they don't have to

Sadly these are not one offs the birth parents own mothers are often know to ss as are there grandparents

And often it's not even about support its about insight

With the utmost respect intended user not all families in the system are like the families your children came from and a huge amount of them can be helped

Also user I am afraid we can't just stop 'going on' about supporting parents until the Government resiles from the ECHR. Article 8 imposes positive obligations on state to keep families together.

But what I agree seems to be happening is support is patchy and/or parents don't feel that SW want to support them, but rather are there to gather evidence against them.

The situations is in a mess, that's for sure. And everyone suffers, but children most of all, as always.

User, why should a child suffer a single day of removal if they don't have to? With the correct support many children could remain at home. Sounds like you agree with your taxes being used to make inaccurate reports which cause trauma to children?

Would anybody be willing to contribute towards an open discussion on how we can build trust in the service and what social workers can do towards that?

Meaning prior to threshold?