Little Arthur

youtu.be/RZL5p_Lqle8

Yes, while he was very clearly at risk and reports were made to the relevant agencies.
Saying that isn't in bad taste at all.

Some of these comments are in very bad taste. The parents killed Arthur!

Bottom. line, Tustin hated Arthur to the point that she wanted him dead. She influenced his father to feel the same. He was the link between Hughes and Arthur's mother, and if Arthur were dead the link would be broken and Hughes would have no reason to have anything more to do with the mother.

Iam64. I don’t understand your comment directed at me.

You are consistently finding excuses for the abject failings of social services in this case. In your previous post you stated it was understandable there was conflict between Hughes and the maternal grandparents. I haven’t read that there was. I believe you were attempting to further excuse the sw’s failure to take the abuse allegations seriously. I merely pointed out to you that the allegations were made by his own mother and brother and, no history of conflict. You never mentioned alcohol abuse.

Ultimately, this is nothing to do with alcohol abuse and his birth mother. Unless you have other information, I’m not aware of any safety concerns which were raised when he was living with his mother. Unfortunately, many children in the country are living with alcoholic and drug addicted parents. It’s hardly a good environment but they aren’t all being deliberately tortured and murdered.

I don’t believe Tustin and Hughes were alcoholics or drug addicts but they had a clean and tidy home…

So where were the people employed to oversee his care?
It was obviously lacking, and yet nobody seems to have joined the dots.

You’re clearly determined to find fault with anyone connected to social work tickingbird. My point stands, it wouldn’t be unusual for there to be conflict within extended families.
Children who life with alcoholic parents are exposed often to violent rows, it seems that happened with Arthur in the care of his mother. She seems to have met his needs but with substance misuse, those needs are never met consistently.

Bringing up murderers? There but for the grace of God!

ReadyMeals. "blame the parents". Uh, yes, the little boy didn't kill himself did he. Of course it was the parents.

I was referring to your post stating that both sets of grandparents had brought up murderers. Very poor taste comment.

Old woman70. Very good post.

tickingbird

OMG. Blame the parents. What utter nonsense you speak. Not really worthy of response.

As for the mother being bad tempered - she was found guilty of manslaughter. Two alcoholics together, undoubtedly being physically violent to each other when drunk. It certainly doesn’t follow that the woman was bad tempered or abusives to her son.

"blame the parents". Uh, yes, the little boy didn't kill himself did he. Of course it was the parents.

Iam64 - It was the paternal grandmother ie Hughes’ mother taking photographs and reporting mostly. It was his own brother ringing the police and being threatened with arrest. There was no conflict.

I can’t understand why it’s so difficult to follow and it concerns me that sw’s can get these things so mixed up ( if they did) as you appear to be doing. Hughes and Arthur were living in an annexe of his parents’ house up until lockdown when he moved in with Tustin. Therefore Arthur was very close to his paternal gran and extended family.

It was the paternal family that described his mum as lovely, not her own family.

By all accounts she was a good mother and had a loving relationship with her son.

OMG. Blame the parents. What utter nonsense you speak. Not really worthy of response.

As for the mother being bad tempered - she was found guilty of manslaughter. Two alcoholics together, undoubtedly being physically violent to each other when drunk. It certainly doesn’t follow that the woman was bad tempered or abusives to her son.

Of course the mother was bad-tempered, she killed someone in a fit of drunken temper. Being an alcoholic she was probably drunk quite often. And if she got bad tempered when drunk then she was probably quite often bad tempered. Of course the parents are going to say she was wonderful. And both sets of grandparents had brought up people who turned out to be murders. The kid was disadvantaged and at risk no matter which relative took him in!

Maddyone, your point about a clean, tidy home, the children appearing happy in their play, the fact father had seen the GP and attended a follow CAMHS appointment would all be viewed as positive. It seems the parents do-operated with the sw visit. Given the fact A’s mother was in prison for manslaughter, conflict between his father and maternal gran not unusual.
The sw visit was in April. If a paediatric assessment had taken place a full exam would have identified any further bruising and checked height and weight. This poor little boy. Those wicked parental figures.

I gather the local authority are planting trees near where he lived as a memorial to him. Are gestures like this too little and too late? I would like the memorial to him to be that no other child is let down as he was, that all those involved really do "learn lessons" and priority given to protecting children rather than to "keeping families together".

I forgot to mention in my post last night, that’s Arthur’s teacher had also raised concerns. I’m assuming this was his new teacher. We don’t know what those concerns were, but why was he not regarded as vulnerable during lockdown if his teacher had raised concerns? I don’t want to pre judge, but how will the school come out of all this when the inquiry reports? It’s not looking good for the school in my opinion, but I know we have to wait for the inquiry.

One thing struck me about that clip of film that was released, the house was clean and apparently tidy, and looked after. Pleasant even. When I was teaching, our school adopted the policy of a pre school visit for all our Early Years children (that’s children in Nursery or Reception classes) and if you’d seen some of the homes I’ve been in, it’d make your eyes pop. When anyone visited Arthur’s home they would have seen a clean, tidy home. Would that change perceptions of what was going on? I don’t know, but I wonder.

Soda pop, I’m not defending poor practice. we don’t yet have an inquiry to give even more awful details. Just a word though, so many families referred to social work have ‘two dysfunctional parents’.
Tustin’s other children weren’t identified as ‘vulnerable’. Some people are adept manipulators. Some parents are cruel, abusive - this isn’t always immediately obvious. So far as I’m aware, neighbours weren’t reporting screaming from Arthur, abusive screaming to him by his ‘carers’. What was going on

Two dysfunctional parents how many more signs did the agencies need. That's not including the stepmother. The hairdresser still sticks in my mind, putting self interest before the welfare of a child.

I’m another who agrees with your post maddyone. What we have learned about this little boy’s life in the ‘care’ of Hughes and Tustin is heartbreaking.
So many ‘ifs’, the central ones being if he’d been in school and, if the families concerns, that photograph had led to an investigation under S47, then a multi agency safeguarding meeting, he may have been protected.

Previous child death inquiries have similar themes of missed opportunities which inevitably include poor multi agency co- operation and manipulative, resistant, dishonest care givers.

I agree so much, maddy.

A little boy who started a new school in September, who now lived with his father instead of his mother, a mother who was in prison for manslaughter; there are a lot of red flags for the school there. A social worker who visited, I don’t know why, or what prompted that visit, but who took no further action as far as I understand. That she/he needed to visit raises a red flag. Police who thought that the red flag raised by grandparents was being dealt with by Social Services and took no further action. How many red flags does it take? I think Arthur has been let down by all the services and people who should have protected him. As an ex teacher, I feel particular annoyance by the school, who apparently didn’t feel Arthur warranted extra care and attention, that he wasn’t vulnerable. I know we’ll all have to wait for the inquiry to report, but this is such an awful case, and so very, very sad.

Thanks.
Oh for an edit button, though.