This fear that social services will come and take your children...

[willsurvivethis]

...it worries me!

There seem to be so many women out there who are afraid to seek help for depression and other problems out of fear that they will lose their children.

I have just asked MNHQ if they would consider doing something with this. Because surely if so many of us fear to lose our children something is going wrong somewhere! Surely we should all be albe to seek help with confidence?

What are your thoughts on this? I struggle with PTSD and even told my doctor that I tended to keep emotional distance from my ds when he's ill without even considering the possibility of that having repercussions.

Anyone who trusts people who work for the same organisations that employ parking attendants and street warden police wannabes must be daft! And don't forget that ss have access to NHS databases for those who have not opted out....

SurreyDad what a supremely 'helpful' post

(And let's forget, just to keep things simple, that the council also employs teachers, occupational and physiotherapists, child diability support workers, nursery staff, carers, binmen, lollypop ladies)

Actually surreydad - social services do NOT have access to NHS databases - they have to ask for information like everyone else - ONLY if it is in the interests of a child (ie to safeguard a child from harm) can any information be shared and even then it will only be what is relevant to the child - a pattern of neglect or suspicious injuries.

I think a big part of the fear is the stigma attached to mental health issues by society as a whole. I have heard people say that nutters (their words not mine) should have their children taken off them by SS.

Personally I am actually petrified of SS. XH and his family delight in telling me they are going to get them to take dd away and prevent me from ever seeing her again. The fear is compounded by the fact that XMIL works with SS and they are more likely to believe their own and bugger the truth. This was backed up by them giving the courts a complete misrepresentation of my health. There was no medical evidence to back up what they said, but the solicitor writing the report said it must be true because they were a respectable family (can you imagine how offended I was by that).

There is also a mother at dd's school who works with the child protection team (though is not a social worker herself). She strutted about the playground telling anyone who would listen that I would need her services soon because I was mentally unstable and anyway single mothers are useless.

I know there are good social workers out there but the consequences of not getting one of the decent ones are so horrific that the fear is very much there. I am ashamed to admit I jump every time I hear someone at the door or when the phone rings.

www.nigb.nhs.uk/nigb/meetings/061108-4.pdf

Don't try and cover up the fact ss have access, hopelessly.

ok Surreydad - you managed to find a 2 year+ old paper discussing the possibility of providing access. Any proof that it actually happened?

Read stuff before you post it so you know for sure it says what you want it to say.

And do proper links please

MP's have said Social work training is not fit for purpose.

www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmselect/cmchilsch/527/527i.pdf

If anyone can tell me of any improvement's made since this report ws published, i would be really grateful.

or google: House of commons childrens, schools and families committee. Training of children and families social workers. Seventh report of session 2008. July 2009.

I was told by a social work team manager that the reason i was referred to SS when pregnant was " because people with mental health problems are unpredictable"

That's the same as saying " all Muslims are terrorists and all hoodies carry knives" or any other discrminatory sterotype!!

At that time the only info they had was that i had ticked a box during my booking visit stating i had a history of MH problems.

I now tape record EVERY phone call and have a hidden camera in my home for when HV etc come to visit. If i had done this when pregnant it would have made the news the way my dh and i where treated.

This equipment can be brought quite cheaply btw

www.connectingforhealth.nhs.uk/systemsandservices/hscip

done as a proper link for the benefit of madmouse. And they wouldn't have been discussing it if they didn't have the intention of doing it...

Thanks for that - yes it is clear that they are running some pilots that still have over a year to go but that give access of some sort. Do you happen to know what form that access takes?

As a lawyer working with government agencies all the time I'm quite used to a) pilots that go nowhere and b) projects that get pulled as our systems of checks and balances stops things from happening on the basis of for example breaches of human rights or privacy rules.

I will be keeping an eye on this.

surraydad - I work for the NHS and I know EXACTLY what access SS have and what they do not.

Your link is out of date and inaccurate. I am NOT allowed to share information with SS about anything unless it would be in the interests of the child to do so. And "in the interests of the child" means to safeguard them.

SS can ring me and ask questions which I may or may not answer from the records depending on why they are asking. They have no direct access to the records at all. I have no interest in lying about this - if as a health professional I could see they had direct access I would say so - hopelessly is right and YOU and wrong.

Inform yourself before writing crap!

... and I am not in an area which is running any sort of pilot and would have serious concerns about this. I take my clients confidentiality very seriously. I don't share information about them willy nilly.

Hi dont hide it be upfront and honest I did and I lost my children into care the worset thing you can do is not get help from I ended up on my own from 2005 to 2007 its not worth risking lossing your children social services always take children first then find out whats going on

www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmselect/cmchilsch/527/527i.pdf

Whoops, I really should remember how to post links.

One of the posters on the Community Care message board has quoted my post as an example of how some 'service users' actually have an intelligent and valid point to make. Patronising as hell, but at least she understood what I was trying to say. She is soon, however, drowned out in a barrage of insinuation that anyone whom Social Services pursue must be hiding something evil they have done to their children.

That is the exact same contemptuous response I received when I was victimised for complaining against the widely-acknowledged cock-up in which I found myself.

I am now absolutely furiously because I have nothing whatsoever to hide.

My first instinct is to sign up to the Community Care forum and tell the whole entire story on the thread and ask them what they think I should have done differently.

But to even join the forum would require me to give my full name (which is a very unusual one, and easily traceable to me via google) and phone number and job details. I refuse to give a fake name simply for the purpose of remaining anonymous; to me, that would be stooping to the level of the SW who lied to me about the purpose of a meeting and told me afterwards that her lie was justified by the current pressures facing her profession. And yes, call me pathetic or a victim but I would be frightened to put my real name to any disclosure of what happened... I am genuinely concerned that if I were to do so, SS or one of the other agencies involved would find a reason to show up on my doorstep and 'investigate' me all over again.

So, I am not prepared to say anything else without using my full name and disclosing precisely what happened, where and when. And yet, I am not prepared to use my real name because I am afraid that to do so would threaten the security of my family.

Would anyone from Community Care like to suggest what I should do?

ok I've taken the decision to hide this thread now because again, like the first time it ran, it is taken over by a few people with a grudge against SS (justified or not) and a handful of ill informed scaremongerers. Doesn't help anyone and I'm getting too stressed. Because yes I started this thread because I had been poorly (with PTSD), admitted to my GP that I kept emotional distance from ds, yet got the help i needed, without judgement. And I want others to have the same.

Over on Community Care Forums:

www.communitycare.co.uk/carespace/forums/anti-social-work-websites-and-blogs-9636.aspx

Alladultsarepapertigers replied on 7 Feb 2011 12:09 PM

?I was stalked and threatened in a virtual and real life manner by someone I worked with through my role in social care. The providers of the internet services were very helpful when I approached them for support to stop it occurring and they cooperated completely with the police investigation.

Which, incidentally, ended up with the person harassing me receiving a two year restraining order from contacting either me or the people in the office I worked in.?

I don?t agree with stalking anyone, but lets look for a moment. This man has taken a parents children away, probably because the mum had PND and was a bit distressed. Then over 9 months, as the stress mounts on the parents, the Social Worker constantly refusing to meet with and discuss things with the parents ? cause well parents aren?t capable of looking after children ? the Social Worker accuses the parents of not engaging with professionals.

Solution ? get a restraining order preventing the parents engaging with the entire Department! Engagement problem solved.

The Social worker goes on to say ?I think the real point is, why should we as social workers be prepared to receive such abuse and threats when we are undertaking our work ? It astounds me that some of the above posts almost seem to be seeking reasons why we deserve it... whilst the work we undertake is indeed often that of the state and indeed sometimes is contentious with the families involved that does not give anyone the right to undertake vendettas against us.?

Wait, let me understand. In England today, people are arrested for future acts of terrorism, which, for all intents and purposes is ?carrying out their job? as instructed by, shall we say Osama Bin Laden (I can?t say it?s true, I?ve never seen any evidence, but the media reports such.)

And then there are all the people in Hitlers command that exterminated Jewish people in one of the worst crimes every in human history. War crimes tribunals have rounded up henchmen in Hitler, Hussian and Bin Laden for decades and this will continue.

But, wait, just like Social Workers, these people are, just, following orders ? right? So why should they suffer the indignity when it was the Boss who Made them do it?

Are social workers saying that they are individually except from scrutiny and the law, because they are just following orders? That just because the tore a family apart on a hearsay inference that is unprovable, that their work doesn?t deserve public scrutiny?

I do agree, and so do many of my colleagues that aggrieved parents often, mostly, have the wrong approach. But it?s totally understandable. Being accused of failing your children is terrible. Having your children removed is, well, animals and prisons get treated better. What is worse, is when the social workers use the same phrases ?the care given prior to the children? or ?not meeting the needs of the child? but when do they sit down and explain which of the 497 Well Being Model Indicators aren?t being met or the 378 PAM (Parents Assessment Manual) skills a parent is lacking in? Once the child has been adopted to China and used for organ harvesting?

Social Workers, in general, have created the public perception and, the comparison the Hitler SS. Hence the use of the term ?SS? in relation to both and to be honest, in the cases I?ve reviewed in the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada and Australia, there isn?t that much difference, there are deaths of children at these peoples hands and they just cover it up.

A child smuggled a recording of the foster carer to their teacher who was shocked to hear the foster carer threatening the child with ?being locked in your room in your bed for the night? and then following that when the child stamped a foot, threatened to kick the child out of the house.

We?ve reviewed the audio recording several times seeking ?emotional warmth? and explaination. We worked out what we?d have done was ask the child why they were upset, and what we could do to help them not be upset, and what they thought we?d agree to. Leading to would the child be happy if we were happy, and would both of us being happy be a good thing? Leading to the child no longer being upset and the problem is resolved.

So let me understand, Foster Cares are expected to have a higher standard of care than parents, yet foster carers, who are strangers who will never care if the child gets married, won?t be there, and won?t even know what the child does in their future life, is allowed to emotionally abuse and threaten a child, but a parent who engages the child is not meeting the needs of the child?

We also have a record of a foster carer throwing a 5 yo across a room, bouncing off a bed and into a wall, because the child was having a tantrum form being locked in a small room for 8 hours. The child just wants to see their parents. Clearly parents have it wrong. Right?

Or is the standard of care given by foster cares, which is suppose to be higher than that of a parent, so appalling low? Noting that foster cares can get paid £400 a week per child. Whilst most parents struggle to bring in £500 a week for the family.

Today we received information about an incident that occurred between a mother and a contact worker. I?m still getting al the details together but in short: A child was standing on a swing. The Contact worker demanded the mother tell the child to get off the swing. The mother said that she knows her child well and that her ability to balance and control was appropriate. The Contact worker threatened to cancel the contact because this was a Health and Safety issue.

A colleague received the Health and Safety Policy for this LA and the centre some months ago as a result of another incident that occurred on the premises with, strangely, the same contact worker and centre manager [who is a social worker] (a pattern of behaviour by these ?professionals? perhaps?)

There is nothing in the Health and Safety policy that says anything about swings. There is nothing in the LA?s broader health and safety policy about Swings. You can read them here ah.net/l/health

As a result of this, the contact worker instructed the social worker to call the police. The police arrived and all hell broke loose. Well the mother was amazingly calm (she had initiated emergency phone call to our crisis line at the time, so we listened in and recorded.) The children were screaming they wanted proper and quality contact, and that the contact worker told the children that she hates the mother. Strangely the contact worker and the centre manager are witnesses in a criminal trial that is taking place and the mother is a witness opposing their evidence.

You tell me how any of this is appropriate.

And for the record, the Social Workers have refuse to tell the mother over the last nine months, and even in cross examination in the High Court, admitted they know nothing about the parents or the family as they haven?t done any investigations in the preceding nine months, but that doesn?t mean that the parents are meeting the needs of the children.

WHAT?

The CAFCASS social worker ignored a letter from the parents asking what the concerns were and then claims that the parents don?t want insight or to hear the concerns explained. The parents wrote to her manager last week asking when they?ll get a reply to the letter from last year.

HELLO?

We?re not expecting a reply. Which means, off to the GSCC, again to see another Social Worker removed from the business, thankfully.

I?ll make another posting shortly that was submitted to Community Care, but we suspect it?s been moderated to oblivion, and it was in support of Mum Net which is being talked about over there with claws and green eyes.

If you want have a look at these films that have screened around London since December, they really make you stop and think for a moment ?Is that what I expect from the police or social workers?? ah.net/l/tmpo ah.net/l/tmsw and ah.net/l/ytsc

And MadMouse, any time you?d like to have a genuine conversation with me and a lot of professionals who support mothers accused of PND (which is a SYMPTOM, not a cause) and those who work with exhausted mothers to alleviate PND, you are welcome to call and meet! Being new mother (that doesn?t mean first child, that means ANY birth) is damn hard work and extremely exhausting, even if you have a doting dad.

So you all have a genuine right and concern, however, as new mums (be it 1st, 3rd or 50th child) you need support and outlet and the ability to let yourselves fall on a heap and just breath out and know, that?s OK and people should smile and tell you, you are doing a great job! Specially if you?re breast feeding!

I?ve also been given permission to announce something very exciting. First the first time a web site that will enable parents to self assess, or review assessment, of their parenting using the 479 Well Being Indicators and 383 Parenting Capacity Skills from the Parenting Assessment Manual. There will also be the Parenting Scale and a few other amazing insights as to how social workers assess you and decide if you are better than they are!

legalmums - I consider myself of average intelligence and I am one of those sub humans known as social workers - well I was until I retired after 30 years.

I have read your post and find it garbled, disjointed, and impossible to understand the point you are trying to make.

Mind it is after midnight, so if I have the motivation I might try again tomorrow. On the other hand I have pledged to myself to keep away from these threads. There is so much comment from ill informed posters about what happens in Childrens Services and I have wasted so much time in the post trying to explain all the steps that have to be gone through, and all the professionals that have to be involved before a case goes to court, that I am weary of doing this.

Also many posters have far more invested in believing their own viewpoints without a shred of evidence that it is a waste of time.

Would there be an chance of stating your case a little more clearly and highlighting briefly the point you are trying to make.

Trouble with ill informed posters is, that is the general perception of the population, so perhaps there needs to be something done about the reputation of the profession? Otherwise it will just be a permenant uphill struggle.

NanaNina, thank you for your insight with regards to my posting. The posting itself outlines a number of different cases that team members are investigating. It's not a single case, so perhaps that's why your finding it confusing.

The elements reported are individual specific events that have been assessed based on the paperwork provided by parents, social workers and the court. The outcome is, in these instances the same - poor quality social work, or as the Judge said himself 'was any social work done at all?'

It may well be, given your experience, and I can't judge whether you are one that received 'a badge of honour' repeatedly for complaints from rambling distressed and traumatised parents, or if you were one of those rare SW's who focused on what could be done to enhance the quality of life. I know they are out there! I've heard reports! I'm yet to actually have contact with one though.

I haven't expressed a view point. I've expressed briefly, the factual evidence. I even provided links to a serious of recent short films that, I think, if you watch, I'd love to hear from you, if that is the conducted expected from social workers.

As to ill informed. I think given that we're all trained from the CWD, well versed and most of us can quote the Assessment of Children in Needs and their Families, we all know the Children Act (or sections) verbatim, and we have worked with PAM and the Well Being Model, the reality might be, overly informed, rather than ill informed.

Any of our team members will tell you that in going to meetings with SW's and parents, it's like watching night and day fight for position. The parents are hopelessly uninformed, and in the sense of social work protocols, uneducated, and the SW's just sprout catch phrases they have seen on Power Point Presentations at the last in-service day. Seriously we see these patterns. Out with the old catch [phrases, in with the new, but never do these people when asked, have an understanding, and worse, how is a parent suppose to understand what these phrases mean.

I'll pick one and I'll challenge any mum on this thread to explain sufficiently, without researching, what the phrase means:

'not able to meet the future needs of the child'

Lets see what parents, who are afraid of social workers know.

How can parents and social workers work together otherwise?

We've just had a call from a distressed parent that the contact was cancelled, whilst the parent was travelling. The reason 'We have discussed the incident that has occurred and made a decision to cancel contact' when the parent asked if the social workers wanted their input, the SW said no, we have all the information we need.

But how can anyone make a decision based on the bias of one party - that is an employed party, who is, in this case, known and prone to be hostile. Even the children concerned have expressed serious concerns.

SurreyDad, sadly it's not a case of repairing the reputation of the profession.

When a Social Workers Manager is standing up physically removing the social worker from abusing parents in a meeting, and the parents run into the LA foyer to get security to try and prevent the matter becoming physical, yet the parents are so calm, you have to wonder.

One only needs to look at he GSCC Notice of Decisions as to the conduct of Social Workers - that are DISCOVERED doing the wrong thing, or that parents have had the courage to report.

Strangely most of the GSCC hearings are as a result of a Manager making the complaint against a subordinate.

We're monitoring one case currently where the parent has been charged with assaulting the social worker.

Yet the video and CCT shoes the parent about 5 or more feet from the social worker and even the police report that there is no evidence of 'strangling' in any of the video. But the LA has insisted that police prosecute. The SW's statement constitutes fraud and by giving the evidence in court, will amount to perjury.

What will the outcome be? Will the parent be scared for life with a criminal record fo assaulting a social worker? Which these days seems to be more serious that shooting a police officer.

Or will the Parent be exonerated by the truth and the video, and the Social Worker prosecuted for making a knowingly false statement.

One of the SW's colleagues admitted in the High Court that she went back to police to change her statement after she saw the video. We can only imagine what was in her first statement, because the second one says there was no assault.

These aren't isolated cases. Every day now, we get more and more parents calling in from all over the UK with documents and stories.

On reading many of the documents, you could almost believe that the children have lived through hell, but what isn't making sense is why 37 families in different LA's all have pretty much the SAME allegations, of horrendous abuses but there is no actual forensic evidence and in all the cases so far, Police have found no evidence of any crime. Not even shop lifting!

I wish there was 'brief' in these situations, but social workers produce so much paperwork, and it's usually a re-writing of a former social workers rewriting of yet another former social workers records, and that first social worker never had contact with the family in the first place.

Personally I believe the standard of evidence needed to proceed in removal of a child must be the criminal standard.

This idea of removing and maintaining 60,000 children a month in care whilst social workers apply to courts to have £36,000 psychiatrists 9 months on have a 1 hour 'interview' with a 5 year old, just astounds me.

In the mean time, the child just wants to be with mum and dad and mum and dad just want to have their child home, go to work, bring up their child and see their child become the next World Leader.

Yes, I know, some parents prefer to be at the pub getting drunk and gambling the benefits away, whilst their kids to got school, so they think, and the kids get into the same pattern of abuse.

But really, is that the common or the uncommon situation?

One of my colleagues raised a good point to NanaNina - you say there isn't a shred of evidence, in relation to my posting, but you haven't sought any evidence.

This is what social workers do - blanket allegations, no evidence, and parents are unable to adapt to the rapid occurring and prohibitive situation.

It's been suggested if you'd like to see the evidence, you drop us a PM and we'll arrange this for you. I'm not talking a letter from a parent, I'm talking CCTV video and video recorded by parents or surveillance.

Then talk to us about social workers meeting the minimum standards expected of a social worker and say there isn't a shred of evidence.

- end colleague input -

Ok, I didn't expect to take so much fire based on the joint views of dozens of professionals from around the world, but people in a forum. We're quite surprised and in fact it's making one PR team wonder do all parents and social workers behave like this and is it the 37 cases are just so totally unique and unjust?

Or are we better investing our passions into something more profitable than caring about our children's children's future?

Did parents know that a LAC (looked after child) record lasts for 75 years? And that at any time that their child becomes subject of a pregnancy, be they the mother or the father, they are automatically flagged for a Case Conference and on the balance of probability removal at birth?

Incidentally someone was talking about the NHS and access to records. I've been told to say 'Symphony' - and that is all that is needed. We aren't all 'ill informed' parents, some of us are highly informed!

[We take no offence, NanaNina, you retired, I'm sure you are in regularly contact with many children whom you corporate parented, right? I'm sure you helped some parents find their way out of hell too, right?]

What organisation do you belong to legalmums - you talk of investigations by team members? On what basis do you carry out these investigations - are you by any chance involved with John Hemmings the Lib-Dem MP from Birmingham.

To be honest there is so much inaccurate information in your post I don't have the time nor the inclination to begin to correct you. Some of the examples you give of sw practice is quite frankly ludicrous. I'm osrry but I will not believe that a sw tried to abuse parents in a case conference.

It's tempting to make more comments but I will resist, but I would be interested as to the nature of your organisation, and on what authority do you investigate cases concerning child protection matters.

I'm glad you take no offence as I am now retired - why on earth would you think I am still in touch with children I worked with in the past. It is true to say that the local authority does become the corporate parent if the child is made subject to a Care Order, but I did not personally parent these children. The actual care of a child in the care of the local authority is carried out mostly by foster carers, or residential workers.

NanaNina, no not involved with Mr Hemmings, although we do cross paths.

I'm puzzled as to how my posting can be inaccurate? It's all facts taken from documents issued by Local Authorities themselves and video or audio recordings. My job is to analyse the data and find the contradictions. So I'm not sure what you mean by inaccurate. That's very 'social worker' of you - make an allegations and keep repeating it till everyone believes you, even if there is no evidence.

Here's a question for you. In contact notes I've just read today, a child is asking the contact workers to write in the notes that they want to go home now, that they hate foster care and no one has explained why the child is in care. This case is now into 6 or 7th month.

What does this mean? That the contact notes are inaccurate? That the social workers are doing a great job? That the child was abused?

Why would I think you're still in touch with children you worked with - because you removed those children from their families, made decisions in the best interests of those children to ensure they had a positive future and reached their full potential.

If you aren't still in their lives, how do you know that your decisions to rip apart those families was right?

How many children did you remove, that were shortly returned to their parents.

Take Winona's case for example, thankfully she found her mum via facebook.

How is a Corporate Parent where the 'adults' change face more frequently that the child sits an exam in school, positive for the child? Isn't the best place for a child, with their parents?

Of course, if the child is being physically beaten by a parent, sure, I agree, there are limited options, and if the child is seriously harmed then there really are no options, at least initially. It would be nice to believe that most people can be helped to refocus, but that becomes harder when your own actions, taking away, punishing the parent by taking what they love, like a parent punish a child by taking the teddy bear, is pretty harsh.

And what if you make a mistake? What if you in fact set a family backwards, socially, economically, spiritually and educationally because you thought best?

You didn't parent the children, but you decided what was in the their best interest and you have no clue as to how any of the, how many?, turned out?

600 children were abused in Foster care in the last year. That we have records for. I hate to think how many are unreported.

And I heard an audio recording of a foster carer telling a child that the foster carers will throw the child, a 5 yo old, out on the street. This is NOT emotionally abusive?

If a parent said this, would this not be a cause for alarm?

So why is a foster carer?

Just a point of clarification if you might assist me to understand and gain insight.

You say that as a social worker you make decisions in the best interest of the child, but you have nothing to do with the parenting and future of the child.

You say that foster carers parent the child, but they have no part in the process of deciding the best interests of the child, they are after all paid employees.

Yet a parent has to not only decide in the best interests of the child, but also parent.

Does that mean families are flawed from the outset and that LA's and Foster carers are the only means to proper upbringing of a child, with the arms length separation of 'best interests' decided by strangers to the child, and the parenting done under instruction by the Foster carer?

I'm looking for happy stories, if you know any, I'd love to be put in contact. But as you said, what interest do you have in the future of the child once the care order is handed down. Next child - right?

Legalmums - you have not responded to the queries I raised about which organisation do you belong to, on whose authority do you investigate these matters. If you will respond to this query I will point out all your inaccuracies, and the way in which your thinking is very muddled about the work of social workers in childrens services. I feel I should do this in case anyone actually believes some of the things that you post, but PLEASE answer my queries. I have to wonder why you haven't done so??

www.ehi.co.uk/news/EHI/6620/sus_anonymisation_described_as_trivial

DillyDaydreaming - just because you work for the NHS does not mean you know everything. How do you know SS are giving you the truthful reason for access to records? I consider what you wrote to be crap - you are stating an unprofessional opinion - so I presume you are not a healthcare professional? In which case you will have very little knowledge of what access SS have.