Cooking with aubergines

[ImSoNotTelling]

And here we are! I don't know if anyone will join in or not, but if anyone does, I have a little rant I would like to get off my chest!

How's that for tempting

I would never ask for a copy of my file as I don't want to draw their attention to me.

That sounds really paranoid doesn;t it.

I know that the report says some untrue tihngs about us, as I have a copy. Nothing I can do about it. I know that Leonie is trying to get hers changed, she is a better and braver woman than me. I would be scared of getting their backs up.

Putting my feminist topic frequent posting hat on

Thinking about that analogy of being falsely accused of rape - it is a good analogy

The difference is that very very few reports of rape are false. While (the estimate by a SW on the other thread was that) around 50% of reports to SS result in an all clear. That is an awful lot of people walking around with this weight hanging over them when they have done nothing wrong.

It's not closed though is it, if it comes up on CRB checks and the school knows and the nursery knows and the doctor knows. Everyone you come into contact with in those sorts of roles I'm sure views people like us with suspicion.

The just-in-case culture keeps us powerless.

It keeps us suspects.

Enhanced CRBs contain 'relevant non-conviction information' including unsubstantiated allegations, etc. Human rights orgs are very concerned.

The just-in-case culture means that employers, who may use their discretion, can say ok, these have not been substantiated, but just in case, let's hire the other person.

The police, instead of saying, 'you twunt, don't threaten to take the kid again and get your wife down the GPs', say just in case, we are referring you.

The school can say, well he's probably got SEN but just in case, because there's this mysterious FILE, we better contact SS again.

Just in case, just in case, just in case!

V good point re the rape allegations ISNT.

Glad you're here Alt. apprecaite it.
when you say :"SS only become involved when their is a concern made, and YOU WERE NOT IN TROUBLE. (im going to shout that until the roof tops come off lol) even tho you feel/felt you were."
please cann you explain thta. becasue i'm really sorry, but i just don't get it. the pseron at the drinks agency who refered ISNT said that "they had reported me to SS as my children were at serious and immediate risk of harm".
But ISNT didn't think her children were in danger. what danger were they in ? what abuse or neglect were they subject to ?
I still think the drinks agency man did not have 'reasonable grounds' for his referal to ss.
can you please answer this question, in simple terms please.

Alt, thank you. You have mde me feel a whole lot better. Ironic really when we are talking about ISNT. Hope that makes you feel better ISNT.
Have you actually written a complaint to the drinks agency ISNT ?

The thing is that after I spoke the the manager he agreed that it sounded odd that they had referred me, and that he would like to retract it, but it was done now.

Then they came and saw me at home, and said that everything seemed fine, and they would talk to SS. He did call them and tell them that they had acted hastily and in his opinion there were no probs but it was too late by then SS had to come and see us.

I don't know if anyone remembers but I had to have my "giving up drinking" support thread pulled and my "oh shit I've been reported" thread pulled as the agency found them and contacted me via MNHQ. The option is still there (I guess) for me to complain formally about what happened, the man who contacted me seemed fine, it would have meant breaking my anonimity though and at the time I wasn't really strong enough.

I do feel though, that this woman is a loose cannon, and maybe I should do something.

The things she came out with were horrible. She said stuff like, my childen were at serious risk of harm, they had to call SS because it was obvious they were at serious risk of harm. I sort of said in a shocked "please reassure me" way, oh they won't take the children will they? And she said "yes if they find they are at risk they will remove them immediately". i mean FFS.

After the visit the SW said that I had to engage with the drink charity, with this woman as my case worker helpful. The woman said that I had to go to a drop in centre in the middle of a housing estate, for alcoholics and drug addicts, and of course I had to take the children. I asked how long I would have to go there for and she said "as long as it takes" and when I asked about what would happen when I went back to work, she just kept reiterating that I had to attend for as long as it takes.

God she was such a nasty person. really me beef is with her, and that charity. I feel so angry about it.

Also, when she said she had referred me and that SS were coming to see me, I said, what happens how does it work? My husband works, I need to make sure he is here when they come? And she said, that doesn't matter, it's got nothing to do with him

Sorry am starting to RANT now.

ISNT I don't think you've ever told me about the thread pulling. god thats frightening. makes us all feel even less secure. Thats why i worry about giving too many details on MN.

They did contact me nicely. MNHQ forwarded an email which expressed concern about what had happened and did I want to talk about it etc.

I had named the agency a lot, and I expect someone just googled the agency name and up it all came. That's something to rememebr about MN threads they do come up on google.

Holy shit re thread pulling!

OMG.

This is one reason why I'm not keen for MN to become an agent of the government!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So, because I'm confused, SS said you must engage with that agency? And you did indeed have to go to the drop ins?

FFS. I wonder if SS has moles in AA!

I did go to a drop in. But it was the bloke there rather than the woman and he expressed extreme surprise to see me there.

I spoke to him and said I wouldn't be back.

It wasn't AA! My mistake was not going tdown the anonymous support route, which is what i would advise anyone with kids to do now TBH.

Sorry I'm turning this into my personal rant thread

Oblomov did you ever talk to your GP practice or your usual GP about what had happened?

Paranormum your situation sounds bad. You must feel so stuck. I don't know what to say. If this wasn't hanging over you, do you think you would be with your husband? Do you want to be with him?

It was all a bit random really. The SW told me I had to engage, and I did what I said in the last post and spoke to the woman on the phone.

However the SW had said when she visited about support, and I said that a. I didn't think I needed any support anyway and b. if I did I didn't want it from thsi organisation who had shopped me and certianly not from this woman.

The SW said I had to engage with them but that she would call and see if I could have a different support person and she would ring me in a week or so and let me know. She never called back. Or contacted anyone else or anything.

So I just left it at that really.

Good news is I haven't had a drink since about last august/september and don't miss it at all no bloody thanks to all the supposed support agencies.

Ni ISNT. this IS your field. your time. your stage. those that want to be here, there are about 6 of us or so. Leonie etc are welcome if they want to come. this is our time to say whatever you want to say.

I am still thinking about how to tell my story concisely. ISNT knows most of it. I still don't know what to do about my situation.
Dh and my mum thinks that a GP will never admit to making a mistake. NHS never admits to anything. if they do they are liable for suing. Also both think that if I push, they will find a way, maybe not think month or next, but eventually find a way of asking us to leave the surgery. which they have already done to us once over this. and i agree. so i don't know what to do.

Alt, you do know that we do have respect for sw'ers and ss. all of us. most of our grimes are about being refered in the first place. you did see my post that my step dad retired form being a manager of a county dept last week. and my mum worked in his adoption team( they ran adoptions for one of the sw counties) for nearly 8 years.
i do know the good work that ss does. but alot of their stuff they are required to do, is unwanted. no one wants to have to deal with ss. if you are refered for mental health. no one wants to see a sw. if you are accused of abuse,. no one wants to see a sw.

ss and sw'ers can never get away from this. rarely does anyone want ss's intervention. sorry but we all know that everyone hates sw'ers.and that will never change.

but our gripes aren't actually with sw'ers.

Well not hates SW, maybe, but would hate to be personally involved on the wrong end of SS attention.

Thing is that the positive stuff that they do is never reported, and if people get help from them they never pass on the good news stories as they don't want to go around telling people they have been involved with SS.

Would you be better off leaving teh surgery and finding a new one (depending on how many there are in your area?).

How about this

Can docs expunge referral from their notes, as SS confirmed no action to be taken and everything fine so there is no need for it to be there. Then change docs, they get the notes which have no reference to SS, you can start afresh? rather than having it all dredged up in your mind every time you have to go to the doc?

What we all want here really, I think, is an apology from the people who referred us, an open and full apology, and for someone to say that there are no records and forget the whole tihng, you can live your life as if it never happened.

That's not how it works though, is it.

No my main gripe isn't with SS either. I do think that the procedures could be a lot more transparent and I am as horrified by the closed family courts and their power to have children adopted when the burden of proof is so much less than in an actual criminal court as much as the next person.

I am still angry that I took dd to two different hospitals but it was the one where her medical team have a well-documented knowledge of her condition, the one which was supposed to be our defence against unfounded accusations was the hospital which insisted on a referral.

The local hospital had no concerns and were so shocked and surprised when I rang them to get the name of the specialist registrar who was the only one to actually examine dd's graze. And when I say "local" I mean it isn't a city one BUT it is a very large teaching hospital which serves a huge area.

That post on the other thread about a certain agency looking into time-wasting referrals and how they might be cut down was so positive, I was really pleased to read that.

Like most parents / tax payers I would like to see public resources going towards families known to SS, to children at real risk, children like Baby P, Victoria Climbie, those with nobody to protect them at all.

Hi -- I find reading this thread SOOOOOo surreal. I know exactly what you all mean.
I feel quite positive reading your posts because I don't feel the pain (so much) any more, I guess I've finally moved on (2.5 years ago I was reported to SS). But for a long time I was deeply traumatised and I'm sure I could feel that way again if I dwelt on it.

I want to post more, but must read more of the thread, first. XXX.

Hello mloo

And hello from me

I am interested to know whether you were looking for advice about aubergines

I wonder if there are a lot of people about who might like to talk about this, maybe we should get the title changed? What do you think Mloo? And not hide behind the aubergines