The shocking rise of fascism

Lilygran and other posters who have spoken in defence of social workers....thank you.
Tragically, 'known to Social Services' does not mean 'watched over by Social Services 24 hours a day, with limitless resources and facilities to keep them safe from evil people'.
I wish it did.

A fear of being accused of racism may well have played a part in that extraordinarily sad and sorry tale as I think I am right that most, if not all of the perpetrators were of Pakistani origin. Once again, it was almost certainly irrelevant in legal terms but may have been an issue in the minds of others.

I didn't say it was a race - but I think that was what inhibited many social workers and police officers from speaking out.

Muslim is not a 'race'. There was a lot of coverage /debate in the press & wider media about the fact that most, but not all, men involved were Muslim. I thought it was the judge who said that the religion of the men was irrelevant to the case. Think he was thinking of it from a purely legal aspect. Also if the general public think it is a problem only in areas where there is a large Muslim community it might leave 'space' for other men to exploit vulnerable girls.

The dread of being considered racist has certainly inhibited some people from facing the fact that the men tageting vulnerable girls were mainly Muslims.

I agree with the posters who have spoken up in defence of social workers. They can't win once the news hits the streets because they are accused of not acting when they should or of acting too quickly. BUT this is the same authority where it was recently found that young girls were being prostituted and one was murdered even though 'known to social services'. There is something going wrong.

Greatnan the reason for separating the siblings was probably because there are few foster carers who can take larger sibling groups. It seems particularly cruel in this case when the children do not speak English as their first language. They are likely to have a limited understanding of what has happened to them and reduced opportunities to communicate at all in their first language.

But Joyce Thacker has given factual information about the basis of this decision and has said the foster carers were providing good care. It has been confirmed that they will be allowed to carry on fostering. The placement was only ever a temporary placement. So why the need to remove the children with no planning or preparation. It makes no sense to me.

Separating siblings is so cruel - I would love to know the reasons behind that.

I am not saying that chidren's service never cock things up but the trouble is with this, is that we don't really know about what may have gone on in this case as the department cannot talk about the details for confidentiality reasons.
The main thrust of concerns have come from UKIP.
Where there are serious case reviews on a children's safe guarding issue these are published on line. They make an analysis of what went wrong with the processes in the department. Salutory reading indeed for social workers .

I am well aware that the actions of social workers are all too often misrepresented by the media, but my views are based on the statements made by Joyce Thacker, the director of children and young people's services and other factual information. I am sure the professionals involved acted in good faith but they were wrong. This was NOT a child focused decision and I stand by everything I said. There is rarely any good reason to move children so hastily or to separate siblings. These are facts in this case. I will be interested to hear the outcome of the inquiries and if I have been too hasty in reaching this view I will eat my words.

Jess, completely agree.

Well said, Jess.

I'm sure the social workers had the children's interests at heart. We do not know the details. Anything in the press cannot to be relied on as being a full and accurate account. Remember the number of fictitious stories that were made up about the McCanns.
So any discussion of these stories can only be based on partial information - the full story is , after all, confidential and the social workers are unable to set the record straight. The fosterers on the other hand are not so bound and can make any statements they want.
jo4 you do make these provocative remarks from time to time. Whether they are "off the cuff" or deliberately provocative is not clear and it is confusing to people. It also, regularly, causes unhappiness on this site. Remember a lot of people have got in trouble recently on Twitter for posting things about people they do not know, without thinking of the implications. Some of them might yet get sued. Gransnet is also a public arena but neither trial by twitter nor trial by Gransnet is appropriate or wise.

'Narrow-minded lefties'?

nightowl

White dove emoticon. Nice to know it's not required.

Don't worry about it POGS I am far less defensive of social work than I used to be. There are still some excellent social workers but I fear the profession itself is in danger of losing its way. I don't take any criticism personally, I can only try to do my best.

Winding down now anyway, looking to the future

nightowl

Well said.

I must add to my previous comment, I do not mean to 'tar and feather' all Child Care/Social Workers as uncaring. I fully appreciate there are good and bad in all professions. It is a very challenging job and they have to deal with some very unhappy circumstances the rest of us can only talk about, similar to the police and other services who have equally difficult jobs.

I suspected the children had been separated when it was reported that one child was moved first and the other two a few days later. It's an indefensible decision. Made by people who should be ashamed of themselves. Blinkered, knee jerk reaction made by unimaginative professionals who have betrayed not only the children in their care but their social work values and principles. Makes me despair.

JO5

Amen to that it would appear.

I do think debate will follow though.

There is no debate POGS. Sorry. But its just a bunch of narrow minded lefties sticking to what they consider to be pc, and sod the children involved.

From the Telegraph:

" "We feel that we were meeting the cultural needs of these children. We were actively encouraging these children to speak their own language and to teach us their language. We enjoyed singing one of their folk songs in their native language.

"Having been told of the religious denomination of these children, we also took steps to ensure that a school of their denomination was found." - the foster parents deemed unsuitable.

It is reported that the children have been 'split up' from their siblings and I am sorry to say I find that totally upsetting and under the circumstances a disgraceful decision for adaults to make.How are they better off, can someone enlighten me please.

Is it wrong of me to question if in fact it is the Council who are displaying signs of racismin this particular case?.

I wish I knew why the children are in care and why the authorities cannot find their family in their country of origin. Surely they could possibly be better off if reunited with family rather than suffer at the hands of the British care system.

There is a lot of debate to be had on this matter that's for sure.

Absolutely agree with that Greatnan. The care system is a shambles. I have seen it through many incarnations but I am not at all convinced the one we now have is an improvement on the one we had in the late 1970s. No more large institutions within which children are abused, but instead we have small private homes where children are not protected from those who target them from outside. Fostering has improved dramatically, but on the whole it's all very depressing. I still believe more preventive work to keep families together is the key, but that costs money.

I believe it is not uncommon for people who have been adopted to feel some alienation, particularly if they are not told right from the start so it is not surprising that some cross-racial adoptees are unhappy.
I do hope that the care system is improving, but I have read the statistics about the number of 'cared for' (horrible phrase) children who end up in prison, on drugs, homeless, working as prostitutes, etc. or who are abused n some way whilst in care. No doubt some come into care already very damaged, but surely that just means they need even better care. We have all read about children who are shipped off to children's homes or foster homes hundreds of miles away from their extended family, or others who move as much as ten times in as many years.
I am not blaming the social workers, who, no doubt, do their best for all the children they meet, but something has very clearly been wrong for many years and I don't think we can just pretend that everything is right. Care is expensive unless it is given by the family and the amount a country spends on it is a fair indication of its level of civilisation.