To think that even in the 1970s, social services should have been involved?

[KickAssAngel]

DH comes from a family that I think was deeply toxic. He, of course, minimizes and normalizes a lot of this. From what I know, it's clear that there was considerable verbal and emotional abuse. When he was 18, in the last year of 6th form, a friend's parents sat him down and offered him a home with them, because they thought things were so bad.

there are some things that happened that make me astonished that social services weren't involved. He thinks I'm exaggerating, and that's just how things were back then. So, I'm wondering what other people think? DH would hate to discuss this with friends in RL, but am I being a drama lama? I know it makes no difference now, but I'd just like to get things straight in my own head.

DH's mum re-married when he was about 6. His Step-dad had a daughter who was 12-ish. This step sister lived with them full time as her mother was diagnosed with schizophrenia.

1. When the parents married, step-sis became the main carer for DH. St-sis would pick him up from school, walk home, give him dinner, supervise homework & get him ready for bed. At weekends they were almost always left alone for at least 12 hours a day as the parents were building a house several miles away, so the children were left home alone except for overnight.
2. After one day out, the family returned home to find it had been broken into. Step-sis's mother had broken in, and committed suicide in the bath.
3. A couple of years after that incident, step sis had major problems with anorexia. DH's memory is hazy, but he thinks she was in hospital for several months. I think she was around age 16 by then.

I think that 1. would probably fly under the radar, unless someone made a complaint, but that either 2 or 3 would trigger some SS involvement, and that both together must have alerted someone.

I mean, the police and hospitals were involved.

MIL is an accomplished lier. I've heard some amazing things from her that I know aren't true, and other family have said the same. FIL passed away several years ago. MIL no longer speaks to, or even acknowledges the existence of, any other family. Step-sis was cut off decades ago. So I don't have any other details, just DH's hazy memory from his childhood.

So - would SS have got involved back in the 1970s, or did MIL & FIL lie/conceal things?

2 is the only one that would have been a particularly unusual event then, and no reason why it would have attracted SS.

Far, far, worse was going on publicly without intervention. Young abused girls with genital injuries were tutted at and told to keep their skirts below their knees in future, and pregnant 12 yr old's were pre -teen Lolita's out to wreck decent men's lives, and naming an abuser in a position of power was a quick way to be in far worse trouble.

Children weren't fawned over or lived through, and the neglected and abused where just problems to be solved and made to vanish or retract any complaints one way or the other, with class of both SW's and children playing a huge part. As for 'emotional abuse' no one cared.

As a child my image and one of our conditions was used (without my permission of course) to raise awareness of both neglect and poverty. By the early to mid 70's the situation was visibly so, so, much worse. It still didn't merit SS intervention.

Little neglected or immorally raised children who could be scrubbed up, or better still babies who (it was thought) would supply middle class childless couple's with their dreams, attracted SS attention. Those deemed too damaged or older ones who fate or officialdom shoved into SS offices under their noses, got dealt with. The rest, where seen to be already lost causes.

All abusing parents at any level cover up their abuse, lie and conceal things. You can hardly expect them not to if you think about it.

Having seen my only other sibling to survive our childhood, hit psychiatric hospital as a no longer coping teen and spin round the revolving door for decades since, I think simple acceptance of one's lot can be sensible.

He's dealing with it the way that works for him. He's not wrong that it's just how things where then. Listen to him. Telling him no they must have been other reasons he lived like that isn't helpful.

I agree with the posts above. While it sounds like they had some tough circumstances to contend with, i can't see anything that would warrant social services involvement.
2) was a tragedy, but unless it affected his parents ability to care for him then why would social services be involved? 3)... I assume was being managed by the hospital? Again, unless it meant that your DH was being neglected/mistreated then its not a SS issue.

No.

MIlL/FIL weren't neglectful enough for SS by a very, very long way. The SS definition of verbal and emotional abuse is not going out on Saturdays. PIL may be bad people, which it sounds like, but they're not bad parents enough to get legal intervention.

I think it would be boarder line today.

In the 70s loads of siblings around 12 cared for youngers ones. Yes they left them for too long and i feel for them.

Number 2 was awful. But in no way your mil or fils fault and would not warrant ss involvment. Now you would get an offer of support.

And number 3. The sister was in hospital l. Again would not warrant SS involvment.

I have to agree with your dh. You are seeming to be blowing this out of proportion

Sorry I disappeared, suddenly had to go out.

Thanks for replies.

I'm a teacher, and we're told to pass on concerns such as children who are carers, sudden trauma, and self harm. Obviously I wasn't around, but I don't think there was ever any suggestion of support/counseling for step sis, even after her mother committed suicide. I'd like to think that a child growing up in those circumstances would have someone who would try to step in and support them. I kind of assumed that someone in hospital for long periods would get some counseling and maybe disclose the abuse. But then, I grew up in a family where we were slapped across the back of the legs, and chased upstairs as a part of punishment, and that was just how it was. So step-sis could have told everyone about the daily screaming in her face, and it wouldn't have been picked up, would it?

With point 2: Do you mean that the entire family were out and returned to find a corpse in the bathtub?
Or that the children were left alone in the house and the stepmum broke in and committed suicide with them there?
If the latter, I can't imagine how that scenario would play out without the attention of police and social services. And I can't imagine it ending any way except with the removal of the children from the home there and then. 70's or not.
If the former then, yeah police and medical matter. Not social services.

You are surprised tgere wasnt offers of counselling in the 70s?

What happens today is irrelavant. You may need to report a trauma. Doesnt mean SS would get involved. They may offer support now. Probably not in the 70s.

You havent mentioned abuse in the Op. Some boarderline neglect. No abuse.

Treatment for anorexia was very limited as well.

I dont think you have a realistic view of the 70s.

I'd ask you to consider which feels worse:
Even the most horrendous abuse was often ignored or explained away, and in the bigger scheme of things he fell well below what would have been considered in need of intervention. C'est la vie.

He must have somehow missed out on a caring society noticing what was happening to him, and help was there the whole time if only h'ed done something different.

I know you don't mean to, but because you want to feel the world couldn't have been as harsh to children in need as it actually was, you don't want to accept his reality, and that can feel like victim blaming.

I would be interested to know whether professionals dealing with children referred children as regularly to SS in the 70s/80s as they do now. I suspect not. We have become massively more sensitive to issues of exploitation and abuse (of all kinds) as relates to young people. I think many people used to have a kind of "boys will be boys/men will be men" attitude to things - which is why so many high-profile abusers got away with it in broad daylight for so long. I hope this has changed, though there is undoubtedly still progress to be made.

1), absolutely normal back then. Still happens now, in some families.

2. Awful, but not sure how his mum and step dad could be held accountable for this by SS or anyone else.

3. His step sister witnessed something awful, succumbed to anorexia and got appropriate treatment (which would in no way resemble what is appropriate now), they did their best. Counselling was not handed out like sweeties back then.

I think you have little to no clue about what life was like back then. If the parents had not worked, there was no one giving out wide screen TVs or other benefits. Nothing.....

Can I ask why it matters?
I'm not trying to be obtuse, but WHY does it matter?
Your DPs home life was chaotic, and yes from the viewpoint that his friends parents offered him somewhere to live, yes was probably quite abusive, even seemingly obvious to those in the local area, but what I'm getting at is what will the knowledge that SS should have been involved change?
If your DP has no interest in hashing this out, then you should leave it alone.

I'm really not trying to be confrontational, but I grew up in a very abusive, neglectful environment, we moved every 2-3 years. I have since seen many of my school reports, most of which outlined what would now be a cause for concern. There were so many times that our family should have been reported to Social services. Many, many times.
The knowledge that there were people who knew the hell that I was going through as a child, yet no one ever intervened has caused a lot of further trauma. it wasn't even patently obvious to me that my childhood was abusive. It wasn't obvious to me that my parents were neglectful. But as I've become aware and I've seen that all of my teachers would have known what was going on, between my behaviour, and the things they saw, and the way I presented myself to school, no one wanted to stop that from happening has almost put a black cloud over the few happy moments I had in my childhood.
All of my teachers who seemed to care, well they didn't. In fact there is only one person I can say who really stood up for me. I was in year 9. I thought he hated me, but years later I realised that the anger that he had was never geared toward me, but at my parents. At their lack of care toward me, toward school work, toward ensuring I had school uniform or that I had shoes.

Honestly, please if he is at peace with it don't dwell on it, it won't do his confidence any good.
I've spent half of my adult life feeling worthless that no one felt I was worth protecting.

Point 2. Dh's family (him, step-sis, his mum and step-dad) came back from being somewhere and the corpse was in the bathroom.

I started teaching in the early 90s, and even then would have been expected to pass on concerns.

Obviously, daily verbal abuse can be covered up (and was). But if we thought an anorexic child wasn't receiving support, we were expected to pass the info onto the child protection teacher in school. I'm not sure of the exact timings, but the anorexia was late 70s/early 80s.

I'm obviously very naive! I thought that if police had to deal with a suicide, and the child later ended up in hospital with mental health problems, then someone would bother to at least have a chat, make a family visit, even if they then closed the case and said that all was well.

PIL would appear to be the perfect mc family btw, to a casual outsider, so I wouldn't expect there to be any on-going involvement.

Lots must have changed in the 1980s around those issues.

(btw, step-sis is a success story. Although PIL later pretended she'd never existed, she has been happily married for decades, with a highly successful career and a great family.)

1. Wasn't really cause for concern in the 70s.

2 and 3 wouldn't even attract SS involvement today would they?

The majority of dcs in 70s made their own way to and from primary school and this was the norm. Parents only came to school on parents evenings. Corporal punishment , slipper/. Cane/ birch was totally acceptable way of discipline primary school pupils then which nowadays would have the teacher arrested for assault/GBH.

It was only when Esther Rantzen started Childline in 80s that the issues of child protection became a serious issue for society as a whole, so I think you are using the norms of today and applying them restrospectively to your DHs situation.

But if we thought an anorexic child wasn't receiving support, we were expected to pass the info onto the child protection teacher in school

She was recieving support. She was in hospital.

Fred west was noticed by a police woman and even she struggled to get anyone to take any notice of what was staring them in the face - missing children and missing people

I agree with the others, there wouldn't have been any SS involvement.

Obviously, daily verbal abuse can be covered up (and was). But if we thought an anorexic child wasn't receiving support, we were expected to pass the info onto the child protection teacher in school. I'm not sure of the exact timings, but the anorexia was late 70s/early 80s.

verbal abuse would not get social service involvement now, and the child was getting treatment for her anorexia, so I still don't understand what you are thinking.

Well I am
Pleased that he and the step sis have moved on and are happier

But not suorises that this didn't even touch the radar

The bad old days

Sorry, my computer is being a dick, it appears I posted twice, having had to re-type my post as I didn't think it had posted the first time!

In what way is someone in hospital for anorexia 'not receiving support'? I just do not understand your reasoning on this!

Luckily sw don't class emotional abuse (which verbal abuse is) as unimportant. They do have a harder time getting a clear picture, so don't always get it right. But mainly the reason sw don't get involved is because far too many people don't see it as worth reporting in the first place.

I know someone who grew up in a family of 6 children in the 70s. The father was extremely violent, and raped the daughters. He'd hold them down in icy cold baths for kicks. When they ran away and told police, they were dragged back home.
At 16, the eldest gave birth to her father's daughter and the baby was taken from her. No one was allowed to talk about it. Her brother went on to murder his wife.
It wasn't until the 90s that she received any professional support.
Respect and kindness for children, and professional support for families is a relatively new thing.

sorry - I meant not receiving support for the suicide of her mother a couple of years earlier. Obviously, being in hospital she was getting support for the physical symptoms. I have no idea how much 'support' her dad and step-mum gave her, although apparently the anorexia was her fault and attention seeking. It was about 4 years after this they cut her off and proclaimed that she'd never existed in the first place (all photos, documents etc destroyed. We have to pretend that DH grew up as an only child.)

OK, I was wrong.

I just find it so hard as DH doesn't think his childhood was 'that bad' but those events seem quite bad to me. Coupled with how manipulative I find MIL, and that DH's friends obviously thought it bad enough to offer him another home to live in. It must have been a miserable childhood for his step-sister. I don't know her well (we live thousands of miles apart) but she's an incredibly well balanced and together person. She stayed in sporadic touch with DH even after she was declared not to have existed, which I find highly forgiving of her. None of this was his fault, obviously, but he was the golden child to her scapegoat life, and she still kept an eye out for him.

It's on my mind atm as I just had the refresher about looking out for children who might be suffering abuse etc. Loads of the warning signs listed, that we're encouraged to report, I sit there thinking "that was DH's family". I'd like to think that anyone living how step-sis did would get some help, but suspect that I'm ridiculously naive there as well.