Elsie Scully-Hicks

[Elephantgrey]

How can you understand how someone can harm such a tiny baby. My husband knew Matthew Scully-Hicks and said you would never imagine he would be the sort of person to do something like this. When we first heard about it we imagined that he had just snapped but seeing the news report he inflicted so many injuries on her since the day she arrived. It's just heartbreaking.

One thought that has struck me is that if people are saying he was always so 'nice, charming, loving' etc but also showed the kind of tendency toward violent language in the shouting heard/text messages sent (and also apparently behaviour behind closed doors) then it could be that he psycho/sociopathic. People with those kind of behavioural traits are very good at manipulating others into seeing, hearing and believing only what they want the others to.

That SS and apparently his husband missed all of this would not be as surprising. Although I do wonder why the neighbour who heard such awful shouting and name calling didn't think there was anything to worry about (as stated in one of the BBC News articles). Does that person think it is normal behaviour?!

Well said, Katherina.

I also strongly suspect that isn't the reason they changed it.
Yeah, I would agree with that.

Such an awful case, at least the poor little mite won't be in pain anymore...

People who adopt have to jump through enough hoops (if SS do their job properly). We tread a very treacherous line if we start saying that gay couples should be scrutinised more. Just because they are male doesn't automatically mean violence. I spoke to my surro dads tonight in light of this & they have sadly already had comments about gay dads not being fit parents because they're more likely to be violent/sneaky etc. It's a crappy stereotype & no statistics back it up. How many mothers ditch their kids? Bash their kids about? Kill their kids? Nobody calls for greater scrutiny of females...

susurration unfortunately that sort of verbal abuse is common in many, many households. I can also understand why people might

a. feel that ringing up SS would be an overreaction, or possibly
b. feel scared to 'anonymously' report it, because it would be pretty obvious it was someone sharing the party wall.

I am fucking angry and sickened by the same old phrase " Lessons will be learned from this case" which is trooped out, every fucking time, by the social services, a child is murdered, but the lessons are never learnt!

Sadly I’m not sure I’d call in if I heard my neighbour swear at his kids. It seems like a bit of an overreaction, or like it would be obvious if it were me. Having read this story now I think I will in the future - it may build up some kind of picture and help snap some missing links together (this is just a hypothetical scenario btw. NDN is a lovely bloke who never swears at kids or otherwise).
There was a similar tragic story in the US a few weeks ago.. about an evangelical family of Indian ethnicity who adopted a baby girl with special needs and either killed her or left her outside the house at 3 in the morning and she ended up dying. Just so sad.

I don’t think we need more scrutiny of gay dads or anything.. just need more communication between agencies and workers to ensure violence is reported and a pattern is observed.

In every case like this there is a pattern, but multiple missed opportunities to spot it!

Firstly, with a fractured skull there would have been bruising and swelling. I think a new law has been passed that life is going to mean life, not 7 years and you are out. I think some people have an idealised version of having a child/family and cannot cope with the reality. As other posters have said Elsie was probably a troubled, traumatised child who needed experienced parenting. He sounds to me like he was jealous of her. His partner must have had concerns. Another child beaten and abused until she died RIP Elsie

since, I’m not talking about SWs turning amateur sleuth. I’m talking about how their vetting process went wrong or why the training didn’t make sure he’d be able to cope with a grieving/traumatised child, or why he didn’t ask for support or let the adoption disrupt when it was clear, surely to him if no one else, that he wasn’t coping. There are lots of things to look at to potentially avoid this happening again, and only one of them is looking at injuries after they’ve already happened.

CoolCarrie this is my thought. I remember years ago doing reviews of public cases & all the promises that were made...that was eight years ago & the cases were a few years prior to that. Still the same cock ups are being made by those who are meant to be safeguarding out kids.

I know so many families wrongly split up by SS - despite the 'mistakes' coming to light adoptions cannot be undone so parents lose their kids for some idiot's cock up. Yet time after time chances are missed to safe vulnerable kids. The system is f**ked up

I sympathise with your anger Cool but I am not sure what SS can do differently.
The reason why blame is not apportioned in the vast majority of child murders is because they can't be predicted.
We know what happened in the lead up because its laid before us.
If SS are not aware what can they do?

We could have the best SS on the planet and parents will still murder their children.
We could have the most draconian child protection laws imaginable and parents will still murder their children.

The lessons learned are that people can be manipulative and clever and very good at lying.
What do we do about it?

In cases like Victoria Climbe the mistakes were obvious and that girl could have, should have, been saved.
I don't know enough about this case to tell if the death of Shayla was predictable .

We've had a dreadful case in this area recently - the poor little boy involved didn't have a chance. Mother and boyfriend both drug addicts

Reading the sentencing remarks, I am wondering how the doctor missed the second fracture.

Because if that had been spotted, a full CP medical would have been triggered back in the autumn. And just think what a difference that could have made.

That confused me too scaev
Didn't they say the fractures were very unusual for a toddler?
Was that the doctors making reports for the court?

Surely a fracture of the large bones in the leg would make an A&E doctor want investigate?

Since we constantly hear about how stretched the NHS is, perhaps it would be wise for SWs to be particularly watchful where a child has seen a doctor about an injury. It might just be that the medical professional who saw the child hasn't probed far enough or been thorough enough, for whatever reason.

While there will never be procedures that are 100% effective in stopping parents abusing their children, we also shouldn't be too quick to say that any determined abuser can go undetected. Especially when the same patterns seem to crop up repeatedly.

I dont think anyone has said that a determined abuser can go undetected.
They can be difficult to detect in a relatively short space of time though.
Patterns take time to establish and if there is a reasonable explanation its difficult to justify escalation.

I am not excusing any mistakes here. For all I know SS totally screwed up with this case.

Having SW Butterymuffin wouldn't have made any difference in this case. Misreading an x-ray isn't anything to do with whether the circumstances were properly probed.

Because the judge said the doctor did not see the second fracture when s/he examined the x-ray. If they had, then the complex injury would have triggered investigation. If the account of how the injury occurred did not match the mature if the injury, then also investigation triggered. The account matched the single diagnosed injury. It did not match the presence of both.

If the doctor had diagnosed accurately, then the existing procedures for investigation would have been activated.

Same platitudes trotted out each time. Lovely bloke/never would have thought/perfect family etc etc. I dont believe it. I just don’t.

But there’s always a sign - and I think some people DO think ‘no he puts my back up.’ And they get ignored. Why?

I’ve had two colleagues over the years nearly beaten to death by their husbands/partners. One ruptured his wife’s kidneys by kicking her so hard. Severe violence over years. Both pillars of the community.
I’d met both of them and thought they were awful - and said so at the time to be roundly condemned.
And yet most of the people we all knew after the event said the same - lovely bloke/wouldn’t have thought/she must have pushed him to it.

So why is that? Why would two people out of twenty think ‘shudder... awful’ and 18 think ‘oh what a delightful man!’
Why aren’t professionals who should have spider senses not picking up on a baby with multiple injuries? How can this keep happening? What are professionals trained to spot? There must be empirical work done on this, there must be research and training... surely?

We’ve all met men like this - everyone thinks they’re wonderful but they make your blood run cold.

Poor, poor kid. This stuff is so hard to read. It makes me so angry, I just want to take all these kids in and love them and make them safe.

Patterns take time to establish

That is absolutely true. So what are the criteria for single injuries to trigger an investigation? Because I know people who’ve had Social called after say, a kid fell holding onto a climbing frame oddly and twisted/broke the arm. The injury happened in public and so there were several witnesses but before they’d been asked, the Hospital triggered a routine check because of the nature of the fracture (twist based.)

There must be single inicident triggers? Just from scanning the article the child had multiple injuries, any one of which could have triggered an investigation.

If it was PC that stopped it, that has to be dealt with, because to say that x group of people don’t get investigated is both incorrect and also highly damaging. Gay men are no more likely to hurt children than straight - they should be treated exactly the same and the same triggering of investigation should be used. We cannot have either prejudice or reverse fear of being called prejudiced interfere with child protection.

Lessons won't be learned and SS are still making mistakes.

Decades ago I was placed in a foster home. Someone rang SS and reported concerns about the couple that proved they weren't suitable. A sw decided that the caller was jealous and the couple were perfect. I'm now living with the affects of their physical and sexual abuse and it will probably prove too much for me in the end. But you know, SS got one more kid off their books and they were oh so proud of themselves.

Scaevola Wasn’t it the doctor who failed to spot Baby P’s broken back

To whoever asked (sorry, am skimming) 18 years will be the minimum term and he'll only ever be released on licence, which isn't the same as being "free". Which is something.

Also agree that her name was probably changed to make her better fit as an accessory to their lifestyle.

Elephants

Vicious primary carers of children are the most frightening people in our society.

18 years the minimum term he will spend in prison not the maximum. The parole board will not release him unless they are fully satisfied that he is not a danger to society. If they are never satisfied then he will never be released. The vast majority of life prisoners are not released on the day that their minimum term expires so it is very unlikely that he will be out in 18 years. If he is released he will be subject to a stringent licence for the rest of his life and he can be instantly recalled to prison for breaking any of the conditions of his licence.

Also the way he described the poor little girl should have raised concerns with his husband. Could he be done for negligence?'
Yes I'm surprised by the support of his husband. We've all sent the odd text like 'the DC are being a right pita today' perhaps, but those constant vicious descriptions of the poor victim should surely have raised the alarm.

^This. I hope the other child in the husbands care is monitored

Anatidea certain injuries tend to raise concerns and if the explanation from the parents doesn't add up there is likely to be an initial investigation.
But the majority of those investigations don't go further than one meeting and a few phone calls.
Because if the SS go to a home where there are no obvious signs of chaos and neglect and the parents are concerned and behaving appropriately, there are no previous issues and none of the professionals contacted have concerns, what can they do?

Even if they suspect the parents are a bit 'off' they have to have more than a hunch to warrant intervention.