Woman to have baby taken away at birth...

[SharpMolarBear]

because she is likely to suffer from Munschausen's syndrome by proxy

the cleveland case was a tragic one, I agree.

However it does irk me a little that the case is synonymous with bad sw practice, rather that bad paediatric and sw practice, given that it was the paediatricians who were diagnosing "anal dilation" and attributing this to abuse (a theory now completely discredited).

Smallwhitecat has put her finger on it. SS and the family courts operate in the dark, without proper public scrutiny. That's how those evil bitches - and I'm sorry but there is no other way of putting it - who used their position as social workers to torment children during the Rochdale child abuse scandals a. got away with lying through their teeth to the court and b. were able to continue working. And c. have never, ever, answered to any of the now adult children whose lives were destroyed. And who continue to suffer to this day.

You cannot claim social services acts with any integrity at all when people like this are not only protected but keep working and even get promoted. Watch the footage from the despicable 'interviews' they carried out with children who were, it was alleged, victims of child abuse in Rochdale. Their treatment of those children was horrific.

And it's not just them. It's the people in charge of the department that let Victoria Climbie be murdered - the junior SW got it in the neck but her bosses were promoted. To nationally-important posts. There is example after example after example.

What's more, as a society, we are destroying children in care. We don't give a shit about them. Only something like 12 per cent get 'good' (A-C) GCSEs. Far too many end up mentally ill, homeless, pregnant in their teens or in prison. And the people responsible for this system want to take this woman's baby away because she 'may' harm it?

I'mBarry, the way ss and medics collude with each other in mass hysteria leaves neither side covered in glory, frankly. Reminds me forcefully of The Crucible by Arthur Miller.

Marietta Higgs, the paediatrician you mentioned, can rot in hell as far as I'm concerned.

yup, we pay! I agree that sw will remain a low-status, poorly valued occupation.

shame, really.

Although what's worse is the fact that people know so little about the broad range of things we do with different groups of people, and there remains a stigma attached to having any SW input. So lots of people miss out on getting linked in with some great services.

this
makes for interesting reading.

Does John Hemmings have his own agenda?

IBS, round my way ss is leaving children in care, child carers, adult carers and pretty much everyone who needs their help to rot. I'm sure it's to do with senior management being arses, not having enough bums on seats, etc. etc. etc. But the people who suffer are those who are least able to cope.

Well, thank God John Hemmings is taking an interest in this area, because no other bugger is. And there are a series of miscarriages of justice, the same mistakes being made time and again, with no official recognition of wrongdoing, let alone holding anyone responsible. The whole system is rotten to the very core.

edam that's very sad. I think you pinpoint one of the problems as acute staff shortages - I think some areas work on 50% vacancies. this means that workers end up having to prioritise work, and end up only working with those in crisis. Medium-term and preventative work is neglected as there's not enough hours in the day, and lo and behold, these people fall into crisis too. Then every case is in crisis, and you've still only got half the number of workers you need to cover the work in the first place.

And no, I'm not asking for sympathy, just trying to explain why things got so bad.

Right, I have to go to bed, so that I can do a good job in the morning .

I'm sure that is the case, IBS, and it's appalling (and I bet my bottom dollar that the bosses at my crappy council are doing sod-all to recruit and retain experienced SWs). But there is still a major crisis to do with ethics and the treatment of mothers.

oh i think i have a vague memory of the cleveland case after all. yes im sure it was actually the case that SS took the word of a senior peadiatrician and tehrefore ran with the case and had the child removed.

would poeple rather SS disregarded the advice of a top Dr?

this really is a proffession where you cannot do right for doing wrong.

i think maybe i should ask the Sun to run an article of the case where i had a young girl who was persitantly shoplifting. after months of talking with her as her refferal worker i worked out that she was stealing in teh hopes she would be sent to prison to escape her sexually abusive father.

or maybe i could bring up the time when i along with my colleague realised there was something not right about the boy who was so evasive about us being in contact with his parents. we did a home visit and discovered his mother was a severe drug addict and at 12 years old he was pretty much bringing himself up and putting up with horrific abuse from his mothers addict friends.

or maybe the case where........i could go on forever.

but i dont suppose they would be interested. it doesn't show me as incompetant and it doesn't make my proffession seem like it is run by a bunch of monkeys that put children at risk on a daily basis...so it therefore cannot possibly be newspworthy.

I get tired of defending the career path i chose. Do all Dr's get treated with suspicion when dealing with teh elderly because there was a high profile case about a man named Dr Shipley?
do all SCBU nurses get looked at funny because of beverly Allet?

no, because it is accepted that in the main these caring professions do a fantastic and under valued job.

but our roel is one that no one wants to have an invovement with. no one has a good word to say about us because, lets face it no one wants a social worker so we are alwasy viewed negativly

Wannabe I was just going to post that link again I did earlier. Why does John Hemmings have to have his own agenda? (any more than any other politician with his eye on the vote does IYSWIM! )

To my mind it answers some of the questions put on here by marmazon & others in the SW field. Obviously they think there is more to it than meets the eye, but I repeat if the mother is being open & frank about her nnebtal health history & where she is now then why the need for secrecy? Who are we protecting? If she has offered to go into a M&B unit why is that not allowed?

Not trying to be inflammatory but I would really appreciate some guidance from those in the know.

nnebtal =mental sorry!

sorry marmazon x-posted with you -not haivng a pop honestly just concerned.

I'm a journalist, Mamazon, and I'd be interested in covering those cases. But in practice you wouldn't put me in touch with the people concerned, in order to protect their confidentiality. (If you are seriously interested in raising these issues, CAT me.)

As for top docs, I've already mentioned that a very eminent doctor of my aquaintance was actually threatened by SWs (and medics involved in child protection) for daring to point out that they were getting a tad carried away fabricating ludicrous allegations about one of his patients with no evidence.

mamazon i know many very good social workers, but they like you act reasonably in awful cases like the ones you mentioned.

This one doesn't seem to be being reasonably handled & until we can get assurances from Fran that she is getting her questions answered I will continue to think that.

I think the confidentiality thing is a smokescreen in this particular case.

no no advice
not my bag

ok cod/hun thanks for replying any way

"Why does John Hemmings have to have his own agenda? (any more than any other politician with his eye on the vote does IYSWIM! ) "

It said in that Community Care link that a woman who was pregnant by him (he's married) was threatened with having her baby put on the "at risk" register.

Now how a magazine like Community Care (the trade mag for social workers) got hold of that juicy little tidbit when these sort of cases are supposed to be confidential is anybody's guess. I guess it's OK when social workers are breaching confidentiality, just not when parents do it to complain in public about the injustices they and their children have suffered.

The only reason why we ever heard about Angela Cannings or Sally Clark is because their children are dead. A parent who has had their living child taken from them on a MSBP diagnosis is gagged and so are any journalists who want to cover their case.

"Why does John Hemmings have to have his own agenda? (any more than any other politician with his eye on the vote does IYSWIM! ) "

It said in that Community Care link that a woman who was pregnant by him (he's married) was threatened with having her baby put on the "at risk" register.

Now how a magazine like Community Care (the trade mag for social workers) got hold of that juicy little tidbit when these sort of cases are supposed to be confidential is anybody's guess. I guess it's OK when social workers are breaching confidentiality, just not when parents do it to complain in public about the injustices they and their children have suffered.

The only reason why we ever heard about Angela Cannings or Sally Clark is because their children are dead. A parent who has had their living child taken from them on a MSBP diagnosis is gagged and so are any journalists who want to cover their case.

edam - whilst i would love to show the good social workers do on a daily basis i would rather not be teh spokesperon for teh proffession....i imagine it is very frightening on the firing line and however positive yoru story wasy there would alwasy be someone that will want to take a pop.

and of course confidentiality would mean i could never give full accounts of what happened anyway.

but thanks for the offer.

well-spotted Elizabeth I missed that little gem

Elizabetth - this thread makes chilling reading. It really does

and there's the answer to your question, Mamazon. That's why coverage of social services is negative (apart from the fact that most news is bad news anyway).

I have actually written plenty of articles about good stuff social services has done, as it happens. Doesn't mean there isn't something extremely rotten at the very heart of the profession over so-called MSbP or FII, though.

mamazon the thing that I object to is the way mistakes KEEP happening despite all the lessons learnt. Anyone remember the Maria Caldwell case in the 70's?

A new committe was formed to
"promote good inter-disciplinary practice in preventing and dealing with the causes and effects of child abuse;
assess issues of significance in collaborative working which arise from the handling of cases and from reports on inquiries;
review arrangements for providing expert advice and inter-agency liaison"

It's all good talk but nothing changes.

AS someone else said earlier, if the incompetant ones were sacked, the good ones like you wouldn't have to be tarred with the same brush. There HAS to be some accountability.