Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

posted for traffic...can I refuse a SS meeting?

431 replies

ssquestion · 22/09/2017 09:11

The circumstances are quite sensitive and identifying so this may be a bit vague.

I've been contacted by SS who want a meeting with me about my DC (over 16 but under 18).

My view is DC are over 16, not at school, not children and therefore don't need child protection. They are suggesting a meeting with me and then me and DC.

Can I refuse? Apart from anything else, I have no annual leave left til Xmas, so if I did meet them I'd be losing a days pay, which isn't great.

OP posts:
RestlessTraveller · 23/09/2017 14:20

"my family is is greater need"

That's the most sensible thing you've said all thread.

Original poster
ssquestion · 23/09/2017 14:20

I wasn't present when the offence was committed.

They say they did it.

I believe they are telling the truth.

Is that sufficient?

OP posts:
Queenofthedrivensnow · 23/09/2017 14:21

Drkroger - agree

Original poster
ssquestion · 23/09/2017 14:22

No anecdotal evidence. I saw the letter, so first hand. More assumptions.

OP posts:
PlatformNineAndThreeQuarters · 23/09/2017 14:26

OP I don't blame you for not wanting a meeting in your home, for various reasons I wouldn't either and it's got nothing to do with having something to hide. You're right about not wanting to take time off work for it either if it means losing money and it's wrong for anyone to suggest you're putting that before your child's welfare. It's easy to say that if you've got loads of savings and no one will suffer for the loss of income.
There may be reasons why you're not being told the reason for the meeting in advance but it's horrible to have to go to something blind when everyone else has the advantage of already knowing what's happening.

User02 · 23/09/2017 14:29

Arranging the meeting. If you want to argue the point with a SW then do so. You are totally resistant to a whole list of posters here so I am quite sure you will manage to cope with a SW.
Let us know how it goes

Queenofthedrivensnow · 23/09/2017 14:29

One letter doesn't equal a whole service. Muting this thread though

ludothedog · 23/09/2017 14:37

my goodness. who would want to be a social worker!

OhTheRoses · 23/09/2017 14:44

OP could you not take the day as compassionate leave?

Why don't you want the meeting at your home. I'd be thrilled to show them my home and in my home I'm in charge not them.

hula008 · 23/09/2017 14:45

I also think that it must be a partner

Whocansay · 23/09/2017 14:47

OP, you are very defensive. It comes across as if you are more concerned about keeping your family member's secret, than protecting your DC.

Maybe there have been reports to SS about this person before? The police wouldn't necessarily know that would they?

You have nothing to lose an everything to gain by agreeing to meet with SS. Even if they tell you nothing new, surely it would put your mind at rest? Just organise it out of your normal hours.

Crunchymum · 23/09/2017 14:50

Was the crime sexual OP?

Twickerhun · 23/09/2017 14:53

I feel sorry for the social workers here with this level of suspicion.

Leavingonajet · 23/09/2017 14:55

You don't have to attend the meeting but the meeting is provided for the safety of your DC not because the social workers are sitting around twiddling their thumbs looking for people to annoy. No one wants social care involvement if their life is going well but if this is just to share information and make sure that your DC have the information they need to protect themselves and potential future DC they may have then it is unlikely to be protracted involvement. Minimisation of offenses is very usual in families, as is grooming by family member. This is even more common if it is a non contact offence such as downloading and viewing indecent images of children. Please do not assume that the only offence committed will be that which there is a conviction for this would be unlikely. You and the social workers do all want the same thing to keep your family safe even if you are not agreeing about the risks involved or how to do this.

ludothedog · 23/09/2017 15:04

CPO = Community Payback Order
Are you in Scotland OP?

I would disagree with you that a community sentence (as apposed to custody) means that the offence was not serious.

Also SW can disclose information that was not brought up in court or shared by police, where they believe there are safeguarding concerns.

Was the crime in relation to the possession of child sexual abuse images? because when I read your post that was the first thing that came to my mind.

ZippyCameBack · 23/09/2017 15:08

I'm not surprised the OP is defensive. I would be too. It's easy to say that SW's only want to help and that not wanting to engage is a sign of poor parenting or some sort of guilt, until it happens to you.
This sort of thing can feel very isolating and shameful (for every person who is supportive there will be at least two "no smoke without fire" types).
Had I taken a few simple precautions when I was in a similar situation then I would have been able to avoid a lot of stress. I just didn't know either that I could or that it might be necessary.
What did the helpline people say would be likely to happen if you refused to attend any meeting?
OP, in terms of just making it all go away, your best bet is probably to go to a meeting if you can, but do protect yourself.

Jewlry · 23/09/2017 15:09

You are being unreasonable. Without a doubt. Several times over.

I am a Social Worker and this is what I am reading so far

Someone close to you was convicted of an offence at court
You took time off work to attend court and support this person
SS believe this person to live at your address
SS wish to meet with you in relation to relatives court conviction
Relatives court conviction requires SS exoration as to whether this may or may not have implications regarding the two teenagers in your care
You do not want your teenagers to have knowledge of the conviction

In my experience the only convictions that SS would wish to explore in relation to teenagers 16 plus are either violent or sexual.
Given the ages of your kids, all SS will want to see is that can act as a protective parent. And can they self protect or are there other vulnerabilities at play.

You would be wise to fully comply with SS. Of course you can remain with this ridiculous stance you are taking about being a private person, not wanting them in your home, not getting time off work etc etc. All ridiculous excuses and to me all your posts on this thread post to the following
Your boyfriend who lived with you and your kids was convicted of a historical offence
You supported him in court
Your support and him pleading guilty and the fact it was historical and no other convictions led to him having a community type order
He is still in contact with you and your kids
You want to protect him
You want to keep your kids from finding out about his conviction
SS involvement may mean you cannot keep this all as quiet and brush it under the carpet !
You have no insight regarding being a protective parent and you are likely going to make this blow up into something bigger than it needs to be.

FGS be sensible. Meet with SS, be honest with them. Allow them to visit your home if needs be, and allow them to speak to the kids if they identify this as needed. Refusal to engage in any of this has already raised the suspicions of others on this thread. You don't want to be going down that road with SS especially if there's nothing to hide.
Although as I say, from your posts I believe you're hiding and minimising a lot!

Jewlry · 23/09/2017 15:11

Also can you clarify
What's the person's relationship to you?
What was the offence?
Does the person be in contact with your kids?

CotswoldStrife · 23/09/2017 15:13

OP, the more you minimise and delay the more we are likely to see why SS are involved in this case.

Agree with PP that sounds awfully like a non-resident partner and DV.

Leavingonajet · 23/09/2017 15:18

In purely practical terms I also wanted to add that most front line social workers are contracted to work standard office hours and are not paid overtime so the expectation that they have to meet out you outside of their working hours isn't reasonable, anymore than a GP would see you out of their working working hours. Some social workers will be flexible to support people but this will be because they are going over and above their working hours and you are very unlikely to get this individual level of support by demanding it with some hostility and sense of entitlement.

EamonnWright · 23/09/2017 15:19

I've been involved with SS. Not due to risk but due to them moving to mine from their mothers. There has never been a problem with them living here yet they wanted to call out every 6 months or so.

Let them once and decided to tell them to fuck off and never come back and they haven't.

I wasn't letting some wee wet behind the ears twat talk to me about my children whilst their organisation were a major part of the problem in the first instance.

They have rang me a couple of times and I've just told them to mind their own business.

Haven't heard from them in a couple of years.

PlatformNineAndThreeQuarters · 23/09/2017 15:30

Again I don't think not wanting people in your home is a ridiculous excuse. Loads of people don't want that, for many different and valid reasons.
It's easy for someone in a well paid job to criticize others for not taking time off for meetings as well.

Queenofthedrivensnow · 23/09/2017 15:30

Ludo you are correct - I have clients who have been given cpo when it's been a violent offence. It's normally coupled with a period of probation and caveats such as not entering the victims home or not contacting them at all. Which you know...might fit with the op Wink

Original poster
ssquestion · 23/09/2017 15:31

Jewlry, you have made many assumptions in your post which are wrong, and not based on what I've written but what you think I've written. You say you're a SW - your response is exactly why I have concerns about engaging with SS!

Family member doesn't live here. Never has. SS got this wrong. They have I hope accepted this is an error (just like calling me Mrs) on their part. No information they could have says this person lives in our home. It simply isn't true.

OP posts:
Queenofthedrivensnow · 23/09/2017 15:33

Eamonn ss wouldn't be involved just due to kids moving from one parent to another you have edited that scenario.

We don't get over time we get toil. Which I always have at least 20 hours of owing and I never get back