Social services referral- panicked

[Panicpanicpanicpanik]

I had a call late afternoon yesterday from social services saying they’d received a call from a concerned neighbour.

They were very empathetic and loosely highlighted the concerns that the neighbours had. All four are beyond false

1. the children barely leave the house and don’t go on holiday. Well firstly surely not going on holiday isn’t grounds for intervention?! But we also literally just got back from one. The children (4 and 6) go to school, so that’s leaving the house. They also have 2 hobbies on the weekend they go to as a minimum. How many hobbies do young children need? They’re starting rainbows and squirrels next academic year too. We were careful to not overwhelm them. We also go to parks, cheap days out, more expensive days out et. But there are times we have to stay in, illness, behind with house chores (but with housework days they still go out or play in the garden etc)

2. the children aren’t fed / fed poor quality food. I don’t even know how a neighbour would know what they’re being fed. But I batch cook and maybe once a month maybe twice we have a McDonald’s.

3. tatty, unclean clothes. They’re always weather appropriate. Sure they might make mess on their clothes out and about but that’s life and they’re always clean

4. they’ve got no toys. They’ve got all the toys. But it’s given me a clue as to which neighbour reported us. The toys are kept in a storage cupboard as to not clutter the living room and taken out on rotation and when we finish we tidy and put away.

5. they also said they hear squabbling a lot, which my kids too argue and can’t really be left unattended without them arguing over something because they like the same thing and just pester each other. But surely this is somewhat normal?

as to my clue who has said this. Well we were temporarily friendly with a couple in their late 40s until they found out we’d ’taken their baby name’ for the son they never had. It had taken a while for them to find out as they’d only recently moved in and we’d been calling our son by a nickname that didn’t really bare resemblance to his actual name. Ever since they found out his name, which I’d assumed they’d known as it wasn’t a big secret, the vibe changed. They made a few funny comments, about how it’s unfair people get to have kids and they didn’t, implying people like us, and how unfair it was they had no toys. Then it came out about the name and how we took it from them and they couldn’t be friends with us anymore but would be civil. Fine. It was getting weird.

since they’ve blanked us when they’ve seen us so hardly civil but now this.

what do I do?
im overthinking and worried that making accusations now might look like mudslinging and make us look like we have something to hide?
also the things were reported for are BS right? I feel like I’m doubting myself

help

thanks for reading :)

Yes she is, it’s the safest way to travel, she’s below the weight and height for her axkid seats so she’ll keep using them.

the visit was left with we’ll be in touch

SS shouldn’t have told you who made the report and they certainly can’t “update the neighbours” without your permission. I really don’t understand why they even told you that.

They may have asked the question about holidays because it shows that the allegation is untrue, even though it wouldn’t be a concern even if it were true. It shows that the neighbours are either lying or don’t know you at all.

Did you tell them about the situation with the neighbours and why they fell out with you, and raise your own concerns? I would be asking their advice and making sure that your concerns are on record. It seems somewhat obsessive that they have done this. This isn’t a malicious report because of a petty argument, there may well be some deeper psychological or mental health issues behind this. I doubt there is any serious risk to your family but I wouldn’t be surprised if there are more false reports to SS and other agencies in the future. It might be helpful to have your concerns on record.

As PPs have said, it is quite surprising that SS visited given the nature of the allegations rather than just speaking to you and the school. I wouldn’t be surprised if they have made multiple (possibly anonymous) reports at the same time or previous reports about things that SS wouldn’t investigate eg things like not going on holiday.

The "not going on holiday" business baffles me.

As a child, there were many years when we didn't go on holiday - we couldn't afford it. The jokes round our way were: "I'm going to Rome....about the doors!" and "I'm going to the USA - the UpStairs Attic!"

@LiteralLunatic the SW did not identify the neighbour

Although did say it was a neighbour, which goes completely against what was covered in my training (not SW but closely aligned) as we were to provide no detail that could make identification possible

That’s why she mentioned it, getting my consent to update them which I said no as this is malicious

I did ask for more detail on who made the complaint she couldn’t give it, the initial phone call said someone who lives close by which I took as neighbour. She didn’t mention there were multiple reports but perhaps there were.

i did say that this is malicious and gave a high level summary about what happened with that couple but was careful to not descend into mudslinging. But tbh she didn’t seem that interested

They will be interested. I've perfected the 😶 face when people ask me. The less interested I seem the more I'm making mental notes

by mentioning that this “person lived close” the SW went against her training.

You aren’t meant to give any detail whatsoever that could be used to identify the referrer if they have asked for anonymity.

Indeed.

And I’m right in recalling that if a visit has been deemed necessary following the initial assessment call it is because the referrer has provided information that is sufficiently compelling to warrant a visit rather than closure post initial call?

Not necessarily - I haven't read the whole thread but if it's a neighbour report you are going to say it's a neighbour report if that's the only way the information could be gathered.

If that were the case then OP would know what that was. They wouldn't visit without telling OP all the concerns. So either she's not telling us everything, or the social work department have lost their damn minds and don't have enough work to keep them busy, as well as forgetting what threshold means, or this is a fairy story.

No, I am in an associates field

you are meant to give no information away that could lead to identification

Yes
and one of the concerns is the children are not being fed properly.
given the 6 year old is clearly very slight if still fits a rear facing
I imagine that this was just one thing sufficient to warrant a visit beyond initial assessment

many referrals are closed after the initial call assessments

@FortyElephants you aren’t a SW and not in a related field are you?

I am a social worker. If the information is 'loud arguments have been overheard and banging and you have been observed walking around outside the flats at 1am with baby in buggy looking distressed' then you are going to say it was a neighbour report. Obviously you use your discretion - it's easier to say that if they live in a block or area with a lot of neighbours but it's not always possible to say nothing about where the information came from.

I am a social worker

“It has been reported….”

That is how it should be reported

@FortyElephantsI am also a social worker and agree with everything you’re saying. Anonymous referrals are a pain - people want for nothing about them to be shared, but it can be relevant to how reliable the concerns are.

Thanks for telling me my job 😁

Absolutely. And if you don't even say that it's a neighbour who has reported for example you have nowhere to go if the parents simply denies everything. People tend to believe we have a lot more power than we do, and that sharing anonymous information will lead to some kind of protective action when if often can't.

Well, you wouldn't say Mrs Smith from number 42 called us but theres no reason not to confirm that it's someone in the neighbourhood that's called in especially when it's obvious that's the case.

Any professionals reporting concerns should expect to be identified as the referrers if they are reporting as part of their professional duty, but it would also be expected that they had informed the family first before making the referral unless the risks were too great to do so.

General rule of thumb is that social services should be as transparent and open about the concerns with families as they can be unless doing so would lead to further risk.

Well, you wouldn't say Mrs Smith from number 42 called us but theres no reason not to confirm that it's someone in the neighbourhood that's called in especially when it's obvious that's the case.

it may make identification easy if the person being referred had had an ongoing spat with a particular neighbour

this very thread demonstrates how easy “from a neighbour” can make identification!!

Well to be fair if it's malicious there's usually a reason you can pinpoint them doing it so I'd say in most cases you've got a pretty good idea anyway who is doing the malicious reporting...

Maybe, and when you make a referral as a neighbour you really have to accept that the person might guess it's you, especially if you have ongoing conflict! We live in the real world here.

They make Rearfacing seats that go up to 125cm and 36kg that’s pretty chunky for a 6 year old

but I imagine the allegations combined with the child being thin (which she is but her bmi is healthy, and as a culture I think we are out of touch what healthy looks like in small kids and how you should be able to see their ribs) plus a mum that opted out of the hv weight checks and school nurse health checks probably was enough. Combined with the enthic minority factor was enough for reasonable doubt then combined with the other allegations

i Did drag it out of her on the initial call and tbh until she confirmed my thoughts, plus with allegations like those that were made it was it was clearly someone who lived in an observable distance but didn’t know us very well. I can’t speak to training as I work in finance