Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

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

733 replies

Morbihanmum33 · 05/08/2023 10:13

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?

OP posts:
Stressedoutforever · 05/08/2023 11:38

We went through very similar with my baby due to medical negligence not being recorded. We nearly sued the hospital etc but I've since calmed down and decided although it was awful for me and my husband it's better they were wrong this time rather than let another baby get hurt. What helped the most was we had an acknowledgement and apology they were wrong.

Whatswhatwhichiswhich · 05/08/2023 11:38

@Jellyx for what it’s worth, the majority of people that have been through a SS involvement are grateful. My mental health very badly deteriorated when my two eldest were under 2 together, I wouldn’t have made it through if it wasn’t for the support the SS gave me. You all do a fantastic job, ignore the ignorant. You’ll know yourself by now belligerent people are always covering something up.

Jellyx · 05/08/2023 11:38

Jellycatspyjamas · 05/08/2023 11:36

The nursery manager told me she went home and cried when I told her they'd started a section 47 investigation, as she knew we wouldn't have hurt him and she felt awful about what we were subsequently having to go through.

That’s a nonsense, the referral from nursery to social work is what prompted the investigation process, the referral is raised because the nursery have concerns - if they had no concern they had no reason to raise it so either the nursery manager has no understanding of safeguarding and referral processes or she’s lying to you. What did she think would happen?

I’d request a copy of the referral paperwork - I think you’ll find your answer there.

Wow. Agree.

Does the nursery not believe in safeguarding concerns?

I'd be VERY worried they'd avoid reporting future bruising!

commonground · 05/08/2023 11:38

"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."

If they 'know what he's like' then the other 5 accidents shouldn't have happened.

YANBU to feel like you do, but I would be looking for a different nursery.

RudsyFarmer · 05/08/2023 11:39

wlana · 05/08/2023 10:26

It seems astonishing that they wasted all that time investigating you, when children who are really being abused aren’t identified and sometimes die as a result.

And I thought exactly the same thing.

I know from a friend, who works in a Family Liason role, that the bar is pretty high for crappy parenting. I’m going to guess it was the age of the child and the bruising pattern that triggered that level of intervention.

Jellyx · 05/08/2023 11:39

Whatswhatwhichiswhich · 05/08/2023 11:38

@Jellyx for what it’s worth, the majority of people that have been through a SS involvement are grateful. My mental health very badly deteriorated when my two eldest were under 2 together, I wouldn’t have made it through if it wasn’t for the support the SS gave me. You all do a fantastic job, ignore the ignorant. You’ll know yourself by now belligerent people are always covering something up.

It's really frustrating.
I've actually just left the job- unbelievable stress and abuse from others (including other professionals such as teachers sometimes).

So to hear them being bashed is infuriating - I wish people could shadow social work for a day

saveforthat · 05/08/2023 11:40

I think being a social worker is a very tough job and sometimes they get it wrong. Much better (imho) that they investigate parents that have done nothing wrong than miss abuse. (Yes I di know that they have missed abuse many times). Maybe your local ones are more vigilant than some.

Hibiscrubbed · 05/08/2023 11:40

Jellyx · 05/08/2023 11:34

How do they know if a child is truly at risk without a proper investigation?

I mean cases with red flags galore: i.e. the mother is already known, the father/stepfather/boyfriend is known to agencies and has relevant past convictions or reports, drug or alcohol abuse, history of care for the parents, no employment, etc…

I work in a field where I encounter the after effects of abused or murdered children at the hands of (usually) the male partner of the mother. Social services were all aware, the children never having been removed. The mother, often vulnerable in her own right, is privvy to, or complicit in, the abuse and eventual death/severe assault of the children.

These families almost never comply with SS and still the children have remained in the home. Such as it is.

I understand my field of work may lead to bias.

BlossomCloud · 05/08/2023 11:40

Yabu for thinking your "professional jobs" were relevant

MySugarBabyLove · 05/08/2023 11:40

OP, I think a lot of your issue here is with the nursery.

I don’t believe for one minute that they said in the paperwork there was no cause for concern. Neither do I believe that the nursery manager went home and cried.

She’s covering. It seems obvious that they’ve expressed far greater concern here which is why SS have been on the ball so quickly.

Museya15 · 05/08/2023 11:40

Jellyx · 05/08/2023 11:35

@Museya15

What a horrible thing to say about social workers. I'm in the jib and we're all upset to find any abuse! Of course we don't want to find it!

Why do you insist on giving proper abused children back to their abusive druggie parents? Guess the truth hurts! Useless system that needs a massive overhaul, so many many mistakes are made too often.

Jellyx · 05/08/2023 11:41

@RudsyFarmer
Exactly - it's a small child with unexplained bruising in an odd place (thigh , no knees etc)

Of course they need to investigate properly to assess the level of risk. They can't just go ''ooh no prior record and they're professionals..must not be abusers'

SoNotRainbowRhythms · 05/08/2023 11:41

When" professionals"come up against real abusers they never stand up to them. They are scared of them.

Innocent families comply with everything and dont make a fuss. Great for getting boxes ticked and targets met.

Ask any DV survivor who has tried to protect her kids from an abuser esp going through family court.

Or any parents of SEN children who try to protect their children from being endangered due to authorities' cutting corners with their children's needs

"Safeguarding" is a joke.

Cucucucu · 05/08/2023 11:41

A few years ago I volunteered at a free legal clinic , after dealing with a specific person I realised a young girl( 8 at the time ) was most probably being molested by several people including her mum “ friends “ dealers , and drug users . A call to SS confirmed she had been under their radar for years but they didn’t have enough staff to deal with it as it would be such a complicated case . Took a further 4 years for that girl to be removed into care despite school , grandparents on both sides and a doctor referral .
Recently a friend who used to be a social worker tried to explain the reason , basically there already had massive failings on her case, it would be extremely long to deal with and the previous involved staff would have been investigated , so they often choose to pick the easiest families , the ones they know 99.9% of the time will be innocent so they can keep their loads high without risking investigations or getting into trouble . This way they show a full workload but the reality is those who often need them most are left the without help , simply because it’s to much work .
The whole system needs to be restarted , with everyone being retrained

moistclam · 05/08/2023 11:42

Hibiscrubbed · 05/08/2023 11:40

I mean cases with red flags galore: i.e. the mother is already known, the father/stepfather/boyfriend is known to agencies and has relevant past convictions or reports, drug or alcohol abuse, history of care for the parents, no employment, etc…

I work in a field where I encounter the after effects of abused or murdered children at the hands of (usually) the male partner of the mother. Social services were all aware, the children never having been removed. The mother, often vulnerable in her own right, is privvy to, or complicit in, the abuse and eventual death/severe assault of the children.

These families almost never comply with SS and still the children have remained in the home. Such as it is.

I understand my field of work may lead to bias.

But not every case fits those "red flags" and that's why it's important that all unusual bruising cases like this are investigated regardless of what a good job mummy and daddy have.

CurlewKate · 05/08/2023 11:42

I don't believe the nursery said that.

Cucucucu · 05/08/2023 11:42

SoNotRainbowRhythms · 05/08/2023 11:41

When" professionals"come up against real abusers they never stand up to them. They are scared of them.

Innocent families comply with everything and dont make a fuss. Great for getting boxes ticked and targets met.

Ask any DV survivor who has tried to protect her kids from an abuser esp going through family court.

Or any parents of SEN children who try to protect their children from being endangered due to authorities' cutting corners with their children's needs

"Safeguarding" is a joke.

I just posted a example to this , you are spot on

Hibiscrubbed · 05/08/2023 11:43

Also in case my post is misconstrued, I’m not suggesting the nursery was wrong for referring due to safeguarding concerns, they did the right thing. They have to act.

I just wish that everyone referred was subject to the same levels of scrutiny, and that such robust action was taken for all children, regardless of their background.

Jellyx · 05/08/2023 11:43

@Museya15
Social work make recommendations and plenty of times they don't want a child home but the court allow it. It's very upsetting.

If you are worried a child is currently being harmed or abused please contact police or social work. Any evidence you have would be very gratefully received and I'd also says it's everyone's duty to protect children.

crapactually · 05/08/2023 11:43

Cucucucu · 05/08/2023 11:41

A few years ago I volunteered at a free legal clinic , after dealing with a specific person I realised a young girl( 8 at the time ) was most probably being molested by several people including her mum “ friends “ dealers , and drug users . A call to SS confirmed she had been under their radar for years but they didn’t have enough staff to deal with it as it would be such a complicated case . Took a further 4 years for that girl to be removed into care despite school , grandparents on both sides and a doctor referral .
Recently a friend who used to be a social worker tried to explain the reason , basically there already had massive failings on her case, it would be extremely long to deal with and the previous involved staff would have been investigated , so they often choose to pick the easiest families , the ones they know 99.9% of the time will be innocent so they can keep their loads high without risking investigations or getting into trouble . This way they show a full workload but the reality is those who often need them most are left the without help , simply because it’s to much work .
The whole system needs to be restarted , with everyone being retrained

Absolute horseshit.

mrsneate · 05/08/2023 11:43

Must have been horrific to go through

However. Anyone that works with children have policies and guidelines to follow and particular areas of the body which are unlikely to be bruised as a result of play/falling have to be reported. Thighs being one of them.

It's irrelevant whether you've had SS involved in the past. It's irrelevant what jobs you do.

Abuse always starts somewhere. So they have to investigate.

I think you need to move on as best you can

HeidioftheAlps · 05/08/2023 11:43

Morbihanmum33 · 05/08/2023 11:32

I do understand Social Services have an important job to do. Like everyone I get so distressed whenever I hear of the cases that have been missed and there's been an horrific outcome.

We think we know what happened re the bruising - it seems 2 year old tripped and fell onto a kids bike lying on the lawn, during the melee of a kids party in our garden. 7 year old scooped him up, gave him a cuddle and off he went again. He didn't make much of a fuss, and 7 year old didn't tell us at the time.

Nursery told us they had a statutory duty to report it as it was unexplained. The nursery manager told me she went home and cried when I told her they'd started a section 47 investigation, as she knew we wouldn't have hurt him and she felt awful about what we were subsequently having to go through.

I find the whole 'unexplained' thing curious. Surely people who abuse their kids come up with a 'cover story' to stop them getting found out? It feels like we were severely punished for holding our hands up, being honest and saying 'sorry, we don't know what happened, he's an active 2 year old'. If there's any lesson for me in this, it's if I should ever spot another bruise and I'm unsure about where it's come from, I'll be sure to make up a plausible explanation and lie to the authorities.

I don't have a problem with social services giving us a call, or paying a visit to our house. But I believe the decision to start a Section 47 investigation seems completely disproportionate when there are no background issues or history with 14 years of parenting behind us, the nursery referral saying they didn't think it was suspicious, and on day 1 Drs saying no evidence of non-accidental injury. I can't understand why there was no initial assessment as per guidance,
and why instead a decision was made to drag our other 3 children and their schools into this, and put us through weeks of stress and worry.

The 7 year old is a credit to you for their kindness.

category12 · 05/08/2023 11:43

You're not unreasonable to be angry and upset about being investigated, but just put it aside and let it go.

Better SS investigate and do checks for the benefit of children, sometimes erroneously, than they miss abused children.

Morbihanmum33 · 05/08/2023 11:43

Yes, I have requested all paperwork. Nursery called me prior to making the referral and said they had a 'statutory duty' to report it as unexplained and on a soft part of the body. She assured me it was routine and nothing to worry about, and I stupidly said ok. I do think if I had come up with a 'plausible explanation' at that point she would not have made the complaint. Big lesson learnt.

OP posts:
Hibiscrubbed · 05/08/2023 11:43

moistclam · 05/08/2023 11:42

But not every case fits those "red flags" and that's why it's important that all unusual bruising cases like this are investigated regardless of what a good job mummy and daddy have.

See my post above.