'snatched' by social workers

[DuelingFanjo]

oh ffs

I know it's the Daily Mail but Social workers don't snatch children!

She looks good for 48 mind!

Underlying this is the fact that we need Social Workers and hence we need to ensure that the job is one that someone is willing to do.

I have argued against searching out for a scapegoat when things go wrong. There was a meeting chaired by Esther Rantzen at my party conference this year at which I was one of my speakers.

She was tending to take the view espoused by the media that anyone to fails must be sacked. I made the point that if you treat people too harshly then people don't want to do the job. That does not mean that there should be no accountability, but that we should not be driven by a desire to find a sacrificial goat any time something goes wrong.

This is what has worried me and has not been addressed, except by NN who claimed there is not validity in what Camilla Cavendish of The Times says as she is a journalist.

?Emotional abuse? has no strict definition in British law. Yet it now accounts for an astounding 21 per cent of all children registered as needing protection, up from 14 per cent in 1997. Last year 6,700 children were put on the child protection register for emotional abuse, compared with only 2,600 for sexual abuse and 5,100 for physical abuse. Both of the latter two categories have been falling steadily. Meanwhile emotional abuse and ?neglect? - which replaced the old notion of ?grave concern? in 1989 - have been rising. Both are catch-alls. But emotional abuse is especially vague. It covers children who have not been injured, have not complained, and do not come under ?emotional neglect?.

starlight, I probably understand quite a lot about how you must have felt. When my son was subject to a CP investigation I knew it was unfair, disproportionate and the result of a policy that social services had re: domestic violence and children under the age of 1.

I also wondered what would have happened if I hadn't cooperated. I've since been told that because there was no evidence whatsoever that my son was at risk-they wouldn't have been able to take it further. I know how powerless I felt and I hope its made me a better social worker.

I don't deny there are real problems in social work but I honestly don't think that some of the things described in this thread by jh are credible

Here is the whole article. I am still sure it is very rare for children to be taken wrongfully, but it would be interesting to get a [calm] SW's take on this article.

This is the problem isn't it.

The SW want you to do stuff.
You know if is stupid.
You have to agree to do the stuff as you don't know what will happen if you don't or if you argue - as this is never explained.
So you have to get on and do whatever it is, as at the back of your mind you feel there will be dire consequences if you do not comply.

It is a situation of exquisite powerlessness, with the worst imaginable sanction lurking in the background.
No-one knows the system, how it works, what they have to do to make it all go away.

Of course this makes SW unpopular. I think they need a serious image overhaul. For people to be frightened is normal it is not an illogical reaction designed to upset SWs. For SWs not to acknowledge that people are scared of them is odd surely - and key to the interaction between client and SW. If SW do not acknowledge how they make people feel, if as far as they are concerned all they are trying to do is help, and do not make any allowance for fear, then misunderstandings will arise.

Having said all that, I don't know who NN is actually talking to, as her ideas that there are a bunch of JH supporters, who believe all SW are child snatching maniacs, and would prefer if children weren't protected at all - I haven't seen anyone on this thread who has said anything like that.

As for SW vs non SW - many on this thread are speaking of their personal experiences with SS which surely puts them in a position of some knowledge, and if people really are having such a bad time wouldn't it be better for SW to acknowledge that rather than saying that people on the sharp end aren;t allowed to have a view as they don't understand it properly.

Of course personal experience is important and of course people have bad experiences of social services-I did too.

I think to make general assumptions about a profession on the basis of personal experience isn't helpful. Thats not the same as denying the validity of someones experience.

I know that I often have to do a lot of work around building up trust with clients who assume that all social workers do is take children into care or cart people off to hospital. Thats part of the job but only part of it. My job is actually to try and support people to stay out of hospital and to acheive their potential in often v difficult circumstances. I believe passionately in the good that can come from social work input and I'm afraid thats why I 'defend' my profession

dittany, I'm baffled about how I've 'again' twisted what has been said to avoid addressing the point. Please let me know when I did this as it wasn't my intention.

Its possible to disagree without getting aggressive.

I think I've pointed out pretty clearly that comments and opinions from anyone are valid. However as someone who is, as you say, an 'insider' I do think some of the assertions by jh are difficult to believe.

By the way I always think for myself and I've always felt able to express my opinions if I witness poor practice. Maybe there was a particular culture in Haringey-I don't know I've never worked there.

I think you need to acknowledge that noone is suggesting there aren't real problems in social work. There always will be even in a perfect system because the very basis of social work is the tension between social care and social control. I'd love to hear your opinions on how to resolve that.

'A state of denial'. You are clueless dittany and insulting. You are denying my reality and the reality of the people that I have worked with to help them get some quality of life back.

I knew i should have hidden this thread!

Dittany, are you aware how rude you are being? I didn't want to make a professional opinion, because I don't know very much about the particular subject. I explained this to you, several times, but you seem to be incapable of taking this on board and are determined to give me alterior motives. I gave you my personal opinion, and you seemed to turn that into another failing on the behalf of the social services, despite the fact that my opinion seemed broadly simmilar to yours.

Anyone wondering why Social Workers are feeling got at, just read dittany's posts. It would appear there is nothing we can say.

Sorry that you had such a crap time of it Starlight. It doesn't sound like you were served well.

dittany, you really can't have a civilised argument that doesn't rapidly degenerate into personal insults and demeaning others who disagree with you.

I'm sorry it has to be like that for you but won't waste anymore time on responding to you

You haven't ascribed any motives to me? Apart from being passive aggressive and obfusicating you mean? i have given you nothing but my honest opinion and experience on this thread.

What more information would I require to give a professional opinion? I would want to have read the whistle blowers complaints, the councils response and any independant inquiry. Rather than just having watched it on the news, which is the case.

In a busy thread, dittany, where lots of people are asking lots of different things, some points will get missed. Its not passive aggression, and when it happens to me, I don't assume that there is some ulterior motive.

I honestly don't think there is much point in continuing this discussion, as you are just not going to listen, and your rudeness is interfereing with my ability to have a reasonable converstion with anyone else. I am sure however that you will have an interpretation for that.

"Or we have grandpoohbah, who apparently is able to comment on everything else, but in a case where it was an insider criticising the system, suddenly it's not possible to bring any professional knowledge to bear on that information."

Sorry dittany, but that sounded pretty much like a dig to me. If it wasn't, then I appologise for ascribing motives.