Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Telly addicts

Panorama - I want my baby back

996 replies

BeyondTheLimitsOfAcceptability · 13/01/2014 21:29

Anyone watching?

This promoting of the idea that SS want to steal babies makes me very uneasy...

OP posts:
MadameDefarge · 17/01/2014 20:00

tragically I did use SS as shorthand in my previous post.

BeyondTheLimitsOfAcceptability · 17/01/2014 20:15

SS is fine imo, at least i hope so - I used it in my op! Grin

Its the "the ss" when you wouldnt say the social services, you'd just say social services. Iyswim?

OP posts:
Spero · 17/01/2014 20:17

Cindy, I am sorry that you are going through this and finding it so stressful.

However, getting angry with the SW, however much reason they give you to get angry, is always going to be counterproductive. If you can, try to grit your teeth.

the bottom line is that a 3 month old cannot break their own bones. If there isn't some kind of genetic bone deficiency, somebody, somehow has applied enough force to her arm to break her bone.

this could be an accident, but again, questions will be raised about how such a young baby sustained accidental injury of this seriousness.

The LA has no choice but to investigate. They have a statutory duty to protect children.

It must be awful to feel under the microscope in this way and it must be horribly frustrating if they can't even get the right names in documents.

But you and your dad will do your case nothing but harm if you get a reputation for being 'angry' and 'difficult'. that may seem really unfair, but it is what will happen.

Hopefully the medical evidence will support a version of accidental injury and you will be able to put this behind you.

LoveSewingBee · 17/01/2014 22:18

Cindy, I hope things get all sorted for you.

I only don't understand what the problem is with CRB checking the student, surely that is not a big deal? However of course I don't know all the details and you are all clearly under a lot of strain. Hope baby's arm is healing well and she is able to use her arm properly again.

Cindy3674 · 17/01/2014 23:10

Firstly Spero I am not the Father but the Great Uncle,my sister and brother-in-law are the Grandparents. Hope that makes sense and gives you a better picture. There has been no anger shown towards Social Services merely pointing out that they have twisted statements and not quoted answers given correctly and got names wrong, thats in the report they wrote. Also the initial document for the grandparents to sign to supervise care had names wrong and they refused to sign it.

Their discomfort (SS) when these issues are raised is almost visible and they obviously dont like it so they put down in report grandfather is awkward. And I do believe that report was not accurate because they have not taken a liking to the Grandfather, its how it makes you feel and if thats the case there is a series floor in the professionalism of SS.

During the meeting held yesterday the SW had brought new accurate reports and had to be nudged by another to produce them because the chair was sitting reading one of the inaccurate reports. Also some questions put to her she could not give a answer and on occasions just shrugged her shoulders. Questions not from my family I might add so you dont think they were intimidating or angry questions. Since that meeting a new SW has taken over, she came round going on about CRB check for student. That was discussed in meeting the day before and the conclusion was no need. But she would not listen and as I said we made a few phone calls then a return call to say student will not be CRB checked.

When the initial document had to be signed for supervision and the grand parents would not sign as the names were wrong the social workers went and sat in the car for 40 minutes outside the house. Then later came back with a correct document and it was signed.

So I would say MadameDefarge I am thinking clearly, but not being given any confidence that these people have the ability to carry out there responsible duties in a professional manner,which makes me question there ability to comment and report on such a delicate and sensitive situation where life damaging changes can be made. So I do think they dont know their heads from their asseses from the reasons I have stated above.

The Social Worker who mentioned about CRB checks today should not have come round like a bull in a china shop until she had read all notes,statements and the outcome of yesterdays meeting. No MadameDefargeit is not "of course" all adults have to be checked. Because the student is not being checked a decision already made and decided but the SW was not aware. Which again questions their ability to deal with all this information which is going to have or could have a massive damaging in-pact on a whole family. And it is the WHOLE family. My Mum and Dad have had to tell my grandmother today who is 94 and the great great grandmother to the girls the SS say they are protecting,as she has realised some thing is not normal in the family.

I agree a unexplained injury needs to be investigated and while that investigation happens the children need to be supervised. Please dont get me wrong, but the way SS are dealing with this is almost unexplainable,its definitely not professional, I just dont have the words other than they are chasing their asses and they dont seem to be thinking clearly which is how pot affects you I assumed.

We are all aware of where this could lead and what all the options SS and the courts have. We all worry about those little girls being taken from our family, then all family members worry how those closest are going to deal with it. From my sister worrying about her son and partner to my 94 year old Grandmother worrying about her son (my Dad). Its horrendous and stressful situation and always will be, but it does not need to be made worst by incompetent SW.

There is something seriously wrong here and this is before any decisions are made on what the out come of this will be. What needs to change, I really dont know at this stage. But I would say I believe the wrong calibre individuals are being recruited to take up these positions.

Lioninthesun · 17/01/2014 23:11

Interested to see the developments re 'Open Courts'.
I do think it is a death knoll for social workers on the whole - who in their right mind wants to be paid a pittance to be a target of a public hate campaign?
I also think it a little unfair that the abusers can hide in secrecy still, when they are the ones causing all of the fuss.

Lioninthesun · 17/01/2014 23:15

I actually don't know how much danger money I would need to be paid to do an already highly stressful and emotional job, let alone being held up as responsible for baby snatching/forced adoption by the Fail every time you take someone to Court to try to sort out the poor child's life. Society finds it so easy to point the finger and sadly I fear this is a step towards less abusers being caught as SW's go for the blindingly obvious cases only so that they don't get mobbed.

Cindy3674 · 17/01/2014 23:25

Hi LoveSewingBee

I did think the question would come up as you say, you don't see the problem with the student being CRB checked being a problem. But there was a very good reason for this which I could explain.

Thank you for asking about babies arm, she is fine. She was in plaster for 48 hours back for another x-ray and told it had healed and the plaster was removed. I don't know if that's normal for babies, but thats a speedy recovery.

MadameDefarge · 17/01/2014 23:26

I was abused by one of the foreign students my parents used to have.

So I think it was actually a dumb decision.l

MadameDefarge · 17/01/2014 23:28

were you present at the meeting yesterday?

peacejoy82 · 17/01/2014 23:38

Thanks for your reply Spero. I don't relish your job at all, I think I would (know I would) take my work home with me - in that I wouldn't be able to put cases out of my mind.
I think a lot of DV victims are going to be very vulnerable, in this case. Of course children need to be protected, and mothers should leave abusive fathers. The sad thing is, many mothers won't, because perpetrators threaten them 'I'll get contact on weekends/go for custody, you won't be able to stop me.' Mothers often feel they have no choice to stay, because (depending on the situation) it feels as if it's the only way to protect their child/children. If an abusive man gets contact/custody and the mother's not there, she can't protect the child.
Also a lot of victims of DV, have in their past suffered mental health problems. Perpetrators threaten mothers that if they report the abuse, they will cite them as unstable, and they will then lose their children. So many mothers hold back reporting the abuse.
My heart goes out to DV victims it really does. Worse, due pressure from fathers rights lobbying, the courts pushes contact through at all costs, even when fathers have been found guilty of abuse. Funding is low so contact centre sessions are limited, before contact is unsupervised. This causes fear/stress/anxiety/emotional turmoil for mothers.
I wish the system would change, and help DV victims.

Cindy3674 · 17/01/2014 23:40

I was abused by one of the foreign students my parents used to have.

And did you have a care order on you MadameDefarge where nominated people had to sign a document to say they would supervise your care 24-7. If so those people did not do a very good job.

MadameDefarge · 17/01/2014 23:46

So, cindy, were you actually present at the meeting yesterday?

Or is all your information third hand?

MadameDefarge · 17/01/2014 23:49

And I think your post above is wholly inappropriate and unpleasant.

Cindy3674 · 17/01/2014 23:54

And does it really matter MadameDefarge if I was in the meeting, from that you can probably guess I was not. What would you like to question?

Cindy3674 · 17/01/2014 23:55

Could you explain what you find unpleasant please?

MadameDefarge · 17/01/2014 23:56

I am also struggling to see what you want from this thread.

You are a third hand 'observer' of child protection proceedings which have not been resolved. It might infuriate you and your family that this is going on, but unless you actually live with this family 24/7 and have observed every interaction, you actually have no way of knowing either way what the reality is.

You have decided social workers are arses, or possibly past drug addicts. Based on reported interactions.

MadameDefarge · 17/01/2014 23:58

I'm sure MNHQ will explain how it works here to you Cindy.

Cindy3674 · 18/01/2014 00:23

What I want from this thread is a difficult question, but correct me if I am wrong it did start regarding panarama reporting on fractures on toddlers and how it was dealt with.

You are right regards being with the family 24/7 and not knowing the reality, how can I argue that, I would not attempt to. But how this has been dealt with from the beginning regardless of the final out come is not right. There are to many mistakes and contradictions that only add to the pressure the whole family is put under. Mistakes that could be avoided with the proper training, support and the right people for the job. Its these mistakes that triggered the panarama program, its these mistakes that make people think conspiracy, its these mistakes that make people think adoption quoter's. And its these mistakes that leave me making the comments I have regards SS. So I suppose I read this thread and try to understand where and why these mistakes are happening.

Cindy3674 · 18/01/2014 00:26

I'm sure MNHQ will explain how it works here to you Cindy.

Please explain.

Wannabestepfordwife · 18/01/2014 08:27

cindy unfortunately I don't think your going to get what you want from this thread.

It sounds like your family are in a horrendous situation and it's very unprofessional if ss are getting basics like names wrong. Might I suggest that you get in contact with the family rights group- they provide excellent advice to families in your position.

Spero · 18/01/2014 09:23

Yes, or agree the family rights group would be a great support for you - the big problem for family members in a case like this is that you won't necessarily get invited to meetings or have all the information and you won't necessarily get funding for a lawyer unless allegations are made against you.

So I can see how suspicions and anger can rise.

The frustrations you describe I think can largely be explained by the massive pressure SW are under, with unrealistically heavy case loads - less time to proof read documents so they don't notice the wrong names etc.

It is not reassuring and I don't blame you for being angry and upset.

But your anger is palpable from your posts and if you show that anger to the SW, it will hurt your family's case.

One of reasons the Webster case went so wrong is that Gary Webster threatened to kill a social worker - I should imagine that relationship was not repairable.

Speak to someone at the family rights group, take a deep breath and try to get through this. It may feel never ending but care proceedings now MUST conclude in six months.

Cindy3674 · 18/01/2014 19:51

Hi Spero

We have been in touch with the family rights, we have solicitors and a barrister and no there are no allegations against me personally. My posts may come across as anger, but I would say I do feel very strongly about this and have posted such which seems to upset a few. I do know how to deal with SS after a difficult breakup a few years ago and going through the family courts for 10 months over contact with my daughter. I had a lot of dealings with cafcass and they were excellent in my case. My solicitor and barrister were excellent and although it was a long drawn out process the right result for my daughter was achieved in the end.

I have showed no anger to SS in this case and nor has any other family member. I believe my brother-in-law (The grandfather) was noted as difficult purely because of his back ground. He is high ranking in the emergency services and does have a air of seriousness and authority about him.Its just how he is. Obviously SS did not take to him and labelled him as difficult. I think he just expects the same level of professionalism in writing reports and investigating as he would expect in his work place, after all the whole scenario does not get more series. Child abuse, suspected child abuse, removing children from a family, massive life changing decisions to be made and if wrong very very damaging.

With reference to the webster case I know nothing about this case, but then if he threatened to Kill a SW, then as you say where do you go from there. As a SW your looking into protecting children and you have some one (the father I assume) threatening to kill you. No one can condone that behaviour.

You say MadameDefarge my decisions towards SS are based on reported interactions. You come across as if that is wrong, or I am wrong to do so. But decisions in these cases are made in exactly that way, reports on interactions. So surely those reports need to be accurate.

I feel that because I have viewed my opinion on how this has been handled and questioned SS ability to deal with it in a profesional manner I am not welcome in this discussion. I would assume MadameDefarge you are a SW.

I agree with the new rule laid down by Sir James Munby, but I suppose that is another discussion. But it does mean we might get to the bottom of how many cases are really out there where wrong decisions have been made.

I have heard so many times that SW are under massive pressure and have to deal with unrealistic heavy case loads, how long can we go on saying this. It cant be a excuse for incorrect decisions and mistakes. I would like to think the decision to go public would not mean the SW at the bottom of the chain being used as a scape goat, but going public will improve the current process and situation.

I will probably get knocked down for also saying how does SS actually work. For instance a SW who dealt with my contact case a few years ago would that SW also deal with suspected child abuse cases.I dont know. My point should there be (may be already is) a special department of highly trained SW to deal with such cases.

This thread is related to panarama.I only joined this thread to get a better understanding and read others views. My views may be strong but I do read and take on board what others say even if they do question my comments.

MadameDefarge · 18/01/2014 20:06

Cindy, you will get more respect and engagement if you stop tarring every social worker with the same, prejudiced brush.

And also, if people share stories of abuse they have suffered, you do not make sneery comments about it. It makes you sound like a complete bastard.

I'm done with Mumsnet now.

Cindy3674 · 18/01/2014 20:31

MadameDefarge

When communicating in this manner things can be misread, I do not tar every social worker with the same brush. I agree we need them and many do a good job but it seems to me that in certain circumstances they can not cope, and I feel that needs to change. Where those changes need to be made I dont know, but I do try to understand.

With regards child abuse, emotions can run high, and I do apologise if I came across as a complete bastard. That most certainly was not my intentions. I tried to point out that what happened to you had no bearing on the decision made on my family's student.

Please do not be done with Mumsnet on my behalf, and again I apologise for my comment. I was only thinking of my families present situation when I made the comment, with no consideration to you and your feelings.