Should parents contribute?

[shoppingismydownfall]

I'm aware this may be a contraversial topic. I work in social care and see children brought into the care system from all backgrounds, from the extremely wealthy to extremely poor. I'm not debating the rights and wrongs of social workers here.

My Aibu is, if it costs the local authority on average £3,000 per week to look after that child, should parents be financially assessed to contribute towards their care?

Ex foster carer here. I don’t think it would be unreasonable to expect birth parents to contribute to child’s expenses- things like clothes, hair cuts, Christmas presents- even if just as a token gesture.

It's an interesting question. And may have interesting impacts. When we attach a price to something it can become more prevalent - taking kids out of school during holidays just pay the fine and do it. Would Rich people just outsource problem kids or do they do it already like the boarding schools in jilly Cooper novels

The system can do pretty much fuck all about absent parents not contributing to their kids, then there's the reductions for every tiny little thing, job changes, hiding money from self employment, having their partner work while they look after any other kids... it would be a nightmare to enforce.

How would it work with separated parents?

How would it work if one child was removed and there are others still with the parent/s.

Children are usually in the care of a local authority because the state has removed them against the wishes of the parent. Even those where it has been done voluntarily, I've never come across it where it has been the outcome a parent actually wanted - it's usually a last resort, where a child is unable to cope with parenting the child (eg if a child is caught up in CCE/CSE, or where their behaviour is putting other children in the house at risk, child on parent abuse etc)

Charging parents after such an extreme state intervention seems pretty brutal tbh.

*parent is unable to cope, obv!

This is an abhorrent thread.

* Parents should be made to. You choose to have kids, if you choose then not to look after them, you should be made to pay as much as you can.*

^I agree

To be fair, we can't get absent parents to pay after a split. Not sure we could enforce this and not CMS.

If a parent is a poor parent, even though they are wealthy (so its not poverty related issues) to the point the child is removed, would they pay this? How much would pursuing it cost?

And if we pursue those payments, through the courts with fines or prison time, why not CMS dodgers?

I also think it would make people who are genuinely trying their best, but simply can not care for their children, less likely to seek help.

Women in DV situations are already terrified of having their children removed. They would then be terrified of having their children removed and then having less money to get out of the situation.

In an ideal world, yes, I think they should. But its so complicated and fraught with problems it wouldn't work.

Forgot to say in an ideal world nowhere near as many kids would need this.

And we would be reaching all those that we could.

The pandemic and panic over vulnerable children, attending due to their home lives or potentially never turning up again showed how badly those children were being failed.

in theory, yes - but I think more would be spent on assessing .administering chasing than would actually raised from the process

@Simonjt

No, the priority should be the welfare of the child, not wasting both time and money trying to get a few quid from birth parents.

Possibly yes, but in all honesty this🔝

No, I think it would lead to more abuse happening (just better hidden) and far less people would admit they can’t cope and it would be at the detriment to the children.

I must be naive - why are people who are wealthy have children removed?
Im only used to hearing about deprivation and I link that to poverty and addiction issues - parents who have been traumatised themselves and therefore don’t know how to parent.
I probably would have been placed in care but I was born in 1964 so the social services didn’t exist in the way they do now.
My parents where on benefits. My father an abusive alcoholic. He had other priorities and social services would have struggled to get anything from him.

The money that is being spent on my CIN children for the last 18 months is a total waste of tax payer's money...... 6 weekly meetings to hear that my DS still has 100% attendance, 100% punctuality, plenty of achievement points, no behaviour points, hands in all homework and represents the school at sports.
My DD still has ASD, anxiety, SPD and PDA and struggles to attend school......
Honestly, it's like they've started now so they'll have to 'see it through'....... they can't be seen to back down.
The stress it's caused is beyond belief. They couldn't care less. We've found no care in social care.....

@Whydidimarryhim

I must be naive - why are people who are wealthy have children removed? Im only used to hearing about deprivation and I link that to poverty and addiction issues - parents who have been traumatised themselves and therefore don’t know how to parent. I probably would have been placed in care but I was born in 1964 so the social services didn’t exist in the way they do now. My parents where on benefits. My father an abusive alcoholic. He had other priorities and social services would have struggled to get anything from him.

Abusive families or those with addictions or health conditions can be wealthy.

@Whydidimarryhim

I must be naive - why are people who are wealthy have children removed? Im only used to hearing about deprivation and I link that to poverty and addiction issues - parents who have been traumatised themselves and therefore don’t know how to parent. I probably would have been placed in care but I was born in 1964 so the social services didn’t exist in the way they do now. My parents where on benefits. My father an abusive alcoholic. He had other priorities and social services would have struggled to get anything from him.

Being wealthy doesn’t mean its okay to abuse or neglect your child.

I'm a social worker - people commenting on this thread saying parents should pay clearly have no idea of the actual real circumstances of children coming into care and the cycles in place that lead to that happening.

Parents can be charged for some types of care arrangements. I am suprised you don't know that.

This could lead to more child deaths, couldn't it?

In what context, i have a disabled child, if his needs and education could only be met in secure residential school (as a friend of mine is going through with her child now) should i be assessed in these cases, putting your child into care is a very emotional decision and made in the childs best interests

@Iworkedhardforwhatihave

What % of children in care come from high earning families?

What does it matter?

@drpet49

* Parents should be made to. You choose to have kids, if you choose then not to look after them, you should be made to pay as much as you can.*

^I agree

Not everyone chooses to have kids.

I’m theory yes they should contribute but would it lead to parents who would usually ask for their child to go into care not asking for help and then things getting even worse.

Because I would have thought the % of parents who can pay any significant amount towards the cost is minuscule?