To think SS usually won't remove children who are 'just' being emotionally abused?

[daisymeadowsky]

I've put 'just' in inverted commas not because it isn't serious but because I mean no other issues, no sexual abuse or neglect.

If a parent is calling a child names, denying them access to normal popular culture, insulting them, bullying them really - it seems to me very unlikely SS would intervene.

Or am I wrong?

Parents should be allowed to parent. SS should be for actual abuse.

Well the problem there is what is classed as abuse to one family is parenting to another.
Emotional abuse is a very difficult area to prove and see an immediate consequences it is of a drip drip effect

I think denying pop culture COULD kind of be abuse if it's like...denying the kids access to anything they enjoy, and not for monetary issues but it can be very isolating as a child to know absolutely nothing about what your peers are talking about, to have clothes that don't fit in at all with you/being forced to dress in gendered clothing you don't want to be dressed in (as OP said). There's a difference between not letting a kid play call of duty and isolating a kid from anything other kids watch and not even giving it a chance.

Omg Todaysuser actual abuse? You have never been emotionally abused by a parent, obviously.

For me the emotional abuse was more torment than the sexual abuse, if everybody thought like you, there would be a lot of children commuting suicide just to try and escape the mental torture of being emotionally abused and neglected.

And just to clarify there was no physical, sexual abuse or neglect .

Emotional abuse is extremely damaging.

Denying access to popular culture is a really odd way to describe buying awful clothes
Are the clothes bought with the intention to humiliate the child ie dressing a boy in a dress against his will or are they just practical, non trendy clothes that the parents can afford? There's a difference I think.
If giving access to popular culture means buying the latest fashion/designer stuff many parents either don't want to or can't do that for their kids.

Roughly what aged child? Can they articulate the abuse?

Because a 5yo saying mummy buys me clothes I don't like is very different to a 13yo saying their parent stands over them ensuring they put the specified clothes on with the intention of distressing or humiliating them. Even though the 5yo might have correctly interpreted the situation they cannot compete with the counter argument and possible lies of an adult.

Also an adult who deliberately bullies their child for fun will have bullied others throughout life and be experienced at deflecting blame.

You could report but it will have a better outcome for the child if you can be specific with what happened and when.

You are right, especially when it involves court appointed contact with an abusive non resident parent. My friend was deemed as the 'protectective' parent, so no action taken. Her son still suffers emotional abuse when on contact with his father, despite previous SS involvement. They wrote a report that was omitted the facts, and played down the fathers abusive behaviour towards the son. This goes on quite frequently.

I sincerely hope they would intervene these days. I (well, we - my sister & I) were physically and emotionally abused by our mother in the 90s - and I remember being told off by the SW and emotional welfare officer because we should be grateful as we had toys & summer dresses. Regardless of the fact that mum was drunk most evenings and thought nothing of banging my head on the floor. Grateful.

The access to popular culture was included in a post that mentioned name calling and bullying and encouraging other children to bully their own child. I find it odd so many have focused on it.

Today you know all about emotional abuse and the social services intervening considering the fact that you and your husband abuse your SS and are now having him removed from your care. Perhaps you should think drastically about offering advice to others on situations like this.

I think it stiles a chord because many people don't like popular culture. They don't ascribe to it or want that for their children. It should be a choice.

A very dear and lovely friend of mine is a child protection officer, and has been for most of her career. She's so unbelievably stressed out and emotionally stretched by her job that she's on the point of giving it up. She never discusses individual cases obviously but she said that it is now so difficult to remove children that it is becoming a battle even when children are in very obvious and immediate danger. Parental "rights" have a lot to answer for sadly. The system is over stretched, under funded, and under staffed so only the most serious cases are even getting on the radar these days. It's heartbreaking.

Everyone's opinions on emotional abuse will be different. I think we are losing our freedom to think and believe as we like. My DSS was never emotionally abused by us and I'll say that till the day I die.

So many have focused on it because the other things are clearly abuse whereas denying access to popular culture isn't.

My DSD has been badly emotionally abused by her bio mother. Social services nor the police have two fucks 🙄

*gave

Emotional abuse is probably the most deeply damaging form of abuse.
Fractures and bruises heal in time, psychological damage is much more difficult.

It is courts who order children to be removed from their parents, not ss.

Courts need evidence and sadly it is often harder to evidence emotional abuse.

Ime in the absence of physical/sexual abuse or neglect in addition to emotional abuse it has to be very very bad for children to be removed.

Unfortunately I think it would depend on which local authority has to respond. Some are massively overstretched, some much less so. Similarly it would also depend on the individual that took the case.
I think the level of intervention would also vary widely as above.

Please report though, if that's what you're getting at. And keep reporting.

When I say denying access to popular culture, I don't mean no TV or similar. Rather buying dc awful clothes, dressing them in clothes clearly targeted at the opposite sex (when this isn't their choice.)

I'm not sure that is abuse, unless of course they are deliberately buying them clothes they know they'd hate with no reason to buy them. I have lots of male relatives who handed down nearly new clothes and 5 brothers, so even if mum had to buy clothes they'd be boys or fairly neutral so I could pass them down, I was therefore dressed as a boy, often in t-shirts of shows I'm too young to remember/fashion from 10 years before, my mum would have loved to take me clothes shopping and dress me in pretty things but that would have meant not feeding us, I would never have admitted to someone we were that poor or that my clothes were second hand, or especially that my similar sized brother and I shared clothes, so a lot of people probably thought she was dressing me as a boy deliberately.

Also, maybe they think the awful clothes are nice, I've seen plenty of adults wearing what I would call awful clothes and I doubt anyone is forcing them.

What is the situation you're alluding to OP? It's hard to be helpful when it's all a bit confusing.

People have focused on the 'popular culture' point as it's the most 'baggy' term, and understanding what that means, and expressing it in a different way may well be classed as emotional abuse

e.g. Not being allowed fashionable clothes vs dressed with an intention to humiliate, two very different things there.

You are very wrong. I would EXPECT SS to intervene for emotional abuse. Depending on the circumstances, they could easily present a case to a court that the child has suffered or will suffer significant harm, thereby resulting in an interim care order. Further, if necessary, removal to foster care.

Do you think a gender issue is at the root of this, OP? IE that the parents wanted sons and got daughters (or vice versa) and this is why the DC are being tried unkindly and bought 'inappropriate' clothes?

today actual abuse?

Does spouting complete bollocks come naturally or do you try hard to sound like such an idiot?

Lurked today's a homophobe Christian who seems to think her and her husband should have been free to treat her dss however they like.
It was emotional abuse Today, you can deny it all you like.