Social Services Children's Disability Team

[sazale]

After a battle to get my dd 14 (HFA) an initial assessment and then get an accurate assessment we have finally been allocated a social worker and a child in need plan is being drawn up.

We have been allocated a SW from the child in need team and not the disability team. My thoughts are that if she needs SS support purely because of her disability then she should be under the disability team. The disability team say not as they only take the most severely disabled which for ASC means they have to have accompanying severe learning disabilities.

They say there is no difference between the social work teams as to what we can access etc. I have to decide whether I want to go to stage 3 of the complaints procedure about this but I am trying to figure out if worth the fight. It has already been accepted by the LGO for investigation due to the delays etc in getting the assessment (its taken us over a year). So are they right in saying there's no difference? If there's no difference then why have a disability team?

My daughter is in special school, has a blue badge and gets HRC/HRM. She has no sense of danger, has quite bad demand avoidance issues and needs adult supervision at all times but has an above average academic ability. Anyone any experience/advice? Thanks for reading.

Claw, I asked for the assessment in April last year! Had it in April this year, took 6 weeks to get report which missed nearly everything off and said no services so I complained and rewrote the assessment and they kept it and then said we should be under the CDT but they won't take it! That's why we met with them yesterday. It's a joke!

Have they stated that the service needed is CDT in the IA?

I apologise if I seem all doom and gloom!

and would add the really terrible SW who threatened CP action, if I didn't do as she said. She also chased ds around the house, telling him he was a 'law breaker' and threatened to turn up at our house the following day and force ds out of it. She also phoned my GP and instructed him to remove his medical certificate and then lied about it at a meeting (which I didn't attend), however it was all in writing and she was removed from our case, shortly after my complaint. Although my solicitors complaint was never replied to or even acknowledged, I assume it was as a result of the complaint.

We now have a very nice SW, she doesn't provide any services or any help and cannot answer why she is even involved, as it is a 'education and health issue'. She did however tell me 'well done on getting your ds his statement and school place, after reading your notes, you fought really hard for this. You are his mother and know him better than anyone and what he needs'

I think that is the closet I am ever going to get to my complaints ever been answered!

A child can be a CIN without services provided by Social Services. If there are unmet needs that would be best met by other agencies (Education and Health) Social Services still identify that and it doesn't stop a child being a CIN.

It states in the IA that a referral to CDT is needed. The assessment officer referred us and it was refused so he had to find someone else.

My complaint is at stage 2 and all have been upheld apart from that my child meets CDT criteria. I've read the criteria and I believe she does. The meeting was to try to stop me moving my complaint to stage 3.

The outcome of my other complaints is that the criteria has to be more transparent to both the public and staff and needs to be relooked at. My point is that the investigating officer wasn't in a position to decide if DD met the criteria as dd still hadn't had the IA so no one could decide until after IA. The only part of the criteria they're saying she doesn't meet is usually accompanied by severe learning and communication difficulties. My point is that she would meet that part depending on the interpretation and it says usually not has to!

It's whether it's worth pursuing to stage 3 or not

Lougle, ds was already being seen by CAMHS for his mental health and education I was in the process of getting a statement, he had no unmet needs and has a statement now.

SW told me they do not get involved with educational needs. Although she did provide a report to the SA process, which was used by the LA to try and stop ds from getting a statement. The very reason the LA reported me to SS in the first place, for applying for SA and asking that his educational needs be met!

Since when has CIN been used to try and hinder a child?

Sazale, sounds like you have good grounds for pursuing it.

As I said earlier, my ds is CIN and even when he was subject to a CAMHS safety plan and wasn't sleeping of a night, had to be supervised 1:1 day and night and I asked for respite. This was refused and my parenting skills again questioned ie how are you going to keep him safe, if you cant stay awake all night. What happens if there is a fire, I had to take him into bed with me and put a lock on the inside of the door, just in case I couldn't stay awake and he wandered. I got no help whatsoever, just criticism.

I would say far more help would be available from CDT.

Claw that's shocking the way you were treated but sadly doesn't surprise me. We live in an area where SS have had serious case reviews and criticism from government over their handling/continued handling of child exploitation by Asian gangs in our town. Children's services are pretty dire in our area.

It is shocking and quite unbelievable, if I hadn't experienced it myself, I would find it hard to believe and would be of the 'no smoke, without fire' school of thought!

Anyhow, apologises for taking your thread off track my point was sometimes the LA use CIN to criticise/bully parents, so they do NOT have to provide services. I suspect this would be far harder to do, if your child was 'disabled'. It would also be far harder to do if SS made it crystal clear from the start exactly what your child is in need of and exactly what services the CIN Team have access to.

My ds is 'CIN' yet there is no CIN plan. I suspect there is no CIN plan, as there are no unmet needs. If my ds wasn't CIN, they couldn't have threatened me with CP.

No need to apologise Claw.

Thanks and good luck

Mine is a similar story to Claw's.

The worst came when I complained that school were not implementing the statement I'd fought so hard for (TA being used for whole class instead of 1:1) - that triggered an unbelievable sequence of events.

Bochead, that is the pattern I see, parents who have fought hard for support for their children and don't give up, parents who make complaints. It also seems a common pattern when the children are above average/average functioning academically, but have complex needs, especially when demand avoidance is involved ie school refusal.

I was accused by SW of 'not being strict enough' and ds self harm were 'gnat bites' this was the whole tone of her involvement, ds didn't have a 'disability' that was responsible for his needs, he had 'behavioural' difficulties which I was responsible for, caused by not being strict enough and trying to make out he had more difficulties than he had. Despite CAMHS and GP reports and ds's long history of the school environment, social understanding, interactions and communication etc being responsible for his anxiety and self harm.

I had a blundering SW, who had no experience or understanding of complex sn's or the statementing process, charging around like a bull in a china shop, over riding medical advice and CAMHS safety plan as I 'wasn't strict enough' and was making up difficulties.

She was also telling other professionals this. I dread to think what could have happened if ds had not had previous CAMHS involvement.

I would hope that the CDT would have more understanding and experience of complex needs etc, as when ill informed, inexperience people get involved, it can be dangerous.

"Bochead, that is the pattern I see, parents who have fought hard for support for their children and don't give up, parents who make complaints."

I fought hard for support for DD1 and didn't give up, made complaints. I might sound like I had it easy. I didn't.

I had to push for referral to physio, long before anyone took an interest in DD1. I had to report the SALT for her woeful 'therapy.' I had to complain about the preschool's lack of knowledge/training. I had to challenge the Ed Psych on her assessment. I had to go back to Social Services and tell them that I didn't agree with their assessment. I had to say outright to the second SW 'This is what they did last time. You've seen DD1 hitting me, standing on me, pinching me, biting me. Do NOT say that she is a happy child who likes adult attention; don't do that to me again. ' I had to tell the Inclusion Co-ordinator that I wasn't satisfied with her timescale for arranging DD1's 5-11 school placement and that I'd sort it out myself, thank you very much. I had to apply for Statutory Assessment myself. I had to be assertive with the Special School and say that I had to view it now because I only had 10 days left to make a decision, so sorry about the Swine Flu outbreak and the snow, but I really needed them to make time for me. I had to face MS primary schools telling me that they 'wouldn't be able to support DD1 unless I had a really good statement.'

I appreciate that I was lucky in that once I got to Statutory Assessment stage the Education Officer realised that SS was the best place for DD1.

Sorry Lougle I wasn't suggesting that you didn't fight hard or any other parent, just that LA use SS in some cases to try and stop parents fighting, to bully them, to scare them into just shutting up, going away and accepting what they have.

I've had a letter today confirming that the LGO are investigating and the letter they have sent to the LA is asking for an explanation of why dd doesn't meet CDT criteria as well as loads of other things!

I'm also fighting the lea who have decided the rubbish school dd is in that do nothing from her statement and give her phonics classes when she has a reading age of 16 (shes quite hyoerlexic) as well as word searches for end of ks3 science , is perfectly fine!

That's good news Sazale, hopefully you will get some answers.

One thing I have learnt is that school/LA/SS don't like being complaints being made about them. They tell lies, to cover themselves.

I had a 9 year old, who was self harming and having suicidal thoughts due to anxiety about school. Despite SW referring him to A&E for an emergency mental health assessment after visiting him in school (weeks after LA forced me to return him to school) within 8 days, despite ds being subject to CAMHS A&E safety plan and GP signing him off from school. The same SW was trying to force me to return him to school again with threats of CP if I didnt, where he was receiving no support at all.

This was a 'CIN', a CIN desperately of some support in school, however SW didn't ask for support in school, instead she turned up at my house and told ds he was a 'law breaker' and that she would be back the next day and would be forcing him to leave the house and go to school.

I was a parent, who was up all night with ds, he was an emotional wreck, threatening to jump out of windows, threatening to stab himself in the head, head butting walls, cutting himself with scissors, hitting himself in the face with hairbrushes, scratching his skin off and covered from head to toe in scratch marks.

Ds was most def a CIN, a CIN of some support, not threats and being forced to return to the place responsible for his anxiety. I was a parent in need of some support, some sleep, a break of even 5 minutes, not threats.

Im not saying this will ever be the case for you, but CIN and the powers entrusted to the people can be very dangerous, when they get it wrong.

CP misused as a bullying tool is a almost always a very empty threat.

That's providing you don't have particular weak spots (eg ongoing DV) and you are able to accumulate evidence of adequate parenting as you go along, so you know that some of the professionals have understood the reality.
So 'child protection concerns' lead to evidence gathering (perhaps a couple of phone calls) This is assessed, either by the SW or in a 'professionals mtg' or 'strategy meeting' It has to be agreed as 'meets threshold to investigate' and a formal 'section 47 investigation' is then started.

If the concerns are apparently well-founded and serious, then there is a case conference. A few areas are trialling 'family group conference' instead: professionals plus gran/ aunties/ neighbour, mums best friend etc.

A decision is made to close the case, or give support under a CIN plan. Or to register the child as in need of protection (put on the register) and make a Child protection plan and offer services (including foster care if need be). If the parents object, the LA makes an application to court.

S47 enquiries, CP conference and plans etc all cost a lot. Foster care for a dc with asd is stupidly expensive, so it's highly unlikely the LA would offer it to an unwilling parent.

Complaints make people feel nervous and defensive, especially if they have done something wrong, and even more so if they've then told untruths about it.

You don't need to be a psychotherapist to know that fear/ guilt /arse-covering tends to impair people's judgement. And we all expect others to be as nasty as we are. Sometimes we even hate people because we treated them badly, and then we find reasons/ excuses to justify it.

And there's something called projection: noticing/ imagining our own fault in another, but not seeing it in ourself. Granny called it 'people in glass houses throwing stones'. Add all of that together and you get a rationale for complaint/ CP link.

Mumudelulu you have hit the nail on the head, it was an empty threat. But when in that situation, your child an emotional wreck, no sleep for nights on end, having to safeguard your child 24/7 and someone in a position of power criticising your every move and undermining you, trying to prepare for a Tribunal at the LA's refusal to assess, having to make formal complaints about ss procedures and sw's conduct, my thinking wasn't at it best!

Your projection idea is also spot on, the SW wasn't understanding the info she was being given, but then blaming me.

It was never raised to CP, we now have a different SW, ds has a statement, attends special school, ds is a CIN and we have meetings in school about what support ds needs IN school. This SW is now working with me, rather than against.

But what an ordeal for a vulnerable child and their parent to have to go through, just because SW was unable to understand complex needs. Which is why I think CP SW's should not get involved with children with disabilities and all children with disabilities should be dealt with by the disability team. Who would hopefully have more experience and understanding of complex needs.

Claw2 & I have the same PCT - there are similar issues across the LA's this PCT covers. It's not just the "invisible disabilities" either, DS has a friend recovering from cancer whose life was made harder when things were grimmest medically by SS bullying. I can't imagine the anguish of this sort of pressure being brought to bear at a time when your child's illness is looking to be terminal.

Trouble is when your child is already self-harming/saying they want to die, & you are extremely sleep deprived, before the bang on the door; it is incredibly hard to fight back. If like me you do fight back, you'd be amazed at the lengths they'll go to re the bullying.

When we are safe I'll be compiling a formal list of the families subjected to this type of bullying in this PCT/LA and sending it to central government. There has been a recent teen suicide in the area because of it, and it's time it's stopped for good before there are more tragedies.