My sisters children are going to be removed

[Namechange543]

Name changed for this but hoping someone can offer some advice.

My sisters children are going to be removed, there is a court hearing on Tuesday to decide this but with the overwhelming evidence against her and the fact they’ve been on a child protection plan for so long with her making no positive steps it’s only going to go one way.

The social worker tells me once the judge has made a decision they will speak to family about placements for them. I really want to help but the problem is she has 3 children and I already have 2 of my own so I can’t take them all. I have a 4 bed house so couldn’t fit them even if I could cope with 5 children.

Will they want them to stay together or will they split them to keep them with family? And if they do split them how on earth do you decide which 1 you take?

It’s such a nightmare. My mum could take 1 and I could take 1 but then do we leave the 1 not chosen to go into foster care. How damaging would that be! I’ve cried so much this week with the guilt that I can’t help them all.

[ExhaustedBeyondBelief]

How the hell have the poor children been allowed to get in that state?!?!?

[Coyoacan]

Actually if you feel able to take one and deal with all their issues, do so. Likewise your mother. It doesn't sound like it is necessarily in their best interests to stay together as they all sound like they need a lot of individual expert therapy.

[amijustparanoidorjuststoned]

@SoloMummy READ THE FULL THREAD. Two major updates since then.

OP - I don't have any constructive advice. I'm so sorry your family are going through this and I just wanted to send an un-mumsnetty hug

[Deadringer]

That sounds really hard op. It seems unlikely that the children will be kept together due to the challenges they present and the shortage of suitable foster homes. Its possible that residential care might be considered due to the violence, especially for the older ones. Fostering is not easy, even if the children are related to you. As a pp its not just a question of them sleeping in your house, they would become part of your family. Ask yourself what you can cope with, and if its possible for you to take one of the children it can be considered if a place is not found for all 3. Alternatively, if a suitable family is found for them, you can help by visiting, keeping in touch, having them to your house for visits, in short being there for them as a loving auntie.

[RandomMess]

I have 4 DC, I have to say I would be reluctant to consider taking in even one, their needs are going to be all consuming.

I know several foster carers and several adopters. Love and space isn't enough. The impact on your DC would be huge.

It would be nice if you can build a relationship with them in terms of individual days out a few times a year. That could be of benefit to the DC and something you could discuss with SS.

[Babyroobs]

@ExhaustedBeyondBelief

How the hell have the poor children been allowed to get in that state?!?!?

Exactly this makes me so cross, how can they have been failed so badly.

[AIMD]

@Namechange543

The children are 5, 9 and 10. The 9 and 10 year old do not get along at all and are very violent towards each other. To the point the school they used to both go to moved 1 to a neighbouring school in order to separate them as they felt they were not safe together. So in my opinion it’s not in their best interest to keep them together.

All 3 children also have severe behavioural needs due to their situation and the abuse they have suffered. The 10 year old has engaged in inappropriate sexual behaviour, the 5 year old is very aggressive and the 9 year old has previously stabbed another child. I don’t think anyone could take all 3 of them and cope.

I have a spare bedroom and can take 1. My 2 children cannot share bedrooms as they are 15 and 16 years old (boy and girl) so it’s not appropriate for them to share with each other or a younger child. My sisters children are all boys but they are not safe to be in a bedroom together. They are going to need a high level of support after all this and honestly social care have been negligent leaving them where they are for so long as they’ve suffered so much. I expect they know how difficult they will be to house and that’s why they’ve avoided removing them.

Ah this is awful. Those poor children. From this update is does sound likely it will be difficult, and not necessarily preferable, to place them together.

Are you prepared for meeting the needs of one child with a lot of emotional/behavioural difficulties? If so In your shoes I’d probably ask to be considered to care for the youngest child and ask to keep contact with the older children.

[Namechange543]

My mum can only take 1. She lives in a 1 bed flat. She could give that bedroom to 1 child and she sleep in the living room. That’s providing she’s deemed suitable. She’s in her 60s so she will need an awful lot of support with this still. My thinking is she might be better taking the youngest as the youngest currently has less behavioural issues.

I was thinking I could take 1 of the older ones. It will be very tough and they will need a huge amount of therapy but I’m lucky that my partner doesn’t work, is supportive of this and my children are older so pretty much independent which means I would have more time and resources to help the 1 child.

But we can’t just leave the 3rd! There is no other family at all. We’ve tried to explore all options and I can’t see how it could work. It’s absolutely heartbreaking. I’m so angry at social services also, if they removed those children 3 years ago before they became as difficult as they are now I could have taken 2 as then they could have shared a room. It’s honestly horrifying what they have been through and social services knew. My sister has been arrested repeatedly for child abuse and still kept her children!

[Doodar]

@Babyroobs

I would take the youngest. Let the elder two be fostered separately be experienced foster carers who will know how to handle them. The youngest is far enough removed from your children in age for them not to feel threatened. Are your own kids on board with you re-homing one ? The youngest may well thrive on some individual attention and love. I guess you wont know without trying. How old is your mum and does she have support, it sounds like any of them might be too much for her to handle on her own ??

agree

[solidaritea]

If you feel you could support one of these children, tell the social workers. Your current relationship with them will be important - is it better than a stranger's? They'd then assess and decide what is in the best interests of the children. Don't let yourself be pressured into taking on more than you and your family can handle, but do seriously consider it.

[Theforest]

This is an incredibly difficult situation to be in. Maybe longer term specialist fostering with contact is a better option bearing in mind the impact this would have on your family.

[WhySoSexist]

The three children should be homed together. It's very, very, very, very unlikely that a court would think it's beneficial for them to be split even amongst family members. If you can't take all three then you probably won't be allowed to care for any of them.
Even if you are willing to take all three, the courts (guided by Social Services) may determine that you're not the best option for these children. It will depend on your own circumstances but also whether you helped your sister with her problems and whether you'd facilitate further neglect/abuse from her. Family are usually a priority but it depends on the risk to the children.
If you're not able to provide a genuinely good environment for these children then please don't tell social services that you can. It will just result in these children spending longer in care whilst the court issues are resolved and make them harder to place later on. If you are able to provide a genuinely good environment then you need to take all three children. Two children can share one bedroom so, depending on the size of your bedrooms, that shouldn't be an issue - however, there are an awful lot more factors to consider than bedrooms.

[Mehmen]

What a terrible situation for everyone, particularly the children.
Like everyone else has said it depends on ages and their understanding of what is happening.
Think very carefully. Either way it’s going to be tough but try and look at damage limitation in the short term.
Me personally would have them all between family members, it really wouldn’t bother me if my children had to share a bedroom with their cousins. Anything to keep them in the family

[riotlady]

@SoloMummy and her current two kids just have to deal with 3 new siblings, with violent behaviour, one of whom has been sexually aggressive? It’s really not that simple.

OP, these children need long-term, intensive therapeutic parenting. If you don’t think you’re capable of providing that, then I think all you can do is hope that social services can place them with someone who can, and provide as much support as you can via visits etc.

[titchy]

You've a 4 bed house ffs. Take them all!

Read the thread solomummy (though OP you should have mentioned their severe behaviour originally).

It doesn't sound as if it would be in their best interest at all to stay together, and realistically placing one with your mum might not be sensible if she is near to your sister. I'd have thought the older two need to be fostered separately outside the family by very experienced foster carers who can deal with their needs. They are probably best off being the only children in the house.

The 5 year old is really the only one you could consider. But he will need a lot of specialist intervention and support. Don't take him on unless you're fully prepared for that. And be aware your older ones will suffer and probably resent you/their cousin.

If you choose not to foster the youngest don't feel guilty. This is NOT your fault, or your problem to solve.

[titchy]

You've a 4 bed house ffs. Take them all!

Read the thread solomummy (though OP you should have mentioned their severe behaviour originally).

It doesn't sound as if it would be in their best interest at all to stay together, and realistically placing one with your mum might not be sensible if she is near to your sister. I'd have thought the older two need to be fostered separately outside the family by very experienced foster carers who can deal with their needs. They are probably best off being the only children in the house.

The 5 year old is really the only one you could consider. But he will need a lot of specialist intervention and support. Don't take him on unless you're fully prepared for that. And be aware your older ones will suffer and probably resent you/their cousin.

If you choose not to foster the youngest don't feel guilty. This is NOT your fault, or your problem to solve.

[amijustparanoidorjuststoned]

@ExhaustedBeyondBelief @Babyroobs I can see you're both clearly very concerned for these children and not AT ALL sneering.. .. But this isn't really the time to be asking these lovely questions. The OP has bigger problems.

OH and PS some of the answers could be:
Poor parental mental health
Lack of support/funding to address the mental health
Shit schools
Shit SS care
A shit government with no funding to help these kids. HTH.

[PrayingandHoping]

If your mum only lives in a 1 bed it's highly unlikely she will have a child placed with her more than v v temporary.

[ChewChewIsMySpiritAnimal]

You have more than enough room and 5 children is easy. It is up to you to do what you want to do

Bloody hell what world do you live in that permanently caring for 5 children, 3 of whom aren't yours, is easy?!

[Namechange543]

@ExhaustedBeyondBelief It shocking isn’t it. The youngest was HOSPITALISED last year due to being attacked by the oldest. Social services still left them there. My sister was arrested as she was seen in public encouraging the kids to fight each other and taking bets on who would win. They still left them them! They keep saying it’s her mental health and she need support etc. They’ve protected her at the expense of those children and now they have been damaged and subjected to so much.

[SockYarn]

I agree with needs being all-consuming. A child in my eldest's year at school was fostered then adopted out of a background like this at the age of about 3 or 4. His adoptive parents had no children of their own, and had plenty of money and a large house. The child was SO damaged by his early experiences that he wasn't able to attend school full time, his mum ended up changing jobs so she could juggle every thing, he had lots of appointments, and therapy, and gradually things got better. He's now an older teenager, a fantastic young man and a credit to his mum and dad.

But speak to his mum and she;ll tell you the early years of violence, rage and fear from her son were awful. It took so much work from them to get him to where he is now.

All those people saying "just take them in" - it's not that easy. And when there are three of them, two of whom are already showing very damaged behaviour, then it might be too much for anyone to handle. Splitting siblings is never the first choice but it might be that each child needs such specialist, intense care than it's the only option.

[CuppaZa]

They should not be split.
Taking 3 extra children in is a massive thing. However, if the only reason stopping you is space, as pp have stated, four beds is absolutely fine, depending on ages of kids etc.
Obviously if it was for other reasons, ie not wanting that many, money, being able to cope etc then fair enough, but don’t split them.

[AIMD]

@WhySoSexist

The three children should be homed together. It's very, very, very, very unlikely that a court would think it's beneficial for them to be split even amongst family members. If you can't take all three then you probably won't be allowed to care for any of them.
Even if you are willing to take all three, the courts (guided by Social Services) may determine that you're not the best option for these children. It will depend on your own circumstances but also whether you helped your sister with her problems and whether you'd facilitate further neglect/abuse from her. Family are usually a priority but it depends on the risk to the children.
If you're not able to provide a genuinely good environment for these children then please don't tell social services that you can. It will just result in these children spending longer in care whilst the court issues are resolved and make them harder to place later on. If you are able to provide a genuinely good environment then you need to take all three children. Two children can share one bedroom so, depending on the size of your bedrooms, that shouldn't be an issue - however, there are an awful lot more factors to consider than bedrooms.

Did you read ops update?on the surface of things it Sounds unlikely they will be placed together.

[titchy]

The three children should be homed together.

No they absolutely shouldn't.