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?

We had to use Social Services when my grandfather was diagnosed with dementia. Luckily we don't have their intervention now but the first woman we were placed 'with'... ugh.

She repeatedly lied to us, refused that we'd told/sent her things, misinformed us repeatedly, left us with an almost £1000 bill for respite she'd told us was free, told that if his house wasn't 'emptied' that he'd not be released back to family and lots of other horrific things.

I don't have children but I'd dread to think what being involved with he child side of our social services is - particularly given one was recently fired for posting on her open PUBLIC feed about cases - insulting the parents, children, her colleagues and her bosses!

I haven't read the full thread, but I've never understood the conspiracy theories about SS taking children from loving parents and selling them to rich infertile couples. I know that the Catholic church used to do that, but that was before IVF was widely available. Nowadays, surely rich couples would go for IVF or surrogacy before adoption? And if the conspiracy were ever uncovered, it would be an absolutely massive scandal. SS would be taking a huge risk by engaging in that sort of thing.

Thank youTessliketrees

I sometimes feel like Mumsnet only believe you if it has happened to other posters. It does sometimes seem like if someone has no experience of something then it didn't happen.

I don't think the investigation is to do with friend as this happened a few years ago.

Friends experience was obviously not an isolated incident which does seem quite worrying

I sometimes feel like Mumsnet only believe you if it has happened to other posters. It does sometimes seem like if someone has no experience of something then it didn't happen

I think its more that you say things that are outlandishly unbelievable?

I think it is advisable to record all conversations with authority figures. In my humble opinion what is later written down bears no resemblance to what was actually said at the time. Social/Welfare workers are no exception

I will never trust them after what happened to my friend. She was investigated as a result of abusive ex reporting manipulative lies.
I could not belive what I heard. As they were sharing care 50 50, she was advised that her DS should now stay overnight with dad only. This went on for weeks without a court order! Of course, she could have disagreed, but she was petrified and complied. The whole system is completely rotten. I also rember a colleague who tried to adopt-the gentlest, most caring couple were driven to despair by the inefficiency of SS. It was a truly traumatic process and after a successful adoption she said had she known how they’d dissect every bit of their lives, including their sex life! she would never have gone through it.

the conspiracy theories about SS taking children from loving parents and selling them to rich infertile couples

I have never heard this conspiracy theory! I have heard that SS are given adoption targets and incentives to meet these targets. The targets were given to try and increase the adoption rate.

The opposing view is that these targets and incentives could interfere with decision making ie which children are ‘more likely to be adopted’ when removing children to meet targets and gain incentives.

I’m not sure if it was ever proven that bonuses and/or promotion etc for meeting targets were given

Can someone explain why the argument is said social services have targets for adoption?
Why would there be money in having kids adopted ?
Surely it would cost the authority a lot more?

toomanychilder

But many of the people posting have had experiences they are drawing on in their comments.

I used to have huge faith in SS having worked with them via legal channels and having personal experience via a family member who was sucidial.

Then we had the misfortune of getting stuck with the most biased unprofessional excuse for one. She was absolutely shocking. Made some disgraceful comments about domestic violence.

Her employer gave a written apology but the damage was done.

Valanice they don't "sell" children.

It comes from a Labour policy (if I am correct) where to get the older children that were in care into proper families the government gave the LA an incentive.

But what a lot of people think is instead of getting the older children out of the care system they took babies into care then claimed the incentive by getting the babies adopted so they were got out of the system.

Adoption is a very thorough process, it needs to be. A couple's solidity will be challenged so ensuring all parts of their life including their sex life are functioning makes sense. It also helps in but is not guarantee of trying to prevent sex predators adopting dc. Adoption is for the benefit of the dc not the adults.

They’ve been a lifesaver for me. My son simply refused to go to school and the school blamed me. My life was hardly worth living thanks to my consisting of trying to get my son to school, failing and missing work. I was constantly upset and going to court. SS helped get my son tested for ASD and suggested I homeschool, we’re all a lot happier for the choices they supported me in making. Not everything the SS do is good but it’s certainly not all bad.

I really love your post. I have a child with ASD who I Home educate. It saves both him and me decided to HE. Life was utter chaos till we made that decision. I'm glad that SS suggested that and helped.

nologic the government felt too many dc were in foster care long term and wanted more dc adopted in a timely fashion, that was the point of the targets.

toomanychilder they might seem outlandish but someone has actually backed up (on a different case) the same thing has happened to someone else

But what a lot of people think is instead of getting the older children out of the care system they took babies into care then claimed the incentive by getting the babies adopted so they were got out of the system

they may think it, but it isn't true.

Ella have you read the thread? Where there are examples of social workers lying, making assumptions, manipulating "evidence " to fit with their pre assumptions.

Trying to work with Ss can be detrimental too. In the instance where I spoke about my own experience of a sw trying to force me to do a parenting course, telling me I had to do it and it was only available on a Wednesday morning.

I had just started a new job, it took months to find a new job and was important because I had previously been working with ex dh who I had just got away from. If I had "worked with them" I would have had to go to my new employer, explain the situation and asked for every Wednesday off for a term. This would have put my job in jeopardy as well as left me short at the end of the month. The social worker "helpfully " suggested she talked to my employer for me. 😐

So following their advice because "it was on the CIN plan" could have effectively cost me my new job which could then have had a domino effect because that would have put me in a position of not being able to pay my new mortgage at the time.

Instead I used my common sense, told Ss I wouldn't be taking time off to complete a course because paying the mortgage was what was going to help my family (and it transpired that the course wasn't compulsory like they had made me believe.) I wouldn't let them lie and bully me and they didn't like it.

A few years on and my kids are thriving and I'm doing great in my job no thanks to Ss. They could have really fucked it all up for me and I'm glad I didn't let them!

Yup. Incredibly. My OH is a SW who has watched me go through hell with them - and still am doing. He has been known to say he is ashamed to be part of the same profession.

The rationalisation of SS is a middle class concept. If you lived in a hugh rise in poverty your perceptions would be different

I had a social worker she was not a good one coloured my view a lot I would have accepted support instead they supported my ex who was accused of child abuse

The rationalisation of SS is a middle class concept. If you lived in a hugh rise in poverty your perceptions would be different

nonsense.

I had a social worker who supported my ex too, even though he didn't see the children or pay for them. His words were more valuable than mine.

I think it is advisable to record all conversations with authority figures. In my humble opinion what is later written down bears no resemblance to what was actually said at the time. Social/Welfare workers are no exception

100% yes to this!!! With hindsight I would have done this! Could have saved so much stress and time!

The rationalisation of SS is a middle class concept. If you lived in a hugh rise in poverty your perceptions would be different

Couldn't agree more. The common idea (as in the MN idea) of "good" parenting is going to be imbued with all sorts of class bias. SW should be trained to be aware of their own biases and ignore certain things, but if you are sitting on the receiving end of the judgement, are you going to have any confidence in that?

The sw preferred my ex too. He lived in a nice 3 bed house in a nice area and fed her a bunch of lies and agreed with everything she said. I was the evil woman who left the family home to stay at my mums (whilst I bought a house) who didn't agree with everything they said.

When the case was closed he wanted Ss to "keep an eye on me" but luckily Ss said they aren't here to keep an eye on ex's (about the only thing they go right!) To my ex Ss was just another way to control me and he manipulated them well.