Sara Sharif case - update - horrifying

[amIloud]

This case is just beyond the realms of horrifying,

www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cgl461xwg3do

This poor child.

What options were there, for Sara?

Placed with her father, who had a history of abusing women and neglecting children;

Placed with her mother, who had a record for biting a child, possibly learning difficulties, and a history of violence and neglect of children;

Long term fostering, which as Twiglets says, has poor outcomes for children on any metric;

Adoption and the chance to grow up with a vetted new family.

That's it, that's all the options that existed for Sara and she was completely failed by those who had power over her life. You seem determined to believe that she'd have gave been better off with her mother but while she'd be better off as in not dead, that a very low bar indeed isn't it? Neither of her parents 'care' was good enough. Being alive is better than being dead but she'd still have had an awful abusive childhood. It's not good enough.

On the radio lbc I heard someone saying each child at risk needs a digital number so for instance the school and police would have been able to link up the whole picture that Sarah was on a child protected order since birth etc.
I'm astonished that this isn't already in place. Apparently the school therfore were working with very limited information about the abusers??

Surely if everyone had access to the info this wouldn't have happened??

Bruises strange hijab pulled way over, home school /on protection order.

It's all being massively over complicated the bare risks and facts are right there they weren't linked up. AND yes the home school sealed her fate but she was being brutally attacked for years whilst at school it's a miracle she lived as long as she did.

@Tandora I don't think any of us can know that from what is reported in the press. Even the guardian article refers to things not considered in the social workers court report, but then says it doesn't know if the social worker had access to the other documents containing that information.

Also if it's true that the social worker only had nine months in practice - it says they qualified 2yrs prior but not whether they practiced - they shouldnt (according to social work England standards, the regulator, and the policies of most local authorities) be allocated any proceedings, so they shouldn't have been assessing dad or writing reports about him. It's a bit daft to talk about holding someone to account for mistakes if they're at a level in their career that they're assumed not to be capable of that type of work.

Also interested as per the other poster to know what the 'other options' are that you keep referring to, as I'm non the wiser?

@Wimberry I feel for SW with huge caseloads. At the same time this was preventable.
Uktimately, it's govt at fault really - for not funding this properly.
Surrey SW are so overrun that my friend who is on CP (SEN child, needs residential and this is the only way to do it) was numerous times 'can your family support you'? Can they take him more? Can your neighbours! give you a few hours?
If that's the oversight children on s47 get I don't know how worse it can get.

Am I correct that under 5s aren't tracked at all? So, we somehow must have register of home ed kids bc we might miss them, but under 5s aren't required to attend nursery, have HV check at 2yo (our area has no funding), immunisation is not compulsory? So younger kids who are generally more vulnerable are not covered at all? They aren't registered/tracked?

Yes, they possibly underestimated the impact of their abuse because of the prolonged nature. The probably started off seriously injuring her, thinking they took it too far, but were surprised she seemed okay. They probably told themselves that what they did wasn’t that bad so they kept doing it assuming she would bounce back again. In reality she had broken bones and internal injuries, the medical experts could tell she suffered historically in their care which they likely didn’t anticipate.

Yes, exactly. The child becomes an object, a receptacle for their anger and hatred, and they cease to think of ‘it’ as a living thing, with a limit on how much he or she can take.

Your point about them being emboldened by how much abuse a child can take is spot on.

Look, I just dont agree there’s enough evidence to say that with the right support and the absence of an abusive man in the picture that Sara wouldn’t have been safe living with her mother. Maybe this is the case, I just don’t think we can say this based on what we know.
Most of the allegations made against Olga were made by Sharif himself and not tested in court. Previous incidents were while the two were living together and she was also being subject to serious domestic violence.

Women who end up with abusive men are often in an impossible position. They are at risk if they stay; at risk if they leave. They are held responsible for not protecting their children and threatened with having their children removed if they don’t leave/ cut contact, but then disbelieved/ blamed of parental alienation , and at risk of having their children removed if they do.

The same attitude displayed by people on this thread- the instinct to draw an equivalence between the parents and hold Olga just as accountable as Sharif; to see her primarily as a perpetrator not a victim , to dismiss her account of events and take the allegations made against her by Sharif- a man who systematically abused her - at face value, is the same attitude displayed by the social worker and the judge that led to this terrible chain of events.

I don't think any of us can know that from what is reported in the press

You don’t think we can know if the report was wildly irresponsible / inappropriate?

A report that determined:

Sharif “appears to have the children’s welfare at heart.. I have assessed Urfan as being able to make decisions, in line with the safety and wellbeing of the children,”

A report that recommended that Sharif should be given responsibility for deciding whether and when to increase the children’s contact with their mother, an alleged victim of his abuse.

Of course we know this was wildly irresponsible and a terrible error in judgement. Sharif murdered her .

This is just right wing extremists capitalising on a young child’s death. It’s in serious poor taste to post this.

@Wimberry thank you for your insight. I managed to find the reference to her length of service. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/dec/14/inexperienced-social-worker-sara-sharif-father-risk

Now the Observer can reveal the author was allocated the complex case in July 2019 only nine months after starting their employment with Surrey county council (SCC), having gained their social work qualification two years earlier.

@Tandora do you know what a caution is? Olga admitted biting the children. That’s why it was not tested in court - because she admitted it and they gave her a caution as a quick resolution. Cautions require acceptance of guilt. If you think biting children makes her a good and safe choice, then your judgment is extremely poor. Your standards are in the gutter.

Just a small addendum to @Wimberry 's very helpful posts - these tragedies cast a long shadow over SSD over many years

By chance I've worked in 2 places in the aftermath of highly publicised child deaths - one 2 or 3 years later and one decades later - the former place was like the Marie Celeste anyone who could leave had done so and recruitment was all but impossible

At the latter place a small number of staff who had been young SW at the time of the death were approaching retirement and still carried the shame anxiety and guilt even tho' not directly involved in the case

@Efacsen thank you for sharing this, that was really interesting and insightful to hear. It’s also a bit sad as you can only imagine the knock on impact to children in the catchment area having low staff. Hopefully SS get the right support they need, to enable them to help other families.

Yes it’s clear that she bit her child while she was living with Sharif. We don’t know what the circumstances around that were- one poster (was it even yourself?) suggested that maybe Sharif forced Batool and Olga to bite the children. Of course I have no idea if that’s the case or not- it’s a possibility, there are many others.

Olga was clearly vulnerable, she was a victim of domestic violence, has additional learning needs, an immigrant with limited language skills , etc. she was clearly failing as a mother. Biting a child is clearly horrific and beyond unacceptable, but children aren’t adopted because of one incident of that nature, and regardless of the context.

I just don’t think there is enough evidence to say that with the right support in place- a different environment- the absence of Sharif’s abuse and control- Olga couldn’t have provided the best environment for Sara. I just don’t. Maybe that is the case, but I just think the assumptions that are being made are so very wrong .

I've never bitten my children, but I think it is more common than you think.

A former colleague of mine admitted to me that he was biting his now 20 year old son as a toddler.

Apparently his son was a biter as a toddler and one day he bit him back to teach him a lesson.

I'm not defending Olga, I don't know the full details of the case.

I'm just saying that she most likely wasn't as bad as Sharif.

Apparently his son was a biter as a toddler and one day he bit him back to teach him a lesson

There was mumsnet Aibu thread not that long back with the title “Aibu to bite my toddler”. The woman had twins, one of whom was a terrible biter and used to constantly bite the other twin . The OP asked whether she would be unreasonable to bite her toddler just once really hard to show him how it felt. The majority of mumsnetters voted YANBU.

But surely it's obvious that there's 'biting' [small painful nip] and actual biting [broken skin, teeth marks, bruising]

No-one is ever recommending the latter as normal parenting

Personality disorders are connected with repeat trauma. Often in a family environment.

When it comes to abuse of children, you will find often there is an origin in the family.

The degradation of the children in this case was specific, calculated and sadistic. Urfan’s defence was truly alarming. It was highly manipulative.

That no one spotted the capacity for a personality disorder and instead put it down to “not knowing what to do” beggars belief. It suggests that social workers and judges really believe that beating, biting children, burning them with cigarettes is connected with “not knowing how to parent”.

And I think any sensible person would think it was more likely that there was something mentally wrong with this “parent”.

The child complained that Olga bit them “hard”. The bite would have had to be hard enough for the police to have been involved ie leaving a mark/injury. Did your colleague inflict the same force on their child? If not, it’s a false equivalence.

No one here has said that Olga was as bad as Sharif, aside from @Tandora putting words in others mouths.

What people are saying is that Olga was not a fit parent as both parents were abusive.

No of course you are right and it’s not normal parenting. It’s absolutely unacceptable to bite a child. But as I said children aren’t adopted because of one incident of that nature, and regardless of the context.

Remember that Sara’s sibling (child Z) reported by abuse by both Urfan and Olga to their foster parents.

one poster (was it even yourself?) suggested that maybe Sharif forced Batool and Olga to bite the children. Of course I have no idea if that’s the case or not- it’s a possibility, there are many others.

That poster was really reaching. She was throwing up pretty outlandish suggestions to absolve Olga.

No one here has said that Olga was as bad as Sharif

Wasnt it you who posted that Reddit thread saying exactly this?

Furthermore, people are endlessly making statements that draw equivalence as you just did just now- eg “both parents were abusive”.

Im not “putting words in people’s mouths” at all. And actually I know that rationally everyone on this thread knows that Sharif is much worse than Olga. but it’s the unconscious bias , the ingrained misogyny that is leading people to demonise Olga with the same brush, to make wild assumptions based on limited evidence, to hold her responsible for the decisions and actions of an abusive man, to disbelieve / distrust her account of events, to see her as an abuser not a victim that concerns me.

I don’t think the suggestion was outlandish, nor do I think she was trying to absolve Olga (I think she’s a pp who also sees her as an abuser, and thinks Sara should have been adopted ), but it was a theory and we have zero evidence for it.

However, again, what is true is we don’t know the circumstances of that incident ; biting children isn’t as rare as some may think and children aren’t adopted based on one incident of that nature and regardless of the context.

This is you behaving in an intimidating manner yet again, and putting words in people’s mouths yet again to prove a point about your men vs women rhetoric.

Yes, I posted a Reddit thread where a commenter stated what is in the attached screenshots.

Yet on multiple occasions you have acted like it is my personal wording and dropped in your passive aggressive emojis. Could you stop pestering me now? I’m not posting to engage with you specifically yet you keep cropping back up. Please leave me alone.

It's not really the sort of 'parenting' that occurs in isolation - and it's emotionally abusive to terrorise a child there was also evidence of neglect - which together were sufficient for care proceedings to be instituted

The 2 Guardian journalists above have more documents so further information is likely to become available in future