My name is Matthew* and I’m 13. I live with foster carers now, and they’re nice. I ended up in care when I was little because my parents abused me, but I still have to see them. I try not to make a fuss about that because the social workers say it’s important for me to have a relationship with my mum and dad, but I feel very uncomfortable during contact and more than anything, I wish someone would make it stop.
But nobody listens.
Nobody except my grandma.
My grandma is a very good person. Sometimes she says things that surprise me, but I know she loves me and I love her, too. She stands up for me. I can’t tell you how much that means to me.
My life is really restrictive. I can’t cycle around my neighbourhood because my family complained about cuts and bruises they’ve seen on me in the past. I tried to tell them I got them from doing regular activities like the kind boys do, but they wouldn’t listen. So now, I can’t cycle with my friends and because of another incident, I can’t socialise freely either. I’m so angry. I just want to be able to live my life.
But nobody listens.
Nobody except my grandma.
I want to see more of my grandma. But the social workers won’t let me. they’ve accused her of being addicted to drugs and alcohol, but she isn’t and all the tests they made her do came back negative. They say she’s harming me with the things she tells me, that she complains about the care system to me and tells me bad things about the people who work in it, but she isn’t. And sometimes, when she says things that are a bit awkward, I just brush it off. I don’t mind the things she says at all, it doesn’t affect me. She lets me speak my mind and stops when I ask her to. The real reason the social workers won’t let me have more contact is that they’re frightened of my grandma. They keep threatening to reduce contact if she carries on with her charity work which involves helping children in care have a voice. I don’t see how that comes into my contact with her. The social workers say she’s being vocal about my case and putting me at risk, but she isn’t – she’s just trying to get people to hear me.
But nobody listens.
Nobody except my grandma.
I’d like to spend time with my grandma without it being supervised. When we’re together, there’s a whole list of things we’re not allowed to do, which are supposed to be for my own good. The social worker told my grandma that boys my age don’t want affection, that we’re too old for it, but we’re not. We all need affection, at 1, 11 and 101.
I miss my grandma and the love she gives me so much. I got to live with her for a while. But the social workers took me away. On the day I went into care, I put stones under her car tyres so she wouldn’t leave me on my own.
The social workers are always criticising my grandma. It’s like they’ve got it in for her because she’s complained on my behalf about the way I’m being treated. It seems so childish – like a tit for tat. I feel like the adult, and the social workers just behave like squabbling children. It’s really depressing. The list of things my grandma can’t do or bring during contact is depressing too. These include:
- No chocolates or crisps at contact unless permissions is given (what do they think I’m going to do, contract diabetes in an hour?)
- No comments about wanting unsupervised contact or contact which occurs outside of the god forsaken contact centre (hardly quality contact)
- No whispering during the contact session
- No spontaneous kissing or hugging by my grandma
I’ve written a statement for my next court date. I would like to stop having to tell a million different people what my wishes and feelings are all the time. It would be fine, except
Nobody listens.
Nobody except my grandma.
I would like to be able to live my life, and although I’ve agreed to contact with my parents, I really don’t want to see them. I find it deeply upsetting – I feel like social services are abusing me. After years of being abused by my parents, now it’s the social worker’s turn. What’s wrong with everyone?
In my statement, I ask people to listen to me.
Will somebody listen?
* Name changed to protect this boy’s privacy
Researching Reform 
Social workers beggar belief! I am reminded of what another grandmother told me. I can hardly believe the social workers involved are supposed to be intelligent, rational people with the best interests of a child at heart. It began simply enough. The grandmother, always on the look out for little items her granddaughter might like, spotted two Japanese doll ornaments, one about 5 inches tall and the other 7 inches. She duly gave them to her granddaughter on a contact. Her granddaughter was delighted!
At a meeting to discuss contact arrangements, some months later, the social worker questioned the grandmother about the dolls and more than implied the grandmother had insisted her granddaughter put the dolls on her bedroom window cill. The implication being that the grandmother would be able to track down where her granddaughter was living!
The meeting was beginning to resemble an inquisition somewhere in the twillight zone. The grandmother denied telling her granddaughter where to put them and had in fact never discussed her granddaughters bedroom. The social worker insisted she had.
I don’t suppose it ever dawned on the social worker that if the dolls had been put on the bedroom cill they would not be seen by anyone walking past as they were too small to be seen. Most house bedrooms are in an upper floor and to see them from the street the dolls would have had to be much taller. It possible she lives in a bungalow but unlikely. She could live in a flat so the likehood of seeing her bedroom window is even lower. That of course supposes her bedroom is located at the front. None of that really matters as the grandmother has no idea where she lives!
Was this the delusions of the social worker, her paranoia getting the best of her? A lack of basic common sense? All contact was stopped between the grandmother and granddaughter so maybe the social workers was looking for an excuse, any excuse, to prevent any contact.
What this social worker did is reprehensible! This decision was all about control! All social worker decisions concerning contact with family members should follow set guidelines that cannot be changed unless contact is harmful to the child and only then if investigated by a third independent party. These decisions should involve ALL parties including the child and family not just the deciding social worker.
LikeLike
Terrible.
LikeLike
Natasha, its not only terrible that contact has been stopped but the granddaughter must have wondered why she can no longer see her grandmother. What has she been told by the social worker justifying her decision. Her human rights have been overridden too.
LikeLike
Do today’s 13 years old have this good a grasp of grammar, puntuation and sentence construction ? I don’t think I did !
LikeLike
I guess I should say thank you 🙂 Clearly I’ve written it, but the facts as far as I’m aware are accurate, as I’ve used documentation written by the child to put the piece together.
LikeLike
Are you so thick in the brain not to know that Natasha is trying to also be a voice to help the thousands of kids in care being abused if you wanted to comment then I suggest you do some research into the children in care industry then be positive.
LikeLike
I hesitate to comment, which makes a change, but Mr. Whiston is not being ‘thick’, in the brain or anywhere else. I won the only prize I ever did at school for English Grammar, but there is no way I could have written something like this at thirteen. And that was in 1963 when standards of English were higher. Thanks to Natasha for clarifying the position.
It’s a fine line between being a voice for children and assuming, perhaps, that this is what they’d actually say if they could. They may well – and they may well do so in a few year’s time. I desperately hope they do, for it will be their testimony that will eventually topple the system if it doesn’t fall before then. See Rosy Stanesby’s speech on the Children Screaming to be Heard website, when she spoke at the Conference in the summer. We all campaign in different ways, almost all of them valid, but I think one of the things we must not lose sight of is that we must make sure that when the children do speak out themselves of their own volition, they must be encouraged, their voices must be heard – and then acted on. It’s happening now, at long last, and we should do all we can to facilitate it.
LikeLike
There was no assumption. The sentiments are taken directly from written documents by the child.
LikeLike
Hi Roger just how is it “happening now at long last”? To my knowledge, despite Munby and Simon Hughes making all the right noises, children are rarely allowed to speak in court of their wishes and feelings. “Gillick competence” is still allegedly used to determine if this is possible. Gillick is vague and ambiguous and can mean whatever the Judge wants it to mean, in practice, Children are deemed too young to know their own mind if they want to go home, but when eventually the child has been in care long enough for Stockholm syndrome to take effect, they suddenly become Gillick competent.
LikeLike
Hi Natasha, I think Dana has written again of truth of what you have written regarding not only grandparents but parents, it is by the charities help line that I speak to families daily one grandmother took her case to Ofsted and after more than a year was told yes the social services and the social worker were wrong,
BUT WE CAN DO NO MORE AS THE SS ARE A LAW UNTO THEM SELFS, yet again anothe rgrandmother told your grandchildren do not want to see you, but what does come in daily is that those families who are applying for contact the SS continually write in all reports for all kids throughout this country to the courts,
WE DO NOT RECCOMEND CONTACT AS THE CHILD WETS AND SOILS THEM SELFS BEFOR OR AFTER CONTACT, and then no contact. the lies that are continually written by the SS had I just been told by one person I would have thought UM, but to hear daily from people from all over the country and we hear the same info then I question what are the Governments hiding they cannot sit in their offices being paid untold wealth going around the world first class staying in first class hotels talking and talking when knowing kids are being sexually abused in the care of the British Empire, so here we go no contacts for kids in care OR if contact is ALLOWED it must be supervised other wise these kids of the plebs will be able to tell all who is F—g them, but then we dont care what can the plebs do.
And so I will have to listen daily to many more parents and grandparents and such as the child Natasha wrote about but that child is only one of thousands with many stating the same no one listens and for this reason I registerd the charity
http://www.childrenscreamingtobeheard.com
CHILDREN SCREAMING TO BE HEARD THE SILENT WITNESSES HERE LIES THE TRUTH.
and not a word could be further from the truth because governments, ministers, Lords, Sir Mumby, the courts social services/workers, dont give a damb, as for the other half of the army “In a child’s best interest” kids are just money or their bodies abused and when they are dead their little bodies are sold to the scientist,
Natasha has not written of one child’s plight but of the plight of
ALL OF THE SILENT WITNESSES.
Thank you Natasha from all of the children in care being abused in every way I wish there were more people such as you to help the kids in care. .
Maggie.
LikeLike
There is an 11 year old boy in care who calls me Grandad, though I am not his biological Grandad, I cannot say too much as I am applying for Residency, but there are many similarities with the One Boy’s story.
Since I made the application, The LA has turned it’s well oiled apparatus of spite and venom on me. They objected because contact has been negative and told the court they had sent me a letter informing me of this. When we received the contact notes, they all seemed positive and they later admitted there was no letter..
Between hearings I had another contact session (4 hours in a public park) we had a wonderful time and I was careful not to give the LA any reasons to find fault.
According to the LA, I am now “Undermining the placement” they allege I told TOM (not real name) that we were going back to court, He was going to come home etc. etc. He was disruptive after contact, soling, ran away from home twice. (apparently he came home after 30 mins on one occasion and was at a friends for an hour on the other.
I said nothing of the kind on contact and will prove that in court, when the prevaricating stops and we are finally allowed to get on with it, the soiling seems to be a go to allegation used by LA’s as I have heard this from so many other families in similar positions. It is an easy thing for LA’s to claim and very hard to disprove when the child is not given a voice in court.
They are now objecting to the judge granting my leave application on the grounds that “The very process of the Residency Hearing will undermine the placement, IF UNSUCCESSFUL” This is tantamount to the Barrister for a Burglar saying you cannot try him your honour, if he is found Guilty he will not be able to burgle any more houses.
Tom has a “Guardian” appointed by the court, a solicitor by occupation, who when “interviewing me” (It was more like an interrogation) asked if I had moved home. I told her you have never interviewed me before or been here before to which she replied “I do so many of these, I must be getting confused”. When I asked her if she had asked TOM his wishes she replied, (Not PER SE….) ” How disturbing is that? Using “Rent-a-report” exports to determine a child’s future. She is supposed to represent the wishes and feelings of the child and has not even asked him what they are.
Make no mistakes, once a child is in care, the chances of using the Family Courts to have the child removed from care and reunited with family members are very slim indeed, partly because of the costs involved, but mainly because the “Template” used by LA’s to oppose such applications is well tried and tested, they use “Cut and Paste”, change the name scenarios in many similar cases, knowing full well that such arguments have been successful in the past in the Family Courts where it seems Judges seem to accept the word and recommendations of “The professionals” involved, who are able to submit to the court their own versions of events without challenge, and treat Family members as if they are the ones telling lies.
This is unlikely to change as long as children in care are represented by court appointed Paid professionals, who continually ignore the wishes and feelings of the very Children they are supposed to represent, with the sickening oft repeated claim “In a child’s best interest”.
Sorry to Plagiarise Maggie T, but children in care really are “Screaming to be heard”.
LikeLike
Hello, for legal reasons I’ve had to edit your post, but thank you for your comment and I’m so sorry for this little man’s experience.
LikeLike
Yesterday at the end of a contact session with his mother, the contact worker said “OK [Name Withheld] it’s we have to finish now” XXXX said NO!! (Loudly) I NEED my mother, SHE is my mother (pointing to mum) ********* (Foster Carer) Will have to wait! Will the child’s Guardian take any notice? Will the Social workers take any notice?? Will the Judge take any notice??? I doubt it.
Children are removed on the risk of possible future emotional harm. When will the so-called professionals begin to realise that taking a child in care unnecessarily is a guarantee of certain future emotional harm.
LikeLike
Simon Hughes ,Minister of state for justice and civil liberties, said that children aged 10 or more should be heard in court if décisions there could affect them..The United Nations Convention on the rights of a child also says that children have the right to be heard in proceedings that concern them.
jUDGES TOTALLY DISREGARD THE LAW in this respect though sometimes they allow a child who wants to come home to confide in the Guardian who then usually reports to the judge that the child no longer wishes to see or have contact with the parents !
What a load of hypocrites parade in our so called family courts !
LikeLike
Roger you are becoming like an old women you are still going on we dont care about your bloody English and you won an awared, why cant you just support the children who need a voice and Natasha was it so where are you, still moaning on the blog get off your ar and be a voice for the kids never mind about English, and remember MPs Lords Minister and the lot of them dont speak or understand good English, but Natasha does.
LikeLike
Maggie, Please don’t put John Hemming MP in the same category. He is trying is hardest and helps many families outside his constituency. I am sure it an oversight but people who do not know his efforts should do.
LikeLike
Amber what on earth are you going on about if you want to write of what ever then learn to get your facts first and do not accuse, where and when did i mention Mr Hemming, it would seem you are still looking to cause aurguments from nothing which makes you look a bit simple, instead of writing accusations do some thing positive for the children. .
LikeLike
Another case we are aware of is that the court orderd the cafcass and the child’s guardian to do an assesment of the grandparents home with the child taken there , the cafcass said the social workers who have P/R of the child will not allow me to take the child to the house so I cannot write the assement for the court, but it is not the social workers it is the cafcass who is ove ruling the court as for the childs lawyer well as we know from the help line the childrens lawyers and the cafcass work in co-hoots and the child has no say or even knows what is happening in their lifes, and until the courts are open and evidence can be produced, then every kid in care will be locked into the multibillion pound industry
LikeLike
Mike,
Of course you’re right. I should have been clearer and said that those who were abused as children in places such as Rotherham and in Care Homes in North Wales are now beginning to speak out. I don’t remember this happening before, perhaps because of the stigma attached to having been in a care home and the lasting damage done to these poor people. And now Rosy speaking out about being prevented from seeing her dad when it was her express wish that she wanted to. The system always defends itself so rigorously and quashes dissent, protest and argument that individuals have found it almost impossible to be heard. I do believe that this is changing, and I’m not really much of an optimist on these things usually.
LikeLike
Yes Roger, but this is all children (usually now adults) speaking after traumatic events in “care”. We need children to be given a voice before they are “taken” into care. They should be allowed in court to express their views, it is their lives that are affected by the decisions made and they only have one childhood so we need to be sure that decisions taken are correct. They should not be just fuel for the never ending fostering/adoption circus.
LikeLike
This Blog is typical of poor children in the care system no voice at all no gillick competence as the children are not ALLOWED to see the solicitors.
Social workers never listen to the children i know my kids are in care aged 16 and 14 now and they have no voice.
Natasha of researching reform from the freedom talk radio network and the famillies and children searching for justice in family law we thank you as a well established website blog for giving us the chance to air our views and ftr invite you and any user of this website to come on air and discuss issues just email us freedomtalkradio2013@gmail.com ref Andy.
Children are screaming to be heard everywhere are you LISTENING ?
LikeLike
Hi Freedom, thank you for your thoughts and yiur kind words.
LikeLike
Hi Maggie, I know you feel passionate about this subject and I’m very grateful to you for being so supportive of this post, but could I encourage you to avoid getting personal with the posters? That is of course the only condition I have for writing here and it applies to everyone. Thank you x
LikeLike
Maggie, I know you have full respect for John. As you stated,
‘remember MPs Lords Minister and the lot of them dont speak or understand good English, but Natasha does.’
I just wanted readers to know John Hemming MP is not included in the ‘naughty list’ and I did state it was an oversight from you. Apologies I wasn’t clear in my last comment.
Warmest Regards.
LikeLike
Hi Natasha
Well done Natasha, this is a great piece. The language you’ve used is entirely appropriate for a bright kid like Matthew and you have echoed the feelings of helplessness that people like Antony Douglas have also articulated. I applaud Simon Hughes for his promise to ensure that children like Matthew are able to have their voices heard. Having been through the family law system and after emerging from the other end I can empathise with what it feels like to be ignored, pigeon-holed and not heard but, unlike Matthew, I’ve had lots of experience at commanding an audience.
It’s interesting how the social workers use alienation techniques to thwart Matthew’s relationship with his grandmother. And, they clearly realise that, if they are able to isolate Matthew, they would then only need to increase the intensity of they effort to succeed. The incessant denigration and false accusations against the grandmother are indications of emotionally abusive behavior and vicious attacks against Matthew’s already damaged sense of “self” perpetrated by those entrusted with the protection of vulnerable children.
In any discussion involving the voice of the child I think that it is essential that we make the distinction between private and public law settings. We must ensure that all those involved in the process are fully trained to distinguish between expressed words and feelings, which are truly those of the child, and, those which have been coached by an alienating parent or professional. Without appropriate expertise there is a very real danger that “the voice of the child” initiative will achieve the antithesis of what it is intended to do. It is imperative that the courts do not collude with the emotional abuse of children.
In an earlier post Natasha, you, “reminded us that children are capable of the incredible, with the right support”.
Matthew’s expressed wishes and feelings provide good evidence of this and his precocious critical thinking skills leave us in no doubt of the value of hearing him. Compare and contrast Matthew’s situation with another where an overly precocious vocabulary will provide evidence of emotional abuse and coaching. Without essential training we risk actually hearing, “the voices of abusers.“
LikeLike
Thank you stevie, and thanks for your thought provoking content.
LikeLike
Thank you Stevie, lovely thought proviking comment.
LikeLike
Matthew, you are correct in your fear that social workers use the voice of the child to alienate family members from seeing their child or grandchild in care. I know this is what happened to me and mine!
If a child says something that is life changing, for instance, that they don’t wish to see any of their family, why is this not recorded at the time? We live in a digital age so it would be quite easy, most people have recorders on their phones. I’m sure that sessions are secretly recorded anyway!
There should be face to face meetings with all the people that if affects including the child, not just be told by a social worker, that suddenly, out of the blue, with nothing to foretell this view, a child does not want to see their family! Why is this not done as a matter of course?
I am now of the belief that social workers and foster carers coach children to say what they want them to say. Its easy to influence a child’s mind by subtle condition. It’s when they start to think for themselves is when it becomes a problem for social workers to keep the child contained and away from the family. Thank God for this digital age because when a child is older he/she will be able to see a lot of parents/ grandparents have been trying but twarted by social workers to see them!
LikeLike
I am applying for a residency order, the LA countered by opposing contact. The judge suspended contact during proceedings. Now the LA have changed their mind about contact and want me to sign up to a list of Do’s and Dont’s just to have supervised contact in a room at a centre with the “Guardian” present to observe.
I am a law abiding citizen, so can anybody tell me why I should be afraid to accept their offer of contact, fearing 1) The child may have been given some kind of sedative and they will report the contact as negative. 2) They will twist things anyway in their usual manner to try to present a negative report to the court. 3) They will report that after contact the child has soiled, misbehaved, run away from home etc.
Having had nearly 3 years of the lies and misrepresentation of the LA, I have no faith in their integrity or the integrity of the system, particularly their antiquated method of recording contact (pen and paper) which I believe can only be to allow them to put their own particularly perverse spin on events how than this possibly be in the child’s best interest?
LikeLike
Edward Timpson MP, minister responsible for Children’s and Families, Department of Education, wrote to me responding to my concerns that social workers had refused any contact with our grandchildren.
There was supposed to have been contact as mentioned in court and agreed by the Judge at the time of care proceedings. Contact was stopped after the failed attempt of forced adoption with the youngest, who became very distressed when removed from his older sibling. We were told the potential adoptive parents decided they no longer wished to adopt him due to his attachment to the foster carers!
An independent social worker was appointed to decide the fate of the youngest. Was he to remain with his sister or was another attempt made to adopt him? After the foster carers agreed to foster him, it was decided he should remain where he was, living with his sister.
The independent social worker called us to a meeting to discuss the new proposal and advised us the foster carers were to take out Special Guardianship Orders on both children and the forced adoption would no longer take place. It would then be up to the foster carers/SG who would supervise contact. The ISW told us she had recommended that contact should take place.
After a month we were called back to see the inderpendant social worker who informed us that when speaking to our granddaughter she had stated she did not want to see us anymore and our contact was stopped. It transpired my granddaughter had stated she did not want to see her mother or father either so contact was stopped with them also! The ISW expressed her shock as such a statement coming as it did, out of the blue, without warning!
We were not informed if an SGO was taken out or not.
We reminded the social workers that the new reduced contact arrangements after care proceedings had not been started. That 6 months had passed and we were due a visit. It didn’t happen. Nor the next! Nor the next! We wrote monthly, reminding them of their obligations and duty under the childrens act as it was then, to promote contact with familty. We requested they look into the reason why and after no change requested that an Advocate see her to ascertain why she would suddenly say she did not want to see any of her family in one fell swoop! We were informed that the social workers did not think it appropriate!
Edward Timpsons MP response was that social workers should be working with families to maintain contact but forgets to mention the children’s act no longer has the clause that local authorities should promote contact between looked after children and their families. It is left to the discretion of social workers who are supposed to act in a child’s best interests. I believe it has more to do with control. Undermining placements? In a childs best interests? Isn’t that the catch all?
More time has passed and we came to the conclusion that we were continually and consistently lied to by social workers who had their own adenda. I don’t believe for a second that my granddaughter then aged 8 years old say she didn’t want to see her entire family! If it was a true statement, social workers should have ascertained the reason behind the words, as it clearly showed something was very wrong, as it was such a departure from her normal stance! They failed to do this!
What does Edward Timpson do to rogue social workers who have their own agendas and do not stick to the principals of the children’s act? What penalties exist when social workers destroy family relationships that would be of benefit to a child in care, acting as a protective element when the system goes wrong? What can family members do in such a cleft stick situation?
LikeLike
Dana, the charity has heard from so many families stating that the social workers have said or written to say your child/ren do not want to see you, it is insane that Governments Ministers and Mumby and the rest of the army “In a child’s best interest” continue to allow children to be completly cut of from their whole families is there more to taking the children then meets the eye and of what we know. This nation must rise up to save the kids in care.
LikeLike
One wonders if its a hidden government agenda! Otherwise when its pointed out to MPs including Edward Timpson MP the minister in charge of making the Acts and overseeing the enforcement of them, why don’t they do nothanything! They don’t write to local authorities, they don’t investigate complaints, so who does? Its not the local government ombudsman as there is a care order on the kids and they cannot get involved! So who? Who in the pecking order do you have to speak to or write to investigate if the social workers are doing the right thing when its clear they are not!? Frankly I see the only way is to go to a journalist, tell your story, prove its accurate and publish or be dammed!
LikeLike
Mike,
Of course you’re absolutely right. My last comment did not mean that children should remain silent or unheard until they’re eighteen! In fact I believe the children ARE heard by CAFCASS and the Family Court – if they say what the CAFCASS officer or other social worker wants to hear. If they don’t – it’s then that they get ignored! I do hope (and believe) that the more those who have been abused within the care system speak out, the more notice the kids today or in the near future will receive. In other words, a greater acceptance that they may well be telling the truth rather than trying to cause trouble.
Maggie – how many more times must I point out that it’s Sir James MUNBY; not Mumby!! (only pointing out because I know you occasionally write to him and people do like to have their name spelt correctly!).
Roger
LikeLike
http://www.whale.to/b/tavistock_q.html I am told most social workers police and psycos train at the tavistock, and many pyscos I know are mind controlling the kids in care.
LikeLike
Maggie, Are they being conditioned to condition others?
LikeLike
If you read the link from the Tavistock many answers are there with more, many parents who report to me by the help line I wish I could name and shame but back to what the system is all about is yes mind controle, many parents report that when they have contact their child cannot remember lets say TOM DICK OR HARRY same as when I intervied kids from care on the streets many said they had no recollection of their families and do remember many homeless on drugs are from the care system and when in care many were used for drug experiments, at the conference in July for the children screaming there was speaker from the citizens commission of human rights who informed us of the drugs used on kids in care and of the mind controlling, shame you could not have made it to the conference on the day there was so much to learn and to know with legal people and the media there and Sue Reid from the daily mail, for Sue to speak at a conference for the people that says most. There is a video called ALL FALL DOWN it is about the drugging of the kids en-mass, I can loan it to you.
LikeLike
Maggie, Yes, I heard that was happening. It would be good to put video on your Children Screaming to be heard website for all to see.
LikeLike
Thanks Dana, I am in the throws of doing this with some of the research I have.
LikeLike
I was a foster child once, then adopted to an abusive family. The workers then lied telling my own children i was a drug addict and alcoholic, which was untrue, so I feel the childs and grandmas pain in this as this is our almost exact situation. Only it is my ex and his family that abused the children and they put them there to live and told them all this stuff about me. Now they are older they know the truth, and are angry with the workers for destroying us. I could tell you every thing but it would be too much, in the end the worker falsified documents to get crown wardship and me out of their lives for good.
LikeLike
Thanks for your comment, Lisa. I’m so sorry to hear that.
LikeLike
Maggie, I ponder if the professionals are conditioned, either by NLP or subtle pressure from colleagues or by virtue of the fact that they become immune to the real effect their decisions have on both the child and family members. If you love and lose a child it matters not how or why that child is no longer with you. Your child is gone! You are in emotional pain.
If you have deliberately harmed a child and have been convicted in a criminal court and are now in prison, you are unlikely to care if that child is now in the care system or dead since you probably never wanted the child in the first place and the child was merely a means to an end! Those monsters exist!
However, I don’t believe the majority of parents that pass through family court feel that way. With 92,OOO kids in care, 1500 kids taken into care each month, that is a lot of people hurting but the authorities are totally oblivious!
It was recently admitted by a retired high court family judge that the taking of children into the care system was routine! That means its automatic, without thought, without thinking of the consequences. It was admitted by a SS director that putting a child in care was not the same as keeping the child safe from abuses! That was impossible!
What happens is lazy social work! Unsupportive and adversarial, the system fails the children, who in most cases would be better off at home, not in foster care or adopted!
It smacks of a power trip by those who lack the conscience for what it really means for the children in the care system not just as children but when they are older and leave.
Those who work in the system are feared and despised for what it has now become and their part they played. They became the stick to beat the families with, the ultimate sanctions being removal of their children, then stopping their contact! It’s inhuman! To do something so inhuman, day in, day out, must affect those within, so they are no longer aware of the suffering by both the child or the family. Maybe that’s how they can continue to do it. A burn out of feelings becoming immune to the suffering. It’s happened before in history and it’s happening now within those working in child protection!
LikeLike
Sorry that was 15,000 Kids and Counting! channel 4
LikeLike
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2804103/Why-death-baby-cloaked-secrecy-Judges-ban-details-inquest-lasts-just-seven-minutes.html
Why is the death of this baby cloaked in secrecy? Judges ban details… then inquest lasts just seven minutes
Transparency????
LikeLike
I consider that Mrs ???? tried to
circumvent the authority of the Local Authority when, unfortunately, I need
to agree that the reasons for not increasing contact, based on her behaviour
during contact, are necessary precautions taken for ????? welfare. She
made an application and used the child’s wishes and feelings to increase her
contact without addressing the issues raised with her by the Local Authority.
Your report as above accusing me of using my ????? wishes and wants for my own benefit for contact, well what can one say to a young man who is qualified to work with children and taught by the Tavistock Clinic, may I suggest you go back to the Tavistock Clinic and learn to listen to the children as here in this case we have a child who on hands and knees begging praying to stay with his ???? and has done so for more then three years, so please what are your true motives for your most ridicules comments of using a child’s wishes and wants he would be so lucky if he had any.
This is the latest information from within the system that now families asking for contact with a child in care are using the childs wishes , my god what is this country coming to but worse still what of the poor little children being stolen only to be abused and continually screaming to be heard
LikeLike
Hi Dana I know there has to be a mistake in the figures of kids in care, you say 92.000 now with 1.500 a month taken into care from what I know there are no true figures of kids in care because there are so many different figures written on this info or that then we have 10.000 running away from the abuse of the care system then take into account there are 100s of adoption and fostering agencies all making millions of pounds Barnardos for one has a turnover of £175 million a year, and all cannot make millons from a mere 92.000 kids not when an adoption/fostering agancies went to the market for 60 odd million and within 2 weeks bidding went to and it sold at 135 million pounds to a company in Canada, why on earth would a company in Canada buy an adoption/fosering agency in the UK dont they have enough kids to steal there,
LikeLike
Maggie, Agreed, the figures don’t add up! I can only quote from the official government stats. Other figures I have quoted come from NSPCC and BAFA or other such organisations. The main problems appear to be the differing dates of the stats and not all information for the whole of the UK is included at any one time.
https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/statistics-looked-after-children
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/children-looked-after-in-england-including-adoption
THESE FIQURES DO NOT INCLUDE SCOTLAND AND WALES OR NOTHERN IRELAND.
KEY POINTS
Note: All of the comparisons below and in this document relate to 31 March of the year in question.
There were 68,110 looked after children at 31 March 2013, an increase of 2 per cent compared to 31 March 2012 and an increase of 12 per cent compared to 31 March 2009.
There were 28,830 children who started to be looked after during the year ending 31 March 2013, an increase of 2 per cent from 2012 and an increase of 12 per cent from 2009.
There were 28,460 children who ceased to be looked after during the year ending 31 March 2013, an increase of 3 per cent from 2012 and an increase of 14 per cent from 2009.
There were 3,980 looked after children adopted during the year ending 31 March 2013, an increase of 15 per cent from 2012 and an increase of 20 per cent from 2009. Although the number of looked after children adopted fell between both 2009 and 2010, and 2010 and 2011, the number of these adoptions has since increased and is now at its highest
Placement orders had been granted for 9,240 looked after children. This represents an increase of 16 per cent from 2012 and an increase of 95 per cent from 2009. The proportion of looked after children where a placement order had been granted has also increased. In 2013 14 per cent of children were looked after under a placement order, an increase from 8 per cent in 2009.
This stat is different from the recent tv documentary, 1500 and counting! Researchers followed social workers so the stats must have been correct at the time.
LikeLike
BAAF NOT BAFA1
LikeLike
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/642288.stm
Children in care: Now and then. This article was written in 2000! 14 years later…….!
Children in care in England and Wales
Foster placements 37,340
Community homes 5,100
Others inc voluntary children’s homes 13,960
source: DoH 31 March 1998
The situation for children looked after by local authorities has changed significantly in the last three decades.
The biggest shift has been away form institutionalised, residential care towards foster care – and efforts to keep families together in the first place.
Now, at least two-thirds of children being looked after by local authorities are in foster families rather than residential homes, and the trend away from institutions is continuing.
The few thousand who remain in homes now typically share with four or five children, as opposed to the dozens of the large institutions of the past.
Their care has become more “holistic”, with efforts to ensure they gain academic qualifications, life skills such as looking after their own health, and the confidence to discuss problems with those in authority.
England and Wales are now half-way through a one-month, £375m government package – called Quality Protects in England and Children First in Wales – of practical improvements.
And a Care Standards Bill aimed at boosting the legal rights of looked-after children is currently on its journey through Parliament.
But the problems are by no means over. Only three years ago, then health secretary Frank Dobson said the story of care for children in the UK was a “woeful tale of failures”.
And the Waterhouse inquiry prompted serious questions from charities about ongoing standards of care in North Wales and across the UK.
Scandals led to change
The cultural changes have been enshrined in law, with the biggest watersheds being the Children Act of 1989 and the Utting Report of 1997.
These in turn followed a series of child abuse scandals, such as the Pin Down Inquiry in Staffordshire, the Frank Beck case in Leicestershire and the recent Waterhouse inquiry in North Wales.
Children’s Society spokesman Tim Linehan said the scandals made people realise that the area of residential care had been “completely neglected” – making it fertile ground for predatory paedophiles.
Residential homes, like the notorious Bryn Estyn, are now fewer, and smaller
He said the most important change had been to open up the management of care homes and make them more transparent.
“In the 1970s and 80s residential homes, although not independent, were run like closed institutions,” he said. “You didn’t have the flow of people coming and going that you have today.
“You did have inspections, but if a charismatic, controlling individual was running the home he could get round inspectors.”
The second important realisation, he said, was that the looked-after child must be listened to – on issues ranging from not liking the food, through bullying, to serious abuse allegations.
“Children’s views must be heard,” Mr Linehan said. “If you don’t do that you start undervaluing them. If you do that they’ll start to undervalue themselves.”
And that lack of confidence again leads to vulnerability that draws predators, he said.
Charities such as the NSPCC are now calling for this culture of listening to be taken to governmental level, with a national Children’s Commissioner.
‘Age of innocence’
The Association of Directors of Social Services (ADSS) says that one of the reasons child abuse has been so rife in the past was a lack of public awareness of paedophilia.
This “age of innocence” is past, said director Jo Williams.
That means children are more likely to be believed when they complain – and has also led to more rigorous vetting procedures for staff.
Local authorities now have stringent recruitment guidelines including approaching present employers; demanding written references covering several years; and carrying out police checks.
The ADSS says such vetting means organised abuse on a scale like that in North Wales is now “extremely unlikely”.
The Sex Offender’s Register also makes it easier to monitor anyone with a conviction for a sexual offence.
However, the ADSS and several other leading charities warned this must not lead to complacence, as paedophiles are devious and cunning, and spend time and energy reaching their target.
Recruitment crisis
In the past, many workers in residential homes were completely unqualified. This is said to have exacerbated abuse – they were less likely to notice tell-tale signs, or tackle it.
The government has since brought in guidelines that all home managers should have a diploma, and all support staff at least a grade 3 NVQ.
Latest figures from the Improvement and Development Agency (Idea) suggest there is still some way to go, however – of the 10,603 workers in local authority homes in England, more than 5,505 were unqualified.
Worse, media reports of bad practice and abuse continue to deter people from entering the profession. Across the board, social work applications have dropped 50% in three years.
Drew Clode of the ADSS said the government could tackle the crisis by tackling the “chronic underpayment” of residential staff.
‘A lot of learning to do’
The fact that so many children are in foster care brings potential difficulties of its own, despite the stringent checks on carers.
The NSPCC says that although is it “generally an improvement”, the children are “more isolated”.
Families are notoriously difficult to inspect, and children in small foster families are less likely to complain than they are in homes. It is also harder to ensure that their voices are being heard.
Jane Stacey, director of children’s services for Barnardo’s Cymru, said we “cannot be complacent”.
“There is still a lot of learning to do,” she said. “We must recognise that children in foster care are potentially very vulnerable”.
Main Care Standards Bill aims
Improve social worker training
Increase support for care leavers
Monitor social services performance
Set up independent inspection body
Search BBC News Online
14 Feb 00 | UK
Children in care ‘need a voice’
26 Dec 99 | Wales
Pressure mounts for children’s commissioner
10 Jan 00 | Wales
Care children still at risk of abuse
20 Dec 99 | UK
Social services ordered to improve
08 Dec 99 | UK
‘Better deal’ for care leavers
16 Dec 99 | UK Politics
Hague backs private children’s homes
09 Nov 99 | UK
£1.85m drive for foster carers
22 Jun 99 | UK
Tough new guidelines set for foster carers
14 Feb 00 | Wales
Criticisms expected in abuse report
LikeLike
Morning Dana/Natasha, what no one seems to be addressing because no one os really aware of are the amount of private people such as us who own a house and take in kids from the care system.
LikeLike
Hi maggie, not sure what you are saying exactly….
LikeLike
Please take note of the second sentence and ask why did the government go from supporting families to removal of children putting them into foster care? Anyone know what changed to take that stance?
LikeLike