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?

LydiaBennetsUglyBonnet
sorry, what did you mean by break the cycle?

Every case I've seen involved months, if not years, of support and help with parenting. Parenting classes, support workers, school nurses, respite care in some cases. Only when all this fails are care proceedings started. The only time I've seen children taken into care immediately is when they've sustained significant non accidental injuries. I've seen 2 murdered children since I've been working, which is pretty traumatic.

But what is actually done to help break the cycle? Does anyone even try?

In that case there was a lot of support from health and education to try and help the parents attend to the older children’s needs - advice on dental care, nit treatment etc etc . The reality is some parents just can’t do it, and a smaller group are just unwilling to do it.

Ive seen parent with support workers coming in to get the kids up and out to school, the school arranging dental visits, providing uniforms for kids, support workers teaching cooking and budgeting skills, social work providing cookers and washing machines, arranging transport to medical appointments, support workers teaching parenting skills and the parents still being unable to meet their child’s most basic needs.

Its awful, and not a decision anyone takes lightly but some parents, with all the goodwill and support in the world, simply cannot do it.

It refers to what I said.
Abused children sometimes make bad parents, who then go on to abuse their own children, who then go on to abuse their children . Sometimes taking children away can break that cycle.

A PP mentioned that often those subjected to neglect and abuse go on to have children and (often for reasons such as no example having been set for themselves, trauma etc) also neglect their children. It’s a cycle that we know needs breaking - but what is being done?

This is my experience too. Even blatant errors are never amended. I'd love to know why too.

I imagine that removing the child from the situation is the attempt to break the cycle.
Hopefully if the child is living and learning from a family that does not expose them to negative experiences they will grow into adults who can in turn bring their children up in a way that will not have Sw involved in their upbringing.

It’s a cycle that we know needs breaking - but what is being done?

Its very complex, there’s a dearth of decent long term trauma therapies available, many of these folk - for very good reason, struggle to engage with services, by the time they’ve reached adulthood there’s often further domestic abuse, substance misuse, significant mental health issues to be addressed. It’s also the case that they are very wary of any kind of intervention. There’s often so much immediate crisis to deal with that the underlying issues never get addressed.

In my mind much more needs to be done with children and young people while they are involved with services. By which I mean consistent, open ended therapeutic support at each stage of their life course so that as they grow and mature they have an understanding of their life experience and how they impact them specifically. There also needs to be much better support for learning in schools, tailored from a trauma informed approach to help kids for whom school is a challenge in all kinds of ways.

My two children could easily fall into that “cycle”, they’re adopted and have very complex support needs. There’s very little available to them so I need to source private help, which I’m fortunate to be able to do. Many folk don’t have those resources available to them.

As a former care kid it’s the same as every profession. You get good social workers and bad. One thing to point out is that removing a child and placing them in care whether it’s foster care or a group home is very often the lesser of two evils rather than an end of the rainbow situation. Group homes especially.
I still believe at 36 that placing me in care was wrong and I came to far far more harm in the system than I would have if I was left be. Kids aren’t always removed for abuse, personally I was removed after my great grandmother died and nobody had custody of me. I was a bit of a shit behaviour wise after her death but I should have been placed with family and supported rather than removed and separated miles away.
You also have to consider these days when there’s multiple kids involved they’re more often than not split up because despite probably sharing a room with siblings all their lives that’s not allowed in care. It’s isolating and often exacerbates bad behaviour because you lash out. Because of my past I don’t like social services, I don’t trust social workers and I don’t think they’re changing things for the benefit of the kids.

from my experiences with them in the past (which isn't recent so things hopefully will have changed) is that its rare for a child to be removed for no reason however

they often will focus on the easier cases, and rather than look for solutions with these will often take a more extreme approach. When the case is complicated through, they often will turn a blind eye or take the parents word as gospel and say they checked xyz and to a tick box exercise.

With an issue I know where the father was abusing his daughters the daughters were not removed but eventually ran away, and social services refused to remove his son, because he was male so not at risk. So they basically admitted that there was an issue previously but did nothing, and then at the same time saying its no longer an issue and so did nothing.

people in the service seemed to fail upwards as well. Having spoken with other people from a similar time frame who were the children and not the parents its a similar story.

I want to believe that the system has got better and I know its a very hard and complicated job, but the culture used to be one of admitting no wrong, and sweeping things under the carpet rather then dealing with things

My brother loved his dc very much, unfortunately it didn't stop him neglecting them. I am a Foster carer and I am sure the birth parents of my dc feel that their children have been stolen from them but the fact is they couldn't care for them. Its a judgement call and SS don't always get it right. I am in Ireland and its very difficult to adopt Foster children here, it has become easier in recent years but it's still a slow process and I think that's a good thing. It gives parents time and space to clean up their act where possible.

Hopefully if the child is living and learning from a family that does not expose them to negative experiences they will grow into adults who can in turn bring their children up in a way that will not have Sw involved in their upbringing.

Thats part of it, yes but we now know children who have been removed need much more than just a stable home environment - they need support to form healthy attachment patterns (good parenting alone won’t do that), they need a coherent narrative about their life and how they came to be in care/adopted, they need help with the physiological and psychological impact of early trauma, they need help with social skills and emotional regulation. Simply removing a child into a safe environment is far from enough - too many people think that’s the end of social work/professional involvement when really it should just be the start of a process that follows kids well into adulthood.

It is often parents that have been in care themselves that struggle. Removing them from their parents was certainly not enough to 'break the cycle'

Jellycatspyjamas
when the children are removed and placed in foster care they still have lots of input from Sw.
The carers as well as providing a safe and secure home should also be providing these children with access to all of the services they require.
Therapies, education, medical needs should be in place. Foster carers have to do a lot of training, personally I access extra courses with camhs to enable me to do my ‘job’ properly.
We are advocates for our children and if a foster carer is not providing all the child needs it is up to the Sw to ensure they are. Every year at panel the carer is reassessed, every lac review the carers and Sw are checked up on.
With all this in place, until the child is into adulthood ( upto 25 in some cases) the child has a better chance of breaking the cycle.

No confusion, OP, avoid at all costs.
I don't want to speak about my own experiences (hell, I don't want to THINK about them) but thank you @when2become3 @ClottedCreamAndStrawberries @LydiaBennetsUglyBonnet @UndertheCedartree @LizzieBet14 for your posts.

UndertheCedartree
unfortunately no matter what input a child has,as an adult they may not be able to provide suitable care for their own children.
Both adults who have been in care or have not been in care loose their children.
Sometimes so much damage has been done to children in their early years they will never recover.
Its such a sad situation but giving a child the best chances is all we can do. If this is removing them from their parents gives them a better chance then surely this is the best thing to do.
I was caring for a child who’s mother had had a terrible childhood, there was no way she could care for them properly. She told me she wished she had been taken into care.
she was a really bright young woman but had suffered so much trauma she could barely care for herself.

I've been working for at least 6 years in social work and many years before in the team before qualifying as an assistant.

DV, neglect and drugs are the main reasons. DV is not a poor people or care leavers disease. Neither is neglect but money covers it better.

Care leavers with dc go two ways - either pre birth proceedings with lots of support and usually a baby and mum placement with a 50/50 ish chance of success, or good enough parents. Some are excellent, like in all walks of life. It really is not a given that a care leaver will have her baby removed. Some completely turn their lives around when pregnant and there's excellent research to back that up.

Stop thinking it's a never ending cycle of care, care leavers and babies. It's not. It's a never ending cycle of DV that screws dc up (not withstanding physical and sexual abuse) and that doesn't just happen in poor care leavers lives. Look at MN threads in relationships for evidence of well spoken educated women going through it.

Before qualifying I was an assistant **

I think this is one of the truest things you're going to hear.

*when the children are removed and placed in foster care they still have lots of input from Sw.

The carers as well as providing a safe and secure home should also be providing these children with access to all of the services they require*

I know in theory this should be the case, I also know I’m practice it too often isn’t both personally and professionally. The services too often aren’t available, CAMHS support, for example, is nigh on impossible even for care experienced kids (I know this because both my kids are care experienced, I have a wide network of parents with care experienced kids and have worked with care experienced kids).

My kids experience in foster care was arguably more harmful than the home situation they left, except for the most part they were physically safe (and yes I did formally raise concerns).

And while there may be some level
of support for kids in care, there’s next to nothing for kids who are adopted, unless you’re prepared to scream for it and ultimately find it privately. I know my way round the system and have found it nearly impossible to get the supports my kids need - God help someone who doesn’t.

We all do our best in a failing system - whether that’s supporting families, making decisions about removals, supporting kids in care or seeing them into adoption, but my goodness the statistics show we’re pretty shit as corporate parents on the whole.

True but the cycle doesn’t go away in care. Especially group homes where it’s mostly teens and pre teens. The chaotic life continues there often among the kids themselves with older or more powerful kids singling out younger or weaker kids. Violence, manipulation, fear, and yes still sexual abuse.

I was just saying putting a DC in care doesn't necessarily 'break the cycle' - they need more support than that.

They are useless.

Understaffed, underfunded but also many staff seem to have little knowledge about many topics.

If you ask for help there is tumbleweed.

If they have to investigate for some reason they harrass you over ridiculous things.

As well as the staffing/ funding problem IMO there is a lot of additional training needed for them to be competent. And a complete overhaul of procedures to ensure that far more at risk children are protected, far fewer loving families are harrassed and also that they actually understand and attempt to meet their legal obligations when asked to do things that are part of their job.

They seem to spend much of their time trying to find ways to avoid their responsibilities rather than carrying them out, so irrespective of high caseloads there is huge room for improvement that they could make within existing resources, but they don't. The people who are meant to help cause a lot of unnecessary and avoidable additional trauma and stress for children and parents, which is clearly not acceptable.

I don't think it is a case of the binary options you suggested: both problems are the case because their staff training and procedures are not fit for purpose so time is spent on the wrong things. With often tragic outcomes.

In Denmark, children in care have comparable outcomes - and often better! - than those living with their family. This jeeds to be emulated here. Sadly children have no vote and no adult votes with these most vulnerable children in mind. It's not even listed in the top 10 voter concerns. So politicians do not care and will not fund proper services for children in care.

They can win a lot more than they do by doing their job properly and meeting their legal responsibilities. Their practices are a disgrace and clearly do not work as they should to a) identify and remove those at high risk; and b) provide the supports to other families that they are legally required to provide.

Saying "they can't win" is disingenuous. It's not about numbers. It is about having the right processes in place to ensure that the vulnerable children are identified more quickly. Also also to provide help to meet the needs of children who are clearly better off being with their families.