protecting our children

[thekidsrule]

carry on please

Changeneeded , it's very like pro social services propaganda IMO.

Backlash against the awful baby p case ( and tragically others ) , has created an actual need for positive social work stories .

How convent that this program been made . ( 3 years in the making according to the link)

I'd rather see the bare unedited footage and make my own mind up .

it is not very stringent, capacity is always assumed unless proved otherwise.

can i just say i have been on the thread through out but name change for another thead... no doubt i will out my self on this thread tomorrow..oops

If Toby was free for adoption I doubt he'd be a "billiard ball" in care. In my experience it's the ones who aren't free who bob around.

yes, by being free for adoption he has the best chance he could have of stability. the foster family who took him in, if able, would be able to keep him. given how quickly he responded to having some simple boundaries and people communicating with him i doubt he would have been 'difficult' in the sense of foster families giving up and passing him on.

i'm afraid i don't buy this not knowing how to clean a floor etc business either and find it really patronising. i am also not convinced that toby's problems were hereditary rather than a product of his environment and chronic neglect of his developmental and emotional needs.

I agree with tigerlilly's last post-I think they were all good points.

The purpose of the programme was to show the work of social workers which is a good thing when you have threads like the present one 'are you frightened of social workers'. I am always amazed that people are in such dread-mention leaving a perfectly sensible 8yr old alone for 10 mins and someone pops along and says 'you will reported to SS' and I think-so what? They appeared to be kind and caring to me-against the odds.

You can't make a film about them without filming very vulnerable people. I think they did it in a sensitive way. There wouldn't be vigilantes against the parents-you could only feel sorry for them. Seeing Mike sitting unable to relate to his son, in any way, was quite haunting and Tiffany was in need of a mother herself.

That is a good point cheefulyank

I still think he has little chance of adoption because of his age/gender/SN/family history.

I hope he gets a long term placement though.

I think there are rose tinted spectacle being worn here. Did he come on that fast? Evidence? He was still non verbal, and he had been playing well from the beginning of the film.

And his chances of adoption are practically zero.

I didn't see any evidence of a drastic change in development either.

Only the sw said he'd come on lots but she has to justify the decision.

I saw a lot. He stopped the grunts of frustration.He played well and happily by himself. When he was told he was going soon he went and got his bag, he trotted off happily without a backwards glance. I think that he will be more difficult to adopt-but I don't see it as 'practically zero'.
I think that it is rose tinted to leave the poor DC where he was. If Tiffany was going to remain single and put DCs as first priority then yes BUT she was too needy-she will find a man IMO and he won't be excellent step father material.

he was following instructions and clearly enjoying doing so - re: being communicated with, watched doing something and praised for doing it well. he was playing without throwing everything around aggressively and his own mother said he was much better, not aggressive and nicer to be around - she could see it. he was responsive to communication which he wasn't when he was living at home. i thought there was a huge difference and enough to show that he had a good chance of making solid progress with good input.

I don't think he should have been left where he was.

But I also don't think people should think "fantastic, everything'll be OK now, he''ll be adopted by a lovely family and live the country in a lovely house with room for a pony."

We need to be clear sighted about what happens to children like Toby. And we need to be having a conversation as a nation about what we want to happen.

But we won't. Because for most people, they only think about it when they see programmes like this, and regard the outcome we saw as a happy ending.

i don't think anyone is saying yay he'll have a perfect life now i think they're just thinking well at least he has a chance which is more than he would have had.

it's a lesser of two evils situation in many ways with no ideal solution but getting out of that environment was definitely the lesser evil.

I don't think anyone here has suggested that it was a fairytale ending. The majority have admired that the situation is far from ideal but much preferable to the child continuing where he was. Also as he is still young and his am don't seem particularly pronounced. Saying he has 0 chance of adoption is as far wide of the mark as saying he has 100 percent chance of doing so.

i don't think anyone saw it as a happy ending nor was it portrayed as one. the whole thing showed how difficult and no win the whole thing was but that there were situations in which there was no option but to remove a child. then yes that child is reliant upon what kind of experience they have within the system and there are a lot of faults or limitations within the system hence no child should go there unless there is no other viable option.

Yes swallowed- he was clothed and people spike to him- he wasn't standing in dog shitt bare foot

Admitted not admired

And what Tiffany obviously thought - presumably because someone told her- that they would be adopted together. I bet she didn't think that she was handing Toby over to a life in the care system. And all those picture of Toby running through a meadow- were they not an attempt to present a happy ending? Followed by the small print.

I bet if you asked most people (not on this thread, obviously) who saw that programme they would say that Toby was now adopted and in a new family.

I don't think there was a 'happy ending' to be had in this situation. I was saddened to think that given the timescale this was filmed over, he might now be 7 years old and still fostered. His prospects of adoption are low. However, with luck he may be in one stable foster family, and hopefully doing better than he was in his earlier years. the effects of those early years will, however, be lifelong for all involved.

tiffany said she 'hoped' they would be adopted together. earlier she was aware they hadn't even met. she was fully aware they may well not be together.

And why hadn't they even met?

Because you think that would have been fairer? Here Toby here is your sister now I will take her away and you are unlikely to see her again. Yep. Nice

because there was zero benefit to them meeting realistically. who would the meeting have been for? the baby was a very young baby and toby was not at an emotional or cognitive level of understanding to gain anything from it except distress and being unsettled.

Oh, I don't know. It's just shit. And the programme did not tell us what had been done to help Tiffany possibly keep the children as a single parent. I just know that if she could have been helped to be even an adequate parent, Toby would have be better off with her than in the care system.

Seeker please don't take this the wrong way but I think your negative view of sw and the care system may be clouding your judgement IN THIS CASE. I am not for a moment suggesting that they never get it wrong. Nor am I saying its bound to be all rosy now Toby is in care. But what I am saying is that in most cases children are removed because it is best for them. It's not through lack of opportunity or trying or because all sw are evil and want to tare families apart.

In this case the outcome, though not ideal, was the best they could do.