The Government's new 'Family Troubleshooters' plan: what do you think?

[HelenMumsnet]

Hello.

We've been asked by the BBC what Mumsnetters think of the Government's plans to set up a new network of "family troubleshooters" who will be paid to help turn around the lives of problem families.

The idea is that these troubleshooters would work with these families and be given targets to meet, such as helping the parents to work, stopping them from drinking or taking drugs, and/or ensuring the children go to school and do not behave anti-socially.

Prime Minister David Cameron says that appointing a single troubleshooter for each family is now "crucial" as problem families can currently be visited by up to 28 different public-sector workers - none of whom may have the chance to see or work with the family unit as a whole.

So, what do you think of this plan? Do please tell...

So the government want to cut social care whilst providing the same social service care but under a different name/mandate.
Isn't this what parents on a register got anyway?
This 'If you assign a professional' to a problem then something is being done about it attitude is wrong and it doesn't work.
Not everyone is tick tock middle-class there do still exist working class people who haven't shopped in waitrose or had to worry about what shoes to wear to a black tie party.

Sorry, let me get this right. £450 million out of existing services to do the job of underfunded social services??

I think its a step forward, provided that the "troubleshooters" have the necessary training. Having lots of different professionals allows families to play the school nurse, off against the social worker or the social worker off against the health visitor or the educational welfare officer or community pychatric nurse.

I think that merging some of the roles could be helpful. The problem is how can someone be skilled in all the areas.

It would be interesting to know what other countries have tried. There are things the UK does well and things other countries do well.

It's just soundbites to keep the DM readers happy, isn't it? There's not even going to be any new money allocated to make it work. It's going to be funded by existing money, which obviously will be taken away from other projects.

And when the families "don't comply" and lose benefits of get evicted, how the hell is that going to make their problems go away? Yep, just push them onto the street or into the overpriced private rented sector and never again will they be a problem to anyone else They will have no more MH or addiction problems. They will suddenly see sense and stop the antisocial behaviour/become able to hold down a job/become model parents. It's like fairy dust.

Who pray are the DM readers?
The working class?

I don't think it's a good idea, sorry. Poverty and antisocial behaviour are incredibly difficult to tackle and I don't think these people will respond well to someone coming into their lives and telling them what to do. There's so many factors involved and to take the funds from Peter to give them to Paul when Peter's broke isn't the best way to do things. Social services already try to do this but they are seriously underfunded and stretched to breaking point. Maybe the government will be better off increasing funding to social services departments rather then setting up something else.

How can one troubleshooter replace 28 professionals?

I would rather see the money invested in more training and better organisational communications and infrastructure to allow the people already doing this work to cooperate and communicate more effectively.

The two biggest things the government could do to reduce 'problem families' are:

1. Create more jobs and raise wages

1. Provide more funding and services to treat addiction and mental health problems

I'm still reeling from the fact that they're cutting the very areas who are allegedly going to make up these "troubleshooters". I'm also indignant at the name. It sounds very judgemental and not very understanding.

I'm all for helping families who need it; my MIL has issues with her middle child, my 14 year old BIL and needs all the help she can get. But this doesn't sit right with me. It strikes me that what they're proposing is a "magic solution" to "fix" all those troublesome lower class families

If you think about it the program is only for problem families.
It's just what people in poverty need.
Another professional round there house issuing advice when they have little experience of what a family in poverty goes through.

In theory it sounds good. It sounds as if they are proposing a kind of key worker per family, to co-ordinate and signpost all the other services.

I am quite doubtful as to how it would work in practice. To be effective, these people would have to be quite well-trained and knowledgable in all kinds of areas. Are the Government proposing a "troubleshooter"training programme too?

I have nothing against sustained support and early intervention but this seems flimsy and lacking in detail, is there a sustainability plan?

I would like to know what trainning/qualifications these key workers will have, under paid and over worked. As a trainee social worker it worries me that this will be an unqualified and poorly paid, reducing posts for qualified social workers.

As far as support for some of our most vulnerable families, I think it is over simplistic promises and may well find even more children being taken into LA care, due to lack of adequate early intervention. Will he be providing a magic wand in the professional tool box for these workers.

I would like to see cameron actual understand and represent what issues and disadvantages families face, he talks very much like problems are fixable in one sharp talking to by an official. Unfortunatly the families that require intervention, do not fit nicely into one box of disafected, disadvantaged or troubled, they have real untangiable issues and problems that require adequate joined up services. I would like to see more going into partnerships between justice, education, social care.

just to add maybe cameron could consider a cash injection into common learning in professional education to widen the gap and include, heath visitors, probation, police and teachers and not just social workers, nursing and medicin. This will set the blocks for better communication and unified systems when infact this current initiative will encourage silo working and services will not be tailored to meet needs possibly resulting in further tragedies of care.

It's Social services/sure start/ youth services under a different name.

All the families they work with will still be entitled to be referred to SS for child protection issues/ child in need services so may end up with a SW & trouble shooter. Doubling up. Costing more. And double the admin.

Why not just pour the money back where it was stolen cut from.

so now the government can find millions to pay for this.
yet we are supposed to be so broke, that targeting disabled people for cuts is ok.

xyfactor you don't need to be poor to know your children need to be fed 3 times a day, that school is important and that cole dose not belong in a baby's bottle

And that you should know were you kids are after dark sorry but these people need someone to tell them
The liberal left want to excuses poor parenting as poverty

Those who are bowering on about sure start grate resource but only preaches to the converted those who are so far gone they are in danger of having their children removed would never go near sure start unless made to hence why they are all full with middle class boden wearing mums

festi yes very true sw are barley up to the job as it is

Sure start do outreach too. I work for SOcial services and sure start take some cases that don't reach our threshold.

HarrietJones and what happens if they won't comply most broken families won't want or think they need the intervention

MrsMicawber oh god attacking somone spelling when you have no valuble argument how 2010