Take more babies away from bad parents, says Barnardo's chief

[bubblebutt]

Many more children need to be taken into care at birth to stop them being damaged beyond repair by inadequate parents, the chief executive of the children's charity Barnardo's has told the Observer

How you can you say that when they the parents don't know how they will turn out themselves till after the event

Martin Narey called for less effort to be directed at "fixing families that can't be fixed" and for social workers to be braver about removing children at risk .

what tosh some families can be fixed and yes some cant but come on that means all babies that are under the SS would be taken into care because he fears another baby P and that is so wrong on many levels. A lot of families out there are going to suffer because of this reporting.

After revelations about the neglect and dysfunctional background of two young brothers from Doncaster who viciously attacked an 11-year-old boy and his nine-year-old nephew, social workers have once again come under fire for failing to intervene at an early stage.

this is alleged neglect and abuse no one knows this except the kids and their parents SS have to do a report and have to get all their facts together BEFORE they can remove a child. This takes time not 2 minutes. Another reason mistakes are made as there isnt enough Social Workers.

The brothers, aged 11 and 10, had been known to social services and police for several years. Their mother had allegedly given them cannabis as toddlers and forced them to forage for food in bins, while their father was allegedly a violent alcoholic. Despite this, the pair had been taken into care just three weeks before the attacks. The case has led to Doncaster social services opening an inquiry, its seventh serious case review since 2004.

What do they expect the SS to do wave a magic wand and its all better it doesnt work that way.The 2 boys are damaged now and need help as much as the other boys do.

Calling for more children to be in care from the moment they are born, Narey, a former director general of the Prison Service and previously a permanent secretary at the Home Office, made clear he was not reacting to this case in particular, but to issues with Britain's child protection services that needed urgent attention to avoid failing many more troubled young people.

Yes he is and a lot of families are going to suffer because of it.

"If you can take a baby very young and get them quickly into a permanent adoptive home, then we know that is where we have success," he said. "That's a view that is seen as a heresy among social services, where the thinking is that if someone, a parent, has failed, they deserve another chance. My own view is that we just need to take more children into care if we really want to put the interests of the child first.

So some one struggling is going to leapt on and the child taken away all cos she isnt coping the way the SS want and some want you to go after there arses cleaning em when they are old enough to do themselves Oh there is SS like this out there or the one that comdemns you if you cant cook and give your kids microwave meals all the time or something out of a tin god forbid they do that,

"We can't keep trying to fix families that are completely broken. It sounds terrible, but I think we try too hard with birth parents. I have seen children sent back to homes that I certainly wouldn't have sent them back to. I have been extremely surprised at decisions taken. If we really cared about the interests of the child, we would take children away as babies and put them into permanent adoptive families, where we know they will have the best possible outcome."

If the family is beyond repair so be it but what if they have turned there life around and can get their kids back why take that chance away as some SS do just that. they seem to tar every bad parent with the same brush hence why the SS shouldnt be there after 3 years as it makes them jaded in what they see everyday.

He said he understood his views would be seen as "illiberal heresy": "I think if social workers were courageous and sought to intervene quickly, and were supported properly in that, we would see far fewer problems."

As above and also there would be a national out cry from parents that have done nowt wrong but asked for help to be told they are neglecting their child(ren) when they clearly need help to be a better parent. Not penalized this way.

While foster care was on paper a good option for older children who had to be taken into care, he said, a shortage of suitable placements meant that children were suffering from a lack of stability. "What troubles me is the number of children I meet who have had vast numbers of placements. Last week, I met a 15-year-old girl and her foster mum. It was her 46th placement. The woman said that whenever there was a row or disagreement, the girl went to pack her bags. She expected to be sent on.

there isnt enough foster parents in the world as they are told to see the foster side as a business and it so isnt its helping and nuturing and caring for a child that needs your help

"It is undoubtedly a good option when children have been taken into care to replicate the family in foster care placements, but I have spent the past four years meeting a lot of children in care and I can tell you that it is by no means anything out of the ordinary to meet a child whose foster placements run into double figures. There comes a point where we have to accept that it is not working."

As above

Philippa Stroud of the thinktank Centre for Social Justice reacted cautiously to Narey's comments. "If the model is to move children very quickly to adoption, not necessarily from birth but certainly under a year, then that is something we would support," she said. "We need far more early intervention to try to stop this disintegration of the family we are seeing, but we would like to see more working with these families. What we recommend is the model of the mother and baby going into care, filling that hole and giving the whole family a chance. "With child protection, all the legislation is actually in place: it's the implementation that is the issue."

So if this is the case why do we see baby P stories all the time. I feel that the child protection and SS should be overhauled and the government needs to bring in more and they shouldnt be allowed anymore than 3 years in that field and then moved on if they wish to return they have to wait 3 years to do so. Also the work load of a SS shouldnt be anymore than 5 families and this is for full time workers not the part time.

The numbers of children taken into care rose slightly following the death of Baby P, the 17-month-old boy later named as Peter Connelly, who died in London in 2007 of injuries inflicted by his mother and her boyfriend, despite being seen repeatedly by doctors and social workers. But Narey says it was only a temporary increase.

How many of these babies, children whom parents hadnt done anything wrong really to their children and they where taken because of the mistakes of another SS office hmmmm that worries me more.

"As soon as these cases recede from the memory, everyone will get reluctant to move these children all over again. Only 4% of children adopted from care in England are under the age of one and the figure is even smaller in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

I for one hope it doesnt recede from memory as we need to be reminded of baby P and the others out there that their own parents didnt give a stuff about them. We need to address these mistakes and take stock and agree we where wrong. Not hidding behind we did nothing wrong and it wasnt our fault crap. If known abuse of any kind you amass your info and remove the kids. Not this wishy washy oh we didnt see this or that or she wouldnt let us in crap either. Also if on the "at risk registrar" they should visit more than once a week or what is the point of being on the registrar in the first place. Also no written warnings either. They should just turn up on the door. Again this would mean a full over haul of the SS departments all over the world.

"Less than 5% of the children taken into care in England last year were aged under a year old. Some 3,500 children were adopted in Britain from care, at an average age of four."

This is to do with the birth parents wanting their children back and fighting the SS over it and it takes on average a year to go to court with all the evidence they have against the other to proceed and sometimes this can be stopped if the paperwork isnt done right. Also the parents themselves could have turned their lives round and can show they have so this again hinder any proceedings. Also the SS could be dragging their heels too as one SS could be busy on other cases so it is again delayed. Not good for the child is it.

I copied and pasted this as its the article of said subject and it has angered me the silly man he is. I have added my own bits to it and wondered what you all thought.

"here itthe piece"

I'd like to take this opportunity to thank Mr Hemming, for continuing to pursue this issue.

I'd also oddly enough like to thank Nana, because her posts illustrated to everyone exactly how SS and organisations like them can get when they're challenged - irrational, incandescent and entrenched in proving themselves correct at all costs.

Enough to chill any reasonable person to the core, tbh.

Cory i'm glad for you that the sw's you encountered were professional. Disturbing to read the experience posted by atlantis

If we followed Nina's logic then, as an example, would one need to live in South Africa during apatheid and be an expert on it to criticise it?

And just who is making the damming comments here with "And would you believe my recommendation is that the single mother in the case should be given a further opportunity to parent her child" we don't know the details of the case - do we???? are we supposed to feel grateful for this comment....and then it follows on
with "mind if it goes my way and then that child turns out to be another Baby P - well what then????

This from someone who alleges they are an independent assessor, the mind boggles.

Please re-read your posts nananina.

You are in a position of influence over the next week, please recognise this.

snapple raises that particular Oldham case. What is important to note about that case where the parents were proven to be innocent is.

a) The judge refused a second opinion.
b) The first appeal at the court of appeal refused a second opinion.
c) The second appeal at the court of appeal allowed a second opinion.

That second opinion proved they were innocent.

What about all the other cases which are refused by the first court and don't appeal because they don't know they can or don't have the funding. Or even those who don't ask in the first court because they are advised it will be refused.

I think Mr Hemming is pointing out the flaws in all this. Please tell us MP's are discussing his too? And things wont be rushed through in a 'we don't want what happenend to Baby Peter to happen ahain' type panic. That sort of thing pans out badly I reckon.
And while we've an MP reading....please support Roger Berry's attempts to get winter fuel allowance for disabled people. Despite your average MP thinking DLA is super-stretchy, it isn't.
scuse the hijack.

Thanks for your support folks. There are other MPs who are as concerned, but they don't spend as much time on this as I do.

At the moment the government finances are in such a mess that I have no idea where things are going. (I don't think the government do either).

Just cast a quick eye over this thread again and wanted to correct the impression that I was leaving my profession in a huff because of some nasty comments! I have a choice about going for another post and was agonising about it, but this sort of debate has helped me see that perhaps the time has come to move away from child protection for a bit.

The sorry thing is that if we were all together in a room, I'm sure our discussions would be useful. The problem (as I see it) for the social workers on this thread is that it is incredibly hard to go into the detail necessary to explain the complexities and safeguards without coming off as arrogant, dismissive of failings or complacent. For the record, I don't think anyone has come off that way, but it is an exercise in frustration for those reasons. In addition, there are some people here who I think are enjoying the opportunity to attack a social worker.

I share the concerns about Johnhemming. I think that he spreads fear and is woefully misinformed in some areas and for the general public his status as an MP adds legitimacy to your involvement.

Johnhemming, you say terrible things without really saying anything and as NanaNina noted, never actually evidence the worst of what you say. The last time round it was panic about a child being 'snatched' because a parent had epilepsy, this time because parents are having a tiff. This is irresponsible scaremongering at it worst to suggest that these are sole reasons for removal. You are also posting that you are aware of a situation where there are plans to flee proceedings, I hope that you have brought this to the attention of the court / local authority.

I think I'm going to leave these sorts of threads alone for the future. My worry has always been that anyone coming across these sorts of threads would believe some of the paranoid rubbish and not seek help. If you're in this situation please do not delay in seeking help for a child. Children are protected and families helped in all but the minority of cases and while these minority are rightfully scrutinised and raise concerns, they are not typical.

I didnt get to see nina's posts but I have read Riven's.

I do not hate all SWs. I would not work in CP for any money. I think they are overworked and under supported etc.

BUT I can absolutely confirm that there are many in the social care system that have dreadful attitudes towards parents with disabilities. Foster care is offered as a first option rather than support, social services have insisted that children of parents with disabilities are automatically 'children in need', disabled parents have to prove that they are capable parents in a way that would never be expected of non disabled parents, children are referred to as young carers regardless of circumstances....

I could go on and on. It may not be a majority of professionals that think like this but the ones that do can set in motion a snowball that does not stop until the children are removed.

I have had a great deal of experience in this area. I have seen it over and over.

I do not think disabled parents should be exempt from scrutiny. I just dont think the automatically deserve to be treated as if they are a danger to their children.

IME the group that suffers the most is those with Learning Difficulties.

wahwah, I almost wish johnhemming were the sole perpetrator of this scaremongering as you describe. That way, I can dismiss him as summarily as you do and sleep better at night.

The fact is, what johnhemming says is corroborated by others' experience on this thread like riven, atlantic, snapple, sobloodystupid, dollyps, edam. Not forgetting other similar threads on mn. And my understanding is that because of his work in this area, johnhemming is approached directly by families who have suffered injustice, many of whom he tries to help. Surely his is a very powerful counter-perspective, to that of an ordinary social worker's. But then that is not valid in your eyes?

As for "Children are protected and families helped in all but the minority of cases and while these minority are rightfully scrutinised and raise concerns, they are not typical.", I have still yet to see evidence that such minority cases are scrutinised. Can you explain how mistakes are identified, scrutiny applied and lessons learnt. Presumably all behind closed doors.

Haringey received outstanding Ofsted award despite its shambolic state that led to Baby P and prior whistleblowing.

You see wahwah, when one has followed the threads of a parent with a severely disabled child for several years and it all seems to add up, and when one then sees that parent dismissed as having no experience by a social worker (not you, but NanaNina) who can't even be bothered to look up her past thread history to see if this is the case or not but assumes that she must be ignorant because she criticises sw's, well- it doesn't give a good impression.

Surely, the poster could have avoided giving an impression as arrogant without going into confidential detail- merely by not dismissing other posters as ignorant or bitter?

I have never before believed the people who claim that social workers don't listen to parents/they think they know everything/they won't listen to any alternative view. Because that hasn't been my experience. But this thread has made me wonder. A shame.

And for the record I do not believe in paranoid rubbish, but I have read a series of genuine medical articles, in genuine medical journals (I linked to one, but there are several more) which highlight the dangers inherent in rapid decisions without appeal.

I don't see how anyone could dismiss the judge's comments in the Oldham case, to which John Hemming referred us, as paranoid rubbish. Can you get any more balanced than this?

One point wahwah should be aware of is that I have families referred to me by social workers who work in child protection.

One Birmingham Social worker recently moved out of child protection. When I same him a few months ago he supported wholeheartedly what I am saying.

I am not arguing that we should not have a system. I am not arguing that all social workers are bad.

I am saying that the checks and balances fail and a substantial number of social workers do more harm than good.

It is well known that I encourage pregnant mothers to go abroad rather than face the kafkaesque world that is the family division in England. I shouldn't have to do that.

Yes, some SW's have been challenged on their thread and asked to explain their reasoning which has been found wanting.

Like blueshoes I too have still yet to see evidence or valid explanations or reasoning as to how mistakes are identified, scrutiny applied and lessons learnt.

Out of interest, I see that some of the earlier posts from WahWah and NanaNina have been deleted.

What is interesting from a constitutional perspective is that what we have here is a problem in the judicial system rather than the executive. The executive (government) however, needs to properly wake up to the realities and then either it or the legislature can act.

In a sense it demonstrates the failings of our constitution as a spectacularly bad system has been allowed to develop.

I wrote about a month ago to Ed Balls about RAD caused by care. I had a response from Delyth Morgan which basically ignored the question.

Typical.

There have been several mentions of parents being "gagged" which is not the case. Parents are (quite rightly) represented by solicitors and barristers in court and believe me they spend hours and hours cross-examining social workers (be they independent or not) which again is how it should be.

Someone said that they close ranks on you if you complain yup seen that first hand. Also most of the independent SW are appointed by the council that run the SW departments. Where is the fairness in that.

I havent a clue who John Hemming is but he isnt scaremongering as far as I can see as I checked him out and there is a lot of info out there on him.

As for the people who are criticising me, then so be it. I do not perceive myself as an "expert" in any sense. It's just after 30 years in the job I think I am in a more enlightened position than others who are not. I would not dream of making such criticisms and proclomations about an area of work in which I had little experience. It just annoys me that people feel it fair game to make such damming comments when they really can't understand the job and all that it entails, in the same way that i could not understand others jobs/experiences.
You didnt say that Oh you did didnt you.

I am shocked here as we parents are the experts not a SW that doesnt know our kids. You cant say after so many hours you the SW knows best surely not now that is a concern right there. You are not enlightened to know better than a parent that tries their best for a child or children to be cast down in flames by the very person that asked for help.

I have seen good and back SW over the years I have seen more bad ones though because they are jaded by the job. Nana you are blinded by your profession and your pedastal you think you should be on when clearly you shouldnt be in the job any more you have become jaded that you wont accept you can and most likely have made mistakes.

You didnt even answer my question just dismissed it really about my friend with I see cases like that all the time and there must be concerns for them to be there in the first place. No her ex did that lieing to them I might add for them to be there. I have to say there was a happy outcome to my friends story she still has the kids but what of the ones that dont.

Oh and I have an Uncle that is a SW and we have many a debate I can tell you and no he doesnt name names as he'd get the sack for that. He is leaving soon for more work but in a different field in the SW department.

Sorry that didnt work then but the * is Nana's post in part and me putting my point accross

DollyPS, what are independent social workers and why is there is need for them? Do they spend as much time with the family as the caseload social worker?

they where first appointed to stop conflicts of interests i.e to help the courts and the families for a better outcome and it backfired because they are employed by the councils that runs the SW's. The independent social worker would be inclined to agree with the other SW on the case and be bias in their views. I have to add not all are like this. There are good ones out there that can look at the evidence in front of them and change what is being done.

they usually go over the case with the caseworker and any other agencies there as well they will see the family also but not to the extent of the caseworker asigned to the family already.

As family court is shourded in secrecy this will be refuted.

i would just like to add that there are assessment centres where S/W work and they are completly independant to the LA, they also tend to spend all of their working days with the families as they are staffed 24/7 due to some of the high risk families that enter them to live for a time period of 3 months plus.

They often disagree with the LA as they get to actually see the family so much and work with them in the areas that need to be worked with.

i must add that had these families not been assessed independantly by these people they may have lost their children

at times thee LA and the privavte company agree but their is often disputes

and i would say 98% of the families that enter the particular centre i am talking about actually like being within the supported enviroment, and do not want to leave, this is even parents who do have their children removed as the main focus of the work drifts from assessing to helping and supporting them to make life story books for both themselves and their children, this is a very emotional time for all staff but of those parents and only speaking from my own expereince here so not across the board, they welcome the thaputic input they get as they would be pushed to get it in the community.

Thanks, dollyPS for that explanation.

Kentmumtj, the assessment centres sound like a good idea. Are they state funded/aided and if not, how are they funded? It must cost plenty to upkeep and pay the social workers and staff.

Are the centres residential ie the families move in? Are the families referred there or do they seek it out voluntarily.

Sorry for the questions but this the first time I have heard of this.

blueshoes - tbh i'm not sure how much assessment centres cost at the moment (currently working in fostering) but i thought you might like to know about parent and child foster placements.

basically this is where a parent and child have a placement with a foster carer. this is usually for about 3 months and it is often dual purpose - i.e. when the placement starts the foster carer will often be more 'hands on' so as to help the parent improve their parenting skills, in the later stages of the placement the foster carer will take on an assessment role.

each placement will have clear goals and these are set out in the beginning so everyone should be clear about the purpose and what is expected of them. the foster carer writes an assessment report.

these placements do cost a lot - they can cost in the region of £600 - £1,000 a week. but they are really useful if they are used well.

blueshoes - just did a quick google, according to an article in community care (2008) the cost of an assessment in a family assessment unit is anywhere between £32,000 - £60,000.

Hi ceres, thanks for the info.

An assessment in a family assessment unit costs quite a bit at £32,000 to £60,000. But if the cost of an adoption is estimated at £200,000, then it is still money well spent if it works to turn the parenting around for the whole family.

Foster care placement is also good. I estimate that for 3 months would come up to about £13,000. Do you know how successful such placements are and the profile of the family it is likely to help? Does the foster carer move into the family's home or vice versa?

Ceres these assessment centres sound great to help the parents.

The only ones I heard of were for vunerable teens that where at risk from the parents or themselves or vunerable teens that where pregnant, but they didnt go to a foster carer but in a home type setting. The home setting does have a SW there but not 24/7 but these ones are run by the councils. So the ones you know of must be completely privately run then.

I'm the same as blueshoes what is the ratio of parents staying together and the ratio of the child being fostered or adopted. Can you see more of these centres coming about. I'd really like to know as I am very interested.

This is the field I wish to do for the vunerable teen that is pregnant and am still looking into it as placements within a family home are rare.

blueshoes - yes, a parent and child placement or a placement in a family assessment centre are both much cheaper than adoption. tbh like everyone else i can only speak about my own experience and, in my experience, adoption is very much a last resort. i am not getting into defending social work - i have never, and would never, claim that the system is without flaws.

many of the children and young people i work with are in long term foster care. the term short term foster care is somewhat misleading - some short term placements can last 2+ years! some children remain in foster care until they reach adulthood - ideallly with the same foster carers.

disruption is all too common in foster placements. sometimes placements are disrupted because the foster carers no longer feel able to cope - it is hard for people who don't foster to understand quite how difficult fostering can be. we tend to think of children needing to be looked after and loved and then all will be well but, unfortunately, because of their often traumatic life experiences, children and young people in care can display very challenging behaviour - and i am not saying that all these children have attachment disorders, some do and some don't. i realise that the term 'challenging behaviour' is pretty meaningless, so for example it can mean things like absconding behaviour, drug and alcohol use, verbal and/or physical aggression, deliberate self-harm, inappropriate sexualised behaviour.......again all of these terms are pretty meaningless unless discussed in the context of the individual child. foster carers do an incredibly difficult job and, of course, they also have their own families and other commitments as well as fostering.

sometimes placements are dispupted because children return to their birth parents - when this re-unification works it is great. but when it doesn't it means the child is returned to the care system, often to a different carer and with more experience of trauma.

i know it can be difficult to understand how children can be moved from birth family to care to birth family to care but, in effect ss are only doing what many people accuse them of not doing i.e. trying to keep families together, working with the parents to try to enable them to care for their children. parent and child placements can be used in this re-unification process.

so, to answer your question - the profile of the family that a parent and child placement is likely to help. there isn't a typical profile tbh - i have worked with many parents with learning disabilities, addiction prblems, parents who have been in care themselves, mental health problems, survivors of domestic violence. it really is incredibly varied.

sometimes a parent and child placement assessment will have a clear outcome - i.e it will provide ss and the courts with clear evidence that a parent is/is not capable of safely caring for their child/ren. in other cases the assessment can highlight ongoing support needs - i.e the parent is doing really well but their are still some areas that they need help with, if this is the case then ongoing help can be provided in the form of, for example, family support when they retunr to their own home. such support can be written into a care plan e.g the parent will be asked to agree to. for example, if social isolation is identified as a stressor then the parent might be asked to agree to attending a local parent and toddler group to reduce the social isolation of parent and child and to help them to build a social support system.

sorry - didn't mean this post to be so long!

hi people
the centre i work is not just for mothers it is for parents be that couples or sigle mums/dads

there are no age restrictions so can be any age from 16 right upto ...er thinking now the oldest ive personally seen in the centre think it would be 58ish roughly so you can see it is a wide range in age. we work with care leavers, young mums, learning difficukities, disabilities, drug and alcohol issues, mental health etc etc the list is endless.

it is private and the LA have to pay for the placement. the cost does vary greatly as it depends on how many children and what kind of other services are being accessed ie. counselling, family therapist, pschyologist, theraplay therapists etc etc

and yes the families move into the centres, i hear people speak about foster placements for mums and babys and can add that when we make recommendations this can be that they need further support and we recommend a mother and baby foster placement or a community package or we think its in the childs best interests to be removed sometimes we feel an extension of a placement is necessary if we feel a little longer is needed to work with the family.

i think there are quite a number of residential assessment centres around.