Who is responsible (child protection scenario)

[TheLimeQuail]

Parent has 3 children removed from their care. Changes identity and moves away. Has another child under their new name that they then assault and hospitalise. Could this have been prevented

There’s so many variables here.

Well ultimately the person who assaulted their child is responsible for the assault on that child..

But as PP says.. there are far too many variables for anyone to give you a meaningful answer. There are well publicised difficulties with people moving between social services areas even without name changes.

Did the original SS know about the name change ? Did they know about the move? Were the new area aware but failed to act?

Literally no one here can tell you.

How do you think it could have been prevented?

The parent had their first 3 children removed for aggressive, physical assaults and outbursts

Why do you think it was anyone else's fault?
And they've obviously been found out given you know about it. Unless it's you?

why do you think SS in the new area would know anything about the parent? Even without a name change they wouldn’t know unless someone reported it.

Impossible to say with that level of information.

I’m surprised a parent can get away with having their first 3 children removed for assaulting them and then go onto have another that they do the same thing to just by changing their name and area.

How have they 'got away with it' if you know about it?! Is child no4 with them still?

No. But they got away with it enough to do it to another child causing a brain injury

Am assuming this is your ex? Am assuming other services involved for you to be aware of new charges.

The things is , social services do not have the power (or capacity to be honest), to supervise every single individual they’ve been involved with, indefinitely.

So yes, a change of area , even more so a name change means people “get away” with it. How would Mary the SW know that Suzie Jones (who is actually Alicia Thomas) even had a baby , never mind the fact that she had previous SS involvement?

Why shouldn’t they know! Why do they not make sure that parents can’t just change their names move away and have more children when their first ones were removed

I’m surprised there’s nothing to prevent that from happening

Unless the person is convicted of a criminal act, I can't see how anyone can stop this happening. Did the new partner not know about the previous removal of children?

No they didn’t know. And they were convicted, they went to prison for what they did

How did you find out about all this @TheLimeQuail?

The parent is the one responsible

I think we need a change in the law, I don't think someone with a criminal conviction should be allowed to change their name and there should be some sort of register for those who harm children. Neither of these things would have prevented this person having another child though. What do you think should happen?

Something like .. what?

The only thing I can think of is a centralised data base where the person involved with SS is also linked by their NHS number, so when they book midwife, give birth etc. (and this would only work for mothers) and their NHS number is put into the system, it would flag up with SS involvement. However, the laws aren’t there for it , or the framework. It doesn’t work that way. Even then , it wouldn’t stop people who for example, didn’t access any pre or post natal care and had a home birth. Or it wouldn’t stop people only flag at the point of birth and any court orders etc. take time.

If criminal proceedings were taken against this person and they were found guilty,then some conditions/restrictions could/would be put in place by the judge/parole board and there would be checks.

I can’t decide if I’m surprised that this has been able to happen or not. There is now a central “database” which maternity, social services, schools, medical care etc can all access. It was put in place following baby P so that in theory never again would you have multiple people with concerns but not QUITE enough. I was told about all of this in my antenatal class thing in my first pregnancy 2 years ago, now pregnant with my second and they mention it again at your booking appointment. The previous incidents should have been recorded on there & flagged up when this person went to her antenatal appointments and a SS referral would have immediately been made.

The problem I suppose would be if this person has name changed, but then failed to update the NHS etc with the change of name and just registered as a new patient so no link to previous records then it wouldn’t flag, but I would think a woman of child bearing age with absolutely no medical history or records would flag somewhere anywhere. Or, did she not receive any antenatal care for this pregnancy, and therefore could even have gotten away with not registering the birth so nobody would have known?

I don’t know why you’re getting such a ‘duh of course not’ response - I completely agree and it wouldn’t be hard to implement something eg linked to medical records that can’t be changed even if name changes - NHS number for instance. That could record if they need to be flagged for future children which would then be picked up at maternity appointments.

@TheLimeQuail

How do you think you can stop people having babies? Because that's the only way to prevent it happening again.

In answer to your question who is responsible?
The person that assaulted the child.

I’m just surprised nothing flagged and the new baby could stay in their care