Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think this social worker should have been struck off?

134 replies

SilencednotSilent · 03/04/2021 21:28

www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/teesside-news/child-social-worker-banned-year-20302285.amp?utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sharebar&__twitter_impression=true

He was given a one year suspension, instead of being removed from the register, for engaging in sexual activity with a schoolgirl he let drink vodka. He had been watching pornography and masturbating in a communal area before the act.

Their logic? “The panel is satisfied that a well-informed and reasonable member of the public...would not require an otherwise capable, committed and experienced social worker to be removed from the register in these circumstances."

The decision by Social Work England: www.socialworkengland.org.uk/media/3704/decision-kershaw-s.pdf

AIBU?

OP posts:
MondieBee · 03/04/2021 22:31

While there's all sorts wrong with this, he wasn't at work when this happened, he was in his own living room. The child wasn't anything to do with his work, it doesn't have to be for misconduct decisions in social work. I'm not sure why people are assuming that. The decision doesn't say who the child was or in what way he knew her. If she was related either to him or to his work I think would have been looked at differently. There's no way of knowing if she was "working class" or vulnerable in some way given it wasn't related his work. Misrepresenting what happens only makes it harder to discuss, though I imagine this being the internet calling out wrong info will be seen as thinking what happened was fine. It would be totally different if it happened while working.

However I do actually think it's a difficult one. Masturbating in a communal area of the (private) house with porn on is such a dumb, dumb thing to do. But he didn't instigate, encourage or let anything continue. Lots of creepy fuckers would. It's not comparable to having and maintaining a sexual relationship with a teenager. There's not continued dishonesty, grooming or intimidation. And a big part of the misconduct process is whether the worker shows insight and change around the misconduct which he has. I think there is probably a lot more information than is published as like a pp said they've really erred on the punitive side recently. I say that as someone who regularly reads the decisions. There's quite a lot redacted in this one.

When I was 15 I drank a beer and tried wine away on a naice French gite holiday with my boyfriends family. No one would paint that as me being given fed alcohol, it would be seen for what it was, trying it. I think lots of 15 year old have tried sips of alcoholic drinks. It's not the same as giving her a whole drink.

hatgirl · 03/04/2021 22:33

@eatsleepread

What a vile pig. Let's hope no one will actually want to employ him when the 12 months is up. He'll be seen as a liability, surely? Confused
Doesn't look like he's worked for social services since about 2016. He's now a builder.

The Social Work regulatory body is usually very punitive. You can get struck off for stuff that people wouldn't even blink at in other professions.

This is an extremely surprising and unusual decision for SWE to make which leads me to believe that there was more information known to them than has been included in the full judgement.

Personally I don't really understand why he's been struck off only for 12 months or why he chooses to try and continue to maintain his registration several years after the allegation and when he no longer works in the field. Again, reading between the lines there's a lot more going on with this one. Odd.

TheCrowening · 03/04/2021 22:39

I’m a children’s social worker and from the information in the public domain I absolutely think this man should have been struck off.

Original poster
SilencednotSilent · 03/04/2021 22:39

I know this decision was appealed, but I don’t know by whom.

“The HCPC says there is a number of processes in place to monitor and assure their work, including the Professional Standards Authority (PSA), which produces an annual audit of judgements and shares learning points with the regulators.

However, a PSA spokeswoman told Community Care they would only intervene in judgements that were seen as unduly lenient, and not those that were unduly harsh.”

Interested in writing to the PSA, although not sure if it’s too late to appeal this.

OP posts:
Original poster
SilencednotSilent · 03/04/2021 22:44

I think it unfairly undermines the public’s trust in other social workers. And I agree, I have read social workers being struck off for things much more minor. Social Work England (SWE) has recently replaced the HCPC, who was seen as being too harsh. It’s possible SWE is now too lenient??? I’m very interested in the young girl’s version of events.

OP posts:
Original poster
SilencednotSilent · 03/04/2021 22:53

*Correction: I think the appeal was made after he was fired, not after the decision.

OP posts:
Stoppissingonmyheather · 03/04/2021 22:57

I'm confused if he was in his own house and not at work how did a child walk in on him and it get reported? Who reported it? Was it his own child or their friend if they reported it they were uncomfortable enough to think it was something more. If he was a Foster parent or something yes he should be struck off.

Original poster
SilencednotSilent · 03/04/2021 23:11

My understanding is that it was the communal area of the house he shared with the child. The child reported it a year later. The CPS brought charges of rape against him, but a jury found him not guilty.

If the CPS believed there was enough evidence to bring charges of rape against him, how has he not been struck off?

OP posts:
Summerdayshaze · 03/04/2021 23:13

The fucking animal.

Mintyflesh · 03/04/2021 23:19

Words fail me right now but is this the same guy?

www.thefreelibrary.com/COURT+IN+BRIEF.-a0426419604

TwoBreakingIntoOne · 03/04/2021 23:19

I despair of the people who should be protecting children in this country
Same for the NSPCC who were shameful in their response to their worker wanking in a rubber suit at work
We are going back to the dark ages. Women and girls exist for the benefit of men

Stoppissingonmyheather · 03/04/2021 23:36

So he has charges of rape but they were dropped and he was found guilty of something bad enough to warrant suspension. That is disgusting as a social worker even if he was "just masturbating" in his own home if he shares a communal area with a child why was he not in his own private bedroom he should have known better you can't have charges of rape brought without that actually being reported as a crime can you? So in that case he should 100% be struck off and so should the board who thought it was OK to let him carry on after a year.

Nith · 03/04/2021 23:41

@cheeseisthebest

If she's underage and he admits having sex with her how can it not be rape?? Its statutory rape. Absolutely should be struck off and in prison
Having sex with a girl of 15 who is consenting isn't statutory rape.
AccidentallyOnPurpose · 03/04/2021 23:42

The "attenuating " circumstances.

“A couple of seconds had gone by and like I said then that’s when the reality of everything just kicked in for me and I started not feeling very well... [She] had pushed me pushed back here, pushed in to the bottom of the sofa and [she] just obviously initiated oral sex and then for that split couple of seconds I was obviously still what’s going on and then the reality, like I’ve said the reality and I was pulling myself in like that and then tried to get off”.

By a 15 yo girl. Poor bloke Hmm

Nith · 03/04/2021 23:42

@wingsnthat

It’s weird that they didn’t mention her age once…almost like they’re trying to hide that she’s underage by not drawing attention to this

I can’t believe this is happening in 2021

The report of the disciplinary hearing says she was 15.
Original poster
SilencednotSilent · 03/04/2021 23:43

That is the same person! Mad. So you have a social worker with previous drink driving offenses giving alcohol to a child and then proceeding to engage in a sexual act with the child?? And his version of events is more credible? I’m absolutely baffled

OP posts:
RuggeryBuggery · 03/04/2021 23:47

I don’t understand - was he working in a residential setting? Surely even without the appalling element of engaging in sexual activity with her, the very fact of watching porn and wanking whilst presumably at work, when a child could walk in, is enough to be barred from working with vulnerable children and adults?

Nith · 03/04/2021 23:50

So he has charges of rape but they were dropped

No, they weren't dropped. He went to trial and was found not guilty.

you can't have charges of rape brought without that actually being reported as a crime can you?

No, it can't be a crime unless and until the person concerned has been convicted.

Nith · 03/04/2021 23:53

@RuggeryBuggery

I don’t understand - was he working in a residential setting? Surely even without the appalling element of engaging in sexual activity with her, the very fact of watching porn and wanking whilst presumably at work, when a child could walk in, is enough to be barred from working with vulnerable children and adults?
He was in his own home and wasn't working.
ismiseeire · 03/04/2021 23:55

That's ridiculous?

ismiseeire · 03/04/2021 23:56

He was in his own home and wasn't working.

So how did the 15 year old end up involved?

ismiseeire · 04/04/2021 00:03

*He explained that he was in his living room with the door slightly ajar and Child 1 and another child were upstairs (PRIVATE). Mr Kershaw believed them to be asleep. He undressed and started to masturbate to pornography on the television. He did not hear Child 1 come downstairs, (PRIVATE) He detailed that Child 1 entered the room, said “fuck this”, approached him, pushed his arms to the side, bent down between his legs, which were already open, and took his erect penis in her mouth. He explained that he was caught “off guard”. He had not covered himself in the “split seconds” from being aware of her presence and her taking his penis in her mouth. His penis remained in her mouth for “a few seconds, split seconds” before he was able to pull away and his penis fell out of her mouth. He then put on his trousers. He stated that the whole incident lasted “a few seconds”. He accepted that “I could have reacted a lot quicker in that moment and I accept that”. It was put to him in cross-examination that for those few seconds he did engage in sexual activity with Child 1 and he replied, “I accept that it was a failure and agree with what you are saying”. When asked why he did not react quicker he replied that he was “in a moment”.

AccidentallyOnPurpose · 04/04/2021 00:04

@ismiseeire

He was in his own home and wasn't working.

So how did the 15 year old end up involved?

She was sleeping upstairs with another child(possibly his , if neither were service users).

I can't believe a jury bought the whole "she forced me" bullshit as well.

Nith · 04/04/2021 00:04

@ismiseeire

He was in his own home and wasn't working.

So how did the 15 year old end up involved?

Read the report? It's linked in OP's first post.
ismiseeire · 04/04/2021 00:05

How the actual fuck did a vulnerable teen end up living with him in the first fucking place?
God but men never fail to disgust me.

Swipe left for the next trending thread