to be confused about social services

[whentheraincame]

Bit of a long one but it's something I have thought about a long time. There's two narratives:

SS don't do enough; don't act to remove children in obvious danger (happens sometimes of course)

SS are overzealous; remove children from loving homes (going to happen at times, right?)

there was a show over ten years ago called I Want my Baby Back and it was absolutely heartbreaking and admittedly it terrified me. Basically hairline fractures were found in children and parents were blamed for abuse. The argument was (I forget details and could never watch again) from some doctors that these were the result of Vitamin D deficiency (which let's face it, was endemic a while back and in the news loads)

So the argument was those children were wrongly removed. One mother cried "I want my baby" and honestly it's never left me. I'll have a cry about this later as I always do if I think too much about a child being removed from a loving mum.

So my question is if anyone has proper insight. I'm scared of SS in general. Although I actually had involvement with them myself when I left an abusive ex and they came to check I was not going to go back, nothing further happened once they met me - so proof they are fine I guess.

But I remember seeing a lady on the news, well spoken, and saying SS need to return her children who were removed. I had a friend tell me in work once that a friend with undiagnosed autism got the children removed due an incident where one got hurt by the other (which happens. these things happen, children do get hurt and it's often an accident that couldn't be prevented)

I guess I just don't want to see SS as evil child snatchers, and want insight into how they operate in reality and what actually gets children removed from parents' care?

Also - in my case, first estimate of number of fractures was 21. Two further experts came up with 15 or 12 respectively. Symmetrical- often indicative of bone disease. They could definitively say they had all occurred in the five week period he was at home with me, not in the week he was in hospital where he was kept because he was five weeks early as I had an emergency induction due to pre-eclampsia.

I was told in the same conversation that five weeks early wasn’t really premature and also that he was at higher risk of abuse because he was premature.

There we’re no bruises, only two fractures showed any symptoms which I sought medical advice for, hence SS involvement, and he had been seen by multiple HCPs in that time, and had passed his six week check with flying colours 4 days before he was taken.

No rib fractures, no brain bleed, no retinal haemorrhages - therefore I was obviously torturing him very carefully…..

He was 5 pounds 13 at birth and his feet were about the same size as my thumb. Pulling and twisting at the site of each fracture was posited. As he had fractures at both ankles, I really couldn’t see how the violence they insisted had been used could have left no marks or crush injuries. Obviously I am a torture expert.

Remembering it all still makes me feel sick.

I do know that to be fact.

I also know to be fact that children who are safer at home are removed and put into circumstances where they’re essentially guaranteed to have very poor outcomes

But too many seem to confuse curiosity with making things up or misconstruing facts, and even when called out in it, refuse to change things and run with the lies forever more

@ihateexcel but you are talking about one case where you believe the right call was made.

Do you disbelieve @LydiaBennetsUglyBonnet ? And others on this thread?

@Neverfullycharged there are thousands of adopters out there which will have similar stories.

It's weird the faux worries. I was taught years ago by my supervisor to never write I have no concerns as this could come back on me if something happened. I have to write previous concerns, previous irrelevant information in care plans and even things like - FC reports that mum made an inappropriate joke at contact and I have to ask my YP if it's true or not and write it out that although I believe it to be a joke it might not be a joke. That wouldn't disappear as we'd have to 'cover our backs' if it turned out it was true. We fo have a culture a fear in our profession, people that think we look after each other are wrong. Complaints get made and social workers are sacked. It's not like the police!

Like I've repeatedly said - a radical overhaul is needed. I wish more people would write to their MPs and ask for better social care.

This is exactly why people are terrified - making up concerns just in case it comes back on you is damaging should the child’s case go to court.

Its also the reason I essentially started to give one word answers whenever speaking to SWs and giving away absolutely nothing. If you talk, they will use your words against you

She was right but still nothing was done to make right the things they did.

What did you want to happen that would make things right? The social worker was sacked (and as a consequence would lose her registration - so wouldn’t be practicing again, rightly). What could they have done that would have made it right for you?

Neverfullycharged there are thousands of adopters out there which will have similar stories

I didn’t ask if there were thousands of adopters out there with similar stories, although they are hardly going to be told ‘actually, we do think that the birth parents got a raw deal but never mind’, are they?

I asked if you disbelieve the women on this thread.

I was taught years ago by my supervisor to never write I have no concerns as this could come back on me if something happened.

Thats truly shit advice, if there are no concerns that’s what you record and if something did happen you point to the fact that all was ok in your observations of parent and child interaction. You can’t be responsible for something you don’t see. Apart from anything else it’s fundamentally dishonest and calls into question every concern and assessment you make because if you can lie in one case, whose to say you haven’t lied in others.

I’m not blaming you for following her lead, but that kind of instruction is something social workers should be challenging.

I know 3 local families where SS tried to remove children. All related to health conditions that weren't believed. Threatened parents that they had every intention of making sure dc would be adopted. It's only because retired social workers helped that they avoided it.

MN'ers never believe SS have ulterior motives. But you know that it happens. Dirty doctors kill and dirty policeman - killing Sarah Everard. But MN'ers can't accept dirty or misguided sw'ers accept.

This!!

It's my LA rather than that previous supervisor. Even in our supervision notes we have a section (like the johoris window) of what we don't know. So in that window it might say - we don't know if mum is back with her violent partner. We don't know mum isn't still using class A drugs etc. Even if you as the worker completely believes mum and completely believes that your YP is safe at her house. We have a real culture of responsibility, covering your back and ticking boxes. It doesn't make for good social work and we're not a bad LA. Lots of great initiatives, lots of amazing reunification work and we're investing and have new preventive teams working alongside exploitation.

Lots of parents (me included) experience this.
there seems to be a list of ‘red flag conditions’ as ALL the familiar I know who went through similar had children with one or more of the following and were fighting for support / ehcp/ treatment
-ASD
-SEN
-PoTs
-allergies
-digestive issues
-feeding problems / failure to thrive
eating disorder
-EDS
-ME

In at least half the cases a parent also had ASD as well.

Something is wrong with the system

At some point you have to question why parents who've had children removed are being subjected to gagging orders? If everything's above board why?
The problem is epidemic yet completely secret, that the entire system is rotten from the inside out.
3 mothers stories just in my town that I know
A. Newborn baby died due to neglect over a class a drug fueled weekend - still has her other children.
B. Known prostitute drunknly punched her 2yo boy in the face twice in the middle of town 20 odd witnesses loads of cctv, definitely reported - still has her children.
C. Children stayed out at grandma's for the night. Partner/father come home drunk, row ensues punches mother in the face. Mum does what we are all supposed to do, chucks him out, doesn't allow unsupervised contact and reports it to the police. Social hand custody to father stating that Mother should seek counselling so she doesn't alienate children from their father.

How the fuck is anyone supposed to know where any case stands when there is just zero consistency constantly?
And all the Foster parents smug cos 6 months a year down the line traumatised children's behavior has improved. Consider the fact the kid was only traumatised and had behaviour issues because they were stolen from loving parents and dumped with strangers who just see them as a cash cow. Pretty sure that would create problems in the most well rounded child.

What a weird section to have - and obvious. Of course you don’t know if they’re still abusing drugs etc! What bureaucratic drivel.

Sunnyqueen
Parents are not supposed to talk about their children being removed as it identifies the children. Parents on Facebook giving out private info is not on, completely goes against the privacy of the child.
On one hand you are saying children are left with parents who are inadequate on the other they are traumatised by being removed so what is the solution.
As for smug foster carers saying the behaviours have changed 6 months down the line I think that’s very unfair. Often the behaviours do change, the children have structure, boundary’s all their needs are being met. They feel safe.
Some children never recover, whether this is because they’ve been removed from their parents or it’s because of the things they’ve been exposed to we will never know.
Im not sure where you get your info on finances from but I can assure you I would get more money in a 9-5 minimum wage job, sick pay and holiday pay than I do now.
As any parent knows caring is a 24 hour job 365 days a year, you can’t stop at 5, go for nights out when you want, book a weekend away, foster care is the same.
We have a foster child,been with us over 10 years, they are very much part of our family and treated no different to our birth children. They know this is their home and they will stay as long as they want. They certainly aren’t a cash cow and I’m insulted that you feel that way. You don’t know everyone’s circumstances

@Cassimin that's bollocks. Foster care does not meet all dcs needs. Boundaries do not create well behaved looked after children. Boundaries do create feelings of safety in line with other therapeutic methods but these dc aren't behaving because suddenly they have a bedtime.

Often dc are traumatised from early life and from removal of family AND from being in the new foster carers home. They then act really good to control their world. There's usually a honeymoon period (that's pretty standard) and then lots more settling in. There are absolutely terrible foster carers out there. Foster carers can also continue the loyalty binds the dc have and they usually slag the SW and birth family off to the looked after child.

I've personal and professional experience with some really shitty foster carers. Just like social workers, just like all humans in the world really.

SnowWhitesSM
beg to differ, you do not know our circumstances all of our child’s needs are met. I have ensured our child has had all the therapies they need, I’ve taken them to counselling, camhs, occupational therapy, speech therapy, none of which they had previously.
I have never slagged off their parents, in fact I had a really good relationship with them for years. We tried to make them part of our family, I argued with Sw to get supervised contact with them so they weren’t stuck in a boring contact centre. We had days out, meals out I helped them out with money. I knew they’d had a bad start in their lives and this was why they couldn’t care for their child.
many times we turned up at a meeting place only for them not to. I would ring them, they would ignore me. This became more frequent until it was too traumatic for our f child and Sw stepped in and cancelled contact. They have never given a birthday or Christmas card never mind a present yet would turn up with drinks and cigarettes for themselves.
boundaries are not just about bedtimes, they are developing a healthy diet, not roaming the streets at night, going to school etc.
If you’ve had experience with shitty foster carers I’m sorry but that’s no reason to say I’m talking bollocks.
The foster carer is not the only person involved in the child’s life so if they are failing it should be picked up by the others and acted upon.
as you have dealt with shitty foster carers and shitty Sw I’ve also dealt with shitty parents.

But @Cassimin , @SnowWhitesSM isn’t talking about you, and I do think it’s really important to not defend the specific when people are talking about the general.

What are you differing on @Cassimin as you've just spoken about yourself and yes you do come across smug like another poster said. Are you saying every FC is like you?

Boundaries are a funny thing, I'd argue that trying to make the parents part of the family was a overstep in boundaries. You set them up to fail (inadvertently and I'm sure with good intentions) by trying to have them so close, Arguing for parents to see dc outside of a contact centre when they turn up with drink is a poor boundary overstep on your part and could have led to something bad happening. You also could have added to your foster childrens feelings of rejection from parents and probably did. That's emotionally worse than the dc eating 'unhealthy' food and not having a bedtime imo. They weren't able to look after their dc and you shouldn't have those dc in another position of rejection.

Foster carer - lovingly cooks nutritious food.
Foster dc - doesn't eat the food and feels funny about it. Can't explain why.
Foster carer - this is what you're eating, look how hard I worked to cooked this, eat up your veg it's so good for you. You want to grow big and strong don't you.
Foster dc - yuk I hate your food. May or may not throw food.
Foster carer upset. Fdc upset.

Dc was caught in a huge loyalty bind. Has to deal with the feeling that mum didn't care enough to make food and will justify it that mums way is the better way. Now fc is upset with them so they also feel unstable. Lot's of big emotions. Another traumatic experience in the life of care. You must know this @Cassimin this is basic training. Your healthy food can cause many issues even if it's technically the right thing to do.

Why didn't the woman who had her baby taken away have another baby?

Human rights, the right to family life - everyone can have babies. Good and bad.

@Cassimin Sure.

His comment was a little tongue in cheek (and obviously, for the SW looking to jump, we take our children for medical treatment when they require it). But that was his scathing impression due to years of working in that field. That it is not rare for parents to have their children taken away for no real reason at all, and then having to spend weeks, months etc fighting to get them back.

Of course he could have had the wool pulled over his eyes. I just think it's odd that's the conclusion you jump to immediately. And his experiences follow a court process where these things are investigated and the evidence is looked at in full. Not just him sitting in a room with the parents, taking their work for it and going "oh they took your kids for no reason? Those mean SWs!". Give the legal process (which clearly exists to have some level of accountability where these often is none - too bad parents have to spend thousands accessing justice) some credit. It might not be great (family courts are a whole other story), but it's better than allowing an individual to make devastating decisions unchecked.

@Cassimin Ok, I see you provide foster care? You will be seeing it from a side of poorly treated children who deserve so much more. And I guess you must experience some kind of confirmation bias - I assume you feel you are doing a good thing for those children (you are), which doesn't really stack up as well if those children are removed from their parents for no good reason.

Clearly there are lots of terrible parents in the world. Where the children 100% ought to get removed. What we just can't forget is accountability and due process for those parents where a mistake has been made by a SW (either a genuine mistake or due to poor or biased decision making). And these things do happen, that's all I am saying. Denying it is ridiculous. And it shouldn't be ignored as a non-issue that is fixed by simply handing the kids back with an "oops" because that the vast majority of cases aren't that. That is all I am saying.