Are wealthy parents ever prosecuted for child abuse?

[Lemonsugarhigh]

Have seen about a lot of neglectful parents in court recently who have abused their kids. Almost all the cases covered in the press are about very poor families, generally living in pretty dire conditions. But abuse goes on in wealthy homes too, why does this seem to go under the radar? Is it just that SS overlook suffering kids if their parents have cash? Or is it that the parents are better at hiding abuse? Or does the press have a preference for covering the neglect and poverty combination?

@Isittimeformynapyet

I think vac means the vacations/holidays,

That's heartbreaking.

I think, yes this is true to an extent. Wealth makes it easier to conceal abuse and comes with reputational advantages linked to profession etc.

However, there are lots of ways in which child abuse may be linked to (more likely to occur in the context of) poverty, eg:

1. Those living with a low income or in poverty are under greater strain. They may therefore have fewer personal resources available for managing their own behaviour /parenting because of the mental load associated with being poor and/or may be more likely to experience things which increase the risk of child abuse (eg mental health, eg entering into and then becoming trapped in an abusive relationship)

2. Some factors exist which may lead both to poverty and to child abuse. For example, care leavers may be traumatised or have poor experiences of parenting that make their own children more at risk of abuse, and are also more likely to be affected by poverty. Same goes for mental health and substance abuse. These things increase the risk of both poverty and child abuse.

It's bad for children to be poor. Most children's circumstances will be elevated if their parents have more wealth.

All of this is so true.

I came from a fairly wealthy family. My dad was the chief executive of a very large multi national lift company. He had a lot of money, think mobile phone as soon as they came out, new BMWs, car phone before anyone had one, trips to Japan for business etc. My mum came from a wealthy background, went to grammar school back when it was posh and selective, but she ended up alcoholic and schizophrenic and my Dad was more interested in his work than caring for me. Both of them were abusive in different ways and I fell well and truly under the radar, living in our very middle class 4 bed house in London. I don’t want to upset anyone so won’t go into details but I’ve seen my Mum try to murder my Dad, I’ve seen my Mum sectioned many times, I’ve been hungry and been physically and emotionally abused. But no one really stepped into help because we were a “posh” family. It was only when my Mum tried to stab my Dad with a fork and the police were called that I went into temporary foster care (which was wonderful by the way) and then when she was “better” I was returned to live with her again. She was good at putting on a front. No one really gives a shit if you live on a good street, attend private school and have an alcoholic mum as lots of rich people drink a lot anyway - wine o clock (every fucking day, all day).

And yes the abuse in private schools and boarding schools is dreadful in many different ways. The pressure, the lack of love. Experienced it first hand.

I think you're right 😳

Private schools absolutely definitely do report abuse through the proper channels / to social services! Although in the majority of cases I’ve been told about the parents then withdrew the child from the school. Obviously their file and the history of abuse being reported goes with them to their new school. Rich and intelligent abusers will and do get away with it more.

I think the social worker was caught off guard by the lovely home, the tea served in china (tray and everything, I was the one trying not to drop it) and the dignified, articulate parent.

Not knocking her. I couldn’t do her job. The pressure must be immense and the body keeps score. So she probably relaxed out of relief & tiredness.

And I kept the more obvious red flags under my hat. You might want things to stop, but getting a parent into deep shit kind of trouble, and the reality of being plonked on the alternative parent, can look like a fire compared to a frying pan.

I was trained from birth to have my game face on when out or when company was around. Not because any of us anticipated it all going to shit in our family. Just because of “what would the neighbours think !” normal middle class “nice & polite” child rearing.

Wouldn’t have called us wealthy though. Just normal middle classed (not upper !) well off enough for all needs and enough wants to not become bad for you.

Yes, holidays, non-term time. Oxford terms are only eight weeks, so having somewhere to stay out of termtime if you can’t/won’t go home is key — not possible at all colleges, as some host conference accommodation in the vacs.

Like if a poor parent stopped bothering the house would descend into an unhygienic shithole, the kids would have lice, no food etc etc a rich parent stops bothering they can just pay for cleaners boarding schools etc.
Just wanted to expand more on what I said. Neglect is probably the most common type of abuse but when it comes to physical or sexual abuse it spans all levels of wealth

I worked in child protection for many years. It was very difficult to reach richer families often because they knew we couldn't get through their door without their agreement and quite often suspicions initially won't meet a criminal threshold so the police and courts won't get involved at that point.

Also as pps have said money buys you stress release, nannies etc.

The poor are more vulnerable in many ways.

It was an impossible job on many levels

The threshold for what is acceptable is different dependant on various factors. Look at the mcCanns as a prime example - imagine if a single parent in a council flat had popped to the takeaway across the road and left children unattended and one was abducted- the others would be taken away and a case for neglect would be looming

It’s not as simple as that though. All the research shows that poor families are more likely to abuse their children than wealthy ones.

https://repository.stcloudstate.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1020&context=cfs_etds

I have found (somewhat from personal experience) that the more ‘well to do’ a family is the more the abuse is excusable. Especially mental/verbal abuse. I heard so many times ‘but look how much stuff you’ve got! Look at all the opportunities you’ve had! Just ignore the bad, you’re luckier than most’.

Bit of a sidestep but this is one reason I feel awful for Prince Harry. He evidently felt and tried to say despite the wealth and glory that came with being a Royal, it didn’t mean he didn’t have a very horrid, cold childhood/adolescents at times. Went through things no child should have. Yet he’s always shown to be some sort of ungrateful brat…

Just far less often than in poorer families.

It’s disappointing that people deny the science because they dislike the data.

https://www.nuffieldfoundation.org/news/relationship-between-poverty-and-child-abuse-and-neglect

I don't actually think that's true. The threshold for removing children from their parents care is very high and prosecutions for child neglect even higher.

Sadly abuse can happen in rich or poor families

Imo there are different types of abuse. Some are linked to poverty, some aren't.

Some types of abuse, such as CSA, seem to cross all social and economic classes in terms of perpetrators. Poverty makes children more vulnerable to this type of abuse (less safeguards in place, safe places to go), but all children are at risk. Likewise, you find emotionally abusive or neglectful parents at all income levels. Some well-off parents are abusive to their families and exploit their position of privilege to get away with this.

But other types of abuse are linked with poverty and neglect. It is much harder to find the emotional bandwidth to be a compassionate, emotionally responsive parent if you yourself are stressed, at the end of your resources and ground down by life. Particularly where parents have themselves grown up in abusive and neglectful homes, it can be very difficult for them to break the cycle.

Who’s denied the science?

@HongKongGarden

It is as simple as that. There are many who will not even make that data. They enter therapy in adulthood. It’s got nothing to do with disliking data, but there are huge limitations there. There have been some very sensible replies on this thread. Poverty will increase the likelihood of a child suffering from abuse in a way that makes that child known to services. Known being the key word here.

The comparison would be more like
A working class couple leave their 3yo and 18mo twins in their council house asleep to go to the local working men’s club to drink pints around the corner. They meet their mates who are doing the same thing. They supposedly check on each others kids every 30 minutes and one child goes missing.

I have a very hard time believing that an emergency care order wouldn’t be sought for for the remaining twins.

Provide your data then, to show that the large-scale research that I gave is flawed.

Assertion based on left-wing student politics doesn’t cut it.

@CakeInAJar if there were no other concerns, I think it's very unlikely there would be an emergency care order.

The bar for taking children into care is so high this wouldn't be enough. There might be Social Work input for a while but taking into care? Absolutely not.

Perhaps the wealthier families whose children end up on Child in Need or Child Protection plans have the resources and support networks to get their shit together and fix the issues that are raised during the social services involvement. It doesn’t mean that the issues stay fixed once the involvement of social care has ended, but they can probably gather enough support/help together to satisfy the bare minimum requirements.

Constance Marten is an example of wealth not being able mitigate everything though!

@HongKongGarden

Oh dear….

It isn’t left wing politics to assume that those families living in poverty will be known to services. That data tells us only of the “known” cases.

Do you have any experience in working within adult mental health services whereby you hear peoples stories day in, day out? Have you not actually read this thread at all? Your data doesn’t mean much when families of higher class go under the radar for all of the reasons mentioned above. I don’t know why this has triggered you so much to be honest.

I think we have all agreed that abuse is universal, it’s just highlighted more within working class families. It’s also been stated that various types of abuse such as neglect can actually be even easier the wealthier a family becomes. Money does not protect all children from abuse. Sorry that upsets you/threatens you.

A friend works in child protection. The families she works with are often young//single parents involved with substance abuse/crime/generational involvement (neglect). SS are contacted by the police (crime/drugs) and school (non attendance). SS can be involved for years and years with family members following the same path as previous generations, especially as family members are most likely to be the people the children are placed with.

There are some wealthier families and they tend to know their rights, and are not reluctant to complain through the official channels. This results in a lot of paperwork for SS, causing the SS being switched a number of times until they get one they can 'work with' ie who will do as they are told.

There is usually someone in the wealthier families background who the child can be placed with. The placement isn't always successful but it is often more stable than the child whose family has a history of SS involvement.