Are social services really stealing children?

[user1491583343]

Hi all,

I just seen a terrible documentary in Portugal where some parents living in the UK where asking the government to help them with their children, which were taken away by social services unfairly.

I know some of this documentaries can be only one sided but really made me wonder as they seem pretty terrified and genuine... I am also pregnant so this was really distressing to see. Some of the cases there in my opinion shouldn't lead to the kids been taken into fostering or adoption - they were too extreme and cruel.

To give one example a mum there, had her 2nd baby and noticed something wasn't okay as the new born baby seemed to shake every now and than... She took the baby to Hospital a few times (she showed all the letters and videos of the baby "shaking"). Apparently different doctors told her that was "hiccups" she was always sent home. 5 days latter her baby dies and social services take away her 3 year old as doctors believe she had "shaken the baby until he passed away" - even though the case was still under investigation the 3 year was given for adoption (not fostering), even though she had her grandparents living also in the UK with all the conditions to get custody of the child.

It's super scary but basically more medical exames have showed latter that the baby could have died due to epilepsy as their was no signs of agression, abuse etc... but as the child was placed into adoption this was already too late.

I am sure some details are missing but seemed so cruel that I decided to ask for opinions and see if anyone here has had any experiences.

The documentary also showed the pressure SS get to meet their targets and how it's not the first time that they are accused of lying etc...

Some parents in the documentary have showed concerns on seeking help from professionals due to this extreme procedures - for example another case their was a woman who got post-natal depression. She got her baby taken away after going to GP to discuss this matter, because the GP reported her to SS who have assumed she wouldn't have the ability to look after a child. We all know that woman can get depression but what is creating the problem is the fact that close family don't even get offered to foster. Children are given away and in most cases ends in adoption.

Would love to hear experiences and your thoughts on this.

Gallavitch

You were not my sons social worker but would like to add that when I was rock bottom, absolute broken rock bottom, and I one night called the Duty SW for my area , they were fantastic looking back . They sent the police first though (no SW available at that time so police), House WAS a shithole I hold my hands up so they were put under Police Protection . It was a very bad time of my life and they were initially put into Foster Care that night in Maidstone , Spoke to my SW the next day and said although I cannot cope right now I do want my boys to remain at the school they went , with their teachers and friends they knew, so two days later they managed to find somebody not too far away and I did see my DSs, 3 times a week and within 6 months they were home, it was always planned they would be home .

Suppose I am saying , I am glad the SS stepped in when I so needed them.

I always assumed that social work counties had targets. Had to remove x numbers of children per annum

Why on earth would you assume that? What on earth would be the point?

What's the AIBU?

The UK is one of the only countries with a forced adoption system

It's fair enough to think about why that's the case

"Forced adoption" is one of those emotive terms commonly used by idiots like John Hemming and Ian Joseph, and it's one that people don't think through. It's adoption against the parents' will, but done only after extensive investigation and testing in the courts. So think about it: when might that be appropriate? Yes, it would be appropriate for abusive parents and those who won't protect their children from abuse; and parents who seriously neglect their children and don't rectify that despite getting plenty of help and numerous chances.

Countries that don't have court-imposed adoption either tend to leave abused and neglected children where they are, or put them in children's homes and foster care. Do you think it's preferable for a child who has been abused or neglected to live in a family with parents who are committed to them, or to be passed from children's home to home, or foster placement to foster placement?

cats 'forced adoption'?

I used to give talks to social workers about our personal situation.
Many of them were from outside the UK working here.
I cannot tell you how many of them wanted to talk to me afterwards about how SS worked in their countries.
How they admired the proactive stance in the UK.
I.e. trying to get to children before they are killed by neglect and abuse or spend their lives pimped out their parents.

Yes the majority of adoptions are 'forced' in this country. Because we have the welfare state so parents don't have to give up their children in order that they don't starve to death.
They don't have to put them into care so they can get an education.
We do not institutionalise disabled babies in this country
We do not stone single mothers to death for being sluts
We have relatively easy access to abortion

So what are we left with?
The tiny percentage of parents who relinquish their children because they can not/would not have a termination, or realise that they cannot cope once the baby is here.
And we have the majority who cannot or WILL not put the needs of the child before their own.
And it takes a shitload of work to remove a child from its birth parents.

You are not going to find many birth parents who say 'yeah it was my fault, they did a lot to help me but I just wouldn't do it'
Its not human nature. They will tell you it was unfair and the child was stolen and all they did was have a messy house or own a dog or something trivial.

And many of them believe that to be true. Its self preservation.

Adoptions are a hell of a lot more 'forced' in countries where women feel compelled to relinquish their newborns than in this country where parents get years of intervention before the children are removed.

Where are theses marvelous countries that don't remove children then cats?

Romania
Lithuania
Haiti?

educate yourself why don't you

Social workers have nothing to gain by stealing children from their parents... and much paperwork/worry if they do take them.

We fostered for a number of years and saw good and bad SW and children who had been brought up in appalling conditions. Social workers had worked with their families - and continued to do so - to try and allow them to live together. They often took the view that the parents concerned had also been neglected/abused as children and that they were not evil... whatever evidence there was of evil behaviour. Children's safety came first but they also cared for the adults. Adoption took years - and much effort -and a court of law.

The parents whose children had suffered the most neglect (according to what had been observed by school/neighbours/the police/social workers AND details the children gradually revealed to us as they discovered more normal ways of living) were the ones who went to the press about how unreasonable the system was in taking their children.

What was this documentary please and what channel ?

I think I would like to watch it.

Yup what mega says above- I was a 'forced' adoptee and my sister wasn't. She wishes she had been adopted too and whilst some might think that I am the more stable, better educated, wealthier and happier sibling because I am intrinsically more capable I am not. She has wasted her potential on just coping with a lifetime of shit because the removal threshold is actually so very very low.

Of course there are some errors and mistakes but no targets or corruption.

Why on earth would you assume that? What on earth would be the point?
Because it suits people to spread that crap and it suits others to believe it.

I've talked about this before.

My ex-partner will swear blind I and children's services unfairly stopped his contact with DD.

I'm not derailing but that is obviously not the full story. Saying your a good parent and being one are completely different things.

"what rubbish are you sprouting about the UK being one of the few countries with a forced adoption.

(ok maybe your right about them calling it adoption)"

It's not rubbish then, is it?

You make an interesting point, but there's a big difference between being care, being fostered and being adopted. From my admittedly limited knowledge, adoption is permanent and the birth family is often prevented from contacting the child until he or she is 18.

RachelRagged thanks for your honest post. I can't talk about the work I do, even on here, apart from in the vaguest terms because if any family recognised themselves or someone they knew it would be horrendous. But I do good work and I am committed to keeping families together where possible.
People don't realise the majority of parents whose children are removed aren't 'bad' or typically abusive. They are usually very damaged people who can't care for their children due to poor mental health or being in intolerable circumstances (DV, poverty, substance misuse).
I don't judge the parents I work with, especially not those who just don't have the capacity to cope with life. It's terribly sad.

I really don't recommend you watch this 'documentary' - it won't enlighten you at all.

I actually cannot believe people think that courts remove children from families to meet imaginaryremoval of children targets

Believe me there is no such thing. Departments get it wrong, they are after all human, humans make mistakes, however the issue I have is them covering the mistakes, because it starts small, then it outgrown the individual and the department , and the only one who gets hurt is the child and their family, and we took a oath to protect the child and their families.

I left because the red tape to enable me to do my job successfully was never ending, I also had at times 50-60 open priority cases. Its no wonder people make mistakes, and things get overseen. Its impossible working conditions.

Am I dreaming, or have we had this exact same thread before?

Right down to the documentary shown in Portugal.....

Gwen
Children often don't do very well if they grow up in foster care. They often can't form permanent attachments to the carers because they have no sense of permanence or stability. They know that the foster carers are being paid to have them and that they could be moved on with 28 days notice.
This is sometimes the best option we have for some children, imperfect though it is. But the children who are young enough to attach to new parents, who can join a new family and who will benefit from that sense of permanence, they should have the chance to get that start in life.
Many countries don't have 'forced adoption' so all children in care grow up in foster care or children's homes. That is simply not in their interests. The rights of children should take priority over the rights of parents.

It is absolute nonsense.

I worked in a Social Services department for years in HR and in payroll. There are no performance payments. The only pay elements added on to a SW salary are mileage, overtime, standby etc. I had full involvement in SMT meetings, business planning, objective setting etc and there were no targets for forcibly removing children for adoption. The whole point is to safeguard children.

I did learn that resources are incredibly stretched. i find it very hard to believe that the same agency that struggles to protect the most vulnerable would be out looking for children who weren't.

catscurledup all European countries allow adoption without the consent of the birth parents. As does the USA, Canada, South Africa and a number of other countries I'm not familiar with.

The circumstances under which parental rights can be terminated, and the extent to which it is used varies. But all have that mechanism and do a certain number of adoptions without consent.

This page has various useful links, in fact the Transparency Project website is an interesting resource if you are interested in Family Courts.

Transparency Project

Comparison of European countries approach to adoption without parental consent

One of DP's relatives had her child removed from her care. She then had a second child removed too. Both removed for good reasons and both adopted. She then had a third child and despite her history SS have bent over backwards to try to support her in keeping him and they are now doing the same with her fourth child. They are using loads of resources to try to help her just become an adequate parent. Surely if they had targets to make, a woman who had recently had 2 removed for neglect would be a prime candidate.

That said they do mistakes and these should be acknowledged but that doesn't mean there is a conspiracy.

I had a neighbour, years ago, whos children were 'stolen'

She was genuinely baffled about why they were taken - but she was baffled because she had learning difficulties, poor mental health and a drug problem. She was incapable of linking the fact that she lived with a violent alcoholic schizophrenic to the social worker who kept turning up. She was incapable of linking the drug paraphernalia to the social worker's concern for her toddler and unborn child. She was incapable of linking her intermittent rage disorder with her toddler's insecure attachment.

So when the baby was born, and found to have drugs in his system, both children were forcibly taken.

And then she was incapable of linking her continual drug use and lack of engagement with children's services (failing to turn up for contact, turning up late or high) with their adoption six months later.

I watched all this play out and I am sad for her, sad that she wasn't able to raise her children. But I'm not sad for her children, who got a better chance at life than they could ever have had living with her.

And she repeatedly tells anyone who will listen that they were stolen by the evil social services

Thanks everyone for your time and comments. I also want to believe that this is all a stupid non-sense conspiracy and again was only trying to find more information... Hope no one feels offended by my thread was not meant to judge the British system.

For those who would like to watch the documentary please go here:
www.tvi24.iol.pt/dossier/love-you-mom/57f7bf660cf2e48931e68d72

It's in Portuguese but there are some parts in english but it might be difficult for you to get a full picture - again some of the cases here are really one sided but they have published others (like the example I gave of the new born with epilepsia that really made me feel distressed as it seems to have been a mistake).

Thanks once again!

Info from Harvard University's Center on the Developing Child about the long-term damage done by 'just' neglect:
Damage done by neglect

saul I've been through exactly the same, it's heart breaking and my little one was only 2 days old when it happened. When you think of every possible way to run away with your child you'll understand the fear of social services.

I don't understand this suggestion of social services having targets to take children into care. It just doesn't make any sense in any way.

Totally agree - but it's often said by people who have had their children taken into care. Social workers lie, social workers discriminate, social workers are taking babies into care to pass on to rich parents, social workers invent evidence.

All because those people cannot accept that it was their poor choices which led to care proceedings, not the social workers.

I work with SS a lot. They are often insanely annoying as an organisation, but they are also trying to do an impossible job in the most difficult circumstances.