People who have never experienced being in family court

[SavanahXx]

It really does my head in when people side with social services. They have an opinion that "they are just doing what's best for the child". These people that have the opinion mostly have never even had involvement with SS, therefore don't see the lies and manipulation of a situation that they use.

It's easy for them to say that a parent 'could pose a risk' but do you know how hard it is to prove you wouldn't?

I seen an utterly revolting article that really baffled me. Social workers manage to get away with this stuff daily. Yet its not reported as it should be. This child was removed, with a judges permission. Then placed back with the mother by another judge.
There is so much corruption in our society and it needs to change.

www.google.com/amp/s/www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/06/13/social-worker-criticised-child-taken-away-mother-refused-give/amp/

Thank goodness we have people who want to work in Safeguarding children. The amount of stick they get is sickening.

I don’t think there’s much point engaging with this thread as OP isn’t going to listen to any other views than her own.

I don't see how one social worker can get a child taken away. When a friend was adopting, she had a social worker, the child had a different, court appointed social worker, the parents had yet another social worker. The court appointed yet another independent person to assess their capabilities as parents over a number of months. And this is after they had had several children taken away for (serious) neglect.

I also came across someone in a professional capacity who had her children take away. She'd had tons of chances but could not see where she was going wrong and would have sworn blind the social workers were out to get her.

I agree that in some cases it is not made easier to investigate aggressive, manipulative or violent parents or step parents. Maybe SWs need more protection to visit such homes. Some may think it's easier to visit middle class parents who cause fhem less hassle or direct threat.

But on the whole I think they are doing an incredibly difficult job. The media doesn't help by focusing on cases where things have gone wrong on the SWs part. How often do we hear success stories from SW's intervention. I personally know two v happy children, who would otherwise have had v different lives.

It’s a no win topic
The only real solution is to incentivise
People to not breed or remove at birth

As the foster and care system can be so rife with issues I genuinely question whether it’s actually better

Of course some SS
Make errors but in the main they don’t go into the work to ruin lives

Horrible post really

They can’t Carthage but once a narrative has been created it can be quite difficult to go against it.

Op I have no doubt that some sw's are incompetent. I am not niave about this at all.
My ds was removed from birth mom at 4months for 'could place this child at risk of emotional harm'. To get to this point he'd been under a care plan since before he was born. When you read the list of things that had to happen to get to this point, in my opinion, he had already suffered emotional harm.
Bm drank throughout the pregnancy despite medical and sw advice (we now know ds has fas)
Bm got in fights when she was pregnant
Bm followed bf to other end of country despite multiple fights between the two which police had to be involved in.
Once born Bm held ds whilst throwing a kettle of boiling water over someone. (in a mother and baby unit)
Ds was in a room that Bm wrecked and destroyed
Bm often left ds at mother and baby unit and carers had to step in.
After ds was removed (she was given 3 chances in mother and baby unit but more things happened)
Bm turned up with drugs for a contact meeting
Left ds in a bath at contact meeting
Said she was too ill to come to contact meetings over Christmas when actually (due to la housing records) she was having parties with loads of people in her flat which police had to be called to.

I'm my opinion my ds has already had to suffer emotional harm to get to this point.

I'm sorry you've had a bad time with s. Workers but just like I can't say they're all amazing you can't have a blanket view that they're all awful.

YANBU.

I know of someone who's newborn got removed temporarily because the baby had a tiny bruise on its cheek, a doctor later observed the baby pinching his own cheek.

Every neglectful and abusive parent thinks SS should butt out and let them get on with it. This is not evidence of institutional incompetence or anti-parent bias in SS.

It is NOT easy to have a child removed, even a newborn. If it's got to that stage or even close, it's vastly more likely that the child was at risk than there was some sinister conspiracy to take the child from its parents.

There are two sides to every story. Often only one side is free from confidentiality restrictions and able to give their biased version.

As a foster carer I have seen the most dreadful actions by social workers. Notably one who thought he was called by God and therefore needed no evidence other than his opinion followed by extensive lying to cover his tracks. 6 lives ruined and it has been impossible to call him to account - we have been to solicitors the lot and are making very little progress in getting anyone to look at this man and his actions . I have met only two social workers who knew what they were doing, investigated properly, moved rapidly where there was clear evidence , took the time to talk to the schools and foster carers who know the child. And I have fostered over 80 children.

You are wrong, An, and fact distortion works both ways.

I’m not a social worker but have been part of child protection conferences in a professional capacity. I have regularly seen children upgraded to a higher level than necessary just so scarce resources can be allocated to the family. It shouldn’t be that way as it reflects badly on the parents when it’s actually a funding issue.

I have seen one person on the panel (not always the social worker) bully the parents and be very scathing in their “evidence” and this then influences every one else on the panel. At the end of the meeting they go round the table asking if everyone agrees with the final decision and there’s a lot of pressure not to be that one person that says no I don’t agree.

I also know that there is a push to remove babies sooner rather than later because of the way babies develop. Too many changes and difficulties in the first 12 months can cause lifelong issues so there’s less of a “wait and see” approach where babies are concerned. This will inevitably mean some babies are removed that really didn’t need to be. This is MN where some mums don’t even like relatives holding their baby for too long! Now imagine having that baby ripped away from you and put up for adoption before they’re 6 months old.

I do think a lot of SW do the best job they can in very difficult circumstances. Many of the issues raised around child services could be made a lot better with more funding. High caseloads are a huge issue. SW are human beings, not robots, so they can only get so much done in any single day. They need smaller caseloads and time to discuss tricky cases with other colleagues, or with their manager in supervision. But I don’t see that happening any time soon.

As an experienced social worker you are being unreasonable. You will not have the extensive experience that I have and I can assure you the bar for removal is high. Ultimately judges make the decision not social workers and they need to see that everything has been done to provide support to families. The best place for a child is with his or her birth family IF SAFE. It can be hard for parents to objectively see the concerns which is a concern in itself as there is limited chance of change

A DF had her DC removed, DF is fighting it now and rightly so. SW never helped DF when asked for it. Just proceeded to court to have removal.. (being through everything DF tried to protect the child - SS were the ones neglecting and removed to cover up the truth)

No. I won't listen to people who claim it is not easy to have a child removed. Especially a child under the age of 6 because they can be adopted. They don't really bother over the age of 6 because the child cannot be adopted. But a child under the age of 6 can be adopted. You have next to no chance of getting a baby back once removed. And it's easy for them to be removed. Yet a child over the age of 6 that has been placed in foster care can at some point be returned to their parents? How is that fair? Court proceedings last 6 months and if you cannot prove you would not pose a risk, physically or potentially emotionally and your child is over 6, you can kiss goodbye to your child. No child should be put through forced adoption. Nor should the mother, father and extended family. It doesn't only affect the parents. It affects the whole family.

There is quite a lot of truth in what OP is saying.

There is truth in what others are saying too.

But she is not wrong.

And as I've previously said. Some judges can see through social workers lies. But some believe the lies social workers tell. Theirs noway to prove a lie is definitely a lie. And no one expects a social worker to lie.

The only experience of SS I've ever witnessed was watching my sister being put through hell because her marriage ended, very run of the mill it just came to an end after 20 odd years, her 12 year old DD developed anorexia soon afterwards and my sister being a nurse sought help for her. CAMHS referred it to SS and she endured about 4 years of SS telling her and DD that if DD didn't gain weight, stick to the diet plans etc then she would be removed from home and put in foster care!!! To this day I have absolutely no idea what the hell they were thinking or how the hell they thought threatening to place her in foster care would encourage her to eat!! Everyone knows anorexia is a mental illness. Thankfully already being 12 when they got involved meant that within 4 years she was 16 so they lost interest in her.

So no, I don't believe SS always get it right.

It's really simple, SS don't swoop in for no reason. If people don't look after their kids properly they get removed from their care. No matter what the parent classes as "looking after them properly." Some parents think giving their kids drugs is perfectly fine so it's not a blurry line, it's very simple. Don't hurt a child emotionally/physically/mentally/spiritually and people won't have their kids taken off them.

They do not have to prove you have neglected/hurt your child. All they have to prove is you COULD. Anyone COULD do ANYTHING.

Plus, I know people closely who have been unclimbed with SS and they were actually extremely helpful with a troubled teen of the family. I get what you're saying but we can't tar them all with the same brush.

Again i haven't said all are like this though? Jesus, people get so defensive when someone doesn't have the same opinion as them.

I know of 2 cases where SS have blatantly lied. Also a foster carer has hit children and they won't accept it even though there are photos to show the bruising and even stitches in one case.

I also follow someone's blog who has had dealings with SS for a number of years and the lies and manipulation by SS is shocking

"They do not have to prove you have neglected/hurt your child. All they have to prove is you COULD. Anyone COULD do ANYTHING"

That's very true. But 99 percent of time if they have more of an inkling than the average joe they will intervene. Their has to be a pattern or potential risk. As if said they don't swoop in for nothing

It is really awful though that there has been proven cases of SS lying. Look at baby P

You’re seriously suggesting that your friend’s child was removed because they’d been neglected by social services, not your friend, mummytomunchkins?
Amazing! That’s a rather extreme example of people simply not understanding their culpability in what happens to their own children and wildly blaming all around them for their own shortcomings.