False accusation of sexual abuse

[PusheenLove]

I posted this thread in SN children forum but no response.

Terrible accusations of sexual abuse have been made by the local authority SEND officer regarding my Autistic daughter who has repeat UTIs due to sensory issues.

The SEND officer read our application for an EHCP, noticed the UTIs and phoned the school. The school said the case was referred to social services in 2018 and, after investigation, was closed with no concerns and no further action taken. The SEND officer STILL decided to make a referral to social services on Friday! I phoned the school and they said all there concerns were historical and they have no current concerns. They were sympathetic. Then I phoned the SEND officer to ask why she had re-referred an old case, was there any new evidence? The phone was continuously engaged or rung with no answer. Eventually, the receptionist answered and said SEND officer would phone me back. She never did.

The social worker then phoned me, and after a brief chat, said she was as baffled as I was. She closed the case. This has caused immense trauma to me and my family. I am worried this will keep happening every time someone reads a new form! I must point out that I'm diagnosed Autistic myself.

What action can I take that won't jeopardise my daughter's ECHP application? The SEND officer that made the accusations is residing on the ECHP panel!

AIBU to phone back SEND officer on Monday and ask what additional evidence there was? If there was none then AIBU to issue a complaint? This scenario has re-opened old traumas and damaged what was renewed mental health on my part. I'm weepy, shaky and am having nightmares. I am contacting GP on Monday. The relationship between my family and SEND services has completely deteriorated as a result of this.

Anyone?

This traumatic experience could happen to any SEN parent and indeed any parent:

www.theguardian.com/society/2016/apr/15/rise-in-referrals-social-services-trauma-families-child-protection

Sounds like send officer was doing their job. Flagged uti, referred to ss. Ss contacted you and now case closed. I think your being overly dramatic, it's part of process for echp if there has been any ss involvement in the past.

The SEND officer is doing the safeguarding part of their job by reporting a concern of repeated UTIs. It's a standard red flag for sexual abuse and the SEND officer would not have routine access to social care records re the original referral and outcome.
Childrens Social Care is doing its job by following this up. The outcome was no further action and case closed so they've clearly done what they are obliged to do and found no evidence of abuse.

Hard as it is to live through, you do at least know that your local procedures are robust and the SEND officer is diligent and thorough.

Thanks to everyone that has voted. I wonder if anyone has been in a similar situation? Or simply has any reassuring words?

I think there are two issues at play here: procedural flaw and flaw of professional judgement.

Procedural: A waste of resources to re-refer a previously closed case with no new evidence. This implies the SEND officer does not trust the original investigation?

Professional judgement: It is not unreasonable to assume a SEND officer would have knowledge of Autism? UTIs are common in children with ASD. A jump to sexual abuse is nonsensical and quite frankly offensive:

www.researchgate.net/publication/331212344_Urinary_Recurrent_Infection_in_Children_with_Autism_Spectrum_Disorder

www.nursingtimes.net/roles/learning-disability-nurses/toileting-problems-in-children-with-autism-17-10-2014/

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28265323/

The SEND officer was unreasonable to refer you to SS without asking for your consent. This is considered really bad practice for a professional unless referring puts the child at direct risk ( eg the child has made a disclosure of violence and is going home with a parent that day).
There was NO reason for the SEND officer to make a referral, particularly if it’s been documented by the school this case was investigated and closed. Repeated UTIs have multiple reasons and SEND officer should have asked professionals for the context and outcome first but most of all, spoken to you.
I work in this field btw. I would make a complaint.

@HarrietSchulenberg

The SEND officer is doing the safeguarding part of their job by reporting a concern of repeated UTIs. It's a standard red flag for sexual abuse and the SEND officer would not have routine access to social care records re the original referral and outcome. Childrens Social Care is doing its job by following this up. The outcome was no further action and case closed so they've clearly done what they are obliged to do and found no evidence of abuse.

Hard as it is to live through, you do at least know that your local procedures are robust and the SEND officer is diligent and thorough.

Thanks for your comment. "It's a standard red flag for sexual abuse and the SEND officer would not have routine access to social care records re the original referral and outcome" - SEND officer contacted the school who gave her info on the original referral. Why re-traumatise a family? Especially considering the link between Autism and repeat UTIs.

@Grapewrath I don't work in soc servs but in a criminal justice agency. I refer without parents consent all the time. Sometimes decisions aren't recorded so I need to rerefer in, Sometimes, I need to check if the situation has changed/ remained the same. I can't see where the accusation of sexual abuse was said (unless I've missed it). I have kids with ehcp's too

@Grapewrath

The SEND officer was unreasonable to refer you to SS without asking for your consent. This is considered really bad practice for a professional unless referring puts the child at direct risk ( eg the child has made a disclosure of violence and is going home with a parent that day). There was NO reason for the SEND officer to make a referral, particularly if it’s been documented by the school this case was investigated and closed. Repeated UTIs have multiple reasons and SEND officer should have asked professionals for the context and outcome first but most of all, spoken to you. I work in this field btw. I would make a complaint.

She did ask for consent. I declined to give it as I believed the potential of interviewing my child when she has just started puberty would be traumatic for her. Especially as the case was closed years ago.

The school said to the SEND officer that they have no current concerns. But the SEND officer made the referral anyway, despite me saying how this would cause trauma to the whole family.

To my knowledge, the SEND officer is one of the persons who will decide if my daughter gets the EHCP she so desperately needs. I don't trust the officer to be unbiased now. I'm frankly terrified.

[quote wizzywig]@Grapewrath I don't work in soc servs but in a criminal justice agency. I refer without parents consent all the time. Sometimes decisions aren't recorded so I need to rerefer in, Sometimes, I need to check if the situation has changed/ remained the same. I can't see where the accusation of sexual abuse was said (unless I've missed it). I have kids with ehcp's too[/quote]
The accusation was made from the SEND officer to me, completely out of the blue. I received my first ever phonecall from her and she came out with that.

bumping thread

The vote seems split 60/40 in favour of issuing a complaint.

I'd be interested to hear the views of the 40%. Do you think it was reasonable for the SEND officer to undermine social services by re-opening a previously closed case? How does this build positive rapport with other professionals and the family? The job description for the role of SEND officer under my local authority reads "Excellent verbal and written communication skills will be essential, as will the ability to build and maintain strong and positive working relationships with families, schools and a range of other professionals."

I’d prefer 9 families had a short investigation/referral that SS dealt with and closed, and the 10th family was caught, than in future the SEND officer doesn’t raise a concern despite Red flags and a child is being sexually abused!

Surely you can see this too? Declining consent would only add fuel to the fire, as that’s what an abuser would do too. If there’s nothing to hide, why decline? Do you really want this officer to be more wary about raising concerns in future?

They’re doing their job.

I’m sorry you feel traumatised but as PP said it’s better they inconvenience families than miss assault.

I’d prefer 9 families had a short investigation/referral that SS dealt with and closed, and the 10th family was caught, than in future the SEND officer doesn’t raise a concern despite Red flags and a child is being sexually abused!

^ This with bells on.

As a school counselor, a family that declined consent raised a red flag immediately. Abusers do not want the children interviewed. We asked the parent to decline consent in writing and included it in the child's permanent file so any other school the child attended would know that a concern had been raised.

There were no further red flags though, it seems? No further UTI issues since the last case was closed?

@GeorgiaGirl52 whilst that may be true, families may decline consent for a variety of reasons. I am a social worker and would decline consent for my child to be referred to social care if there was no good reason.

Although professionals often want to cover their backs by making a referral, this can mean social care are overwhelmed with referrals and miss the children who really need their help.

State intervention in family's lives can be traumatic and prevent families from reaching out in future when they need it.

I recently contacted mental health services because I'm struggling, I disclosed I was worried about being short tempered with DD, unreasonably so.

I was told that the therapist had to pass my details to the LA, made me nervous, but OK. They contacted me and said they wanted to refer me to the family help department. They said I could refer myself or they could refer me with my consent. Or I could refuse consent, they would refer me anyway, but refusing consent would be looked on as a further concern.

I think if the SEND officer had any doubts about referring, your refusal would have made it impossible for them not to.

Especially considering the link between Autism and repeat UTIs.

There is also a significant link between sexual abuse and repeated UTI's. And just because it was found that there was no evidence of sexual abuse previously does not mean that is the case now. She was doing her job. You refused her permission to make the referral, which is also a red flag as abusers often do! And just because you may not have been aware of abuse doesn't mean it hasn't happened. That is why they must check.

@AnotherDelphinium

I’d prefer 9 families had a short investigation/referral that SS dealt with and closed, and the 10th family was caught, than in future the SEND officer doesn’t raise a concern despite Red flags and a child is being sexually abused!

Surely you can see this too? Declining consent would only add fuel to the fire, as that’s what an abuser would do too. If there’s nothing to hide, why decline? Do you really want this officer to be more wary about raising concerns in future?

I guess you haven't been one of those 9 families affected by false positives then? Do not underestimate the damage that causes to children and families. Especially for autistic children, who are usually already anxious so professional involvement can be worse than the supposed safeguarding they are providing.

There were no current red flags; the SEND worker knew the case had already been assessed by SS years ago and closed. It's like putting someone on trial for a crime again years later when they were innocent and had already been acquitted.

It is a stressful situation I'm sure she was trying to do her job she should have took the schools advice.
I understand your frustration my DC have extra needs it is frustrating professionals going through your life and history with the children writing the report that follows and refers, form after form detailing your DC.
I get it is necessary it is invasive too.

Does you child continue to have repeated ITI’s or is this a previous concern. If it’s a previous concern then the SEND officer shouldn’t have made the referral. If it’s an ongoing concern is something being done to address it? The SEND officer will have been following their safeguarding policies. As others have said, surely a referral with a concern which is not warranted is better than a child who is being abused, being missed.

@GeorgiaGirl52

As a school counselor, a family that declined consent raised a red flag immediately. Abusers do not want the children interviewed. We asked the parent to decline consent in writing and included it in the child's permanent file so any other school the child attended would know that a concern had been raised.

But I have done literally nothing wrong. Why would I want to put my daughter through intrusive questioning that may traumatise her?

I’ve been referred to social services on two occasions - once before the birth of my first child because I’d was a care leaver and had mental health problems where I had to have three home visits by a social worker (just me not DH). It was irritating but just procedural and I thought how such a visit could have changed my life as a young child. The second time was caused by a major fuck up and I complained.

You may not like it but multiple UTIs as a child are a red flag for sexual abuse - I had them all the time as a child and no one made a referral and they should have. Most young females with UTIs are suffering abuse and professionals have a duty of care towards children to refer these things. If I, as a victim of abuse and a care leaver and a historically difficult relationship with social services, can grit my teeth a be interviewed because I’m higher risk as a victim of abuse (which emotionally pisses me off) in order that children like me do not slip through the net, then you can too. I also have a child with a disability and an EHCP. He also has a disability social worker in order to access respite and twice a year we all have to be assessed which feels like an invasion of privacy but again I grit my teeth because respite is essential for my son’s well-being.

OP the SEND officer isn't qualified/allowed to make the decision that there was nothing to investigate. They weren't undermining a closed case. They weren't making a judgement that your child has been harmed. They have a duty to pass the information on to social services because of the link between repeat UTIs and sexual abuse, and because children with learning disabilities are more vulnerable and therefore at higher risk of being abuse victims.

The send officer wouldn't have details about the prior investigation. That information would only be seen by the social workers.

I understand you're upset but you're putting your own fears onto this. There's nothing in your posts to suggest that the send officer was malicious or judgemental or suspicious or thinks badly of you. I'm sure they would have been pleased with the outcome that its a known issue and not something worse.

[quote purplejungle]@GeorgiaGirl52 whilst that may be true, families may decline consent for a variety of reasons. I am a social worker and would decline consent for my child to be referred to social care if there was no good reason.

Although professionals often want to cover their backs by making a referral, this can mean social care are overwhelmed with referrals and miss the children who really need their help.

State intervention in family's lives can be traumatic and prevent families from reaching out in future when they need it. [/quote]
This, with bells on