AIBU to be angry we were subjected to Social Services Section 47 Investigation?

[Morbihanmum33]

Long post - sorry: My husband and I have 4 children, 14, 11, 7 & 2. No prior involvement with social services whatsoever. No ‘risk factors’ - criminal records / addiction issues / mental health problems / domestic violence / no issues at schools. Both of us have enhanced DBS. Professional jobs.

Our family recently had to endure the considerable distress and intrusion of a Section 47 child protection investigation.

Our 2 year old had light bruising across his thighs. Both my husband and I saw it but did not know how he’d done it. We flagged it when we took him to nursery, he is very active, trying to keep up with his bigger brothers. In the last 6 months at nursery, the nursery has filed 6 accident reports for incidents in their care, so they know what he’s like.

They rang me to tell me they had a statutory duty to report the bruises as they were unexplained and on a part of his body not normally associated with bruising. However, they assured me it was routine and nothing to worry about. They told me they made it clear on the referral that they did not believe we were responsible for the bruising.

The next morning a social worker called me and told me I had to take my son for a medical examination. This had to be done at the hospital - 45 mins away - immediately. I was due at work and had an important meeting so asked if it could be another time. I was told they could take my son into care if I did not go.

My son was given an examination by 2 doctors and I was interviewed at length. While waiting the social worker told me this was a Section 47 and that they would also have to see my other 3 children, and could go into their schools that same day if necessary to interview them! They also told me they had chosen not to involve the police at this stage!

The Drs found no evidence of non accidental injury. This was communicated to me and the SW at the time.

Despite this, the investigation still had to run its course over a number of weeks, with a visit to our home and interviews with the other 3 children, and them speaking to our GP and schools.

We all found the whole process deeply distressing and a total invasion of our privacy. I was fraught with worry the entire time. We were made to feel like criminals, with SS adopting a ‘guilty until proven innocent approach’. I’ve been left traumatised by the whole experience.

Having read up on this I understand that bruising in a non mobile infant under 6 months is always a major cause for concern, and some local authorities authorise automatic Section 47’s for referrals like this. However, government guidance is that (even with a non mobile infant) an initial enquiry or assessment should be made with the family before initiating an investigation.

Secondly, my child is fully mobile and the original referral explicitly said the bruising was not considered suspicious - so I do not understand why this was escalated in this way.

The cases (against all 4 of my children!) have been closed, but I’m so angry we were put through this. I also understand the fact an investigation was carried out will stay on file for a long time. I’m considering pursuing a judicial review on the basis an initial assessment should have been carried out and the lack of medical evidence did not warrant an investigation.

AIBU to feel like this - or should I just let it go?

Sorry to read this. SW'ers original threat was nasty and unprofessional.

Another thing - while the multi-agency approach has advantages, there is also the danger of group think, and also I experienced the people who had been involved since DS was born - HV, GP having there input and opinions completely over-ridden by those who had either never met us or had minimal knowledge of us.

Every expert opinion (we had 4 medical, and 3 psychological) included the line “while we can’t identify the issues, on the balance of probabilities I have to agree with esteemed colleague that these injuries are inflicted” (sic).as each expert got all the previous reports.

There were medical anomalies, but we were told further investigation would be considered obstructive and evidence of inclination to abuse.

The truth was elusive, and we couldn’t pursue it.

It sounds horrendous OP, but given the number of horrible abuse cases there have been in the last few years, I guess that SS is going overboard rather than taking any chances. Which sucks for the families involved, but considering the outcry when a child dies from abuse, what is the alternative? There was a documentary about SS which is on Youtube where parents often said they did not know what happened when there was a problem.

That article, as you’ve pointed out, relates to bruising (in any part of the anatomy) in non mobile children.

The concern re your child is that there was specific bruising across the thighs- an area that can indicate abuse. However, I would also argue there could be concerns around your supervision of your child.

Look, make a complaint. I don’t think you can let it rest and it may provide you with some answers around their decision making. Or they might uphold your complaint and apologise if there is wrong doing.

A very naïve comment. What makes you say the investigation was a waste of time. Do you know the poster/live with them full time and therefore know they didn’t abuse their child. The nursery have an absolute duty and every credit to children social care for doing the investigation. Child abuse can happen in “respectable” families, including ones that are dbs checked.

I'm finding the whole "but we're professionals! A decent family" thing a bit jarring, tbh.
Same here. It's highly concerning that so many people think that safeguarding should be applied differently if the parents have the right amount of money or the right jobs or seem professionals.

The first rule of safeguarding is that a child could be harmed anywhere. Any form of sacred group that is beyond question or has a different standard applies is a group where harm can thrive.

The classism doesn't surprise me though. You see it on education threads all the time where posters refuse to accept there are issues in nice schools in affluent areas. It's worrying.

Why on Earth would you take action against a nursery for reporting potentially suspicious bruising on a child?

You can’t have nurseries (or schools) investigating or ignoring bruising just because most of the time an investigation will show no harm.

that guarantees early intervention for many children will be missed.

Regardless of whether bruising as described by the OP should trigger an investigation, if correct procedure wasn’t followed then the OP is entitled to make a complaint and find out what if anything contributed to the decision making process.

SS are supposed to work in partnership with their clients and transparency is key in building an ongoing working relationship if necessary.

Also the SW used the threat of removal - now that is extremely unprofessional as only if a child is in imminent danger or a lengthy court process has been completed can that happen. As has been pointed out.

Each Local Authority (LA) will have their own procedures in respect of what would constitute a s47 investigation, however the law says if a LA ‘have reasonable cause to suspect that a child who lives, or is found, in their area is suffering, or is likely to suffer, significant harm, the authority shall make, or cause to be made, such enquiries as they consider necessary to enable them to decide whether they should take any action to safeguard or promote the child’s welfare.’
The LA clearly believed they had reasonable cause to suspect a child could be suffering significant harm, so they haven’t done anything wrong by initiating a s47 investigation.

And the threat of removal?

That’s ok is it?

Bruises in isolation don’t usually constitute significant harm if it’s a one off, even in unusual locations.

If there are contributing factors then these should have been disclosed to the OP during the course of the investigation.

And that’s another thing… how daft is it that each LA has its own protocol around the law?

Surely it should be consistent?

Maybe it’s precisely because other children have not had their injuries fully explored and as a result have died that this time social workers were being extra vigilant?

This op. I would be very wary of what nursery actually wrote. I know from personal experience that to get SS involved in this way takes a lot!!

FFS, so called ‘decent’ families can, and do, do horrific things to their children!

What would you want the SW to say if, when they have told a parent they have to immediately take their child for a medical check, that parent says can it wait til tomorrow, I have an important meeting to attend? ‘Oh, ok, well just let us know when you’re free’ or ‘legally if you do not comply with the instruction we have the power to remove your child’.

I see Schrödinger's social worker has made an appearance again. Simultaneously not investigating families enough whilst being too intrusive.

The thing is, we never hear of how may families are put through this and the children are saved. Only failures and cases like the OP's are ever reported.

A social worker can make a thousand correct calls in a lifetime but will be judged and condemned for a single failure.

Oh for heavens sake - the SW would have to get the police involved to remove a child or a court order, and only if the child was considered at risk of immediate harm. There is no suggestion of this here. The OP was co-operating and explaining her situation.

It’s precisely this heavy handed approach with parents that gets SW a bad rap from the get go.

Yes and if abusive parents came with a big red "A" on their foreheads then such a waste of resources could be avoided. But they don't.

I'm not clear if you think the nursery were wrong to report or that social services were wrong to investigate. Which is it?

OP we went through something very similar a few years ago and honest to God it was the most distressing time for us and our children. We also had a snarky dick of a social worker who thought she was smarter than us and made some very poor attempts to catch us out. It was closed obviously but having to drop my children off at school knowing all the staff knew SS was involved was mortifying.

I understand and support the need for better intervention when children before us have been killed after ‘missed opportunities’ occurred. However - aside from the fact that there has GOT to be a better way than damaging children and treating every parent they come into contact with like a lying abuser, rather than supporting them. Our prick social worker told us that she assumed everything we were saying was a lie. Even now I’m not sure how that’s helpful.

I feel the message is ‘if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to worry about’ is such bollocks bet cause there’s plenty to worry about and the children experience so much damage and distrust from social workers asking non-abused children if they’re being abused, casting suspicion openly on their parents and the worst of it when it’s all done there NO acknowledgment as to how damaged everyone is at the end. I don’t support the current system, it doesn’t work because abused children are still being missed because social workers are unable to do anything other than robotic tick boxing

If the doctor told the SW they were satisfied it was not NAI, the following thorough investigation involving all children seems like overkill if there were no other risk factors presenting.

This is why the impression is given that SS sometimes seem to be oddly determined to find something, anything…

Yes “nice” presenting professional middle class families can have abuse going on, but it is unlikely that there would have been zero concerns with 4 children ranging in age, being seen by multiple professionals daily over a period of years.

Which is why the OP should try to find out if there are any other concerns at nursery or anywhere else that may have triggered the prolonged investigation.

You never know, as she is a conscientious parent she might appreciate the help with issues she’s unaware of. But she can’t “change” or come out of “denial” without knowing what the issues are…..

Yes I’m getting flippant here, because the system gets things wrong on every side, and good practice can’t be improved unless errors are investigated and corrected.

These investigations are not harmless, routine events - until you’ve been falsely accused, even if it turns out ok in the end, it is very hard to get over psychologically. Some SWs do not behave professionally and traumatise families and if part of that is by not following due process, they need to be given further training.

Intervention should be proportionate to the situation.

I see Schrödinger's social worker has made an appearance again. Simultaneously not investigating families enough whilst being too intrusive
They appear on every thread about social work.
Schrödinger's social worker also removes hundreds of children because of a grazed knee, whilst not removing children.

I just don't know what people want or expect from social services though

It would be nice if they could use common sense and known actors rather than relentless tick boxing and doing things because they’re duty-bound. It would also be nice if they had correct information and used it. Our SW visited DD in school and continually got her name wrong. That’s upsetting when you’re 7 and some strange woman is asking you odd questions.

I feel like with us initial enquiries and the fact there’s been zero concerning factors from anything should have stopped any intervention but ‘due to process’ it rattled on for what felt like forever

When my case was ongoing I did so much research into the system, mechanisms of injury, psychology etc because at my first meeting with my solicitor he told me that without an explanation for my unbruised, otherwise healthy, but 5 week old prem baby’s injuries SS would want him adopted as soon as possible. Fact. Not conspiracy theory.

This was before I had the luxury of online resources. I spent hours on the phone to PAIN. I bought books. I blagged myself into a hospital library. I jumped through every hoop. I helped my solicitor by finding out as much as I could relevant to my case.

Then I was flagged as possibly FII (MSBP then). Because I was too interested in medical matters. Which I hadn’t been up till then. My qualifications were backstage theatre and design. Which made me dramatic. Honestly until you’ve experienced the headfuck that these investigations can turn into, you have no idea.

I was brought up to respect authority, tell the truth etc. And it didn’t matter one jot once the juggernaut started rolling.

I was “unlucky”. And I have let it lie for nearly 30 years.

But I still carry that trauma.

This is a proportionate response to a head injury. Thigh bruising is much more unusual.