Sharon Shoesmith was unfairly dismissed - WTF!

[Mandy2003]

Verdict just now on the news. I am speechless.

Her department failed this baby and, as a result, a child died. If she'd had any sense of remorse or responsibility then she would have resigned. That would have been the decent thing to do in the circumstances.

The procedure may not have been followed correctly - and that's a shame because she did deserve to go.

Her actions since have been deplorable, stating that she would love to work with children again and that a department in disarray does not mean that they killed a child.

Well, I'm sorry but in my view it does mean exactly that.

They had chance after chance to make this baby's life better. Instead they chose to believe the word of a mother who was allowing her child to be abused. At the very least it was naivete, at the worst it was neglect.

Scandalous.

I thought there used to be a concept of "summary dismissal" in employment law - ie, if someone's conduct fell far short of the accepted line, they were able to be dismissed straight away?

I agree with those who say that she should have resigned anyway. Getting sacked live on telly was humiliating, but she clearly does not accept that her department had significant structural failings that significantly contributed to the failure to prevent Peter Connelly's death. People have commented that this is only one death, however horrific, and that too much may be being made out of it. I struggle to believe that this was the only harm that Haringey failed to prevent under her watch. I think it was simply the most prominent harm.

Her Today interview had strong echoes of the interview with the Ipswich hospital CEO for me, and the attitudes reported to the Robert Francis inquiry into MidStaffs: too caught up in provider interest and how difficult it all is to recognise the fundamentals going wrong.

Slhilly - Quite. IMO, the heads of Mid Staffs should be on Corporate Manslaughter charges because they really did kill people.

Actually, I think I do know what social workers are up against and I don't, for one minute, think that I am naive. Since first starting the adoption process 12 years ago I have been involved with quite a few different LAs, quite a few different social workers, judges, courts etc so actually I think I do have a pretty good idea of how things work!

And given all that, and given that I have been able to compare different authorities and different sws I still say that this woman was negligent. And apart from that very crass to say some of the truly shocking things that she has said.

I understand how things work, I understand how difficult it can be to remove a child from its birth parents and I do know the consequences of allowing a child to remain with its bps for far too long. I live it every day with one of mine.

The whole ethos needs to change. At the moment the assumption is that a child's best interests are met when it remains within its birth family and so clearly that is not always the case.

Many of these birth mums have had huge families. The abuse has been carried down from father to child, mother to child and unless and until the whole ethos changes then there will be more deaths of unprotected children.

The government has to make these changes happen.

But in the meantime, as head of her department, Sharon Shoesmith HAS to take responsibility for her failings and those of her department. I find it morally repugnant that she so spectactularly failed to do so.

The woman seemingly has no shame and very little regret. The process may have been wrong but the end result was right.

She had to go. It's a shame that still she feels such a lack of responsibility.

Dillydaydreaming thanks for your support and I will take your advice and bow out because I can't stand another social worker bashing thread and your are absolutely right about what you say; if these MNs only knew what child protection work actually entailed I am confident their opinions would change. Just wish they could have a month shadowing a cp social worker so that they could see the reality, rather than the fantasy they have that it is an intolerably stressful job.

Someone asked if I would be happy to have SS head up the department. I am retired but I probably would not be happy not because I think she is incompetent, but when social services joined with other disciplines, like education, it was by and large the education managers that got the top job and experienced senior managers in social services were lower down the scale. This also happened when some SSD depts joined forces with Housing and again it was the Housing Managers who got the top job.

I think that in itself has caused a lot of problems for LAs up and down the country.

Oh should have re-read that post, (last line on first para) seems like I am saying that MNs anti soc wrks know it is an intolerably stressful job, but I' sure you know I meant to say.

Sadly Sharon Shoesmith didn't blub, wipe her eyes or have a trembling lip when speaking about Baby P. Didn't look stressed or humble - or beg forgiveness for such a terrible occurrence. (Not surprising as she was a highly intelligent lady doing a very hard job and regularly came across deviants who abused children).
So that put her in the firing line for demands for her resignation and even, sadly, sneering questions from John Humphries. And unforgiving, holier than thou criticism on messageboards.

Much that I am not a fan of Ms Shoesmith it should be remembered that she was tasked with getting a positive inspection for the department which was awarded 3 stars by Ofsted. Hence she was doing what she was tasked with doing. What she was tasked with doing may be wrong, but she did it.

As a society we are too tempted to chase after a scapegoat rather than trying to look at why systems fail.

OMG - I feel feint - for the first time ever I agree with JH - I need to lie down in a dark room!

What is this new fangled word 'tasked'?

I honestly don't know what this woman is like and won't judge her by how the media want to portray her. She did not kill this child and I hat that unless she is seen to be wringing her hands and begging on her knees for forgiveness then she seems to get more attention and almost blame than the people who actually harmed the little boy. I almost admire he strength to say 'fuck you' and hold her head high even though the public want he to hang he head in shame. I think it's quite shameful how she has been vilified. A bit like when the Queen refused to lower the flag at Diana's death and show her grief or feelings publicly but had to u turn to keep a bunch of strangers happy.