Protecting Our Children

It's recorded, so will pick it up later, and report back!

I thought it was excellent. For once a programme showing a small snapshot of the sort of situation that social workers in child protection have to deal with. About time the demonisation is slightly redressed.

Child Protection social work will always be contentious. When I was new into probation we all had to attend a conference on ritual abuse, and the office I worked in was next one along from the Rochdale area where all hell broke loose, along with the Shetlands. Probation and social workers had to walk into the conference through a line of protesters waving flags and placards, proclaiming us to be evil. Beatrice Campbell was the keynote speaker, exhorting us to keep our cool and do what we have to do to protect children, who she claimed were being rounded up and systematically abused by men! All a bit bewildering for a new officer with a commitment to helping people, and realising that many did not want our help, and getting it wrong sometimes sets the scene for many years to come.

Navigating your way through public disapproval, lack of understanding about what does go on for children in some families behind closed doors, and seeing the rising level of burnout in experienced social workers, can be very off-putting - there are easier ways to make a living. Social workers in child protection have always had my complete respect because I have seen at first hand the brave job they do. Just imagine what it's like walking down a path to a house to remove a child to safety, accompanied by a police officer, and expecting to be sworn at, have things thrown at you, spat at by both family and their child who doesn't want to go anywhere, then when the child has been left with a foster carer, to have to go and write all that up in as objective a way as you can. There's a fine balance to be struck and the majority of social workers do get it right, but they can't blow their own trumpets because of confidentiality.

Yes it is a tough job with little thanks. It is always easy to point the finger of blame but the reality of their caseloads is that they cannot do a perfect job. Which must be very frustrating.

I am afraid the scandals in Rochdale and Orkeys did immeasurable damage to the reputation of social workers. When my daughter worked in drug treatment services, the biggest fear of many addicts was that their children would be taken away from them.
I know it is always a last resort for children to be removed for their own safety, but I think of how my own children and grandchildren would have felt if they had been taken to live with strangers. Fortunately, when one daughter had to go into a clinic for four months, her sister was able to add her four children to her own six! (Incidentally, she received no allowance from the government for this).
I thought the social workers on the progamme dealt as well as they could in the circumstances.

Greatnan I hesitated before I typed Shetlands - you're right, it was the Orkneys. Such a tragic time for all concerned. The balance between protecting children and inflicting more pain and sadness on them by placing them with strangers is so difficult to get right. I see how happy children are when they go to live with my sister, who fosters, and the success stories when they go to new parents. Two children in the last few months have had happy results - one going to new adoptive parents and keeping contact with maternal grandmother afterwards, and the other who is now going to live with her grandmother in a few weeks, instead of being adopted. However, I know that each of these children will need their questions answering to their satisfaction in due course, or they will seek answers for themselves. There isn't a quick fix - these children will have to accommodate what has happened to them over the course of their lives. What a huge responsibility to take on when decisions are taken to remove children.

Yes, notso, and felt it was, on the whole, a well balanced programme, and as you say, it was a very low level case. I sometimes think, however, that these low level cases can be very difficult to deal with because it raises questions about addressing possible escalation in the future and when to remove children to a place of safety. When abuse is clear, then positive and immediate action can be taken. Lack of care can be trickier to identify, and feel many children fall through the net.
The programme showed how multi-agency support worked, but I would have liked to see some comment about action in addressing the possibility of parenting classes, basic adult education, home start, nutrition and basic home hygiene support for the parents. It seemed to me that the parents were in themselves, children.

It left me feeling very sad for all concerned.

I have watched the remainder of the programme this morning, and felt so sad for all concerned. The guardian who was taking notes whilst observing the father's (non)interaction with his son did praise him for a couple of things, but how sad that an offer wasn't made to teach him how to play with the child (perhaps it was, but not shown). The amount of neglect and violence was indeed what you would call low level, and I was left wondering whether the parents couldn't have had a place in a family unit for them to learn their parenting skills. Having gone to such units many times to see for myself how parents have been interacting with their children, I would have thought that couple would have been ideal for such support.

I thought the trainee's supervisor used rather a lot of jargon. The couple were obviously 'intellectually challenged' and the mother said her own mother had been short on parenting skills. I thought they needed more practical help to show them how to clean the house, not just a list of things they had to do.

I think that some of the procedures that have been set up in recent years are probably pulling social workers and their managers away from the things we would like them to be doing.
An example I heard of just a few years ago. A teacher pushes a stroppy 15 year old boy in school. To my mind the school have a way of dealing with this via their complaints and disciplinary procedures. This could potentially result in a final written warning or sacking.
If parents not happy they could complain to the police who could decide whether it counts as assault. But no, full social service involvement with senior people having case meetings etc etc Is this really what child protection/safeguarding procedures should be doing?
(You may now tell me it is, Carol... )

No, I wholeheartedly agree with you Jess. Sometimes, the safeguarding process is invoked because some PC fascist who likes to make a point asks for one, instead of being guided by those who know what they are doing. One of the things I don't miss now I've retired.

Oh right we are as one then. Blooming silly I thought.
On the other hand when we had a teenager who was deeply disturbed, and without anyone willing to own up to loco parentis it took weeks to get action, despite much digging in of heels and refusing to formally admit to school roll. Maybe because they were tied up with nonsense like that.
Mind you... another thing p'd me off in terms of social worker time. Refugees who lie about their age. If they say they are under 18 they get a social worker, a foster family and a school place.
We had 3 of these at once a few years ago. 1 nice 2 not. I feel very sorry for the refugees but this did actually cause child protection issues for existing pupils. I wondered if someone was telling them to do this, or whether word just got out on the grapevine...

What do you do when refugees and asylum seekers are arriving in a country that treats people better than their homeland? If they learn a few tricks that will help them get settled, then who can blame them for using what they have learned? If I were in their shoes and knew I might get help quickly by telling a few porkies, especially if I had children, I would do likewise. It is irritating, but I would rather belong to a country that gives the benefit of the doubt.

It's been suggested that triage and stabilising methods should be used for anyone who appears not to be entitled to benefits and/or health treatment, then they should be deported back to their country of origin. I suppose if asylum seekers and refugees became aware of this, they might think again and look to the most likely country that would help them, but they might also just keep arriving and take their chances. I understand that the cost is a fraction of 1% of our health, education, benefits and social services budgets, and to take aversive steps would be costlier. I take a dim view of UK citizens who bleed our benefits system dry, but have a slightly more lenient view about people seeking refuge and asylum. Perhaps adjustments could be made to the oversees aid that we pay to those countries that have affluence and their own space programmes, so we can spread that resource here in the UK?

I retired from social work 15 years ago having done the full range of work,child protection, recruiting and supporting foster carers and adoption. I thought that last night's programme was generally good. My last post was managing a team of social workers for the under fives which was based in a day nursery and we had several families whose difficulties were similar to those in the programme. I found these were some of the most difficult as one had to make a judgement as to whether they did not have the ability to improve the situation or did not have the willingness to try.
It brought to mind one single parent family where the mum had what we now call learning difficulties, but with a great deal of support from the nursery, which involved attendance five days a week and home visits, the children remained at home. If they can remain at home until school age then a whole lot of other support systems fall into place. I do not know if they remained at home as I left before they started school. It did not appear from the programme that there was this resource in Bristol which is a shame as I think a good many families were enabled to stay together through the day nursery. We also had Home Start provision which is now being cut back I understand.

As another ex-social worker, I am with Carol on this one.

The mother in this instance was not cruel, just not very good at being a parent - she had probably been poorly parented herself. And she clearly loved her children. What is needed is to provide her with the opportunity to learn to be a good parent, resulting in her keeping her child, the child not losing his parent, and the mother having some self-esteem returned to her.

This could be done either in a nursery or family centre, or indeed at home. She needs to watch someone doing it right and have it explained to her why it is right - what the child gains, and what she gains. And she needs someone alongside her, praising her when she gets it right - indeed "mothering" her. She needed support above all else.

What she got was a lot of meetings, which are based around middle class concepts of written plans and contracts and inevitably finish up with lots of jargon - not her style. She needed someone to get in there and roll their sleeves up and enter HER world and validate it (a bit of jargon!) and help her to be a good Mum in her own context - not drag her into ours and expect her to thrive.

I was concerned that the lad, after she had made the decision for him to be adopted, would in fact finish up in foster care long term - and the sort of merry-go-round of changing foster placements that tends to happen is very damaging. He is not necessarily an attractive prospect for adoption with his special needs. The baby girl will be snapped up by adopters.

The mother is very likely to be unable to resist the urge to replace her lost children fairly quickly and the whole cycle starts again. I have seen this so many times. Better to get in there now and improve this young lady's self-esteem and skills so that she can be a better mother. Expensive I know - but not when compared with long term fostering and picking up the pieces for further children that she might have.

I have not made mention of the father, who clearly had learning difficulties and removed himself from the scene. I am not surprised - the whole scenario must have felt very threatening to him. Of the two parents, the mother had greater potential for change I felt and she should have been offered the opportunity to move forward in a positive way.

The outcome for children in care in England is rarely good. A disproportionate percentage of prisoners, young offenders and prostitutes have been through the system. The rate for higher education is dismal. In Finland, the majority of children leaving care go on to further education.
I am glad it is a last resort, but surely the money spent on care homes would be much better spent on small family units where parents could be given practical help.
Can you imagine having your children adopted against your wishes? Working class mothers may not be able to articulate ther feelings, but they love their children just as much.

I have always regarded myself as a working class mother who can articulate her feelings - are you referring to a particular group of mothers, Greatnan?

Yes, the kind who are intimidated by authority, schools, doctors, police, the system - like my own mother was.

Mine, too - she never challenged anyone in authority in her life, and was landed with me, who never did anything else!

Yes,I think my bolshiness might come from seeing my mother being so bloody respectful to priests, doctors and teachers!

Sadly this is the reality of Social Work nowadays; defensive practice leading to a huge increase in the number of Care Proceedings. This has major implications for overstretched budgets and leaves neither the resources nor the space for Social Workers to do anything else. They are no longer able to experience the rewards of carrying out preventive work with families like the one shown in this programme and unfortunately those skills appear to have been lost.

It's so good to find some ex-social workers on here who understand how it used to be. Although things were far from perfect we were able to work alongside families and there was a genuine belief that Care Proceedings were the last resort and even a sign of failure.

I agree with everyone on here who has spoken about the types of support that would help families like this, but those resources don’t seem to exist any more, at least not in my authority. I would love someone to tell me they exist elsewhere. The tragedy, as others have pointed out, is that they are cost effective when compared to the enormous cost of Care Proceedings and the costs involved in keeping children in the care system and beyond. That doesn’t even begin to take account of the human cost to all concerned.

I too felt desperately sad for all those involved in the programme, but Toby was undoubtedly the biggest casualty. It seemed such a pity that his contact with his mum could not be maintained at least until an adoptive placement was found. I recently heard from a friend who works in adoption that there has been a significant drop in the number of prospective adopters coming forward; they believe due to the economic climate. Sadly this means that the situation can only get worse for children like Toby

I am in agreement with you in principle Carol about asylum seekers. But I would not want my granddaughter (if she was 16) to go to school and be in the same class as a 20 something year old man from a war torn state who had lied and said he was 16, so that he would not be deported. The staff were pretty sure this was the case. PE teachers are pretty good at telling the difference between 16 year olds and 20 year olds...
I think it is very unfair on foster parents too. We suspected that some kind hearted person was giving them this tip, ignoring the fact that it put vulnerable children at risk.
A difficult dilemma for those involved. Don't know what the answer is.

I know what you mean Jess. Interestingly, I spent a couple of hours with a young man (20) who had fled Afghanistan as a 17 year old (he had been sent to a hostel but needed moving to a more suitable one, so I volunteered to take him). His father had smuggled him into Pakistan for his own safety, after the taliban murdered his mother and siblings in front of him, and took their farm. From Pakistan he made it to the UK, and got a job with an uncle. He got into trouble when he started dating a 14 year old girl and her father argued with him, ended up in a fight and he was bailed pending court. This young man was very like a 14 year old in his manner, language, interests and choice of friends, despite the horrendous experience he had gone through. He was given a conditional discharge in the end, and enrolled in college to learn mechanics. Never claimed any benefits, but worked with his uncle who had a garage and was prepared to pay any college fees. I don't believe that many refugees and asylum seekers set out to exloit our system, but they do see this country as a land of freedom and opportunity.

JessM I am sure you are right that young asylum seekers are briefed and told what to say when they arrive in the UK. There is a huge trafficking system which exploits misery and often takes everything a family has left in order to get one individual to the UK. I have been asked to carry out 'age assessments' on several asylum seekers, and often hear them giving the same rehearsed responses to questions, with the same factual details. Although we often have doubts about their age we have to be absolutely convinced that they are over 18 before we can refuse services. Unfortunately they do not realise the implications of their claims, and I have had asylum seekers say they have been told they will be given a flat and money. They are often very shocked to find that they will actually be placed in foster care and most of the older ones most definitely do not want this. It also, as you rightly say, causes problems for foster carers and has safeguarding implications for other children in the same placement. I have come across asylum seekers desperate to leave foster care who will then say that they lied and are actually in their 20s. It is very difficult for Children's Services to just accept this without proof as they could be accused of not fulfilling their responsibilities. The young people often end up running away and becoming lost to all services, so not a good outcome. So while I agree with Carol that most asylum seekers do not set out to exploit the system they are themselves exploited and it is far from simple.