I'm not sure im ok with this. Social worker/Facebook

[notacooldad]

I was talking to some social workers before our zoom training meeting started.
We were talking about caseloads and one says that she always has a quick look to see if the child has Facebook. She'll look through to see who their friends are and says a lot of kids don't lock their profile down so she can get an insight to the child.
Some thought it was an invasion of privacy, someone else said it was in a public space. I just think I feel like banging my head against a wall because young people aren't listening when I'm doing internet safety sessions and keeping safe!!
What do people think? Should the SW snope? I can see both sides tbh but wouldn't want to do it.

@Frenchdressing

It is not commonplace. Only if required and authorised with legitimate and defensible reasons.

I look at it this way. The street outside your front door is open to the public – just like your social media account on no privacy settings. Anyone can stand in that street. If they stand there, they can see your front door, and if you don’t close your curtains, can see into your house. But if it is a member of the state does that then they either need your permission or an authorisation to conduct surveillance without your permission.

It’s the same here – just because you’ve left your curtains open doesn’t mean that the social worker can stand outside your house in a public road and look through your window whenever they want.

Like most things they really can but it depends how much and the intent. If a social worker has concerns and passes your house to check if it looks like anyone still lives there for example, and sees you punching your child they'd be perfectly safe to take action about that. If they park by your house for an hour every day to check if you're abusing your child that would be completely unacceptable. It's about amounts, like most things.

Same with social media, one check every now and again of a public profile is not likely to cause any issues and may prevent issues but that's not the same as checking a clients FB every break time.

I’m not disagreeing with that. Context is everything. I just think people on this thread think because something is in the public domain means it’s fine to use that information when in reality it’s a lot more complex and hovered by a range of legal and professional frameworks.

Guided not hovered!

I think people will use it, and never say they use it.

I expect so. If you’re found out you’d be in the shit potentially though.

Of course. We do it and are nothing to do with social work. If you don't want it out there, don't put it out there

@Frenchdressing

I expect so. If you’re found out you’d be in the shit potentially though.

How could you be found out? I mean, forensically your search would leave a trace, certainly, if it was within anybody's remit to find it; but who would actually authorise an investigation into whether you had searched at all? So weird...

A disgruntled service user. A parent who is fighting to keep their child and using top
Class lawyers maybe. Who are requesting how certain information has come to light without consent?

Loads of possibilities.

Yes, I suppose...

LA policy here is not to access SM without authorisation and then only if there is a safeguarding reason for example. If someone is just bring nosey then they shouldn’t look because they can’t use that Info in a professional capacity. Which then would trigger someone to ask why they were looking in the first place.

Yes the chances of being found out are slim but it’s about professional boundaries. LA have quite strict information governance procedures in place. Breaching then can be dismissible.

Safeguarding issues aside, reports can only provide so much information, plus they are flat and soulless.

There are many reasons FB is used, DWP Police, and nobody advertises this, but they use it.

Nobody can prove their FB page was looked at. You don't even need to have a FB account to look at peoples pages.

So despite the tightest and best of intentions of professional standards, its not worth the paper it's written on. It's meaningless with regards an open social media platform.

I'd actually relish a challenge in Court.

I can tell you that as a registered SW I do not routinely access service users SM 🤷‍♀️ I respect their right to a private life unless there is a safeguarding reason and someone is at risk.

Most of my colleagues would say the same.

Reports are fake and soulless? How? Based on interviews and relationships? Far from it. And you’re missing the point here...,a SW assessment cannot use information gleaned from SM without consent or a safeguarding reason. So it’s pointless. You can’t use it.

Doesn’t matter if you can’t prove who has viewed FB. If a SW uses information that has been gained from a SM site without consent then that subject would know anyway.

You think it’s fine that SW professionals snoop on SM? When it is legally warranted then absolutely but when there is no legal mandate then it is surveillance.

SW assessment cannot use information gleaned from SM without consent or a safeguarding reason. So it’s pointless. You can’t use it.
It would only need to be "used" for safeguarding purposes in the first place.
You couldn't disregard information that showed a vulnerable person was putting themselves at risk because it came from a source you weren't allowed to use, surely to God?
If so, it's a nonsense.

If you are doing this in any work related capacity you must seek urgent legal advice please.

Others have mentioned RIPA already so I won't bang on about it but I have my head in my hands reading this thread and realising how poorly trained people are

And we did have an issue at my work where someone was "just quickly looking" At someone's page but accidentally liked something and it caused a major shit storm

@Frenchdressing

You can only speak for your own personal professional standards and of those you confer with.

You cannot speak, honestly, to the wider SW community, and other agencies. This is not a criticism, it's a fact.

As the OP states, her zoom colleague and others do in fact enjoy the source at hand.

I find many of the Reports, and I see many, are soulless and a lot are copy/pasted from previous reports too, but that's an issue for another day. I know SW is under resourced.

@KeyboardWorriers

If you are doing this in any work related capacity you must seek urgent legal advice please.

Others have mentioned RIPA already so I won't bang on about it but I have my head in my hands reading this thread and realising how poorly trained people are

apart from the unfortunate 'like' incident, why would anyone admit to using such a platform?

If you know you would be reprimanded or worse dismissed, nobody is going to admit to using it right?

The colleague that 'liked' a page only has herself to blame.

Admittedly I don't have FB due to my job, so Im not sure how it works.

Reports are fake and soulless?

just to clarify, I said FLAT AND SOULLESS, not Fake.

@BlueDahlia69 it is quite easy to accidentally "like" something as you scroll.

And those of us regulated by professional bodies aren't really supposed to breach the rules and just hope no one finds out

[quote KeyboardWorriers]@BlueDahlia69 it is quite easy to accidentally "like" something as you scroll.

And those of us regulated by professional bodies aren't really supposed to breach the rules and just hope no one finds out[/quote]

and this is the crux, who's going to know. It can't be Policed, it's that self regulatory policy, sounds great but entirely ineffective.

thank you for explaining the FB like.

[quote BlueDahlia69]@Frenchdressing

You can only speak for your own personal professional standards and of those you confer with.

You cannot speak, honestly, to the wider SW community, and other agencies. This is not a criticism, it's a fact.

As the OP states, her zoom colleague and others do in fact enjoy the source at hand.

I find many of the Reports, and I see many, are soulless and a lot are copy/pasted from previous reports too, but that's an issue for another day. I know SW is under resourced. [/quote]
Well she can indeed speak to the wider SW community as the professional standards apply to all social workers. As does RIPA.

Well she can indeed speak to the wider SW community as the professional standards apply to all social workers. As does RIPA.

she cannot because the OP states that colleagues are already doing this.