RIP Baby Star Hobson

So everyone that voted Tory did so because they weren’t willing to pay the taxes required to fund social services? What nonsense.

Labour have a lot to answer for. I agree that more funding is required but it’s not the only answer. If young girls weren’t incentivised to have babies and given a house/flat and an income then that would be a start. This country is full of people with children that are in the way of their parent(s) living their life but provide them with the means to do so.

There’s whole estates full of homes with cannabis smoking adults living on benefits, idling their lives away, aided and abetted by the state and children going through hell.

I have seen this repeatedly with my own eyes and life experience - nothing to do with the right wing press.

I believe in the welfare state but it’s lost it’s way and it’s created a greedy, rapacious monster and it bears no resemblance to it’s original concept. When girls leave school with the aim of having a baby and getting a house often following on from the previous generation what hope is there?

So why did it take a whistle blower to highlight the abuse of those young girls?
Why wasn't it set out clearly that targets couldn't be met due to funding issues?

Like Sarnia, my thought was - how many more? We all get fed up with hearing that lessons will be learned, when they never are. It’s heart rending.

Thank you Doodledog for a very reasoned, articulate post.

MissAdventure

I've said before, perhaps we can also look at some of the responses on here to grandparents who have cause for concern about the grandchildren care; "keep your beak out".
"Mind your own business" is what is said to them.

My response to that has always been that I would consider it entirely my business if my grandchild was at risk.

There is nothing wrong with examining from top to bottom all of the many failings to keep children safe.

Of course there is nothing wrong with examining the responses but let's look at the whole picture.
When I first started teaching in a very poor area there was huge network of support for children. There were health visitors, school nurses, a school clinic, local GP, there were regular health checks for children as they grew up, they were weighed and measured and checked over. There was also a wider community where people knew each other. It's all gone. We are left with social workers trying to replace a system and not unsurprisingly failing.
If you have a young social worker with no proper child development training, dealing with parents who are manipulative they try desperately to support the parents and sometimes take the wrong side. No one person should have the responsibility for taking these decisions there should be other support people involved, it should be a proper system of support not just a single person.

As I have said, everyone would be totally up in arms if I was here pontificating about how social workers are too young to do their job properly.

Forsythia

What never ceases to amaze me is that when you look at the adults involved they are always of similar ilk: gormless, unemployable, no purpose to their lives. Always the same types over and over again, that poor sweet baby.

You may get pilloried for saying that but I have to agree with you. I worked on a Delivery Suite for 17 years and those Mums whose babies were on a pre-birth at risk register for various reasons more often than not, fell into that category. Many of them had been brought up in dysfunctional families and having a baby often meant they could move to a council or housing authority flat paid for by the benefit system.

As far as I'm aware, though I may be wrong, no one person is responsible.
A multidisciplinary meeting will be held, bringing together all those involved in a vulnerable person's care.

Talking about gormless, unemployable girls who are given flats, that is exactly what is happening with my neighbours grandchildren.
I would go as far as to say (though o hope to dear god I'm wrong) that they are potentially another Tustin type case just waiting to happen, should they have children.

Sarnia

Forsythia

What never ceases to amaze me is that when you look at the adults involved they are always of similar ilk: gormless, unemployable, no purpose to their lives. Always the same types over and over again, that poor sweet baby.

You may get pilloried for saying that but I have to agree with you. I worked on a Delivery Suite for 17 years and those Mums whose babies were on a pre-birth at risk register for various reasons more often than not, fell into that category. Many of them had been brought up in dysfunctional families and having a baby often meant they could move to a council or housing authority flat paid for by the benefit system.

I agree too. There is a ‘type’. Another partner as well...as in the case of little Arthur.

So many generalisations here. I can assure you that middle class people abuse their children too, but they are far better at hiding it and keeping the authorities at bay than the poor and feckless. What horrible judgmental attitudes some people have.

Well, my neighbours girls are now that "type", not through lack of trying on her part, though.
Still, I expect that's someone else's doing.

Middle class, "well spoken" parents often get away with abuse for exactly those reasons.
They speak nicely, therefore they couldn't possibly be abusers.

There was a case some years back where a mother had starved just one of children to death in her nice home.

So everyone that voted Tory did so because they weren’t willing to pay the taxes required to fund social services? What nonsense.
Who said that?

MissAdventure

As far as I'm aware, though I may be wrong, no one person is responsible.
A multidisciplinary meeting will be held, bringing together all those involved in a vulnerable person's care.

That is assuming a Section 47 notice has been given Miss Adventure if it hasn't then the whole decision would be the social workers.

There should be a sterilisation programme set up for what is deeming to be----unsuitable mothers. Rights ? They have no " rights " to murder children !!
As someone said, you can see the type as I have too when working at the hospital. We used to have a social worker on duty in the maternity department, more so because of the drug/ alcohol-fuelled mums.

Harsh and certainly not au-fait with this country, but we can't either have this horrendous society of murdered babies/ children. It's totally unacceptable in a civilised society.

Where are the children's rights ?

So what would be deemed unsuitable? Domestic violence, alcoholism multiple partners perhaps?

Yes, all of those Galaxy.

They're all issues that have been aired here on gransnet amongst adult children, aren't they?
Just in nicer terms.

trisher

This is completely political and yes of course there were cruelty cases under a Labour government, But let's not forget that the Labour government always has to clear up the mess left by the Tories. Any real develpments in care and social services are then destroyed once again by small state Tories. Like the Sure Start initiative which dealt not only with children but with inadequate parents and the extended family. If you cut that, pare social services to the bone and cut all the public services involved in protecting children like education, the police, the NHS you leave vulnerable children exposed. There may always have been instances of cruelty, but so many in such a short period? I think not. Yes the abusers are monsters but it is society which is responsible for failing to protect these children and it is the years of Tory government that are responsible for that failure.

I agree it is political, because of cuts social workers now have many more cases to cope with, up to four times more I believe. But it is also about people who take advantage of discrimination legislation, the woman in question regularly claimed homophobia and discrimination because she was from a family lf travellers. Like the police in Rochdale during the sex abuse investigation the social workers were frightened of being accused of discrimination.

Ok 2 out of 3 of those were present in Boris Johnson's childhood. So you would have sterilised the parents (I have no idea why it would be just the mother) of the future PM. My guess is you would be sterilising millions of people.

Of the top of my head I can think of 2 people I know well who have experienced domestic abuse, I couldnt begin to tell you how many people I know who have either had an affair or divorced and had new partners. Do you understand what you are saying. Mass sterilisation

Emma Tustin had a hot tub in her garden to while away the hours in between abusing Arthur. Dud she ever work? How did she afford it plus all the McDonalds they enjoyed.

I wonder how Johnson's father filled his time between abusing his wife?

As I've said, thanks in part to social services less than proactive approach, my neighbours grandchildren are fast looking likely to end up involved in child abuse cases.
The older one has just abused pets, so far.