To think some posters are naive about SS?

[fudgeraisinbiscuit]

I see many posts where people seem to believe either that SS will offer support and that parents who are loving and coping but struggling can contact them for a hand-hold, or posts where people believe a not ideal yet normal situation can and should be reported.

AIBU to think posters are naive about what SS actually do?

Yup. Thats what all SW do. It really is a job people do purely to piss people off

I know! Don't they know the only generalisations we are allowed to make about social workers are that they are all heros/martyrs?

There were/are adoption targets where there's a cash incentive for councils to meet adoption targets- this could affect how SS operate in some areas. I'm not sure if these targets are still going though.

Those targets were for children ALREADY IN CARE to be placed with permanent adoptive families. It has NEVER been the case that there were cash incentives or targets to take children from their families. This is another myth that gets dangerously trotted out all the time.

In fairness goat you know that some children would be more likely to be put into care than others on the back of that, many possibly quite justifiably so of course. Still, I think introducing cash incentives to adoption is wrong.

"The assumptions are so dangerous because they prevent SW seeing any evidence that contradicts their original assumptions. Then they lie or manipulate to get the “ evidence “ that they need to back up their assumptions that they “ know” are correct and dismiss other information or opinions as irrelevant.

So it leads to catastrophic and life destroying errors either way. "

Yes to this!!! This is how over the period of 2 months it went from "we are just sending someone to offer support " to going to a child protection meeting. The assessor manipulated "evidence " to back up her first assumptions when she first met me (had just split from dh, was feeling quite numb and emotional.) She must have been frothing at the mouth when she read my medical history of depression! She interpreted a history of on/off depression which was managed when it flared up as "thinktwice must be emotionally unstable and unable to look after dc because she has depression."

Luckily no one at the child protection meeting had any concerns (police, nurse, head teacher) about the dc hence why it was put down as child in need instead. Two months after that and only seeing the sw twice (after she didn't turn up to the initial meeting) and a few phone calls the case was closed after my complaint.

So it went from child protection meeting, children being put under child in need, not seeing a sw until 6 weeks after the meeting, seeing her once at home and once at school then case closed.

From my understanding child protection is serious so for it to lead to a child protection meeting based on one assessors concerns and to then see no one for 6 weeks after the meeting and the case being closed not long after, it could be what you call cracking a walnut with a sledge hammer! It went from "we think this is very serious " to "we don't need to involved " within a matter of months!

I think there is a misconception from many that if families have interventions and support they will work with them and things will change

Sadly this isn’t the case for many often the resistance to work with SW not wanting to make changes and many parents too wrapped up in their own emotions. I thought this was rare and an assumption until I worked in DV (and had also believed that was the case in my family until I found out the truth)

This is another myth that gets dangerously trotted out all the time

It is a myth, but again, that's not the whole story is it? There are legitimate concerns about adoption targets and how they are implemented.

Goat surely their concerns for new born, would be based on the 10 year old? I would assume if baby is a new born and removed at birth? It would not have yet suffered any neglect.

In fairness goat you know that some children would be more likely to be put into care than others on the back of that, many possibly quite justifiably so of course. Still, I think introducing cash incentives to adoption is wrong

No because we are talking about children already removed and living in care homes. The expense to the LA is huge and outcomes for children in homes is not as good. The savings were passed onto councils.

It costs a huge amount to put them in a care home as opppsed to leaving them with the parent. There is no incentive in terms of money for a council to take a child, put him or her in a home then quickly try to get them adopted.

But it does not cost money when they are subsequently adopted, which is my point

Those targets were for children ALREADY IN CARE to be placed with permanent adoptive families. It has NEVER been the case that there were cash incentives or targets to take children from their families. This is another myth that gets dangerously trotted out all the time

It could influence decision making, I think is the opposing point.

And has anyone ever recieved an apology from SS..Even when they have been proven wrong..they lie if they can't win.
They were very wrong in my case and i never recieved an apology because they think they are above everyone. Most of tbe SW ive met are control freaks.

@claw Usually yes. But sometimes it’s a health visitor that flags up problems with the care of a baby when nothing has been ever flagged up for an older child.

So, new baby may be disabled, mum not coping.
Alcohol or drugs (sadly an older child may be left with an alcoholic parent if certain needs are being met)
The addiction may have only recently developed.
An older child who stays with the other parent 50% of the time but baby is with mum who is not coping and the dad has history that makes him a danger to very young children.

Those are some examples. I’m not making any personal moral judgement on them.

Bigcat no you will never receive an apology, even if complaints are upheld, because Ss will always use the line "we were just working within the best interests of the dc and safeguarding them." Total cop out! If you messed up and proved you messed up, apologise!

Op thank you for starting this thread. My experience from Ss left a bitter taste in my mouth and looking back I see how they let down a family who were already going through a hard time of a split.

goat I think that is the bit, like fudge I’m struggling to understand in this hypothetical situation. A new born is removed at birth, due to previous neglect of an older sibling. Yet sibling remains.

goat I think that is the bit, like fudge I’m struggling to understand in this hypothetical situation. A new born is removed at birth, due to previous neglect of an older sibling. Yet sibling remains

I can't see what is confusing about that, unless you don't understand that a ten year old and a newborn are very different?

ThinksTwice I'm going through something similar at the moment. Who do you complain to? Despite many emails I haven't yet had any clarification of what they plan to do, what they want me to do or what will happen if I don't. I have little faith in them doing anything useful, but I could be wrong, but every bit of contact that I've had with them has left me anxious, feeling vulnerable and even more confused as to what is happening. It feels even more frustrating since I qualified as a social worker (but changed direction soon after) 20 years ago.

Yes, they are different, of course they are different.

But they are still dependent children.

Worn it was hard to find their complain information because it is very well hidden! I think I googled my town/social services and added complaints in it. Stage 1 complaint procedure was them inviting me in to "talk" about the problem. I asked them who decides if you have/are doing wrong and they said "we do." So stage 1 was skipped because self governing is not a very fair complaints procedure is it! On to stage 2 which was were I had two very lovely independent bodies come to my house and go through my complaint. They then go off and investigate by talking to each individual involved.

In my case the original assessor held things up for months. She was a locum and made it very difficult to get hold of her. Wonder why 🤔

Keep on it though and don't let them fob you off!

But they are still dependent children

Yes, but their needs are totally different and what is right for one won't be right for another.

What I am trying to get at too is that putting a baby up for adoption is an extreme and cruel act. The only way that act can be justified is if staying with her birth parents is so risky and there is no hope that situation will change.

That does NOT marry with keeping an older child with the birth parents.

Worn there is a separate complaints dept. But don't hold out much hope!

Neglect is neglect. Mother has not unneglected her 10 year old, just by giving birth!

Unless the mother has taken steps to improve her caring ability, 10 year should not continue to be neglected!

If mother is taking steps to improve her situation, enough for 10 year old to be cared for, but not quite enough yet for newborn. New born should not be put up for adoption!

SS should be a supporting role!

Babies should only be removed from the care of their parents in extreme circumstances - circumstances you wouldn’t leave a ten year old in either.

Mum goes on weekend long bender. Ten year old watches tv all weekend, eats cereal, maybe goes to neighbour or friend. What does a newborn do?

You really think it’s okay to leave a ten year old with a woman who would do that?

It can't be a nice feeling for a 10 year old to be left in a home that wasn't good enough for their baby sibling.