极速赛车168最新开奖号码 Comments on: ‘When care proceedings concluded and children were removed, I felt only sadness’

极速赛车168最新开奖号码 By: Simon Cardy

Simon Cardy — Sun, 11 Mar 2018 16:30:23 +0000

I’m not sure that the authors of the Adoption Enquiry have really marshalled any useful evidence that we can use politically about the claim austerity has led to an increase in adoptions. It may well be true but they have not made the case.

The enquiry report says ‘Cuts to family support and social work services were a recurring theme’ .. ‘The pressure on services, particularly given financial cuts and rising demand, left them less time to work with children and families’ …’the impact of austerity, the cuts in family support services and a risk averse climate were considered to be having a very detrimental effect on the ability to effectively support families and prevent children coming into care’ …’In England cuts to the Adoption Support Fund have recently impacted upon those waiting for particular services’. This hardly constitutes evidence as such as all of the above applies to all children facing care not just those with plans for adoption some of which may have flimsy evidence but no means all (e.g. B (A Child) [2013] UKSC 33). Not only do we need evidence as to children returning to care from adoption but we need evidence and research of the circumstances that give rise to adoption plans – this remains largely unknown.

One can correlate the sharp rise in adoptions from 3,100 in 2011 with the cuts to services including chidren’s services preventative services but adoptions have been falling from its peak of 5,360 in 2015 which suggests something else is going on (the Re;BS case). On the question of adoption support families had struggled for many years to get help well before austerity started to kick in. There may be a relationship between cuts in that began sharply from 2011 in CAMHS and the creation of of the Adoption Support Fund (ASF) but this only began as a pilot in 2015. The ASF increased its funding to £19m in 2016 only for the incoming May government to impose a limit of £3000 limit per family late in 2017. It is also a fact that the Pupil Premium was made open to adoptive families in 2013 for all children adopted since 2005. That is not to deny the struggle, access and unequal allocation that has been taking place in regard to the ASF but this is not a partcularly good example.

极速赛车168最新开奖号码 By: Dorina

Dorina — Tue, 20 Feb 2018 22:08:42 +0000

I am doing my final placement within a child in care team specialised mainly in court work and I am aware of the ethical dilemmas revolving around child removal, the extent of state intervention into people’s lives and families’ rights to self determination and to private life. Unfortunately in most of the cases we deal with the parents have substance misuse issues and the children in their care had to be removed because they suffered chronic neglect, some had unexplainable bruises, bite marks, development delays or were themselves parentified children. I remember the famous Munby’s quote from the law module at the uni of bham and it is true that families should receive more support before having the children removed ( which is obviously not in agreement with the current austerity measures). At the same time, we need to be aware that parents’ timescales for change cannot always be the same with childrens’ development timescales. A one year old child with severe development delay cannot wait for mother to become drug free after she has had several relapses. In the end cases like baby P or Victoria Climbié are among the reasons why social workers have become risk averse, but in the end we don t want the history to repeat.
However the article is an excellent piece of reflection and a signal for the government that cutting the funds for supporting families in need may eventually lead not only to higher costs relatec court proceedings but also to create a fragmented society where state interference in private affairs becomes normality.

极速赛车168最新开奖号码 By: Angela

Angela — Tue, 20 Feb 2018 21:55:30 +0000

I begged social services and health visitors to support my daughter look after my two grandchildren. They did one visit and said the children are fine and smiling. Two months later they visited and removed the children. No support given in the intervening months. She was alone, depressed and struggling. What a costly mistake in so many ways. My daughter has lost her children that she adores, I have been looking after them under an SHO for the past 7 years so very costly to me in terms of my freedom etc, very costly to SS financially but mostly very costly to my two grandchildren who have missed being brought up by their mum. With the right support it could all have been prevented. Somebody stop this costly madness!

极速赛车168最新开奖号码 By: Anne

Anne — Tue, 20 Feb 2018 18:52:45 +0000

Come on, lets get real, I am a social worker of many many years and children are not removed on a whim, the parents have had multiple chances and a great deal of time to put their children before themselves. The 26 weeks follows months, sometimes years of working with the family, intensive family support, mental health support, IDVA support, substance abuse support, I could go on and on, whilst all the time the children are suffering and more damage is being done, making the possibility for future permanence for them more difficult. What social workers are asking from parents is ‘good enough’ parenting, that means warmth, food, education, safety, love and shelter, please do not tell me that this cannot be provided with the benefits available, they may be meagre but it is doable if focussed on priorities. I am not unrealistic, I am from a very large family who had barely any money but my parents would make things like potato and onion soup and bake bread, huge broths with scrag end and even from a bag of bones ‘for the dogs’, anything to feed us. I have never met any social worker who has removed a child without it breaking a bit more of their hearts and without a feeling of failure. But what I do say is that the way things are going now Ofsted and the government have a lot to answer for.

极速赛车168最新开奖号码 By: Margaret Dunne

Margaret Dunne — Tue, 20 Feb 2018 06:15:55 +0000

In some cases little support is offered and the family are in proceedings within a month of opening. We set families up to fail. In domestic abuse cases when a mother puts her children first and leaves the abuser she is then told she will not be able to manage all her children as a single mum so cannot win.

极速赛车168最新开奖号码 By: Fustrated sw

Fustrated sw — Tue, 20 Feb 2018 04:38:35 +0000

Whilst not risk averse there would be many more baby p’s of the world should we not do our job effectivly. I fèel no sadness for parents where children have been bruised battered fractured etc. It is often the case that families have had a lot of imput prior to 26 weeks protacol being implemented. Adoption is nit taken lightly by anyone in my view.

极速赛车168最新开奖号码 By: Joanna

Joanna — Mon, 19 Feb 2018 16:31:20 +0000

I only wish it was possible to take the removers to court for causing such damage to my own family,All i can do is hope we don’t lose at the two day hearing that social services have brought upon us,No support from them at all but expected to change to such a high level,possibly even higher than their own parenting? ? No parent can be as perfect as they expect from the poor families they pick to pieces. And discrimination against mental health should not be allowed full stop,why are they allowed to take a parent to court for removal of their children because of mental health reasons alone?
Sod the system its cruel to the highest level.
A well written piece thank you.

极速赛车168最新开奖号码 By: Cathy

Cathy — Fri, 16 Feb 2018 08:06:48 +0000

Excellent food for thought. As someone who works in the same field but with parents who have themselves applied to Court I will certainly take up Pemberton’s referenced work.

极速赛车168最新开奖号码 By: Liz G

Liz G — Thu, 15 Feb 2018 21:04:21 +0000

A summary of my world reflected in probably one of the most honest and factual articles I’ve read for some time – I’m really not going mad after all !!

极速赛车168最新开奖号码 By: Becky

Becky — Thu, 15 Feb 2018 20:46:52 +0000

Very interesting article. I would imagine that if I only started working with families at the stage of proceedings or PLO then I would always wonder whether more could have been done with more time. 26 weeks is a short time frame for change to take place, and you need to know that enough has been done to try and change things before entering PLO or court arena. Perhaps a push towards less specialist teams who work across CIN, CP and cases further down the line?