Fran Lyon has left the country

[milliec]

Message withdrawn

Whilst there may be individual social workers who beleive in their job wholeheartedly and get some satisfaction from doing their job to the best of their abilities, the fact of the matter remains that if you give an agency/organisation targets to reach, they will undoubtably reach those targets by undertaking methods that are availablt to them. Hence police acheiving their targets on solving crime by targetting motorists, etc rather than dealing with other, more difficult to solve crimes.
The ridiculous targets set by the government regarding adoption targets lay at the bottome of cases such as this. I have worked in SS departments where spokepeople have sworn that such targets do not exist - Blatant lies. During the first year of my social work training, we were informed about the targets and the money that comes into departments once targets are reached.
Whilst I do not know the facts of the Fran Lyon case - it seems to me, from a professional and a personal point of view - that she is (or was) an easy target.

Thank you Joash!Good to hear from someone on the "inside"

I think we are all agreed it is the social worker SYSTEM rather than individuals that is at fault, by letting the incompetant & dogmatic few make life-changing calls of judgement without being challenged or made to question their actions. The govt setting targets just enhances the culture of results at any cost that many govt depts are facing.
The difference between the police ,say, & sw is that the are open to scrutiny .

I have to support mamazon here - SS can't win - they are damned if they do and damned if they don't. This is not condoning what appears to have gone on in Fran's case, but say it came to light that they had concerns about mother "A", and did nothing, and mother "A" did harm her child - SS would be strung up!

SS on the whole do an amazing job in awful circumstances, and we only hear about the crap stuff when it goes wrong - which is often the way with SS, the NHS etc...

It doesn't make this situation as it appears, right, but the majority of SS organisations are not like how Fran has experienced.

Hi Fran. If it's true that you are in Sweden and if you need a friend, I have a good old friend who is there in Stockholm. He is one of the nicest people on the planet. He's an architect and speaks about 2 zillion languages. He'd be a great person for comfort and support....Feel free to CAT me for his contact information if you'd like it.

By the way, my own personal experiences with SS have been extremely disappointing. They ranged from egregiously inappropriate and irresponsible behavior (on the part of SS) to just plain old everyday incompetence (on the part of SS). The only other entity that I have ever come across that has had such consistently unacceptable behavior has been Ryan Air. Luckily I have the choice of not doing business with the latter. And now that I'm back in the USA, I have the choice of not doing business with the former either.

SSP- I agree that SW's are between a rock & a hard place at times, but surely you have to admit the fact that there is no accountability within the system makes us less likely to be appreciative of the good work that IS done on a daily basis. No one would question that of course SW's have a right to express concerns-in Fran's case she welcomed support & if needed intervention- bu to not heed the body of opinion from professionals other than their own is at best ignorant & at worst downright dangerous. There has been much critisism of the Family Courts but if they are only making judments on the undoubtably often biased reports presented to them (in all good faith) then it is no wonder these awful judgements are made.

If professionals want to be respected & treated as such they have to constantly try & improve their service with research based evidence to support their actions.

As a nurse, I do find the lack of accountability strange in SS, but they seem to be getting all the flakc here rather than the ?psychiatrist who seems to have made a judgement without meeting Fran. It was raised earlier in the thread about SS blaming them for the likes of Sally clarke and Trupti patel - that was the police and the CPS, and the now disocounted thoeries of Roy MEadows.

It all has gone so badly wrong really hasn't it, and , like in the NHS, it only takes a couple of very badly wrongs to taint the whole system. I wonder how many times they have judged a situation correctly and saved a child from abuse? We won't ever hear about them.

I know it doesn't make it right, and If I or any one else had the answers we'd be millionaires by now....

Well apparently it was the SS INTERPRETATION of the letter SSP, that led to the hoo-ha. There were a lot of IF's & BUT'S that were open to question.

Also the clinging to the use of dodgy expert witnesses who's theories are discredited does nothing to encourage public confidence.

I've been a nurse too & I know my medical & nursing colleagues do a LOT of on-going research to support their daily practice & make sure they are up to date, changing procedures to reflect new skills & yes when mistakes are made they throw some people out or re-train them.

All anyone is asking is for SS to do their job. They should be trained to spot the difference between specious allegations that have no grounds and cases of real concern and actual harm. It's the fundamental requirement of the job! It may not be straightforward, but it is what they are supposed to do.

My godmother was a SW, my sister is a nurse who works with them regularly, I regularly talk to doctors, nurses and (less often) SWs as part of my job. I know their job is difficult. But if something goes badly wrong in the NHS, for instance, there is an inquiry. What inquiry have SSs held into the systemic failures exposed by the series of miscarriages of justice over MSbP/FII? I know the police, lawyers and NHS need to be involved as well, but SS have ducked the issue of the use of expert opinion on MSbP in by SS in cases that went to the family courts.

The only 'investigation' there has been was when the minister responsible asked SS depts. themselves to identify where they had f*cked up. And oddly enough SS came back saying 'ooh, hardly any'. I know for a fact they failed to follow the pathetic remit of that 'review', point blank refusing to include one case involving Roy Meadows. It's just not good enough. And there will be future miscarriages of justice as long as this is hushed up.

Fran, I wasn't aware of your story until the programme last night, and was horrified by the story. On that basis, I certainly wouldn't have my 2 younger girls with me. I really hope you've got some lovely people around you over Christmas, and of course for the birth. In the meantime, try to rest as much as possible and here's a big hug for you and Molly from me and my daughter Isobel (4). (desperately searching for hug icon -- but none here!)

HUG!

Edam I do wonder if a lot of the problem is that SW's are often young women/men straight out of uni/college with loads of ideals but no life experience? Not all granted but many. Unless you have been a parent yourself &/or been through a bit of life's rich circus,or travelled or done something else how can you have any empathy for the stressed out unmarried mum in a high rise flat with 3 screaming under 5's?

They then get entrenched in the SW secrecy dogma & can't see outside the box , possibly.

Well according to today's journal, Fran flew out of Sweden last night accussing Social Services of a witch hunt...

You couldn't make it up could you?

Oldstraighttrack, what is your particular interest in this case, if you don't mind me asking? Are you a social worker, or do you know any of the people involved in the case? I notice you've only posted under that name on Fran Lyon threads.

Apologies if you have explained elsewhere and I have missed it.

OST - are you saying that there hasn't been a witch hunt? and if so, how would you describe fran's treatment?

just to clarify shrinkingsagpuss it was not a psychiatrist who had not met Fran and went on to write the potentially damning letter, it was a paediatrician. And he preceded his whole recommendation on the word 'If' 'if' the psychiatry professionals involved felt there was a potential risk to Fran's child then the child should be taken away. And the psychiatry professionals involved didn't feel there was a risk, but that didn't seem to stop SS going full steam ahead and imagining lots of scenarios in which Fran might harm her baby.

You certainly couldn't make up SS's behaviour in this incidence oldstraighttrack.

And mamazon, there must be many brilliant people in SS working very hard behind the scenes with no thanks, I am very sure of that. But if even on MN quite a few people have had very bad experiences of SS, then in the general population the experience must be much wider. SS really have to look within and address problems in the system.

Thanksruty I fogot to clarify hat.

OST where is it that the Sweden link came from I have only heard it mentioned in this Journal you have quoted ( & am not familiar with it or how reliable it is) Are you saying she has now moved on again?!

hiya,i've name changed for this as i dont expect it will make me v popular.

i know some others have said that none of us know the full story and i think they're right.
something about her doesn't ring true though, she is really intelligent, and articulate, that much is clear, but what worries me is her lack of support from friends and family. wher is her mum? what does her mum think? are her mum and dad still together? i know if this was me then my mum would be right beside me vouching for me at every step of the way. also i have seen very little evidence of people from real life who know her backing her up. i know there are a couple of people on here who know her, but is that it? really? i'm no the most popular person on the planet, but i think i could manage to get a few people giving great character refs to press, mn etc etc.
don't get me wrong, i'm not saying she shoul d have her baby taken away, i think that's wrong, terrible even, but just that it doesn't all add up.
we only have her word about what is in the ss reports because she hasn't released them, which she could have done.
also is it true that she has left sweden? How does anyone know this? please link. If she has then why? how did anyone know she'd gone to sweden in the first place?
oldstraighttrack are you an insider on this case? what is your interest?

Hi Posen,

I do have a lot of support from friends and family - and many of them have given character references to social services etc. Several friends have been on MN. I don't think any have been quoted in the press - but if they were I don't think it would stand for much - surely they'd be subject to the "well, they would say that, wouldn't they?" line of argument?

I have explained, several times, why I haven't released the SS reports in full. It's because they identify, and reveal highly sensitive information about, other people - people from whom I do not have consent.

My Mum has chosen to stay out of this issue (in the public domain) for her own, very valid, reasons. I am not the only person in her life, and she has a lot of conflicting needs to manage - not to mention her own! Other Mum's may have acted differently - but I understand, respect and support my Mum's decision to retain her own counsel.

As for the speculation as to where I am/was/might be/could end up - well, it's all a bit daft really.

Hope this helps,

Fran

Posen it may well be that we don't kow the full story- but we can choose to make a decision based on the information we have available, and the context- the context here being that MN is after all a parental support site, rather than a chamber of judgement. I ahven't psoted much on this thread but there's been a fair few over the years where all you ahve is the info you are given, and you base support on that. If it did prove to be wrong so be it- emotional and peer support is always a positive thing, and one of the best things about MN is the ability to obtain non judgemental support which in itself ahs to be a psoitive in helping anyone with difficulties through tough times, no? If there was any other info out there that will be in the hands of the decision makers, its not our role to pass judgement anyway- tis ours to uplift and care.

Nice post Peachy.

I started off thinking 'Well it wouldn't matter if we were wrong, because there could be no possible justification for denying Fran the chance to care for her baby even in a mother and baby unit.'

I still think that. However, having seen a lot regarding Fran in the media and online in the last few weeks, I am pretty firmly convinced Fran's telling the truth.

Because:

1. we might not have seen all the paperwork, but much of this documentation has been seen by journalists, John Hemming etc.
2. the smears about Fran online seem pretty feeble (eg 'she used to have borderline personality disorder' - we know; 'she is associated with serial adulterer John Hemming' - so what?) and to emerge from people with well-documented views on social work and MSBP issues.
3. Fran herself is open about her story and totally consistent. (I have known fantasists in the past, incl some very bright people, and believe me, they generally still manage to slip up.)

(sorry to talk about you in the 3rd person like this when you are on the thread Fran!)

ikwym peachy but i still feel that for me there isn't enough info.
But you could delete very specific info and names of other people. what is of interest is what directly relates to you. It would be entirely possible for you to release reports which do not relate to others.
i'm sorry fran, i don't want to disrespect you and i hope that everything works out for you both, but i find it all confusing. does your mum still live with your dad?

Posen, I think Fran has said elsewhere (IIRC) that her parents are caring for elderly grandparents, which would seriously restrict their ability to give practical help.

kathy even if fran is a fantasist, even if she displays signs of having munchwhatever disorder, i still think she should be given the a proper chance to look after her daughter. i think it is irrelevent to what the actual outcome should be, but i am still very interested. i don't mind if we are part of some huge manipulation, it doesn't make any difference to how i feel about her, but i would like to know. i don't think she is entirely consistent fwiw. if i were her i would do exactly what she is doing, and if i had secrets which may mean that i would lose support then i would try to conceal them.

Like all mothers, I can't imagine the horror of anyone taking my children away from me. The director of SS said on the Tonight programme last night, it's an extreme measure to take an infant from a mother directly after birth.

Ms Lyon admits herself she has not reveiled the true extent of the SS report so I guess SS have other evidence to take her baby. For example, did the rape allegation result in a conviction? Or was it seen as attention seeking behaviour? What is the true nature of her relationship with her father? What exactly was going on in the background when the police were called?

Are these questions unfair, intrusive and crass? Yes. But if you harness the media and public forums to use as part of your defence when a child's life is at stake, then I think we have a right to ask what we like.

as Kathy said: "'Well it wouldn't matter if we were wrong, because there could be no possible justification for denying Fran the chance to care for her baby even in a mother and baby unit.'

Fran has done nothing illegal, she has never harmed another person, she has not been convicted of any crime.

She does not deserve this.

From what I have seen of her, she appears to be a normal, articulate, likeable human being, but even if I took an irrational dislike to her, she still does not deserve this. She could be the most odious person in the world, but she still does not deserve this.

Again: 'Well it wouldn't matter if we were wrong, because there could be no possible justification for denying Fran the chance to care for her baby even in a mother and baby unit.'