In the last two months, Michael Gove has found out for himself why the care system is bemoaned by so many, and though we are not fans of Gove’s, his story highlights a very obvious but often un-discussed and undesirable element of Top Down management: the view from the top is never the same as the perspective on the ground.
Post a series of scandals involving children being sexually exploited (think Jimmy Saville, Rochdale and most recently Cyril Smith MP), the government, it seems, has had enough, and launched a full-scale enquiry into the standards of care for children in residential homes. This was then followed up by another consultation (which is still open, and finishes on 23rd September of this year).
Michael Gove decided to concentrate on child protection issues, and, much to his credit, began by trying to acquire the relevant data from local authorities: where children’s homes were located, who was responsible for them and whether they passed even basic standards. When he discovered that the data was not forthcoming, it made him think. And the result, was a direct attack on our child protection system, an attack which is currently being sustained by the sheer volume of activity in this area. We’ve compiled a list of documents that we think make for interesting reading and have added them below:
- 12th September: Michael Gove calls Children’s Care a scandal
- 12th September: The House of Commons holds a debate on child protection (You can read the Hansard, here)
- 17th September (Closing Date): Consultation on Reforming Children’s Care Homes
- Sir James Munby supports more transparency in the family court process
All the potential political chess moves aside, Gove’s hands-on foray into child protection services is a valuable lesson to our politicians working in the family sector: you cannot make meaningful policies until you put your feet on the ground, and walk in others’ shoes. So, pound those pavements, and perhaps, at some point, something good will come of it.
Researching Reform 
One would agree that the government has to act but how it acts is always lacking, usually appointing a status quo keeping band aid to the wound sop to public scrutiny lackey a la Martin Narey which is about as effective as a chocolate tea pot.
Years ago when I sat on the Constitutional Committee for the reform of the family courts briefly, it was this very mindset that has allowed child protection to stumble and stagger from bad to worse and unless you are “in” with the crowd then anything as an outsider, a parent say that dare to comment and its ignored with aplomb and nothing changes except measures to protect the system, to extract more money and to ensure that the public see a worried crease on the brow of government as if they are dealing with it. I remember it well, sitting there the second time, after trying to explain that there must be a duty of legal care and legal obligation to the family, not just the child after Alan Levy lost the 2003 law case where Lord Philips struck that duty to parents so that social workers could act as they saw fit as long as it was justified “for the child’s needs” and I looked at Harman, at Douglas, at Hughes, stood up and said “I am wasting my time here” and walked out.
Tim Laughton likened child protection reform as taking the worlds biggest oil tanker travelling at slow speed and trying to turn it around against the status quo’ing pressures that keep it going the same direction.
Yet one has to ask, what of the gatekeepers for child protection? Why is it we hear only of government failings when surely the government funded organisations such as the NSPCC, NCH, Barnado’s etc all had some insight as to what was going on, why is it they are invariably silent here? Where were their protests prior to Savile? Why too were they allowed to investigate themselves refusing the police to do this?
Valid points no doubt.
But the elephant in the room is and always will be social services, for decades children’s services have proven time and time and time again they are not fit for purpose, not fit for the job and that council control, oversight and management of social services is a danger to the charges they are supposed to protect and a huge burden to the taxpayer, in the US and some nations, social services are not council run but a government run system except in some US states where the county or state is responsible and it is in those states or counties that we see the same abuses as we see here in the UK. In some countries adoption is only available for orphaned children or those say whose parents are sent to prison or convicted of sexual offences against children, they see a child is the parents responsibility and they refuse to take children in until all familiarial possibilities are totally exhausted, consider Britain’s potential 15 billion pound budget this economic period against say Russia’s few million used for orphanages.
Control of children’s services must be taken from the councils, must be placed under administration of a trusted entity rather than money making, grasping for the last penny profit councils, we must take the profit out of child protection and until we can expose the enormous pork barrelling and fraud endemic in children’s services today then nothing, not a thing will ever change in my opinion.
LikeLike
you are so correct but that only makes 2 of us.
Maggie
LikeLike
Me too that makes 3!
Yes, all the others were guilty of failing to protect those they purport to protect. Those that were charged to protect the children, chose to protect the system instead! Follow the money trail! Who has financial interests? Anyone who profits from child protection should not be working in the same arena. It is open to exploitation and corruption.
LikeLike
Sadly I do not hold out much hope for the so called change of laws for the children, to much money and jobs invoved, as for the big charities why did they not use their influence years ago, after all there are many big named people on their records, when the charity was being registerd for the children screaming to be heard, it was a bit of a nightmare as charities are not allowed to campagne so is that why no one did any thing to help poor little abused kids who are murderd trafficked body parts sold lose their families, I am not an educated person like those in governments but then no one needs to be educated if they cared for the children who are the silent witnesses, having won justice for other crimes against the Nation I have seen all of this before in comes justice then down the road and out of the doors goes the justice. I have read no where in the reports of the children taken into care illegally and will be returned to their parents or even the children who could live with a grandparent, why because if it happened the government could be sued for kidnapping thousands of children, and again there is no mention of how safe are the children in foster care, in todays papers in Essex a child has run away from abuse of a foster carer, he was picked up and returned to the foster care to be more abused only to have run away again, children living with foster carers are being abused big time and i know that from the amount of calls i receive daily from frantic parents, only for them to report truth and contact is stopped, so i suggest instead of Mr Gove sitting on his rear in a warm what ever gets his rear on to the streets of London and question the kids from the system, but first dress like a tramp change the posh voice and maybe he will get to the truth and i know better than Mr Gove as I have been there.
Maggie Tuttle
LikeLike
http://news.uk.msn.com/red-tape-leaving-children-at-risk
Social workers should be encouraging contact with parents and other family members.
LikeLike
Dana yes correct but we know corruption starts at the bottom of the ladder yes the SW who are taking the children, as for contact money again in the system for the superviser from private companies then contact is stopped with more letter writings and court cases and so in so do they really lose money NO to write a letter costs a fortune, parents and grandparents are left high and dry with the SW living their high life, I just wish the day a social worker told me in my own lounge yes sw are getting paid to take the kids. So Mr Gove needs to learn the life of children and families, but he will not, in actuel fact Gove and others should be named after the (WHAT DO THEY KNOW)
Maggie
Maggie
LikeLike
Pingback: New Consultation – Data: Share To Protect | Researching Reform