Chilling story about child (allegedly) wrongly taken into care.

[Callisto]

It is from the Mail I'm afraid, but there are quotes from the couples MP which seems to add weight to the story.

Article here.

Obviously I am just talking about the ones I have had the misfortune to have had dealings with.

You might think I am "deeply unpleasant" but so have the reprocussion of their decisions.

And, sad though the background stories may be, condemning a preofession of the strenght of something that happened 35 years ago and a report in the Daily Mail is pretty outrageous!

My post has nothing to do with what the DM has published and I am not getting into a discussion about my experiences. Living with them is bad enough without having to justify my posts.

And you know what, this isn't the only mistake they appear to have made.

amazing and a sad indictment of our education system and the capacity for critical thinking it instills that adults are incapable of treating a credible article seriously and dismiss it just because it appeared in a paper, the editorial line of which they dislike.

The Daily Mail does some very creditable journalism and breaks important stories. Writing something off because of the paper it comes from while ignoring direct quotes from named witnesses to the story (no evidence? Ha! What would satisfy you?) and not doing any other research to establish the facts shows worrying ignorance and naivety.

What paper should something appear in for it to be considered true? Or at least worth not dismissing out of hand?

My best friend was taken into care at the age of 10. She was seeing a child psychologist and was on the 'at risk' register because her mum (who she lived with) was an alcoholic and her dad (who she didn't live with but saw regularly) was a drug addict. The child psychologist inferred from some pictures that my friend had drawn that she was being sexually abused. It was really that simple. It was decided she was being abused and she was taken into a children's home where she spent the next 4 years.

We are as close as sisters and although she acknowledges that her parents had a lot of problems, she says she was never, ever for one moment sexually abused or ever felt in any physical danger from her father.

It was devastating for the whole family, I cannot even begin to describe how bad it was...

It sounds as if there have been some negative experiences, but you're probably not going to find that many people shouting from the rooftops how brilliant social services are. I've met a few people who had lots of intervention and were even removed as children and still want to be social workers as they think the right thing was done. However, doesn't mean social workers are always right, or indeed always wrong.

In reference to the DM journalism, it might be brilliant, but there are just too many unanswered questions for me to damn the social workers and courts out of hand. I know something about the level and standard of proof that courts require to remove children and keep them away from parents and it's sometimes ridiculously high and fails to protect children. The simple goal of intervention is to make the standard of parenting acceptable for a child. Not perfect, but good enough. If these parents were providing a reasonable standard of child care or were able to change to do so, then I suspect everyone would be happy not to spend a huge amount of time, money and resources in court.

This is just so scary. My heart goes out to these people.

What is just chilling is that it could happen to anyone.

Example: DS has had numerous admissions to Children's Hospital, and was finally diagnosed as being dairy intolerant and anaemic. He is under a lovely Paediatrician. Had to take him to A & E for something unrelated and the A & E doc insisted on treating his low weight gain. I asked her to call his paediatrician, which she refused to do. She insisted on taking running tests, which I refused on the basis that they had been done the week before by paediatrician at same hospital. My GP later calls me and says A & E doc said I was refusing DS treatment querying whether I had mental health issues

The A & E doc was later disciplined after DS Paediatrician raised the issue, but there but the grace of god....

I have asked my GP and H/V what I should have done? Let DS go through various tests to show that I was being cooperative?

No, I will defend my kids, and the system should recognise this.

But is doesn't

Where is John Hemming?

It does recognise it. You didn't get a social worker banging on your door because there was no need.

It could not happen to anyone. That is another one of those urban myths. It is not easy to remove a child nowadays. According to the popular mythology, the social services are either snatching children from blameless parents or leaving children with feckless, violent parents when they should be taken away. you can't have it both ways!

But it isn't both ways. They could be snatching from feckless parents and good ones, or leaving with good ones/violent ones.

It isn't an either or.

You don't have to damn anyone out of hand, just accept that the journalist has stood up the story with an expert witness prepared to go on the record as saying that he thinks ss have caused damage to the child in their management of the case, and a public representative who is on the record saying the case has worried him deeply.

So there is a story here, isn't there? Undoubtedly there's more to it, but why are these two people prepared to make these statements?

Unless they're in on the dm conspiracy?

Agreed, it's not an either or. However the legal system with representation for all parties, including the child should be a useful check and balance and maintain a threshold and standard. I maintain that there are thousands more children left in abusive situations through lack of proof and resources than snatched from the bosoms of their loving parents.

Seriously, why would any social worker bother to put themselves through the sheer hard work of care proceedings and fabricate evidence against complete strangers to convince a court and most of the experts and professionals involved to keep a child away from parents? I'm not saying it couldn't / wouldn't ever happen, but it's pretty bloody unlikely.

Sorry poor logic - you beg the question there.

You don't know why ss didn't visit and there are no grounds to generalise from that particular that the system does recognise her right to refuse tests.

Because they genuinely believe that they know best and will brook no resistance?

Laziness isn't the main motivator for everyone. Some people are energised by the belief that they are doing good work.

Yes the courts should act as a check, but the lack of scrutiny means that it is impossible to establish whether they do.

Should we just trust that no mistakes could ever be made because the system us so perfect?

I agree that Peter Dale appears to be a credible source of opinion, but he is one out of three expert witnesses and there is always room for differences of opinion.

In relation to the MP, he has no right to access information about the proceedings and has little to add.

However, we don't have all the evidence, the views of all the other professionals and experts and the judge. We are getting a very partial picture and my experience of the DM is that they love these kinds of stories. They know the other parties can't respond.

According to the article there have been 74 court appearances regarding this, including both local courts and the court of appeal in London. I find it spectacularly difficult to believe that the only reasons this child is being removed from her parents are (as insinuated in the article) because she reported choking on a lollipop and then saying she didn't want to go home.

Sure, you might get an overzealous SW who puts too much store in that, and you might even get a judge or two who doesn't look too closely. But 74 court dates, including appearances at the court of appeal? Could all those judges have had the wool pulled over their eyes by a SW on a mission? Or might there be more to this story than the parents are suggesting?

If you go to the public gallery of any court there are bored people getting off on it, people are really nosey, so what ??
That isn't a good enough reason to hide family courts behind closed doors,.

Oh and I was good friends with somebody who became a social worker whilst we bringing up our small children and the change in her once she started work was horrifying. She divided our friends up (who we'd known mutally for 7 years since our first pregnancies) into who she considered good and bad mothers, these were all very decent people, nothing to suggest foul play but who didn't live up to her new found standards and became extremely judgmental and defensive about absolutely everything to do with children, her own and ours.
I can believe that a mistake could be made and then the SW involved doesn't want to lose face because they have so much responsibility on their shoulders to admit they are wrong is just so difficult it would seem.
Its the system people condemn not those working within it.

disgusting, why are they wasting there time when there are chikdren out there who are blantally neglectedand abused. those chidren get ignored and they pick on innocent families, this country is disgusting

Sorry, but I just had to PMSL at "It takes ages to remove a child," or words to that effect from Seeker.

Do you know how long it takes to obtain a court order, to remove a child? About 25 minutes. And sometimes, SS don't even bother, and take the child off the mother in the street. Essex baby anyone?

It is breathtakingly naive to assume that SS cannot remove your child easily, quickly and efficiently. I was involved with a case recently where the mother had become involved with SS due to her 5 month old baby failing to thrive. The paediatrician had the court order there, drawn up and two Social Workers came to the lady's house to make sure she turned up for the Paed appointment. Had the baby put on less than 300g, it would have been removed.

There has also been more than one case reported where SWs have snatched newborn babies from the labour ward without bothering to obtain a court order.

Many SWs may be good, competent people. But it seems there are not enough safeguards to protect children and families against those who are officious, self-righteous and who refuse to consider that, just occasionally, they might be wrong.

One of the most eminent doctors in the country told me how he had been threatened by SWs for daring to point out they were not being at all rational in making up allegations against one of his patients. They told him they would finish his career! If they think they can threaten him, what hope is there for mere mortals.

Tafka, it takes a huge amount of effort to remove a child for Social Workers. Only the Police can waltz in and grab a child legally. Everyone else has to go to court. Even emergency protection orders take a huge amount of work and evidence and they only last for up to 8 days.

Anyway, carry on comparing horror stories, getting yourselves all worked up. If you fancy shining a light of reality into your assumptions then I'm sure a few of the Social workers who post on here and know something about their jobs might respond. I for one am done.

wahwah - did you read the link I just posted? Yes, I know it's just a blog, and you have no verification that this actually happened other than my word, but I can assure you that i did happen, and I spoke to the grandmother of the baby in question who was understandably distraught at the whole situation.

A carful of SW's pulled up next to mother, took the baby out of its stroller, and then drive off with it (incidentally without any kind of car seat or appropriate infant restraint). Such was the mother's shock, that she phoned the police to tell them that a load of people had just kidnapped her baby!

Yes, it was illegal. Yes, it shouldn't have happened. "Enquiries" are still ongoing as to how this could have taken place. But the fact of the matter is that it did happen, and I think we need more transparency and more accountability to make sure that it can't happen again.

"They made, he said, fixed assumptions about the parents at the outset, and had not done the necessary investigations to check whether those assumptions were correct."

This happens time and again in childcare proceedings. Dear god, will social services never be properly regulated?

I'm so sorry for the poor parents.