Q&A about child protection with NSPCC - ANSWERS BACK

[RachelMumsnet]

We're joined this week for a Q&A with the NSPCC, the UK's leading child protection charity. Last week the NSPCC's All babies count campaign was our Campaign of the Week.

Your questions will be answered by Chris Cuthbert, from the All babies count campaign, Kam Thandi, NSPCC helpline team manager, and Jane Petrie NSPCC Parenting Officer. They will be answering your questions about the work of the NSPCC, the NSPCC helpline, the All babies count campaign, and how Mumsnetters can protect children. Send in your questions to the NSPCC before 5pm on Monday 6th February and we'll be linking to their answers from this thread on 16th February.

Chris says: 'It's great that mumsnet is supporting All babies count campaign. Almost a half of the most serious cases of child abuse and neglect relate to babies under the age of one. Evidence shows that with the right services in place it is possible to prevent many of these tragic cases. We hope Mumsnetters will support us by signing our online petition. I look forward to answering your questions about the campaign.'

Kam adds: Unfortunately we can't allow you to use the Q&A session to share concerns about a specific child. If you are worried about a child right now - even if it's just a doubt, please contact the NSPCC's free 24 hour helpline immediately for advice from our trained helpline counsellors.'

Call:0808 8005000
Email [email protected]
Text 88858
(If you are texting from the Channel Islands or the Isle of Man, 88858 will not be available to you. However, you can text the NSPCC Helpline on 0778 620 0001. This service is not free, and you will be charged at your standard network rate.)

This Q&A has been sponsored by the NSPCC

I would have thought that this kind of sensible, intelligent feedback from MN should make a reputable charity seriously assess itself.

To the NSPCC: given the feedback from Mumsnet, do you think that your charity has been become a damaging exercise in self-promotion and something of a job creation scheme for fund raisers and charity executives?

Is the NSPCC liaising with the government re its shocking demand that lone parents go to work REGARDLESS of childcare? What are you telling the government about the potential effect on children?

With regards to Domestic Violence, what is the NSPCC doing to promote the knowledge that DV is harmful to children, even if they only witness it and are not the direct victims of it? Are you working with CAFCASS to ensure that Non Resident Parents who have a record of DV, are not granted sole contact with their children? Currently, CAFCASS routinely grant sole contact to men with a history of DV, who then use that contact to continue to terrorise their ex partners, or who actually neglect their children. When the Resident Parent complains, she is treated as a vindictive bitter ex, who is only complaining because she is a vindictive bitter ex. This systemic misogyny, means that children are being subjected to levels of emotional (and sometimes physical) abuse which the courts seem entirely oblivious of and which resident parents are helpless to protect them from, as the courts threaten them with losing Care and Control if they don't continue to send their child to the abusive parent. What's the NSPCC doing, to educate courts about this?

I'm not criticising the thread. In fact, I feel rather smugly affirmed because I have felt critical of NSPCC for years, and knew that others in my line of work felt similarly, but not that the view was more widespread.

I hope they will respond constructively to the views here.

Does the NSPCC offer, or plan to offer, support to children and the parent who have escaped domestic violence?

This thread makes very interesting reading. As an ex social worker I have long felt that the NSPCC is misleading in its portrayal of the actual CP that it does, and I hate the guilt tripping misery advertising. The NSPCC does not have a good name amongst social workers.

why is the nspcc necessary? what does it do that the government doesnt do? if anything, why is this so? surely it is the governments responsibility to look after children and fund organisations that do this type of work, including research, campaigning etc. why are donations required instead of lobbying government for funds?

Another one wanting to know exactly what NSPCC do if someone calls them with concerns about a child - do they simply refer to local social services, and if so why does NSPCC need to exist? What is their added value?

Also, I still have nightmares from when I was 8 (1982/3) and NSPCC came to my school and did an assembly where they told us stories of graphic child abuse - the sort of thing that would be toned down in most 'misery lit' books now! Followed by getting us to do a sponsored activity to raise money.

Could NSPCC assure me that their fundraising efforts are now age-appropriate? I'm not against funds being used for schmoozing dinners in general as I know they can be very cost-effective (but not always!)

I am not a social worker, by the way.

Just a mum.

As I type this, Alistair Campbell and Ruby Wax are on the BBC using the fact that they are relatively well known to help fight the 'stigma' of mental health issues, and to argue for society as a whole to move out of the MH dark ages.

Will NSPCC support this campaign unquivocally?

The NSPCC are the only Agency other than the Local Authority (Social Services) who can (as stated in the Children Act 1989) investigate Child Protection. In reality, (I am a Social Worker 12 years post qualifying) they run a helpline which takes calls from concerned members of the public and malicious ex husbands, makes a note of the concern, and then faxes it to the Local Authority Child Protection Team. That would appear to be the extent of their Child Protection role - I find their TV adverts totally misleading and possibly even fraudulent as they have no direct role at all in the frontline and their advert certainly suggests that they do. HOWEVER - they DO some very very good work in other areas, in my Authority they are the lead agency in working with children who have been sexually abused and they offer high quality counselling and therapy for these youngsters, however this service is 'bought in' by the Authority. Due to all the cuts, in my area this funding has been cut so the NSPCC will no longer be offering the service.

As a social worker I am often asked at what age it is 'legal' to leave a child home alone or caring for other siblings. There is NO LEGAL AGE - it is down to the parents own judgment as teenagers all differ hugely as do their siblings. It may be completely fine to leave a very mature 14 year old to mind an 8 year old sibling who is also pretty sensible whilst you may have a 21 year old who you couldn't safely leave your goldfish with!!!!! BUT as a parent you do remain responsible for your child's welfare, so if things go wrong you may end up being prosecuted for child neglect if you appear not to have provided adequate care for your child (extreme examples of this are those stories that hit the news when parents leave kids home alone and go on holiday to Spain for a week!!!).

This is apparently a Qand A with the NSPCC - I don't see any evidence of As??

Whoops - just realised that the A's will come later apparently!!

Oh and having a MH problem most certainly does not automatically mean that parenting is compromised - I am a parent AND a children's Social Worker and have bi-polar!!

they'll pick what they want to answer and it will be published later spike (i think that's how the q and a thing works.

i really am keen to know about the nspcc stance on forcing lone parents into work (soon to be from child age 3 i believe) without any investment into ensuring childcare is available and that jobs that allow them to fit with available childcare exist. failing this they will have benefits cut. for many that will mean children left alone at home or alternatively falling even further into poverty (probably the latter either way given the amount they'll have to spend on transport to work anti social hours at distance from their homes).

what is the nspccs stance on this and other changes (cuts in ctc towards childcare etc) that will massively impact child poverty?

sorry that this is repetitive but it is a really important issue.

and please, please, please drop the mental health bashing! you lost my d/d over this (which survived through full time work and onto benefits when i could ill afford to be giving to charity having become incapacitated due to mental health problems).

sorry! one more.

what is the nspccs stance on the proposed changes to the csa which will see mother's paying for the right to try and get child support and having aprox. 12% of their children's money taken away? is it not bad enough that these children and parents are being financially abused and neglected by nrp's without much action from government without them also financially abusing them and taking yet more money from children?

in fact what is the nspcc doing in general about the shocking stats on how few nrps actually pay anything towards their own children thereby massively impacting on child poverty?

i'd love to see a campaign trying to change attitudes and raise awareness on this. we could do with not paying for your own children becoming akin to drink driving with the concommitant seachange of opinion that is required for that.

Has anyone ever complained to the Advertsing Standards Authority (ASA)about the NSPCC's adverts which other posters have said are 'misleading' and even 'totally fraudulent' suggesting a frontline role that doesn't exist?

How does the NSPCC measure the percentage of calls that come in are from malicious ex-partners and how are these dealt with, given that this could be part of a pattern of harassment or even abuse against a parent with care of children?

And without the typo!:

How does the NSPCC measure the percentage of calls that come in from malicious ex-partners and how are these dealt with, given that this could be part of a pattern of harassment or even abuse against a parent with care of children?

I have the same question as everyone else - I watch the adverts that have the awful pictures of abuse on them, but then I think "what do you actually do?" and that question is never answered. I looked on that All Babies Count website too, and there was nothing about the practicalities at all.

And ditto nailak - what do you do that isn't already done (with more accountability?) by the government?

Compare that to Action for Children, and they tell me that they have schools for children with problems like ADHD and autism, short break respite care for disabled children, counselling and childrens centres for families with problems. They seem to actually doing something about the problems, rather than just waffling on and "raising awareness".
www.actionforchildren.org.uk/our-services/disabled-children
www.actionforchildren.org.uk/our-services/our-schools
www.actionforchildren.org.uk/our-services/family-support

My q: what is the job role of the person/people answering these questions? What is your marketing /PR team involvement in this exercise?

There is a lot of talk at the moment, about the government planning to change the law so that a non-resident parent's right to see their child, is enshrined in law. At the moment, the law presumes that neither of the parents have rights, only the child does. What is wrong with that presumption, does the NSPCC support that presumption?

If it is a wrong presumption, what is the NSPCC's view of enshrining a non-resident's parent's right to see their children in law, without any responsibilities tp see their children (I don't think there are any plans to force NRP's who can't be bothered to go and see their children, to turn up at the time and place agreed and to penalise them for not doing so) and without enshrining any rights for the resident parent (they can't insist that the RP feeds the children, gets them to do their homework, changes their nappies at regular intervals during the contact visit or refrains from verbally abusing them at handover times for example)? Are you going to lobby the government to ensure that rights are equally handed out to both parents, or are handed out attached to responsibilities, or are only given to children? Or will you support the government's unequal treatment of parents and ignoring of the rights of children not to be emotionally abused by their NRPs?

I would be interested to know how Local Safeguarding Children Boards regard 'referrals' from NSPCC. I imagine these referrals carry some weight with a lot of people that they really shouldn't.

I would imagine that a 'referral from NSPCC' could be accorded the status of a referral from a front-line agency, when in fact all it is is passing on a sometimes anonymous and possibly malicious message, as the poster above says.

More on the babysitting/leaving your child alone front I am afraid. I have a very mature for her age (in the grown up sense) 15 year old with no health problems. I have been more than happy to pop to the shops since she was about 13 if she was happily reading books or watching something. Certainly don't expect her to follow us about everywhere now! She has babysat for people we know well before now and is more than happy to be left to her own devices which has increased her independence and self-confidence no end. Are the NSPCC seriously telling me I am doing something wrong here? I would have thought it would be entirely down to the individual child. I find this stance quite alienating to be frank.

I'm not sure where this idea has come from that the NSPCC don't think teenagers should be left alone I just found this on their website here

seems sensible to me.

catsrus - here

www.nspcc.org.uk/inform/research/questions/employment_of_children_wda70447.html#At_what_age_can_a_young_person_babysit?

Clearly saying that NSPCC recommends not using babysitters under 16. Never any evidence given to support this, but you see it commonly quoted almost as if it is law because the NSPCC says so - eg guidance on web saying that parents will be reported to social services if found to be using under 16s. Now social workers may well have better things to with their time than investigate 14 year old babysitters, but the NSPCC is trying to replace the government guidance (which simply states that parents must make sure their children are safe and cared for - ie no fixed rules about age limits to be left alone or with a sitter) with a "rule" that says under 16s are automatically a risk, regardless of the maturity of the teenager, age of the child being looked after, proximity of the actual parents (ie how easily they could be contacted, etc)

Also the guidance implies that you shouldn't leave an 11 year old for more than a very short period, but as others have pointed out, 11 year olds at secondary school are commonly home alone after school for two or three hours possibly every night. Again, NSPCC out of touch with reality and making a lot of ordinary parents feel like they're doing something wrong, when they're not.

I think this thread might have taken a different path than what was expected when this Q & A session was planned. And most likely not for the better.

However, I hope that NSPCC will see the amazing opportunity this gives them for getting information of what a lot of parents actually think about their organisation, and then use this information for adapting the organisations communication, resources and decisions.

Also, I hope that NSPCC will not cherry-pick which questions to answer. I know there seem to many questions here, but many can be grouped. As people here have been so generous with their time and frankness it would be a marketing disaster to let ANYONE contributing here feel that their question has not been answered. The MN'ers were invited to ask questions and common courtesy demands that answers are given.