To think a lot of posts on this social services Facebook group can’t be entirely truthful?

[TheObstinateHeadstrongGirl]

5 years ago, my DD made a disclosure about a family friend which we reported to the police. As a result we had children’s services involved in our lives and had a horrendous excuse for a social worker who cast doubt of my DD’s experience. FWIW: I know the vast majority of social workers are excellent, sadly we had a very brief experience with a really incompetent one, so I’m not in the “all social workers are evil” camp. I can’t imagine how hard it must be to do that job in a broken country with failing systems.

Anyway, at the time I joined a Facebook support group for those who have children’s services involved to get advice on how to handle everything that was going on. I never left the group, for no particular reason. And for some reason Facebook’s algorithm have been putting the posts on my feed more recently.

Some of the posts are very strange.

Posters claiming they’re on a child protection plan because their relatives are in the army. Or because they have a messy house. Some claim they don’t know why they’re at PLO level (which is a pre-cursor to court action). Loads of posts claiming SS are involved for no reason whatsoever, including pregnant women who look like they’re gonna have their babies removed and they don’t know why. Not all obviously but a large amount claim this.

AIBU to think that children aren’t placed on the child protection register for living in a messy house and there must be more to it?

I’ve had social services involved twice. The first time due to DV and both of those social workers I had no issues with either of them although I was terrified of their involvement incase they took my children away. Which didn’t happen as I did what I was meant to: stayed in refuge, kept them and me away from their father, got them to school, found us a new home and engaged with what little support they could offer (cuts to everything must make their job so much harder).

The second time was due to my youngest child’s disability. I just wasn’t coping at this stage. I had no family support and the few good, trusted friends I had had their hands full with their own lives. This social worker was a cow. She liked me the first time she came over. The house was clean and tidy. The second time she came over was school holidays around tea time, had a terrible night (youngest sometimes just didn’t sleep for more than 3 hours in a 24 hour period and would systematically wreck the house), the kids were in pjs all day, the dishes needed doing and I’d just ordered pizza for tea. She was not impressed and said she was reporting me to her manager. It’s hard to describe but it was said in a proper mean girl way. I have no idea if she did so, but I never heard anything from said manager and got a letter and a report saying they were closing the case and wishing us luck. We didn’t meet the threshold for support basically. Despite me reaching out for help that time I was relieved to see the back of that SW. The report was littered with errors. They got names and ages wrong for a start: so my children would be referred to as their correct names in one sentence and then suddenly they’d be called Fred and Jane or something. It happened a lot throughout.

I get they’re busy people but I don’t think it’s right to send out reports to families and other professionals full of mistakes. The lead safeguard at one of the kids schools even checked with them to make sure she’d received the correct report.

I really think there is a lot of naiviety here.

Mumsnetters are normally middle class women who gave birth in their 30's who have very little idea of how SS can treat the less articulate.

My hospital has a policy, ( this cannot be disputed, their SS referrals chart makes it clear), of anyone who discloses they were on care themselves as a child to SS during pregnancy. Pregnant mother's to be are then forced to relive their own childhood trauma to SS as part of a prebirth assessment. They don't get to decline , that would be non engaging .

Or Leiland-James or Elsie Scully-Hicks, who were removed at birth from parents who wanted them, and placed with adoptive parents who went on to murder them . As SS had assessed and approved the adoptors, very clearly they do make mistakes.

It's a mixture of low IQ, low education, no idea of healthy parenting and denial. SS are there to support parents and there's a very high threshold for involvement with taking kids away a last resort. And no I don't work for them, I'm a nurse. Even on this thread there's an example. As if a social worker is out to get you and would call you a bitch 🙄.

@ShimmeringShirts that must have been so hard for you. I'm glad that things got better, and hope that you are in a much better place now.

Indeed.

I have worked with children so I do understand children’s services practices. Lots of things don’t add up like going on a CPP the next day. That’s also a decision reached by various professionals, not just a SW.

Im not denying Dontmess had an awful social worker - as did I, and it is very damaging - but you do not get put on a CPP and then PLO (where a solicitor would be involved) for home educating. Especially in a lockdown.

Im also sure a SW wouldn’t call a parent a bitch and accuse them of lying about their child’s weight.

This is exactly what being on these groups is like.

Not going to get into the debate as to whether SWs are right or wrong in their decision making etc, but there is a petition active at the moment asking for SWs to wear body cams, as the police do, in order to reduce the instances of potential inaccuracies in written reports that go before the courts.

I think this might go a long way towards protecting all parties involved. Obviously it would only be used within the system, so it wouldn't risk loss of anonymity etc.

Would also mention that in some areas,it's very difficult now for parents of low income to access advocates or legal representation who can be a great help to both sides by explaining and over seeing due process.

When a child's safety and entire future is dependent on multi-disciplinary input, the standards should be high on all sides to make sure the best interests of the child are addressed accurately.

Have name changed for this post as possibly outing.

I can well believe some of these stories. I’ve been on the wrong side of social services.
They made a mistake that escalated into our child being in foster care for 6 months and it was sinister the way they closed ranks, refused to talk, kept awful (or no) records of meetings and completely shut us out.

One of the worst things was once things had started happening (after we ended up going to our MP about the shocking treatment we had received) they saw how educated, MC and (possibly) white British we are and then completely changed their attitude towards us. It got to the point where we were questioning the most ridiculous things about ourselves as SW had no idea about anything going on and were suggesting ‘this could be a reason for the delay’

They also never followed up properly on our official complaint but sadly, we were so broken by the time it had sorted, we had no strength left to fight so it got put down as a resolved issue. So fucking corrupt.

I think neglect is quite common and because it is a passive form of abuse, some parents don’t think it is a problem.

I think this subject is interesting as it’s so emotive.
Obviously, I can see why parents will lie and downplay issues/ can’t understand the issues.
I also know the SS are vital and have helped parents and children.

But the thing that is more interesting is the way people ,without experience of SS, will deny there may be problems or seem invested in defending the system.

I wonder if that comes from a place of wanting to feel safe. For example, if the system that I’m in is broken and may be unfair then this could happen to me.

However, if the system is good and the people who are investigated are ‘bad/toxic/ low intelligence’ then I’m not those things so me and my family are safe.

I do also wonder about Pp whose husband is a social worker and social services left them alone. Hmmm.
I know someone whose house is really dirty, has severe mental health issues and regular visits from crisis teams. Two children in the house.
This person was employed in a high position and retains their title, and the spouse still work for government in a very respectable role.
At no point have social services been called in for even a visit. I do not believe this would have been the case if the couple were cleaners on benefits.

To believe a group of humans employed in such an important and powerful role are without bias or their own damage is dangerous.

I have no axe to grind, have never had any personal involvement with SS.

I also understand what people are saying about the checks and balances in place.

However, we all know some people are more equal than others. Systems can fail and corruption, or simply lethargy, can spread along a command chain very easily.

@ApiratesaysYarrr this was about 11 years ago now, in a much better place thanks! Never had any involvement with SS after that and I went on to have a much healthier relationship and third child. Tbh the hardest thing to do was admit I was failing my children. I knew beyond a doubt I was a wreck myself but I thought because my children were fed and loved that’s what mattered. I spent my childhood depressed and unloved and hating myself so to me the way I was feeling and living as an adult was normal. It was exceptionally painful to admit it wasn’t good for my children and just as hard to realise that my own childhood was wrong on so many levels. Lots of counselling and support got me through it, but if at the time I’d had people like the above poster saying it was because I had a low IQ and poor education it is very likely I’d have outright rejected the support for fear of judgement and ended up the same as those posters on FB.

I think the term "messy house" probably means different things to different people. Toys on floor, washing not put away and last night's dinner plate not washed up is my idea of messy. Pretty sure ss don't remove kids living in a house like that.

part of the problem is the lack of right to reply. Social workers cannot comment on cases, they cannot breach confidentiality. So there is only ever one side out there.
dont mistake that as me blindly defending all social workers, some will always be better than others. They can never put their side or the sides of the child across in social media.

This poster is going down the 'unschooling' route which basically means, well to be fair people do it differently, but can be just waiting until the child asks to learn something, so you don't start teaching the child to read yo wait until they ask and then you may teach them or these days you might find an app.

It can be a fantastic way to learn for some children who are curious about everything, it can also be devastating for a child who craves routine.

I only know one person who this has happened to. To read her Facebook you would think they had removed them for fun and that she was an amazing mum. The reality is she wouldn’t get rid of an abusive partner, was a drug addict and lived in a mess. They had babies just ‘because’ with no thoughts of how they might adequately house or feed them until afterwards.

Well thankfully there are some super sensible admins who are good at reminding posters that rule no 1 is engage with social services and do as they ask you. That means not having your exBF round who is not supposed to be round to watch Netflix after knocking seven bells of shite out of you on front of the kids. That means not pissing off on holiday when you’re supposed to stay local. I cannot imagine how hard it is to be in a situation whereby, as a grown adult, you’re being treated like this (and it does seem the nuances of DV are overlooked by social services sometimes). But I just think they must be given SO MANY chances before removal to change, there are so many pre-court stages and I find it super hard to believe that, aside from a smoking gun case (ie non-accidental injuries of disclosure of sexual abuse) children are just removed because there was no food in the fridge even though they planning a big shop later that day.

One poster even claimed that a SW told her to stop driving and sell her car. She had ‘no idea why’. Doesn’t drink or take drugs and hadn’t a clue why she was being asked this.

@sashh
I understand the concept of unschooling. I think it's a crock of shit but I also understand not everyone parents the same way!

What I do find disturbing is parents inflicting a very poor education on their children.
Life is way harder for adults who have poor literacy skills and I sadly see this at work. It can have a huge outcome on an individual's potential.

I’m also a student social worker, although have worked in social care for many years, and I must have missed the Gaslighting Training course too.

Is it compulsory? I’d hate to fail my degree, I’ll drop my tutor a message and see if I can get on the next training course.

Even with PP saying there is no way a social worker would call someone a bitch.

I mean you would really hope not and I am sure the vast majority would not dream of it, but we do tend to take our own small experiences and disbelieve any thing else.

As if a police officer would ‘arrest’ a young woman and murder her.

As if, a young nurse would murder small babies in her care.

As if serving police officers would share images on WhatsApp, of women brutally killed for a laugh.

As if a president would ever speak about grabbing women by the pussy.

As if a doctor could systematically kill patients in his care for years.
And on and on.

Placing the people in any profession as beyond reproach is dangerous.

@TourmalineGiraffe I think your posts have been the most sensible on here.
No doubt there is lots of denial, or as a poster said unable to recognise the issues, but we if we believe all SW are good who never wrongly accuse or make false statements it makes us feel safe to believe we will never find ourselves in that situation because we're not like them.
I have personally found myself in a terrible situation which ruined my life for a long time because lies were told about me by those in a position of power, not SS related, so I can absolutely believe there are some out there that will abuse their power.

I also noted that she complained about being repeatedly woken up by the sw calling to ask about what her child was learning (the nerve!)

Which strongly implies that she was asleep during normal working hours despite having multiple children with additional needs in her sole care.

If your plan reaches PLO stage you can get a solicitor through Legal Aid.

A solicitor is not much use on a lower plan than a PLO.

I'm from a traveller background too (bus/squats) and this is the experience of way too many people I know and/or their kids. I see little kids at raves with their parents totally mangled on ketamine etc, parents sharing drugs and alcohol with their young teen kids. An awful lot of neglect, parents leaving their kids with anyone on site so they could go and score, kids living in leaking unheated caravans on sites full of drug addicts. Thankfully my parents were completely responsible (we had a lovely bus and I had a great childhood!) - sorry to hear your experiences.

Despite all this I've never known anyone to have any real social services involvement or be put on a plan unless they were put in prison or long term sectioned. So no I also don't believe a 'messy house' is going to result in SS involvement!

Maybe it’s called something else in an ironic way to gaslight you into thinking you’re attending a different course?

Didn’t think about that! Sneaky fuckers 🤔

Agree that solicitors may not be the answer for lower level cases, but some sort of neutral advocacy or support could reduce the tension in some cases as perhaps SWs don't explain exactly how the processes work and it can be a lot for parents to take in.

I recently discovered that Mackenzie friends now charge for their expertise in many cases which can be prohibitive for low income families.

I also discovered that a SW can also be a child's GAL, which surprises me as it used to be that GALs were independent and there to represent the child only. This suggests a potential conflict of interest.

All good reasons why introducing body cams for SWs is not an unreasonable step.