Dilemma - thank you for the link. I have seen enough of the practice in BCC to think there is a problem BUT I still maintain this is not the fault of individual social workers and this is how it is being presented. Many of them struggle against all the odds - overloaded with ridiculously large caseloads and insufficent support, and trying to take over the work of workers on sick leave etc etc. I just think it isn't fair to talk of 50% of social workers being "poor" without looking at the reasons why this has come about. Birmingham is one of the most deprived inner city regions in the country and the council's childrens services are really struggling - I have see the evidence BUT I still think you have to look at the reasons for this, rather than just think that social workers have "poor practoce" - it is going to get worse because they are axing jobs.
JH why aren't you bringing up the issue of the cuts in childrens services in BCC and how this will exacerbate the worrying situation ??
Dilemma - you are I fear missing my point. You asked how I know that JHs posts are inaccurate. He actually stated in a post on MN that a child was removed because the granny had called the social worker fat. He gave no other details and did not elaborate and he was challenged by social workers and lawyers alike but he made no response as is often the case. He also stated emphatically that another child was removed because they failed the assessment on the issue of BF on demand. What was actually presented to the court is neither here nor there, the point I was making in reponse to your Question "how do I know that JHs post are inaccurate" . You must be able to agree that there will be far far more to these cases than JHs assertions.
I have been doing parenting assessments on an ind basis for 7 years and have to date carried out over 150. It isn't a case of "passing" or "failing" an assessment, it is a case of carrying out a comprehensive assessment based on the Common Assessment Framework, taking into account all of the circumstances and making a recommendation based on the best interests of the child, not the parents. It can be a finely balanced thing and I have had many a sleepless night worrying about these assessments. It is nonsense to say that a parent would "fail" an assessment because she wanted to BF on demand. These are the sorts of things JH wants people to believe to support his hypothesis and it works, because a lot of posters do believe it. It is only social workers and lawyers involved in the family courts who know that this is nonsense.
I absolutely and completely agree with you about residential "care" - I think it is a dreadful way of caring for troubled children. and yes I agree that it exacerbates their problems. In my view all institutionalised care is wrong for any age group, and for troubled teenagers it is just about the worse thing that can happent to them, and it is expensive. I know that these days foster care is the first option for all younger children but it still means that too many teenagers are in res care.
The state is not a good parent but you have to look at why this is. There is a huge shortage of foster carers on a national basis and hence sibling often have to be split up and carers overloaded. Also of course the govt has encourage privatisation and there are numerous independent fostering agencies who charge l.a.s excessive rates though of course the carers get paid more. L.as are forced to "buy" placements from the IFAs when there is no other placement. It doesn't mean that the care is any better, it just means that the carers work for an IFA rather than the la.
You also have to look at the resons why children come into care in the first place and this will sometimes be at parent's request but that tells you a lot about their parenting capacity if they want their child removed and this happens with teenagers far more than many people realise. If children are removed (contrary to what JH believes) it is because they are being abused or neglected in some way, and it surely goes without saying that this means that they will suffer allkinds of anxieties etc that will often manifest themselves in behaviour problems.
I have worked with foster carers over 30 years and have seen the way in which the pre placement experience of children has worsened to much over the years, largely because of drug/drink abuse of the parents. Only on Monday a foster called told me of a 2 yr old placed with her who could only say "Fuck" and his 4 year old brother kept asking whether she was selling the table/chairs etc and when she said NO why do you ask - he said "Well how are you going to pay for your gear then" ..........I could go on but I am criticised for the length of my posts so I will stop.