Social Services and boyfriend moving back in.

[jj1234565]

I am involved with social services and have been involved with them for the last 15 months due to my Ex boyfriend not doing what they say i.e attend certain courses. The reason I am still not here brooks is because I haven't ruled out ever getting back with him. We were on PLO but have recently been downgraded to Child Protection. There has been two incidents of domestic assault because of drugs. Both of which he has been to court for and pleaded guilty and served his time etc. I have spoken to social services RE getting back with him because he has sorted himself out and is now taking part and doing all the courses and is drug free and working full-time. (I don't need any advice on who I should or shouldn't be with.) - They have told him/us that if he does complete the work they ask that they could consider letting us get back together. I.e living together. Does anyone know if they are just playing him along, would they ever let us be together and live in the same home.

People certainly can stay clean if they choose to. I've been sober for years and years and so have most of my friends and family. Not all people with addictions relapse.

The "support" that a few PPs are advocating seems to be telling the OP stuff she'll have been told umpteen times before and expecting her to say, "Oh NOW I get it. Thanks so much for explaining it so clearly. You've been really helpful. Thank you!"

I agree. If the OP has already been to the PLO stage and still wants to take him back, I doubt she's going to be receptive to any kind of support. She doesn't mention her children's welfare once in her OP - it's all about her boyfriend.

I think there's a lot of denial in our society about the fact that some women care more about keeping a man than protecting their own children. Many people find it comforting to believe that all mothers, deep down, want to put their children first - and that if they aren't doing so, it must be because they don't have enough support. I don't think that's true.

In the last few months, there have been high-profile news stories about: a newborn baby who died of brain injuries while living with hid drug-addicted mother and her violent boyfriend; a mother who covered for her boyfriend after her crushed her toddler to death with a car seat because he found him annoying; and an adolescent girl who hanged herself after being emotionally abused by her stepdad (again, the mother had covered for him). People are angry at the OP because they don't want her children to end up as another of those news stories. Her children have no control over their mother's choice of boyfriend, but they are the ones who will pay for it.

Sothings are downgraded to child protection?
WTF, that is massively serious.
I know you don't want advice and probably won't listen but anyone else would not be having a man in their lives at the moment but fighting tooth and nail to keep the children, not the fella!

Shame on you.

It's certainly true that the OP says absolutely nothing to suggest that she cares at all about her DC, it's all about her having the right to be with the boyfriend that she wants to be with. It's like a teenage girl having an argument with her parents, not a mum who wants to prove that she's able to look after her DC properly.

I doubt you're still reading op but I just can't imagine getting to the stage where my children are almost removed from my care and ever wanting to take the slightest risk that would happen again. Agree with a pp that you've really minimised how bad things were here.

You've managed to move on from that and it's great that your ex has since engaged with SS and got clean but it's just too much of a risk that he'll slip back (that's the nature of addiction). Plus he's been violent to you (I suspect in a bad way). Why don't you love yourself more than this?

I have reported your post Jive.

Brava Cambio! Ci sono stronzi qui qualchevolta.

Can I ask (I may be being thick) why wouldn't ss tell her no outright?
I'm thinking surely if they say "no he's too much of a risk" the op would know where they stand. Then it would be much more obvious who she picked her dp or her dc

@Bluelonerose
It will be a case of maybe the OP asking whether he could move back in now. Them saying no, but we'll re-evaluate in 6 months time or something. That's what I'm guessing anyway. If she went against this, and he moved back in anyway, they would likely take the children into care. So a lot at stake her.

SS can not outrightly ban a relationship for life. They have to assess risks. Immediate risks. Currently, he is still a risk in their eyes so they have said no - not yet.

Can that change? Yes.

They will be looking for a clean slate, clean drug tests, no criminal convictions, a good work history etc. and then, yes, they will potentially allow him to live there with the children. Unless a man is deemed a risk to children, their powers don't extend further than that. The length of time they will be looking to see that behavioural change will be a minimum of 6 months. Even after that, they may look at visitation rights, without him actually moving in. Then, if they all jump those hurdles (which will be stressful for a recovering addict), they may look at him being there full time. They will then keep an eye on the situation for 6 months to a year until they close the case.

That's how it would go, all going well.

If things go tits up, they will bring down the hammer a little heavier this time.

Ss can't say "no" to a relationship , they can discourage it , which they have but ultimately they don't have the power to ban you. Most people have the common sense to not risk their children's welfare, ops children are still on cp plans which would likely be escalated back to PLO if she resumes this relationship. not everyone who has taken drugs assaults people in the process , this is a violent man, and he would already be classed as a risk to children for using violence in front of children.

Bluelonerose said "Can I ask (I may be being thick) why wouldn't ss tell her no outright?
I'm thinking surely if they say "no he's too much of a risk" the op would know where they stand. Then it would be much more obvious who she picked her dp or her dc"

You're not being thick. SS cannot order someone to live in a certain way. They will absolutely on many occasions have made it very clear to OP what needs to happen for her children to be safe and nurtured. There will have been many meetings, hours spent on courses, solicitors, family support workers, nursery staff, school staff, community police, often extended family, and the mother remains in denial, unable or unwilling to change her behaviour.

Unless someone has had personal or professional experience of a mother in OP's situation, it can be almost impossible to get your head around OP's mindset. Regardless of how sad her background may be, the children's wellbeing is of paramount importance. Being "downgraded to CP" means a massive backstory.

Walk away from him, yes he's clean now but relapses are common - you cannot risk him repeating what he has done in the past or worse. My friend gave her dh so many chances and her kids were damaged by it, and she ended up having to kick him out anyway, she nearly lost her job (teacher) because of his involvement with cps

I have reported your post Jive

Why have you reported my post?

Cambionome

I have reported your post Jive
Why would you do that. The poster speaker the truth!

If OP is still there, you seem to be working with SS here, and that’s the right thing to do. Once he finishes the courses and is drug free then they will assess the risk.

There are no gaurentees though. They might say he is still a risk. But unless you follow thier lead then he won’t get anywhere.

Just remember that SS priority are your children, not you or your lover.

I hope he has changed and you can be a good family unit, but tread carefully with this man.

Jives post was abusive, which is why it was reported. There’s no need for that abuse in what should be a civilised debate.

I can understand why it's hard to have a civilised debate when it means putting children at risk though. And that's what the OP is doing - her partner has 'served time' in her own words for two incidences of domestic violence, she is risking her children's lives with this man. I also think this is a previous poster and the children involved have already been greatly affected.

There has been two incidents of domestic assault because of drugs. Both of which he has been to court for and pleaded guilty and served his time etc.

Wow. You were at PLO stage and you’re seriously considering this? Just...wow.

I can't manage to find it in the thread, but are the dcs the boyfriend's? I think that does make a difference.

It doesn't seem ok to say it, but most cases of violence/abuse/worse are when the male involved is not the dcs' natural father. If you look at every case you can find in the papers (eg in Valanice1989's post) the perpetrator is always a boyfriend.

I was on a jury in the case of a murdered baby. The boyfriend had been left alone with a three-month-old baby and he was not its father. I agree that you would think that whatever your background, on some primal level you would not make a judgement that leaving a baby with a drug-taking new boyfriend (how do people find boyfriends? I was still walking like John Wayne at three months!) would be the right thing to do. Excuses, excuses, but in these cases it's more than taking personal responsibility, it's basic protection instincts that seem to be lacking.

Don't do it op. It won't get better and your children will suffer.

Okay, if you're still reading OP. It probably seems very unfair that he's come off the drugs and people are still being harsh.

Yes, it's a massive achievement, not many can even with this much at stake and he deserves lots of credit for that.

BUT it takes a long time to permanently change thoughts and behaviour to the point where no matter what happens in his life he doesn't take drugs. Not only that but most people who achieve abstinence relapse a few times first. It will take a long time of proving he can stay clean before he can make progress towards being trusted around the children unsupervised or able to reside with them (even without you there).

Then there is the separate issue that he has permanently crossed a line and changed everything by being violent towards you. He is capable of violence and always will be. The only way I would expect SS to be happy with him living with you after that is if Probation (assume he has a PO as you said it's been to court) after doing tonnes of work with him reassess him as being low risk to you. Why not ask them what they think of his risk?

It probably seems simple to you. He assaulted me on drugs, he stopped taking drugs so he's no longer a risk. Professionals will see it as he knows he is capable of violence after taking drugs, yet took them anywhere therefore every single time he chose to take drugs and go home to you he knowingly put you and the kids at risk.

As others have said this man has the capability of violence, not all men do, not all addicts do, this one does and it will take a fuck tonne of hard work and time with the support of lots of professionals for him to stand any chance of changing deeply in built patterns of thinking and behaviour permanently.

Meanwhile IF you risk it and live with him and either SS think he's not proved himself for long enough or he hurts you. That's it, kids gone, last chance for you to prove you can keep them safe and away from a violent environment blown. No notice, no more support just enough chances, kids gone.

OP IF you are still reading this.

Think about this- he was violent to you whilst on drugs. The first time he can blame the drugs for the violence. The second time as soon as he took that substance he knew that he MAY be violent towards you whilst on it. He still chose to take that drug knowing the outcome could be you being harmed.

I will also say this- was he violent to anyone else? No? Funny that how he could control it around everyone else but you isn’t it? That’s because he thought you would let him get away with it. Because he CHOSE to assault you more than once

Anything done more than once isn’t a mistake- it’s a choice.

This is one of the saddest threads I've read.

These children were subject to a plo. Which means social services were starting court proceedings to remove the children as they were very worried they were at significant risk of harm and not receiving the care they needed.

There have been two instances of domestic abuse so severe he has been jailed for them. This is only in the last 15 months.

The children are currently subjected to a protection order as social services deem them still at risk of significant harm or not receiving the care they need.

And the op is focusing on how she can get him back into the home permanently. And asking if he is being strung along, which indicates, him or her, or both, are considering there is no point complying if he can't get back into that home.

There is only one ending to this tragic story, and It's a family torn apart, and all we can hope is that when it happens the kids are safe.