Jump to content
madme

Local Authority put child in care through 'back door'

Recommended Posts

Training of ASD is essential for social workers

But where do you draw the line - what is training? I've worked with teachers who have been 'trained' in autism (i.e. they've sat at the back of the room sipping cappuccino and texting on their mobile) and I've worked with teachers who haven't had 'the training' who have been interested and have read and asked questions and worked with the parents and sought outside help. Professionals are individuals, ASD pupils are individuals, 'looked after children' are individuals, ASD adults are individuals - I'm not sure it's helpful (although it's easy) to simply call for better training.

 

For my entire childhood, I knew a whole bunch of social workers as much as I knew my parents. I don't know what training they had or didn't have; some of them were great, some weren't, some were better with my brother, some with me, but I think that's as much to do with personalities as any training. In fact, generic training in ASD can potentially be more harmful, as what can be covered in a short time can promote stereotypes.

 

This may be a very unpopular position and I fully accept that my experiences will affect my views, but in child protection issues (and I'm not saying the reported case is that, I'm talking generally with SS) erring on the side of caution has to be preferable to some of the horrific things many children go through day after day, night after night.

 

 

Hey up, Mumbley...how's the view from the rack?

 

These stocks are starting to chafe a tad (after all, they are more BD-shaped than Bid-shaped :o;) )...might join you for a bit of a stretch! :devil:

Not so bad up here - I can see the attacks coming better and dodge the rotten tomatoes. My legs are getting a little sore though, but perhaps that means it's working. There's an ad on the telly for anti-chaffing cream at the mo; perhaps you could try that? :ph34r::devil:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cat, what I'm thinking here is that there is a need for parents to be 'reflective' as well as their child's advocate.

 

As you know, I've had my battles with my LEA and SS, but it does concern me that with any case like this one, there is an almost universal response from other parents that the parents involved must know what's best for their child.

 

I completely agree that there are some miscarriages of justice, but I also think it's very important that parents don't stop 'reflecting' and become overly single-minded in a negative way. There has to come a point, for example, where as a parent you need to reflect on things if every professional is saying one thing, and you are doggedly saying the opposite.

 

I also agree with the need for more training in ASDs, but again I agree with Mumble, it can't be realistic or indeed fair to expect generalists whether in education, health or SS to be fully trained in just one area of additional needs...why not dementia, CP, adult mental health, etc, etc?

 

Bid

 

Mumbley...it's OK, BD's nipped off for lunch, so I've got a bit more space now :devil: Can't scratch my nose though...

Edited by bid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a really difficult one.

From my own point of view I do think it is imposssible to expect professionals to be autistic specific. I shudder when I hear the words "autism course" in our staff room. Most are a complete waste of time, outdated and steroetypical. They also promote a false sense of "we know what we are doing now, weve been on a course!" amongst professionals.

Child care issues with social services always promote staying with parents as the first priority. I have been involved in cases that made me weep for the child but they still went home to Mum and Dad.

In this particular case I can see so much of my son in that little boy. I feel that the overriding concern of the local authority is money. Im astonished that court cost have risen so high. Perhaps they could refer themselves to the European Court of Human Rights.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry but I think that it really isn't too much to expect teachers to be interested in difficulties like ASd Adhd Dyspraxia and dyslexia. These are difficulties that are common and in my experience not at all understood by most of the mainstream teachers who I have come across. A friend who did her teacher training only a few years ago felt that the training was woefully inadequate but more worringly was the attitude of those on the course towards sen. I think that I may have been very unlucky. I too hate this trend of "over concerned" parent. My son's former Head Teacher suggested this when we were taking our son to weekly OT sessions for a year- implying that we had nothing better to do! I'm sure any good teacher will be interested but my own experience has been denial in the face of obvious other evidence from other professionals in both my children's cases. I will now run for fear of being shot!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not going to comment on this case I as I too don't know enough about it BUT let you tell you something that should make you think about whether those in the education/medical/social services should require further training on ASD and particularly those involved in Child Protection.

 

My son attended a school near me. I removed him due to a certain teacher calling him foul names, including 'tw*t'. I recently asked my solicitor to obtain his school records, before this his pead at EVERY meeting kept saying 'in all other respects he is healthy. Extremely healthy. The healthiest on my books'. I thought this strange and now I know why. On his records this teacher, and Child Protection Officer, had stated that the entire school staff where concerned with X being 'under nourished' and that his 'home environment was detrimental to his social and emotional needs'. Had his pead and his GP not been on his side, and mine, my son would have been removed from my care. This teacher didn't understand, nor wanted to, ASD and felt I was abusing my son and that's why he was the was he was. All this despite his SLT saying she felt he had ASD directly to them!

 

The problem is at times ASD children can mimic children in distress from abuse, well often they are being abused just by daily stress of being made to 'fit in'. Instead of understanding this because of lack of training the first thing that happens is the 'inadequate parents' are blamed. Then you have fight to clear your name and get a diagnoses whilst still trying to maintain a secure family home and routine for your child.

 

That's why training is required!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Teachers and other professionals have a duty of care to raise concerns about a child. While it must undoubtedly be devastating for parents where these concerns are unfounded, what would people have professionals do if they have concerns?

 

Bid

 

Edited 'cos I don't want to be shouted at again! :ph34r::lol:

Edited by bid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
While it must undoubtedly be devastating for parents where these concerns are unfounded
It's a little more than devastating!

 

No one is saying that 'professionals' shouldn't report children they have concerns about. What I am saying IF there was the proper training to recognise AS from abuse then malicious reporting would be cut...and I have heard of a fair few in the last few months.

 

As for the original posting...I have just asked one questions many of my LA regarding missing files and been 'warned off!' So yet again Big Brother gets away with doing as it pleases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So who pays for this? SS or LEA and is it 52wk. >:D<<'> Enid

 

It is term time (he used to come home every other weekend and holidays) and the LEA paid (now LSC do). SS refused to get involved. I argued that he needed a 24 hour curriculum for educational reasons (social, life and independence skills), not for respite reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's a little more than devastating!

 

No one is saying that 'professionals' shouldn't report children they have concerns about. What I am saying IF there was the proper training to recognise AS from abuse then malicious reporting would be cut...and I have heard of a fair few in the last few months.

 

As for the original posting...I have just asked one questions many of my LA regarding missing files and been 'warned off!' So yet again Big Brother gets away with doing as it pleases.

 

 

Totally undestanding your position, ive got misleading minuets from MAM and it takes ages to ensure the right proffessionals get the right story, especially hard when many of those proffessionals are trying to bar J from having a diagnosis.

 

I have some minuets from a early year MAM. goes like this,

 

collected at 12pm do an activity after dinner. if not in school effects routines. Evening Routines - NO Tea for either of them. Mum went without food on Monday Night, She said that J is a faddy eater has to change food, so eating late. wont eat same meals.

 

This could imply neglect, that im not sufficiantly giving J his needs, just because we didnt eat tea doesnt mean he went without food, what he had was his predicatble wheetabix, what he always has, what he would live on if given the chance, but hey we both had no tea on this minuets.

 

We ate, just not a meal but cereal and snacks. such as fruit and drinking milk and fruit juice but its not in the report.

 

So it is soo easy how things can get misinterpretted.

 

Another example, Js EX HT report J as having signs of physical abuse, I take him straight to Hospital because I too was concerned and the result was that he was defending himself from been punched, by children in the playground, in the HTs School, so he was been pshysically hurt, just not by me, but by other children and the HT should of ensured Js safety but he didnt, and denied him support because of funding, funding blumin funding fffffff.

 

It's these situations that can lead parents in a whole load of accusations, this EX HT was also responsible for not meeting my sons SENs and denying Js Special needs in the first place, EX HT also stated in a report I had a fine, a penalty for Unathorised Absences, this is not true, but it sticks and its a black dye that will not move, always giving a different assuption, J not had any Unauthorised Absences throw out his primary years.

 

I totally understand you Justamum.

 

JsMum

Edited by JsMum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I totally understand you Justamum.

 

There are just too many stories like ours aren't there.

 

So it is soo easy how things can get misinterpretted.

 

Too easy far too hard to get the muck removed, mud sticks!

 

And I often have cereal for tea/dinner when I have cooked for the children I starve :rolleyes: and I just don't fancy it. Nowt wrong with that.

 

Sigh I now have to obtain important medical information regarding my daughters hypermobility syndrome and low hearing all over again because that's what has been lost and of course my say so she has this is total and utter rubbish isn't it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see all the points raised here and respect them all. I think I can comment about parents knowing best as I have been on that fence for some time!

 

Problem is, with many parents and carers, there is a fundamental reason a parent will fight to the death in a majority of cases and that is that their child has been let down by the system somewhere. Now we are not talking about getting a level 1 SAT result instead of a 2, most people would know what I am talking about due to the amount of posts on forums like these from frantic parents desperate for advice after they have been shafted.

 

It's happened to me a few times over the past few years and it's a horrible feeling. I think parents become "damaged" the trust goes completely. I am sure lots of parents know that feeling. The gut wrenchingly sick feeling, the worry and the fear. It exists because of circumstances, it exists because there are professionals that fight in the opposite direction of the parents and it becomes tug of war. We see the damage that can be done to our children when there needs are not being met, and we live with it. So when these "professionals" tell us we are wrong, and they dismiss the very real concerns we have, and our children suffer because of it, we don't believe a word they say. To me it is that simple really. I think we become cynical. Do you think this conversation would even be taking place if the problem was not so widespread? At the end of the day, the parents know that there is only so much money in the pot. We ALL want "what's best" for our children and adequette does not come into it as far as we are concerned! Unfortunately adequette is all the law allows, but it some what contradicted by the flash policies at the local authorities.

 

So anyway, the upshot of it is, well certainly in MY case and as a "balanced view" of the system (as balanced as it can be) parents often say that their child won't or can't cope in certain situations. Now at the time that may well be either their belief or fact, but that does not mean they can't ever or won't cope. Just because a child has not managed in one mainstream school, it does not mean that with the RIGHT support they won't cope in another, and I am afraid to say MY children have taught me that. It took me a long time to realise that and my children are all doing well in a situation I did not think was possible at one point! I never put limitations on them now. It is, however, very difficult as a parent to accept anything less than fighting for what THEY consider being "best for their child" It is not so easy to see through the rose tinted glasses and be told that your child will have to be educated, looked after etc for a much lesser price tag than the option the parent has in mind. No parent wants to hear that whilst looking at the visions of the future of what MIGHT be!! The solution is to ensure that these children DO get the care they need and the parents get the support they need more often, to prevent the damage being done in the first place and true "choice" is offered like it is for NT children!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those who are newer members here...maybe I should clarify that when my son was pre-AS dx at 6 his then HT told me I was the cause of all his difficulties because I had remarried and had a new baby (turned down for Stat Ass)...then when he was dx'd with AS and ADHD at 7 in addition to the original dx at 5 of dyspraxia my newborn baby and her toddler sister were the subject of an on-going risk assessment by SS because of his 'challenging' behaviour (turned down again for Stat Ass).

 

He had a complete breakdown and came out of mainstream when he was 14. I fought and got him a Statement and a place in a residesi AS specific school in 6 months, start to finish.

 

These are just the bare details, never mind the crisis situation we are in at the moment which I have chosen not to discuss on the forum...so I do know what it's like to have SWs breathing down my neck, I do know what it's like to fight 'the system'...

 

But I still hold by everything I've said in this thread.

 

Bid :)

Edited by bid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a bit confused still by this 'training' thing - surely anyone who's been trained for three years to DIPSWA level qualifies as 'trained'?

 

As for "autism specific"... there are a certain breed of parents (not necessarily parents of AS children - you see exactly the same attitudes in parents of NT kids at the school gates, who will claim if you ask them to stop their child from hitting your child with a length of four-by-two that your child 'started it, by looking at my boy funny' or some such) who are always going to find some loop hole to justify their own behaviour and undermine any degree of expertise that a professional (teacher, doctor, ed psych, paediatrician, social worker) might reference...

 

A few scripts:

 

S(ocial) W(orker) : Hmmm, do you think possibly...

M(rs) R(ottweiler) : No I don't. Have you got kids? Have you? Eh? No? Then what do you know - nuffin!

(assuming SW says "Yes")

M R : And does he have Autism? Eh? No? Then what do you know - nuffin!

 

or:

 

M R: Have you been trained?

SW: Well yes, I spent three years getting my DIPSWA..

MR: Ahhh, but was that autism specific?

SW: Well, no, it's a general qualification but -

MR: See - What do you know - nuffin!

SW: But before that I worked for ten years as a carer, working exclusively with autistic people

MR: Oh - so you wiped a***s in a care home and you think that makes you an expert in autism - what do you know - nuffin!

SW: Well actually, I was the head of care...

MR: Oh - well there you go, head of care, see - that's just an accountant isn't it? What do you know - nuffin!

And so it goes on......

 

Of course, it's possible that the Social Worker does have a child with autism... would that burst Mrs R's bubble even slightly? No - she just pulls out the big guns:

Big Gun 1 - Well you should know more than anyone that NO TWO AUTISTIC CHILDREN ARE THE SAME, so there is not a single, solitary thing you could say that could have even the slightest bearing or relevence to MY situation, of which you know NUFFIN!

Big Gun 2 - Well I'M HIS MUM SO I KNOW....................................

 

Now, I'm sure the forum is a completely rottweiler-free zone - but they do exist, and there is no training course on the planet that would make a blind bit of difference if the Doctor/Teacher/Social Worker was telling them the opposite of what they wanted to hear.

 

Hands up anyone who hasn't crossed swords with an NT parent 'Mrs Rottweiler'...

 

--------------

 

Now going back ON topic -

One aspect of this that is really disturbing is the implication of the legal bill that taking action against the LEA/Tribunal could lead to. That really should be at the forefront of any human rights/disability rights lobbying. That said, if legal aid was automatic in such cases, then they would always end up in court regardless of the strengths or weaknesses of any particular dispute. I dunno what the answer would be there, but I think the need for a totally independent monitoring system would be a must. As things stand, the LEA's seem to be getting more and more control of the whole shebbang, and that can't be good for any of us.

 

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a fascinating thread, and I agree with so much of what different people are saying, and it is important that it is discussed, by as many as possible.

 

Just to add briefly to baddad's MR and SW dialogue, one of the consequences, which is regrettable and very human, is that sometimes compassion fatigue sets in on the part of the professional.

You get tired of being dismissed, personally attacked and accused, whatever you do won't be right and will be seized on...so you do less and less. The child falls through the gaps created by a parent with a hostile and threatening approach and a professional who can fill every minute with the needs of three or four other children with 'nicer' parents who will appreciate the attempt and the willingness to do something.

I'm not justifying this, but it happens.

 

And it happens with children with a range of needs, from plain learning difficulties ' Ah bless, he's a happy little soul' to those parents who feel their child is gifted and the teacher isn't recognising it to their satisfaction.

NT as well as ASD.

 

And Js mum makes a very good point about misinterpretation of signs by others and how that can lead to misunderstandings, but I've also had abused and neglected children in my class that I've brought to the attention of the SWs, and on several occasions it was true abuse and on others the family needed support and input to help them solve the problems.

And on a couple of occasions, I was wrong, but I can live with that. Because the others are alive and thriving.

 

Edited to add : If the rack and the stocks are full, I guess I'm in the pillory.

And witches float Mumble, that's one of the tests!

Edited by Bard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Baddad do you apply this 'no need to be specifically trained' rule to teachers as well as social workers? Most teachers these days have a degree which they have converted into a teaching qualification by taking the Postgraduate Certificate needed to be a teacher. Teachers are to this day given very little training re SEN even though the National Autism Plan strongly recommended that training should be mandatory to enable teachers to have a good understanding of autism - not leaving other SENs out on purpose here but training is at the very root of the National Autism Plan for Children. Is having a teaching qualification enough for most teachers? I would suggest not otherwise why would we have Autism Outreach Teams in most LAs now.

 

In 2002 my better half (much less mouthy than myself) sat round a table with a guy called Lord Filkin (who was at the time the Minister with responsibility for SEN) along with the National Autistic Society and Pace (Now Tree House) They were there to bring to Lord Filkin's attention the need for Social Workers to have 'some' training in autism if they were to be given a case load or making a visit to a family who live with autism. The reason for the meeting was partly down to a lady who almost lost her children to SS because they were not trained and had no understanding of autism, and because my group along with the NAS and Pace were very concerned by the volume of parents who were contacting them/us who were being dealt with by people from SS who had no understanding of autism. Their apparent lack of understanding was leading to parents being put under the spotlight for abusing their children - emotionally and in some cases physically. We were not there because of isolated cases we were there because it was a problem that was growing. Having spoken to someone from the NAS today they still believe that training for SS and their social workers re autism is something that is urgently required.

 

Today we have integrated Children's Services which was meant to make it easier for parents to have unified provision and enable providers to share information with each other, stopping parents from having to repeat everything six times. What is happening in some cases (and again it is growing) is that un-trained teachers or worse still teachers who do not accept that a child with a diagnosis of autism actually has the condition, are passing their concerns to un-trained people in SS who are then coming at parents with allegations that the emotional well-being of the child being put at risk by the parents. This is usually as a direct result of a parent pressing for provision for their child in school. It matters not if after their investigations a parent is cleared, the ramifications of such an investigation are something that parents never forget resulting in them living a life of fear.

 

Let us not forget that The Children?s Commissioner Sir Al Aynsley Green said only last year that the educational system for children with autism was not 'fit for purpose' and that also the National Union of Teachers commissioned a report which stated that for some children with SEN sitting in classrooms with untrained teachers was for some children a form of abuse. If the parents are at risk of abusing their kids then so is the system. Two rights do not make a wrong but a little knowledge is a very dangerous thing and autism is such a complex disability that there should be at the very least, in my opinion, someone within every SS team dealing with families who have autistic children, who is qualified to make a difficult call should the need arise.

Edited by Cat
Hi cat. I've deleted the specific reference to a named third party in line with forum rules and guidelines

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i have seen plenty of parents who are starving, abusing and neglecting their children who swear that they know what is best for their child.

 

i also find the assumption that social workers dont have the interest in their job to go and look up what autism is about rather insulting. being a social worker for children is one of the worst jobs i've come across, its wages aren't great and the hours are terrible. these people have a genuine desire to help children and have to deal with the nightmare of having to return children to unsafe homes because the courts actually favour the parents and will always keep a family together if there is any chance of it working out. (and i've experienced that one first hand)

 

i can think of things that are far worse than someone checking you're able to give your child the care it needs, and then leaving. i find it reassuring that people actually care enough to report their concerns. in the room next to me are two children who went to school for 3 years without clean clothes or food. the teachers gave them extra free lunches because they knew something was wrong, but never reported it. it took a serious incident and police involvement before those children were taken into care, and that has to be the real thing to be worried about!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The link is interesting - sections 11-14 give most of the details.

 

Basically the Tribunal felt that the LEA could meet the child's needs by the special school and the home (which is on the same site as the school), but as the parent's refused to allow their child to attend the home, the Tribunal believed that naming the special school in Part 4 would in essence mean the child's needs would not be met. So they named the parent's choice of school.

 

The appeal by the LEA was that the Tribunal should have named the special school anyway. You can see why they appealed, as the former decision would set a precedent for parents to get the school they wanted by refusing to comply with decisions they disagreed with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Baddad do you apply this 'no need to be specifically trained' rule to teachers as well as social workers? I would suggest not otherwise why would we have Autism Outreach Teams in most LAs now.

 

I don't remember saying social workers or teachers shouldn't be specifically trained - I was just making the point that for some no degree of training is ever going to be enough when they find themselves in opposition with a professional who disagrees with their 'Mother's Instincts'... Do you think mothers who do abuse their kids say 'It's a fair cop, guvnor' when evidence proving neglect etc does come to light? They would still maintain, quite vehemently, that they have done nothing wrong, or that if they did it was someone elses fault, or that the evidence against them is contrived or misinterpreted. I'm all for teachers/social workers the WHOLE PLANET being educated and 'trained' in the whole gamut of disability issues, but that's got to be within a framework where the needs of all pupils are looked at equally, not one that just shifts the boundaries on who gets disenfranchised. Why do we have autism outreach in most LA's? Erm... to train, advise and educate the staff working within that LA! How can you invert that positive and turn it into a negative?

 

Their apparent lack of understanding was leading to parents being put under the spotlight for abusing their children - emotionally and in some cases physically. We were not there because of isolated cases we were there because it was a problem that was growing. Having spoken to someone from the NAS today they still believe that training for SS and their social workers re autism is something that is urgently required.

 

The NAS are a lobby group for autistic people - of course they are going to lobby for more understanding and training. If they ever reach the point of saying 'well, our work here is done' they're all going to be out of jobs! Diagnosis of autism have increased massively in the past couple of decades... given that official statistics suggest 1 in 8 children are victims of abuse in one form or another, and the additional statistic that this 'average' percentage rises dramatically within the disabled population it would be worrying is caseloads weren't rising - that would imply that abused disabled children were being overlooked by the system.

 

Today we have integrated Children's Services which was meant to make it easier for parents to have unified provision and enable providers to share information with each other, stopping parents from having to repeat everything six times. What is happening in some cases (and again it is growing) is that un-trained teachers or worse still teachers who do not accept that a child with a diagnosis of autism actually has the condition, are passing their concerns to un-trained people in SS who are then coming at parents with allegations that the emotional well-being of the child being put at risk by the parents. This is usually as a direct result of a parent pressing for provision for their child in school. It matters not if after their investigations a parent is cleared, the ramifications of such an investigation are something that parents never forget resulting in them living a life of fear.

 

Who's definition of untrained are we using? I'm still not sure that there are huge numbers of Social Workers out there that haven't completed their formal training. Sorry cat - you seem to see social workers as the modern day equivalent of the Child Catcher from Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, and while I accept that there are good and bad social workers, I really haven't seen any evidence to suggest that there are large numbers of them just waiting for the opportunity to break up families for the sake of it, or to suggest that the monitoring of their actions is so lax it enables them to do so

 

Let us not forget that The Children?s Commissioner Sir Al Aynsley Green said only last year that the educational system for children with autism was not 'fit for purpose' and that also the National Union of Teachers commissioned a report which stated that for some children with SEN sitting in classrooms with untrained teachers was for some children a form of abuse. If the parents are at risk of abusing their kids then so is the system. Two rights do not make a wrong but a little knowledge is a very dangerous thing and autism is such a complex disability that there should be at the very least, in my opinion, someone within every SS team dealing with families who have autistic children, who is qualified to make a difficult call should the need arise.

 

Totally agree with all of that, but if there was (and in many CDT teams i'm sure there are) individuals who could make those difficult calls, do you think those 'calls' would be accepted by the people being investigated?

 

 

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BD it's late and my brain is already scrambled so I will be brief- can I just say that one of my very best friends is a social worker for whom I have the greatest respect. I am not on a one woman crusade against social workers. I know that they can very often be in a no win situations. For the record I would like to make it clear that I certainly do not see social workers as modern day child catchers and am quite shocked it my posts have implied this. I do maintain that social workers need accredited training to assist them in a very difficult job.

 

Cat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Totally agree with all of that, but if there was (and in many CDT teams i'm sure there are) individuals who could make those difficult calls, do you think those 'calls' would be accepted by the people being investigated?

 

Many parents are too put off ringing SS in fear they will be blamed or branned there abusing,

 

some cases of child abuse may actually arise because support wasnt given because of the parents fears, until those fears became a reality because support/services couldnt be made available simply because they where too scared to ask, seek help.

 

asking for help from services what ever that be, CDT/SS/Duty officer is a massive forward step for many families, but what if the assessments points the blame on the parent when its clear the child has specail needs and the effects of that which is effecting the family, what if the parent cant change that opinion and then the child is taken away, from a home that is struggling and not coping?

 

for a child to be taken off parents where there is no abuse could be regaurded just as traumatised because of the seperation, the child would fear that someone is going to take them away again,

 

bard I cant believe you can just calmly say I can take it getting it wrong because the ones I get it right are well, but taking a child away from a mum/dad when later is prooved the teacher was wrong in her concerns will be emensly traumatic for the child, it must be hard to know when to report abuse and when not to, but even if you get it wrong it will have a massive effect on the family and how are parents ment to trust teachers if they are accusing them of abuse.

 

Many parents do ask for help from SS too or referred and get the great ring a ring a roses, merry go round, and at the end of the rainbow the pots absaloutly dry.

 

JsMum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BD it's late and my brain is already scrambled so I will be brief- can I just say that one of my very best friends is a social worker for whom I have the greatest respect. I am not on a one woman crusade against social workers. I know that they can very often be in a no win situations. For the record I would like to make it clear that I certainly do not see social workers as modern day child catchers and am quite shocked it my posts have implied this. I do maintain that social workers need accredited training to assist them in a very difficult job.

 

Cat

 

 

One of the main reasons why your friend will be very restrianed in her job is the lack of funding, I bet she wants to give support and other services but cant because the manager said No Funding!!!

 

I totally knew you wasnt getting at social workers, there is some fantasitc Social workers who after getting a reality check emigrate to countrys that actually want to help families, and then your absoultly lousy snail aproach functioning social workers, like teachers there is good and there is the bad. that can be said for parents but not our little darlings, there just cheeky like they should be.

 

JsMum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bard I cant believe you can just calmly say I can take it getting it wrong because the ones I get it right are well, but taking a child away from a mum/dad when later is prooved the teacher was wrong in her concerns will be emensly traumatic for the child, it must be hard to know when to report abuse and when not to, but even if you get it wrong it will have a massive effect on the family and how are parents ment to trust teachers if they are accusing them of abuse.

 

All I have ever done is my job, raised questions about why a child is exhibiting signs of distress or abuse. I have never accused any parent of abuse, that is not my role.

Nor would a child be removed from their parent/s on my word alone.

 

How can it be wrong to spot a vulnerable child in distress and not ask for further investigations to be made to find out why the behaviour is occurring and what can be done to help the child?

 

How can teachers trust parents if a child who is soiling in their class turns out not to have a bowel problem, but to have found the one way to keep his father at a distance? Or to have a child that I thought might have an infectious disease turned out to have infected cigarette burns along the edges of his feet? Or the child with malnutrition because his mentally ill mother thought that most food had germs in it, so was feeding him on milk. Only milk. Skimmed.

If no one ever asks, then children die.

 

PS I've been thinking about this for a bit, and I'm sure. The only thing that I really regret are those children that are being mistreated by adults, either through ignorance or intent, that I must pass every day, or speak to and I don't know what they are going through. The ones that we miss because their parents are either unnoticed or too slick at manipulating the system and the professionals that they come into contact with, who get away with it. The ones responsible for the thousands of cases every year where children are harmed and no one knew or did anything until afterwards, and that is truly traumatic for those involved.

I'm sorry that I gave the impression of being calm about it. I'm not.

Edited by Bard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bard I cant believe you can just calmly say I can take it getting it wrong because the ones I get it right are well, but taking a child away from a mum/dad when later is prooved the teacher was wrong in her concerns will be emensly traumatic for the child, it must be hard to know when to report abuse and when not to, but even if you get it wrong it will have a massive effect on the family and how are parents ment to trust teachers if they are accusing them of abuse.

 

J's Mum, every professional who works with children has a duty of care to report any concerns about that child's behaviour or physical/emotional condition. I have reported to my seniors when I have been concerned. What would you have professionals do when we see the kinds of things Bard describes above??

 

What would you do if a teenager with ASD and SLD told you dad got in bed and laid on top of her?

 

What would you do if another teenager with MLD was upset because on a weekend home visit, parent had shoplifted something? Incidentally, this was a 'looked after' child.

 

What would you do if parents weren't giving their child their epilepsy medication?

 

And from my DH...what would you do when a parent tells you to hit her child if they misbehave?

 

Or the siblings who had no Christmas because they had been 'bad', so were shut in their room all day with no presents, no Christmas dinner?

 

These are all parents who I have no doubt would swear that they 'know what's best' for their child :(

 

 

Thank you Bard for sharing just some of your experiences of that duty of care, that can't have been easy at all :(>:D<<'>

 

Bid :(

Edited by bid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well this is where COMMUNICATION comes into it. If you believe a child is exhibiting signs of abuse, but are NOT entirely sure because there are no cigarette burns etc, you speak to the parents and tentatively ask questions around your suspicions. How else are you going to know if soiling is due to bowel problems or something else. A genuine parent will seek medical help for the former and concerned about the later!

 

Of course it's right to raise concerns if you believe a child is being abused, but you/someone needs to recognise abuse from medical issues and not just go head long into abuse allegations. Obviously if there is a clear case of abuse then that's different.

 

I worked in a council run nursery and once the children were dropped off and the parents gone our first duty was to 'change' the children into the clothes the nursery had..in other words strip and look for bruising. You then became suspicious of every parent at the nursery and the poorer they were the more you looked for bruises...digusting state of affairs but this was 'Council Policy and Nursery rules for staff'. Yes there were one or two that had bruises and the parents questioned but none were abused and one of the children turned to have a mobility problem but still had to run the SS reporting for child abuse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will start this by saying that I have absolutely no clue about the case in the OP.

 

However, a few things have been brought up within the thread that I would like to give my opinion on.

 

Unqualified Social Workers.

 

Yes, there is such a thing. However, they are usually people who are trained to at least a level 4 (First year undergraduate degree, or NVQ4 managerial level), but do not have a 'social work degree'.

My local authority is currenty advertising for what they are labelling 'Unqualified Care Managers'. These people will have to

responsibilitiesLevel 1

Role Purpose:

To assess, social care needs of individuals, relatives and carers within a specific care group under supervision and in accordance with agreed competencies, quality standards and Departmental standards of good practice in relation to case and risk management.

 

To arrange, or purchase appropriate services/care under supervision within the Departments agreed priorities and resource framework to reflect best value principals and as agreed by resource panel or with relevant supervisor.

 

To carry out direct work with service users/carers as agreed/required by supervisor.

 

To work in partnership with users, carers, relatives and make appropriate referral to other agencies, to ensure individuals needs are met.

 

Level 2

Role Purpose:

To assess, monitor and review social care needs of individuals, relatives and carers within a specific care group in accordance with agreed competencies, quality standards and professional good practice in relation to case and risk management.

 

To arrange, provide or purchase appropriate services/care within the Departments agreed priorities and resource framework to reflect best value principals and to comply with legislation and statutory duties.

 

To carry out direct work with service users/carers.

 

To work in partnership with users, carers, relatives and other agencies, to identify current and future service requirements and contribute to service development within the care group and scope of the role.

 

Training for all teachers/social workers gp's in ASD etc.

 

Whilst, in principal, it would be brilliant to have everybody trained in the disability that my son has, what about all the others? I would also like to say that if that is impossible, then I would like 1 or 2 people to be fully trained in them. But then, if that is impossible, then how about the ability for people to contact those that DO know about these disabilities, the experts in these fields. But then you come down to the bare crutch of the matter. This is possible, but it's people's attitudes that are the problem. And not just for ASDs. If you go on any forum for any disability, I bet they are all saying the same/similar things. "I wish there was more information.", "I wish there was more help", "I wish more people knew about this disability", "They don't understand", "I feel alone", "Why isn't there more training"....I could go on and on and on, but I think you get the picture.

 

I very much take the stance that not everyone knows everything about everything.

 

I have been on the receiving end of abuse reports against L. I have fully supported the school in referring on their concerns to the relevant people. I have fully supported social services and the police in acting on the reports that they were given. Because, I know that I have done nothing wrong, but more than that, I know that they have the best interests of my child - any child at heart. If for every 20 people wrongly accused, there is 1 child that is protected in some way, then I feel that well outweighs they feelings of those other 20 people. As heartbreaking as it is to be wrongly accused, I would much rather know that SS/police/schools/GPs/neighbours etc are all looking out for all children. Yes, I understand that there are a few that are wrongly accused, and the case has gone 'all the way', but thankfully that is very rare, and only goes to prove how effective our system can be.

 

Maybe I am blinkered in that Social Services were key in stopping something really bad when I was a kid, and when I was a teenager, I was put into emergency foster care for 2 weeks after I done something really stupid. Both times, they were looking out for me (and my siblings), and not looking after the welfare of the adults around me. But I do really feel that SS/teachers/gps/police all get a really rough ride when it comes to care of children. They are doing a very good job with the resources and understaffing that they have.

 

Fi xx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you believe a child is exhibiting signs of abuse, but are NOT entirely sure because there are no cigarette burns etc, you speak to the parents and tentatively ask questions around your suspicions.

 

But then if you 'question' the parents around your suspicions, then you may be letting on to a potential abuser that you are 'on to' them. This in turn could cause more problems for the child. The guidelines around these situations are very clear and are there for very good reasons. I have given my views on them on my post above, so won't reiterate them again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I do really feel that SS/teachers/gps/police all get a really rough ride when it comes to care of children. They are doing a very good job with the resources and understaffing that they have.

 

:notworthy::thumbs:

 

Bid :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well this is where COMMUNICATION comes into it. If you believe a child is exhibiting signs of abuse, but are NOT entirely sure because there are no cigarette burns etc, you speak to the parents and tentatively ask questions around your suspicions.

 

You can't just start talking to the parents in an ad hoc way...you have to follow very clear guidelines and procedures to safeguard everyone involved.

 

Bid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My view on the whole thing is that if there isn't cause for concern then there's nothing for the parent to worry about. I'm not saying I'd be delighted about it, but if anyone felt the need to send SS round to my house then the door is open, they are more than welcome because I've got nothing to hide.

 

That being said, I've never had SS at my door, but when I was at the top of my fight with the LEA, the overwhelming evidence we had that there was an educational need for an extended/residential curriculum rendered the LEA with no where else to go than to concede or turn the guns on me. They chose to turn the guns on me one week before the tribunal (although there had been rumblings of this for a couple of months). Because I had nothing to hide the panel saw right through this ploy and disregarded the extra evidence submitted by the LEA one week before the hearing.

 

Basically what I am saying is yes sometimes concerns are raised against the parents to hide the ineptitudes of professionals, but if that is the case then they aren't going to get very far and while it's irritating to the parent they should be able to deflect and alleviate any concerns. But on the other hand, as others have pointed out, if there is a genuine concern by any professional regarding the home situation of any child, then they are bound by a duty of care to raise these concerns. I don't have a problem with that either.

 

Flora

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just on the issue of experts on autism my own recent experiences have left me decidedly bitter. The one organisation that presents themselves as having a wealth of experience and knowledge have let us down so badly I am in total despair. The National Autistic Society have abandoned us after deciding my adult sons behaviour was too autistic. We were just cut loose with no further help, contact or outreach.....nothing. So much for experts.

(sorry, feeling very, very bitter)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi J's mum/all -

 

J's mum - Please accept that I'm not trying to 'challenge' you in anyway or cause upset. I'm just really confused about some of the content of your last two posts which seem self-contradictory, and i really would like to understand your point of view because I do emphatically believe that the continual demonisation of the only support services available to people - whether within medical, educational or social service sectors, is causing immeasurable damage. I believe that for our children - any child - to flourish, there has to be dialogue, trust and communication between all of those providing for their care, and that those three things provide the basis for individual (holistic) understanding and consideration that far outweighs the benefits of any 'disability specific' training, which - as mumble pointed out earlier in the thread - tends to concentrate on stereotypes and existing prejudices/value judgements rather than looking at individual need. Within that process, mutual compromise has to be a key factor... taking those points individually:

 

Many parents are too put off ringing SS in fear they will be blamed or branned there abusing,

 

some cases of child abuse may actually arise because support wasnt given because of the parents fears, until those fears became a reality because support/services couldnt be made available simply because they where too scared to ask, seek help.

 

I totally agree, but cannot for the life of me see how perpetuating the myth of untrained/unqualified Social Workers hellbent on stealing children from their parents is going to improve the situation(?). This very thread started with exactly such an implication (and I know that the original text used as a header was taken from a generally circulated, 'heads up', because I received it from the Kent Autistic Trust e-mail system, so i know the original post was made in 'good faith'), which has been, fairly conclusively, shown to be little more than scare-mongering and exaggeration. The boy concerned is already in 52 wk per year care at the parent's request - it's just care with a different 'name' attached...

 

asking for help from services what ever that be, CDT/SS/Duty officer is a massive forward step for many families, but what if the assessments points the blame on the parent when its clear the child has specail needs and the effects of that which is effecting the family

 

If it is clear that the child's special needs are creating the family difficulties, why would the professional point the blame at the parents? Again, the underlying implication is that the professional is wilfully disregarding the evidence presented to them to meet their own agenda of baby-snatching. Additionally, it may be 'clear' to the parent that the disability is the cause of all the problems, but that doesn't necessarily mean the parent is right. It may be equally 'clear' to others that the parents responses to the condition are actually making the dynamic worse, and that intervention on some level (including enforced care in extreme cases) is an absolute necessity.

 

, what if the parent cant change that opinion and then the child is taken away, from a home that is struggling and not coping?

 

If the family is struggling and not coping then intervention of some sort is absolutely indicated. If the child is considered at risk in the home environment then the imperative must be to protect the child.

 

totally knew you wasnt getting at social workers, there is some fantasitc Social workers who after getting a reality check emigrate to countrys that actually want to help families, and then your absoultly lousy snail aproach functioning social workers, like teachers there is good and there is the bad.

 

So the good social workers leave the country, leaving just the absolutely lousy, snail paced ones?

Can you tell me which country they've emigrated to? I'll emigrate too! Our social welfare system is very, VERY flawed, but there are few places that have better ones. Sadly, the place the whole world tends to look to for the 'lead' in this kind of thing generally provides the worst examples of social care given the resources and means available to it.

 

 

that can be said for parents but not our little darlings, there just cheeky like they should be.

 

I'm sorry, I do not accept that children are just 'cheeky little darlings' as nature intended. Children, just like adults, are the sum of their experiences (nurture) and (probably/arguably) a product of their genetic make-up (nature), and are just as capable of the whole gamut of human behaviour those two things provide. I do not believe that 8, 9, 10 year olds who systematically abuse other children or roam in gangs verbally abusing the weak and vulnerable are being 'cheeky little darlings', or does that assessment only apply to disabled children? If the latter, the implications are terrifying, because it denies them the fundamental characteristics that define human behaviour.

 

Quick aside before my final point:

 

Justamum:If you believe a child is exhibiting signs of abuse, but are NOT entirely sure because there are no cigarette burns etc, you speak to the parents and tentatively ask questions around your suspicions. How else are you going to know if soiling is due to bowel problems or something else. A genuine parent will seek medical help for the former and concerned about the later!

 

Justamum, do you genuinely believe that a parent who is systematically abusing their child, if approached, won't demonstrate concern or try to pass off abusive injuries as accidental ones and have them treated? Do you think that abused children aren't 'coached' in concealment and terrorised into collusion? An abused child will fear losing his/her parents as much as a non-abused child - Probably more so, because to enforce that collusion they will have probably been told in graphic detail of the consequences for them should they 'slip up'...

 

Finally :

 

Many parents do ask for help from SS too or referred and get the great ring a ring a roses, merry go round, and at the end of the rainbow the pots absaloutly dry.

 

On this I totally agree with you - resources are woefully inadequate. However, if people stop asking there is no barometer for just how woefully inadequate those services are. Perpetuatiung the idea that even asking is likely to result in dire consequences for parent and child is hardly likely to improve the reporting of needs, or to facilitate improved provision.

 

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Justamum, do you genuinely believe that a parent who is systematically abusing their child, if approached, won't demonstrate concern or try to pass off abusive injuries as accidental ones and have them treated? Do you think that abused children aren't 'coached' in concealment and terrorised into collusion? An abused child will fear losing his/her parents as much as a non-abused child - Probably more so, because to enforce that collusion they will have probably been told in graphic detail of the consequences for them should they 'slip up'...

 

Sigh I am just not bothering doing a full answer to this. When you have removed your teacher's hat and actually listen to what is being said by myself and others I may

 

We aren't all dumb, child abusing parents. Some of us can actually think for ourselves with 'professionals' telling us what to do!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am assuming that CDT means Children with Disabilities Team? If we all came under that team that would be brilliant news. However there are some Local Authorities where children with AS and HFA are NOT included in the remit of this team and come under the umbrella of other teams not specifically there to be dealing with Children with Disabilities.

 

Cat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sigh I am just not bothering doing a full answer to this. When you have removed your teacher's hat and actually listen to what is being said by myself and others I may

 

We aren't all dumb, child abusing parents. Some of us can actually think for ourselves with 'professionals' telling us what to do!

 

That's a bit unfair :(

 

BD took time to post a considered, thoughtful comment...no need for this sort of reply :(

 

Bid :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am assuming that CDT means Children with Disabilities Team? If we all came under that team that would be brilliant news. However there are some Local Authorities where children with AS and HFA are NOT included in the remit of this team and come under the umbrella of other teams not specifically there to be dealing with Children with Disabilities.

 

Cat

 

That's a very good point, Cat!

 

Bid :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sigh I am just not bothering doing a full answer to this. When you have removed your teacher's hat and actually listen to what is being said by myself and others I may

 

We aren't all dumb, child abusing parents. Some of us can actually think for ourselves with 'professionals' telling us what to do!

 

Hi just a mum. I'm not a teacher, but I did actually listen (read) what you said - which is why I took the time to quote those parts which seemed self-contradictory and ask for further elaboration.

I don't think you or anyone else on the forum is a 'dumb child abusing parent' - I don't know you from Eve, so couldn't possibly know.

 

Some of us can actually think for ourselves with 'professionals' telling us what to do!

 

Absolutely - but some, quite evidently given the statistics on abuse, can't, and no matter how inconvenient that truth is for you it's the reason why some people need support and guidance. My mum used to say - 'Do you know what thought did? Thought wrong', when I misunderstood something and offered 'but I thought...' as an explanation for it... She was a daft old bat most of the time, but ocassionally got it right ;) I also think that regardless of how much any individual may or may not know we are all capable of learning something new and/or of making mistakes. I can't think of anyone else better to turn to for advice in those circumstances than a professional... as Cat pointed out, you don't ask a plumber for advice on your elecricity circuits.

 

CAT - totally agree again - every county should have a CDT team, and diagnoses of Autism/Aspergers should be recognised. Apologies for the generalisation.

 

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you believe a child is exhibiting signs of abuse, but are NOT entirely sure because there are no cigarette burns etc, you speak to the parents and tentatively ask questions around your suspicions.

Allowing a parent, who has got away with abuse for years, to take a sword to their child and attempt to kill them in rage at having been 'found out'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can I say for one J isnt antisocially misbehaving, (yet) but he is very cheeky, I love this bit of his personality, he is a kid, I let him be a kid, if he acted like he does now at 30 then yes I would draw the line and get him to BEHAVE, sometimes kids arent actually allowed to be KIDS.!!!!

 

I think from the original post it was susgesting that basically to get childrens rights/services now the LEA are going to try and place them in care because its cheaper, rather than pay the extra thousands it costs in a residential specialist school, the parents in this story had one fundamental right taken off them, a CHOICE, it wasnt there CHOICE to send their child to a childrens home and then a different specail school, its wasnt their CHOICE that their child be placed in Care, LAC, it was well if you want respite its A Childrens home, as this is the reason the Specailist special school was turned down.

 

It should be about choice, and an individual need, J wouldnt be in the childrens home this boy has gone to as his needs are not severe, if I was given this option he would be in a regular childrens home, no special needs provisions or anything particular to his needs, when J has been fostered throw choice and as respite it was with regular foster carers, all failed because they didnt understand his specail needs, his needs where unmet and it failed.

 

J doesnt come under the CDT so cant access the BANARDOS who do pair up families with children with Disabilites, but J doesnt meet the citeria for CDT even if he had a diagnosis of HFA/ASD as they are not classed as a criteria though there discription on the NAS for this service does state HFA so how can they support children with HFA/ASD if the CDT dont acept children with this diagnosis.

 

I have already got written reports from the LEA where they are trying to make me look like Im a struggling mother, inadequate even, which deeply upsets me as Ive tried sooo hard with parenting J positively so it is a proper kick in the teeth, these people dont have it like I do, no family for respite, coping with a child is soo challenging, he is described by the proffessionals as Complex Needs, but its funny how I dont get the complex services to help us.

 

Even when we were given priority care the staff didnt even know what ADHD and ASD were, once a lady said to J that isnt a lot is it too eat, he placed down his folk and walked away, leaving what was on the plate, another accasion was J was displaying challenging behaviour and she said, boy if that was my lad!!

 

It kind of leaves you feeling judged and lacking in trust of those who are supose to help, instead they hindered, his behaviour then esculated because he didnt feel safe anymore.

 

The only workers were it was a bit more successful was when they read up themselves what ADHD/ASDs where, that things did improve until the service providers decided that this service would no longer support families and it was weaned off and now the service is done throw banardoes, a service we dont meet the criteria.

 

Js already experienced foster care Respite and it has had a profound effect on his emotional and mental health, in his report it has said that by been in respite it has contributed to emotional difficulties.

 

As J has been in the system of SS it could be very possible for the LEA to turn his situation into a abuse case, though i defo have not harmed or neglected him some of the reports could be misinturpretted as soo, I didnt have that many on my side at one point especially the EX HT his Class TA at the time and the only supporting person I had was Js GP, cardioligist, it could be very easy for some proffessionals to colude information to make a case more credable.

 

My case could be very easily portray abuse, thats how easy it could be, all so that the LEA could place my own child in care just to save money, thankfully I have core assessments, reports that shows Ive not abused/neglected my son but fighted like crazy to get his rights met.

 

If the LEA get the right proffessionals on board it could be easy for some cases to be brought forward for care proceedings, when its really not abuse/neglect cases. but to save money, so a child like my son could be in care in regular childrens homes, foster care all because they want to save money, when what a child like mine really needs is a specialist special school of which the LEA are trying like mad not to do and want my son to attend a Mainstream setting, something of which isnt meeting Js SENs.

 

JsMum

Edited by JsMum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...