Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

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:
Metoo2023 · 05/08/2023 12:51

Oldermum84 · 05/08/2023 12:46

They investigated and nothing was found to be wrong. They did their job. They don't do their job and children get abused / die and they get dragged through the coals. They can't use psychic powers to know their was nothing wrong. We should be grateful they exist and that they did their job.

Nobody disputes them doing their jobs. However, the ‘how’ is as important as the ‘what’ and ‘why’.

tianabiscuit · 05/08/2023 12:51

CurlewKate · 05/08/2023 11:42

I don't believe the nursery said that.

I can believe they said it.

I don't believe that it's true. They are probably trying to downplay their level of involvement so they're not on the receiving end of the OP's anger.

AthenaPopodopolous · 05/08/2023 12:51

Yes let it go. Social services cannot take risks with children so just be glad that they’re doing their job properly.
I understand the humiliation you feel though. But alls right with the world, your children are safe and they came to the right conclusions.
Thau can’t afford to make mistakes with kids safety.

MrTiddlesTheCat · 05/08/2023 12:52

In my case they suspended the initial investigation and when straight to the full one due to the nature of the referee and timings. Basically I was referred by a social worker in adult services. Child services said the referral was so bad, and coming from another professional, they thought they'd have to remove DS and they only had a few weeks before Christmas so they had to hurry.

Thankfully my health visitor filled them in on how the adult services social worker had been slapped down by the Court of Appeal for failure to comply with statutory law and acting unprofessionally. She'd fought me through the courts for 2 years and the day the road ran out and she had to actually do her job, she referred me to child services to try and have my baby taken away.

The terror you feel when going through it is unimaginable, even when you know you've done nothing wrong. It took me years to get over the trauma of it.

tianabiscuit · 05/08/2023 12:52

That said, the nursery were right to report unexplained and unusual bruising.

CurlewKate · 05/08/2023 12:53

One of the problems is that when a high profile case happens, the social workers are bound by confidentiality and the other people involved aren't.

Bananabrain99 · 05/08/2023 12:53

Whilst there is a small risk of missing physical abuse in this situation (small because you are experienced parents, didn't make a fake explanation, child is 2 and mobile, no other risk factors such as new man in household), there is a high risk of causing extreme distress to the whole family with an investigation like this which can't be ignored. We had similar with our youngest DC 10yrs ago now and we all still feel traumatised and approach seeking healthcare for our kids differently. It all felt very unfair for me as we have a disabled DC which it was always a struggle to get any support for, also when I saw other kids with injuries from parents not supervising them well receiving no such judgements, and the fact that I was an emotionally abused as a kid which wouldn't have provoked the same level of response from SS as a physical injury does so was left to carry on for years. I recognise though that these thoughts are irrational and the system has developed in response to previous failures for abused kids and on the whole things are safer for kids now than they used to be.

I am very sorry you went through this though as it was very traumatising. I don't think a complaint would help you much, but you do need time to talk about your upset and anger as you would with any trauma.

DinnaeFashYersel · 05/08/2023 12:57

@FluffyFlannery

You would be the type that would work for them

what a bizarre comment

You are most strange

lemmein · 05/08/2023 12:59

Museya15 · 05/08/2023 11:26

They did it because they like to go after professional people rather than the kids parents that get reported all the time and after one report don't bother to follow up the rest as they're from a sink estate and so the kid continues to be abused. It's the same with the police they rub there hands in glee at arresting a person with no criminal history, own home, great job etc etc, just for dropping litter or skipping a red light just as it turns. They love it.

So much shite on this thread from the clueless 🙄

GoodChat · 05/08/2023 13:00

Are you certain no previous concerns have ever been raised?

Concerns raised by a nursery are always going to be taken seriously because they know the family and have safeguarding training.

I understand it was a stressful time but my children have gone to nursery with unexplained bumps and bruises loads of times and I always tell nursery the truth.

MadinMarch · 05/08/2023 13:00

Soft targeting, OP.

I would be prepared to wager you don’t have a pit bull running around growling behind the front door, or a large bloke with a’Hitler’ tattoo on his forehead answering it. I expect the older children didn’t tell the SW to F off or threaten to head butt them.

So it would be a nice job to investigate your family.

The notion of SSD "soft targeting' is absolutely ridiculous!
Do you really think the only people who physically or sexually abuse their children own pit bulls or have swastika tattoos on their forehead?
It would undoubtedly be of very great assistance to Social Services if all abusers were so self identifying in this way!
Unfortunately, child abusers can, and do, come from all walks of life, are of all ages, and the perpetrator can also be a trusted family member or friend.

Thebirdhouse · 05/08/2023 13:01

I'd make a complaint - rationally and calmly.

S/workers are just people who make decisions correctly and incorrectly, experienced and inexperienced.

What would irk me the most here was bringing your other three children and their schools into it. It casts more than a shadow of doubt over your family that will remain on school files. It puts you on a very uneven footing if you ever need to raise issues with the schools.

Bobsledgirl · 05/08/2023 13:03

As if social workers have time for ‘soft targetting’ . Ridiculous comment.

Morbihanmum33 · 05/08/2023 13:03

Sorry did not mean to imply this at all.

Having had no prior contact in my life with SS, I was v naive to procedures. When I got the call to go to the hospital for the medical I was on my way to work.

I’m sure other people - with any sort of commitment or appointment may also have said ‘oh I’m sorry but rather busy today, can we do this tomorrow instead?’

Clearly, when told they could take my son into care, I realised the severity of the situation and dropped everything to comply.

OP posts:
madeofcheeze · 05/08/2023 13:04

MrsTwiggy · 05/08/2023 11:18

I've never had any SS involvement or even know anyone who has. I had absolutely no idea that bruising on a two year old's legs would trigger this type of thing?!

My nearly-2yo is running around and tripping over constantly. He has so much energy, he's always running and climbing things. He always has bruises on his shins, I honestly never imagined anyone would bat an eyelid - he's a toddler fgs!

New anxiety unlocked for me, then!

So sorry you've had such a stressful thing to deal with, OP xx

You probably do know someone. I don't exactly advertise that we had SS at our door.

GoodChat · 05/08/2023 13:04

I’m sure other people - with any sort of commitment or appointment may also have said ‘oh I’m sorry but rather busy today, can we do this tomorrow instead?’

I wouldn't think like that if SS called me. I'd comply immediately. My children are more important than my job.

dottiedodah · 05/08/2023 13:05

I agree that SS seem to target "easy" cases .Just a few weeks ago a poor baby was returned to its drug addicted parents after being removed at birth ! Just who makes such a stupid decision? I am not slating SW par se ,just stupid rules they have to follow.The worst thing is while they are investigating innocent parents ,who knows how many babies and children at real risk are suffering ?

Rachie1973 · 05/08/2023 13:05

GoodChat · 05/08/2023 13:04

I’m sure other people - with any sort of commitment or appointment may also have said ‘oh I’m sorry but rather busy today, can we do this tomorrow instead?’

I wouldn't think like that if SS called me. I'd comply immediately. My children are more important than my job.

But if you hadn’t done anything wrong and didn’t realise that it was a potentially serious problem then it’s a perfectly normal answer.

Bobsledgirl · 05/08/2023 13:07

What people are failing to realise us that there is a legal process they have to follow. So interviews with all children, medical, time to speak to other professionals…..this must be done by law. May or may not end with no further action…which it has in your case.

Morbihanmum33 · 05/08/2023 13:10

Of course, the irony of this whole situation is that, had I been abusing my child, there would have been no referral in the first place, because if I had inflicted those injuries I would have had a plausible alternative explanation. Nursery gave us a chance to explain, but we were honest & said ‘I don’t know’. Had we been able to explain they would not have referred, because the statutory duty in this instance relates to unexplained bruising.
So, sadly, there are probably many many cases of abuse being ‘explained’ away all the time.

OP posts:
Ponoka7 · 05/08/2023 13:11

Boomboom22 · 05/08/2023 12:45

So much this. They clearly either don't bother to investigate or buy nonsense stories from parents. The files on all the ones who die show this over and over. It should have been dismissed with a phone call if referred at all.

They absolutely should not dismiss non accidental bruising on a toddler, reported by the nursery. I'd have included the nursery in my investigation, it does sound strange the way the referral has been done and as said, bullshit about the manager being in tears, she's covered her back. I hope Ofsted (who aren't great) looks at the accident incidents.
'SW's' aren't one group who travel around the country, they are separate people, seperate departments and just like maternity care, some departments fail. These didn't, they investigated, just like the other SW departments should have. Unless this team are leaving babies to die, then that's irrelevant that some SW's do. There's never failure just by SWs , it always involves failures in the court, probation and police as well. I think after the murders that have happened by older siblings, now they are included in the investigation more than ever. When I started working in children and family services, the one thing that surprised me was how many families are working and outwardly decent, at least the drug addicts have excuses. Just like DV perpetrators, it's across all classes and incomes. People think it isn't which is what made the Constance Martin case so surprising to many.

jumperoozles · 05/08/2023 13:11

Sounds incredibly stressful and I’m very surprised that it was such an investigation for one incident of bruising! However the case was rightly found that there was no abuse and the case has been closed so I would just move on now.

Willmafrockfit · 05/08/2023 13:11

@Morbihanmum33 you said he tripped over a bike

madeofcheeze · 05/08/2023 13:12

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.

The majority? Are you sure about that? I'd like to see the figures. I can understand why they have to visit but I'm certainly not GRATEFUL for the almost three weeks of stress they put me through.

RugbyMom123 · 05/08/2023 13:12

Sounds like you raising it with the nursery caused them to go into defence mode and make the first strike.