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

[ssquestion]

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.

But actually I've never seen the word kids in an actual report. But I admit I'd rather be referred to by my title and surname rather than my first name.

What does 'so her family is open' and the smiley faces mean? Have you planned or done something to members of her family?

Awfully sorry but I'm not quite getting this. It's ok to be casual is it? For SW's to referb to parents as "mum" or "smith" and to their children as "kids" but it's not okay for the scummy parent to refer to hcps as "doc" or "nursey". I don't understand why casual works one way or not the other.

Jesus Christ Oh the Roses why are you getting so hung up on the language an anonymous person uses in the informal setting of an Internet forum? I could understand if it was a really derogatory term but 'kids' - really?! I doubt the posted refers to them as 'kids' any official setting, it's just a colloquialism. You obviously have had a bad experience which I'm sorry for, but please don't allow it to turn you into one of those professionally-offended people who's always falling over themselves to complain if someone is 'disrespectful', or insisting on taking offence where it isn't meant. It must be exhausting.

Feel free to do the degree then!
Oh the roses sorry I'm confused is that in response to me or someone else? In case it's me, as I've said, using kids isn't OK in a report and I would ask someone to change it if I was checking it. However in general conversation outside of work I'd use the word.

Please can nobody report Eammon, I think everyone needs to read exactly the sort of person he/she is. Nice use of the word moron there!

Please can nobody report Eammon, I think everyone needs to read exactly the sort of person he/she is. Nice use of the word moron there!

What's your problem with me?

Honestly.

Ratemysocialworker doesn't exist but I found another site that states my building has underground vaults for ritual abuse of children. How have I missed that over the last 9 years? Amazed!

I know ratemysocialworker.com doesn't exist. I didn't want to direct them to the real site!

Bloody hell there's some completely unhinged opinions on social work here!!! I think a couple of you need to step.away from the keyboard

wyfofbath yes you are right, but where mistakes are made the fallout for the child is pretty dreadful. I was just trying to draw that to the attention of queen because saying that it was justified because the children weren't "possessions" suggested she wasn't aware of it.

queen if you think I was asking you to apologise for your profession or being over critical of it you are wrong. I meant that sws are trained to use their instincts, and there is risk in that (and the judgement of individual sws is relied on even if decisions are taken ultimately above). It sounds as though you think I am talking crap, so I will leave it at that!

Summer - post wasn't aimed you x

It isn't being hung up on the language it's about being hung up on issues of equality and mutual respect I don't understand why social workers/hcps don't 100% understand that If they wish to be afforded respect it has to be afforded to parents/customers too . In my experience it isn't. Why do hcps/SW's think they can treat parents as subordinates.

I'm afraid you're categorically wrong OP when you say only minor offences draw a community sentence. I've worked with offenders for 20 plus years, a great deal of which has been spent in Magistrates and Crown Courts. For SS to be involved it will only be because your relative has committed an offence involving a minor which is likely to be violent or sexual in nature. Either that or it's child pornography and he has admitted to real life interests. It beggars belief why you, as a parent, would refuse to attend such a meeting unless you also refuse to accept your relative's guilt.

*People trying to push the male version of parenthood off the forum is what this is.

Absolutely disgraceful but will be no surprise considering.*

The biggest surprise here was that you are male. Didn't notice, don't care. The issue is with your tone, your disabilist language and your blatant refusal to accept that your bad experience is not actually indicative of everyone's experience.

This isn't about sexism - that appears to be yet another chip on your already chippy shoulders.

I would meet them OP. I'm not going to make any assumptions. From my own experience, its best to. My dc father assaulted my sons, leading to a conviction. Despite the fact I hadn't done anything wrong, as part of building background reports and child plans for the children, I was investigated too. I had to answer some personal questions about my mental health, how much I drank etc. I was terrified because it's SS. However I cooperated every step of the way and as a result SS deemed me a protecting factor of the children and didn't put them on the at risk register.

I know SS seem scary and I know some people have had bad experiences with them, but they shouldn't be ignored. The whole thing was an extremely anxious time for me but they were great with my dc and I actually missed my sw when it was all wrapped up.

My mother works in a job that has to do with ss and she was very quick to advise me to comply with everything they wanted of me. I'm glad I did.

A majority of these are asking for and say they are grateful for support. One even doesn't want the case closed because they will 'miss' having us around but they don't need us and have made amazing progress

I'm certainly one of those - social workers have been involved for several years now and at our last meeting I had to reluctantly say we didn't need a support worker any more because DD is doing so much better now so I couldn't justify taking up their time and resources any more but I'm so grateful to them. And my case started off in a scary way with accusations of serious abuse necessitating an in-depth investigation but they were professional and caring throughout - that case ended pretty quickly but DD later on had behavioural issues and they offered help which really helped. They called me by my first name but I called them by their first names so no disrespect there

The difficulty with conversations like this on internet forums is that we see posts from people who have had unfortunate experiences with the few social workers who are below par, and also from people who are bitter about legitimate social work involvement in their lives because of their poor parenting choices. It strikes me that we've seen both on this thread.

CardsforKittens

Really?

Yes it's all first name terms, which as I said I didn't like at first but in a way it's better to have it on a more informal footing when we're around the DDs. Now our SW is a really great advocate for our DDs, it's the only reason SS are still involved.

It can be very scary, and they do ask very tough questions (we've been through 2 adoption applications as well), but I do understand where they're coming from. You know who will get the blame if they get it wrong either way, they're 'damned if they do and damned if they don't'.

EamonnWright

Oh, definitely.