Another poor child killed at the hands of his parent and lover

Kate1949

Yes. The cheeky b*****d.

Agreed, still he did get extra time for his trouble.

Yes. The cheeky b*****d.

Kate1949

Today's news tickingbird. He appealed his sentence and was given an extra three years for his cheek. Good.

He appealed?? Unbelievable and so pleased the judges showed what they thought of his grubby appeal. RIP Arthur.

They usually have the wherewithal to ensure they cover up well.

I find it hard to understand how this can happen. Hitting a child in a moment of anger is one thing but, all those who have been in the news recently have been subjected to prolonged abuse. It's amazing that the parents are able to get away with it for so long.

I was thinking the same MissA

I don't know how these pieces of excrement have the cheek to appeal.

Today's news tickingbird. He appealed his sentence and was given an extra three years for his cheek. Good.

Kate1949

Arthur Labinjo-Hughes's father has had his sentence increased by three years. That's something I suppose.

Is this recent Kate as I haven’t heard about it?

Arthur Labinjo-Hughes's father has had his sentence increased by three years. That's something I suppose.

nightowl

Very true Iam, no point at all. It’s easier just to blame social workers whatever the circumstances. If it makes people feel better then I suppose we serve some purpose.

If you're referring to the baby from the 1980s I never mentioned social workers. It was the hospital who returned the baby to the parents three times despite twice being admitted unconscious with clear evidence of being shaken, the third time with eyes not focusing and a haemorrhage on one side of the brain. The fourth time admitted unconscious again, bruised with fracture of the skull and bronchial pneumonia. She died the next morning. Do you think there should be any excuse for returning the child to her parents three times?

There were many of these ‘Mother and Baby ‘ homes across the UK, run by various organisations. Luckygirl is right, the funding was cut, it’s that simple.

There are ‘parent and child’ foster placements but these are in short supply and it’s a very specialised form of fostering.

Not too "woke" - the services are not there - funding was cut.

Near us there used to be a place for new mothers who were experiencing difficulties to go with their babies for some r and r and general support. It was run by nuns. Of course it got shut down and now there is nothing available. I came across many mums who had been there, usually for a spell of 2-3 weeks, and they really loved the help in establishing feeding,routines etc. We are too ‘woke’ now to accept this sort of help, it seems.

Very true Iam, no point at all. It’s easier just to blame social workers whatever the circumstances. If it makes people feel better then I suppose we serve some purpose.

I should have not bothered. It’s a waste of time trying to discuss the complexity of safeguarding,

I’m not suggesting they weren’t happening/. I’m talking about local systems that could be effective.

Back in the 1980s my mother became very angry and upset when she read about a 16 month old baby in Cardiff who was beaten to death by her brutal father. Without putting the horrible details the baby was admitted to hospital many times with serious injuries but always returned to the parents, so as usual warning signs were ignored. So I can't really see the 1980s as golden days, because the same things were happening then as now.

Chestnut, in the 80’s, our area patch sw team supported a Family with a mum who had postpartum psychosis after her babies were born. Midwives and health visitors, plus the same experienced sw were involved. Dad was helped to recognise when he needed to call us out. The social worker had a trusting relationship with them. It was always possible to persuade mum into the hospital ward that specialised in ppd. I look back on those as golden days with community patch teams in police, social work and health services.
We also had resources to support vulnerable families. The dad in this family needed practical support. The parents families of origin lived nearby but as is often the case, their ability to offer consistent support was limited.

In the case of Lily-Mai the mother was suffering severe post-natal depression. I saw a programme about this and it was shocking how deeply affected some women were. They were in such a dark place and freely admitted they could go on to kill their baby if they weren't helped. There was a clinic where the women and their babies were admitted until they felt safe to go home. They received treatment of course. If there were more such clinics and professional help for women in this state then babies and families could be saved.

Tickingbird, I don’t think it’s one sw at fault here. My reading is the sw was told by managers this baby should be sent home. I can’t understand the decision making process. It’s rare for hospital staff to raise such a high level of concern. I’ve read sw managers decided the baby go home, the sw made the necessary application for care proceedings to be initiated. The sw went on planned leave . The little baby had been killed before legal proceedings started.

The judge concluded infanticide, which suggests mum was mentally I’ll at the time.

It seems inevitable the inquiry will conclude an absence of multi disciplinary communication and working. There are specialist CPN working with mothers. Was there a multi disciplinary meeting to share and evaluate the assessments to date.
‘Lessons will be learned’. - no that wheel was invented to plus years ago, it doesn’t need re-inventing, it needs following

In the case of Lily Mai there were very serious concerns raised by nursing staff and these were overrode by sw. This woman had been homeless, didn’t like the noises this poor baby made and was more interested in going for a burger than seeing her baby.

This is a failing on the part of a sw. Yes, they have a difficult job but, as in any other profession, some aren’t very good at their job. I know because I’ve worked closely with them. Some are excellent and some are pretty dire to be honest. In the case of vulnerable children there’s no place for mediocre sw’s.

I could only read a little about this terrible case as the details were heart breaking. How I wish this lovely young boy could have managed to tell someone, anyone no matter who, that he was being so ill treated. The fact that the family were “trapped” in their home together because of the Covid lockdown is absolutely no excuse for either of these monsters to behave how they did. Not that it would have been excusable but they were not having to deal with a screaming baby or demanding toddlers this was a 15 year old boy and what they did was systematic torture. Prison is too good for them and why should we pay for them to be looked after. I would normally never support the death penalty but in this case and in all other cases like this it is the only suitable sentence. They do not deserve to live and if there is an afterlife let’s hope theirs is in hell.

When I trained I did a social science degree, then a postgraduate diploma in social work. My degree was financed by the local authority - no debt - and the postgrad course by the Home Office - no debt. I then had a trainee social worker post where I was supported and helped to find my feet.

However, I do think that I was too young - no real life experience, and I did my O and A levels a year early, so started my university career younger than most.

Iam makes a good point about the maturity of social workers - I know that I did not feel ready to take up my career - no real life experience.

But unfortunately social workers often do not stay - those people with the valuable experience get burned out because of short staffing and lack of support - these are the people we need. I left at the age of 50 - I was working with people with brain injuries at that point and there were no funds to help them - we just assessed them to death and offered little. My colleagues still working in Children's Services were equally frustrated.

Social workers are damned if they do and damned if they don't; they are hedged around by departmental policies and financial constraints; they cannot offer the sort of constructive preventative help that they can see is desperately needed because the tory government pulled the plug on the funding.

There will sadly always be people like these dreadful parents/step-parents, but we will not prevent these deaths unless the government grasps the meaning of the word preventative - they think short term.

I read the report by Louis Blom- Cooper onto the death of Jasmine Beckford in 1984. It triggered an over haul of child protection services. His ultimatum ‘ thou shalt not not I intervene’. It stressed the client was the child, not the parent. By 1988, Butler Sloss concluded in the Cleveland report r=there was ‘no reason to doubt the medical evidence that led professionals to believe children had been sexually abused. The criticism despite this,was of those who intervened. By the mid 90’s, policy drifted from child protection towards family protection.
Moving on to the death of baby p, professor Eileen Munro reviewed services in 2011. Her report warned the systems ability to be child centre was compromised. Michael Gove said the state was failing children. Putting ‘the rights of biological parents ahead of vulnerable children’.
I used Bea Campbell’s article in the Guardian 17.03.13 to check out my memory of the way child protection swin between the needs of children and the rights of parents
The body of knowledge is solid. It needs well trained, qualified, experienced workers. They need clinical supervision, to work in stable multi disciplinary teams, or with good working relationships between the agencies involved.
Austerity has not helped.