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.

OP Social Services are unlikely to contact you about a family member who committed a misdemeanour that only warranted Community Service as punishment.

By contacting you SS are concerned about the welfare of your children. You dc may be over 16 now but there may be historical reasons that SS need to look in to. They may even have been contacted by your dc.

TBH you are coming across as extremely evasive. Do the best thing for your dc and meet with the SW

The person who I spoke to was a trainee social worker, not a receptionist! Surely that shows prejudice if you assume they were at that grade?!

I have no idea how they got the job. That doesn't concern me. I work in financial services and deal with OS centers day in day out. I am used to a certain amount of linguistic limitation. Yet this persons skills fell substantially below that. Perhaps they were recruited to deal with families who spoke their native language? Who knows. But they were impossible to understand, and could not understand me unless I used the most simplistic language.

I don't know what the meeting is about other than it relates to family members conviction. That's all they would say. I have asked. Given they didn't know my name, and thought family member lived here, it's entirely possible of course they have the wrong end of the stick...

Re family member, i was at court. Those of you who say I don't know the history, have you actually been to a criminal court? Because if you had, you'd know it gets discussed. In detail. So please don't tell me there are secret offences I don't know about.

DC are perfectly happy and know nothing about SS, and I'd like to keep it that way.

I'm worried that you're transmitting your fear of SS to your DC. You're making it sound like anyone with any involvement with SS is a failure. What happens if you or your DC do need support at sometime and you've given them this impression that SS are just there to judge.

If I was SS I'd be worried about your insistence that you don't need to see them. Just meet them and talk. You're making it a biggie that it doesn't need to be.

Is there any logical reason why you're so adverse to seeing them?

OP, I think that if you do meet with social services, you might want to think about how you come across, if your posts on here are anything to go by.

Clearly someone who is a schedule one offender is in touch with you.

It might not even be to do with the member who was up at court!

An agenda gives a 'heads up'.....therefore missing the whole point of safeguarding

As a parent with PR&Rs the SS are going to give you info that will allow you to protect the welfare of your kids.

Why oh why can't you accept that?

The person who I spoke to was a trainee social worker, not a receptionist! Surely that shows prejudice if you assume they were at that grade?!

I have no idea how they got the job. That doesn't concern me. I work in financial services and deal with OS centers day in day out. I am used to a certain amount of linguistic limitation. Yet this persons skills fell substantially below that. Perhaps they were recruited to deal with families who spoke their native language? Who knows. But they were impossible to understand, and could not understand me unless I used the most simplistic language.

I don't know what the meeting is about other than it relates to family members conviction. That's all they would say. I have asked. Given they didn't know my name, and thought family member lived here, it's entirely possible of course they have the wrong end of the stick...

Re family member, i was at court. Those of you who say I don't know the history, have you actually been to a criminal court? Because if you had, you'd know it gets discussed. In detail. So please don't tell me there are secret offences I don't know about.

Nah SS don't give agendas for meetings like this.

So what is the conviction? You're not going to get helpful responses being so vague.

SS don't get involved in minor offences. They don't have the resources. It's odd that you don't seem to want to find out what they have to tell you. It may be totally unconnected to your family member.

You don't have a crystal ball. Maybe it's relevant. Maybe it isn't. You're only going to find out if you engage in the process.

I hope your children are not at risk.

I would just go. Ask for the meeting to be at their office. Be open about their almost non-existant contact and never unsupervised with your children and tell them your children are unaware of events. In all likelihood, you will never see them again- I say that as someone who has been responsible for CP in an 11-18 secondary school for a number of years and worked with social services.

But if they are a relative who you see rarely, why did you go to the court case? Could they have picked up you were there and it be seen as supporting him/her? The fact that it went to court shows either - they denied it or it was at a level of seriousness to be dealt with by a court; either of which suggests you can afford to be dismissive of it.

"Over 16 yet under 18" - So 17

"OP, I think that if you do meet with social services, you might want to think about how you come across, if your posts on here are anything to go by"

I'm sorry, but I agree. The more you dig your heels in the more obstructive and uncooperative you seem. What has happened has happened. You can't undo the past. You need to adjust your "fuck you" attitude because it will reflect negatively on you.

Can you work extra hours and build up a little flexi-time as a one off so you can make this meeting?

Apologies for double post.

All I have been told is it relates to family member conviction.

It could relate to something else, as has been suggested. But surely SS wouldn't tell a direct lie would they? I was expressly told the above.

The offence itself isn't relevant and I'm not going to say what it is, I don't need to. I've told you the sentence, you can surely draw conclusions from that. Generally speaking the more serious the offence, the more serious the penalty.

My DC have no fear of SS. We've never had any involvement with them. I've never discussed it. I have been on the receiving end of a threatened referral to SS once (by my DC school head when they were 10/ y6, because I allowed them to walk home alone after school and they didn't have a mobile with them!). Nothing unsurprisingly came of that once I contacted the school governors. I didn't mention any of that to DC though as it was clearly bullshit.

I have worked with 16/17 year olds and It is getting on my nerves how you keep insisting that only small children need safeguarding. Thank goodness you have lived such a sheltered life. Please stop insisting that only small children need social services as that is utter bollocks. I also find it doesn't matter whether the teen has professional, intelligent parents either. Abuse/neglect/crime doesn't tend to let the class system stop it from finding victims.

And just for clarity- very serious sexual offences can be dealt with with community orders eg historic sexual abuse.

I went to court because I wanted to support them. Due to distance and health, other relatives were not able to attend. Also as a person of good standing, job etc, I hoped it might help if I was there.

I don't think I have a fuck you attitude. I won't tolerate people who laugh if I object to being called Mrs when I am unmarried, or think getting my simple name right is an inconvenience. I won't tolerate rudeness. I'm also not the type of person who just meekly agrees with everything, and doesn't question. If that amounts to fuck you...then ok.

There is no abuse, no neglect (well DC do take themselves to and from college but I don't think SS would be interested in that would they?) and no crime. DC don't even drink or smoke.

It's a sexual offence yes? I doubt there would be SS contact and you would be so cagey if it wasn't.
That being the case op, regardless of whether your family member (who you obviously seem to still be close to) received a custodial sentence or not, there really are no minor sexual offences.

Surely you are not protecting your DC if you refuse to inform them that this person could pose a risk. If anything happened to your DC because they did not know to be careful around this person and not have contact alone, how would you feel then?
It might be a small risk but you cannot predict what this family member may do in the future. Keeping information from your DC that could keep them safe from harm could be viewed as a failure to safeguard.
Is it possible that In court they would only discuss what they could prove and there may be other concerns that they do not have enough proof to take to court?

I also work with 16-19 year olds in a college, dealing with young people on full time courses and apprenticeships. The amount of very necessary SS involvement for young people between 16 and 18 would astound most people.

I have also worked in the criminal justice system and for SS. In court they are only allowed to raise previous offences which have resulted in convictions. They cannot and do not refer to offences that were not pursued by the CPS for whatever reason, nor do they refer to cases where there was significant reason to believe that offences took place but they were unable to secure enough evidence to proceed. What you heard in court may be the tiniest tip of a Titanic felling iceberg.

SS, however, can and should have been, made privy to any potential offences or accusations that were not prosecuted. Their job is to protect people from potential and actual harm - whether or not a prosecution has taken place. Often it is their work which triggers a prosecution.

I am not trying to patronise you, but I'm hoping that you will understand that what you heard in court is highly unlikely to be all there is to know, and they are requesting a meeting with you to give you information.

If it was a section 1 offence then I can categorically state that this will not be a standalone incident, no matter what the actual prosecution was for. Section 1 offenders, on average, get caught between their ninth and twenty fourth actual offence. There will be more.

In your shoes I would (and have) meet with them to find out what they want. Their only remit is to protect young people - which, as a parent, yours should be too. The only way to find out what they think you NEED to know is to meet with them. At least then you can make informed decisions.

Nobody on here can judge whether SS have a right to be concerned about your situation. . Because we don't know the facts. I'm not sure if you can refuse the meeting but if you do then they will wonder why. Most people wouldn't like SS involvement if it was unwanted But if you refuse that might flag up even more concerns.

"There is no abuse, no neglect (well DC do take themselves to and from college but I don't think SS would be interested in that would they?) and no crime"

Parents are not the only people who commit such things OP. I was not accusing you, you have already said a family member committed some kind of crime. You may well not know other things about them. SS may just want to check your teens are ok and have not been subjected to anything that you are aware of.

I don't think there is much point adding more to this thread as you cannot say what the offence was and people aren't going to just take your word for it that it was something minor. Think all that can be said has been said to be honest.

*unaware of I mean

Have you made your list of pros and cons then? I'm really interested to know what's on it.