Louise Casey, the director-general for troubled families at the Communities Department, is the author of a new report which has been published today and which looks specifically at Rotherham Council’s failings to protect vulnerable children and adults from child sexual abuse.
The revelations echo Professor Jay’s findings in her report, which she published last year, but what is most startling is that the failings highlighted in both these reports speak to a wider sector, and encompass the entire child welfare system. These problems are not unique to the council – they live and breathe inside every department working on child welfare.
In her report, Louise Casey writes that when she arrived in Rotherham she found a council in denial. They refused to believe they had made mistakes. They were paranoid – the media were out to get them. They were arrogant – we’ve won awards for our work, they said, we are beyond reproach. And perhaps worst of all, Miss Casey writes, the Council were adamant child sexual abuse was not their problem.
Except it was. And it is, both in law and policy. So how do we have entire councils running without carrying out duties legally within their remit, and ignoring allegations which touch upon the very core of their administration?
That is a big question, which we suspect stems from the top down; government at the highest level which still operates under a colonial mandate filtering down to local departments and government agencies. But that is not our immediate concern in writing this post.
The failings mentioned – protectionism, poor training, questionable priorities and practice, even criminal conduct, all carried out by the Council, are not endemic to that local authority.
Protectionism rears its ugly head inside the family justice system every day. Previous reports on multi disciplinary services failing to work together bolster Miss Casey’s report, and demonstrate how, so many years on, our government departments still do not sufficiently trust one another to share data or collaborate. So what hope do vulnerable children being sexually abused have in a world where even grown ups won’t share their toys?
Poor training too, is a bug bear. Miss Casey’s report highlights also the lack of training and understanding of the complex crime of child abuse – so why are we still sending out social workers to tackle problems for which they are not, in the main, sufficiently trained to deal with?
Priorities too, have become self-serving mandates which local authorities and other jobbing professionals manipulate regularly, either to dispense quickly with cases or secure their own interests. Miss Casey reports that when youth services came to the Council in Rotherham to try to tell them about the abuse in their town, the council eventually chose to shut these services down altogether. She also tells us that the council refused to believe that child sexual abuse was a mounting problem for them, and that if it was happening in their town, is was a lot less prevalent than the public were being led to believe.
The ‘It’s not happening in my sector’ state of mind has bled through the entire child welfare system. Talk to many lawyers, social workers and judges and they will say the same thing.
“We don’t have a problem inside the system – these difficult cases make up only a small part of a much bigger, well oiled and perfectly run machine.”
Except that those badly managed cases which make up perhaps 10% of the cases going through the system are a barometer for how well the system copes with difficult and complex phenomenons related to child welfare. They are incredibly time consuming too, and set the bar for everyone else. If a system cannot process the very issues and problems it is designed to address, then, surely, it is not functioning properly.
It is not just Rotherham council that is not fit for purpose. The entire child welfare system is in need of disrupting. We need better training, better resources, a greater respect for this kind of work – after all, it requires a deep knowledge of many different disciplines and keen and penetrating minds to apply it – and above all, a cultural shift in the way we value children.
Until then, we will continue to see reports like Miss Casey’s, drip feeding failings which extend well beyond council walls and police stations.
Researching Reform 
Yes, the lack of training is just incredible. But the arrogance of these child protectors knows no bounds. They know it all. They are the Gods after all with their God complexes and their sadistic schadenfreude disease- celebrating each victory of a child taken from home.
To me having to remove a child means the child protectors have failed and not won.
No heed is paid to the trauma involved for the children on removal.
No heed is paid to the damage this trauma does for the rest of that child’s life and the life of the family.
The corporate care system is so good?? that social workers are trained to remove children from parents who have been in their care??
Police should of course be investigating child sexual abuse and not social workers-as child rape and abuse is a criminal offense- so why would anyone accept that the LA investigate itself as the corporate parent?
Prisons are full of children who have been cared for by the child protectors, so clearly another failure. The mindset is that looked after children amount to nothing anyway- they are the disposable kids – as I heard them referred to when I was a teacher.
There was never a way to talk to social workers- oh they knew everything with their box ticking exercises. No intuition, no gut feelings allowed and these are the things that tell us the real truth.
There are other cities like Rotherham and its not just Asian abuse rings either.
But try and mention that to any Minister and yo get that look – the look that looks right over you as if you are deluded. Even if you have the paperwork to show that social workers, lawyers, judges etc knew of the children inside the abuse rings, you still get the bums rush.Its like “oh do not tell us , we do not want to know, the judge ordered the children into this placement, so nothing we can do about them being raped and tortured”
Its always pass the parcel game in the child protection business. As long as the money keeps rolling in, who cares.
There are a few journalists who have written on the matter and done their best, but there is a culture of hiding abuse of children in corporate care.
A child is 6-7 times more likely to be abused in care than at home, yet we still remove them?
That says it all really.
LikeLike
Thank you for your thoughts Portia. Government is still so bad at understanding child welfare.
LikeLike
Wait until the other cities are exposed in the same way and then people will see the real truth.
Maybe most will not want to believe at first and call the children liars – usual pattern.
Stats prove abused children rarely lie- but that old patriarchal Victorian “Eve ill Eve’s children are all liars” lives on. You don’t believe the disposable kids now, do you?
I noticed how social workers etc were taken in by the rare child telling lies and dismissive of the ones telling the truth. Who trained these people to get it wrong so often? The cunning abusers are so manipulative and keep in with the social workers- charming them etc. It has to be seen to be believed. Every neighbor knows the truth but the social worker is blinded and institutionally groomed by the abusers.Psychopaths are masters of manipulation but social workers are not trained to deal with them, spot them etc.
Its fascinating to observe and so scary at the same time.
Then there is the solicitors and barristers who treat the service users with contempt. I will always remember the words of a barrister – who knew all about the rape and torture of children in LA care and how she looked down at me saying ” don’t be stupid, we do not take ourselves to court”
I promised her in RCJ that a day would come when all would be revealed and her name would be in the public media. She ran away with her face and neck bright red.
Then when the children were older and in trouble she came begging for the case. The children all remembered her and told her where to go.It was like all humanity was trained out of her. She only wanted the money.
LikeLike
That sounds terrible, Lady P.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on World4Justice : NOW! Lobby Forum..
LikeLike
Dear Natasha,
Your articles are very good. Thank you for following up in this very important subject for children well-being.
Please keep up with this good work.
Thanks,
Ricardo.
LikeLike
Dear Ricardo, thank you and I’m grateful to you for your engagement.
LikeLike
I second that!
LikeLike
That’s really kind, D, thank you.
LikeLike
Many of these sexually abused children were “in care” which once again goes to show that the risks in care are far greater than those run if a baby is left with a mother with risk of future EMOTIONAL abuse.
Going into care is one of the very worst risks that any child can take…………………
LikeLike
Poor performance is one thing, but when those failings are pointed out and they ignore them, there is a problem that goes beyond arrogance. This is not just restricted to Rotherham but as pointed out already goes nationwide.
I know of one Local Authority who failed to see the problem with kids in care as young as eight, (that I know of but possibly younger) being picked up by taxi drivers from school on their own, without an escort and taken to contact sessions but the LA have the classic answer that the drivers are vetted, they have a CRB! The letters from myself and an MP to the LA about this issue failed to elicit any changes! I have no doubt this cost cutting practice is nationwide! Any problems are just swept under the carpet of denial!
LikeLike
The problem with UK child protection policies is they are not evidence based. There is no specific legislation or regulations which require local authorities to collect & hold information on child abuse perpetrators or for them to use that information to formulate evidence based child protection policies.
LikeLike
Hi David, thank you for your comment. Yes, I think we need to get much better at collecting evidence, using common sense and having a functional network of professionals who all engage with each other and work meticulously. That should be the norm.
LikeLike
Well, everything bad that you could say about how local authorities maltreat children through abusive child welfare will be on display in the Crown Court in Chester on the 9, 10, 11th of March 2015.
Multiple accounts of Criminality from social workers, their bosses all the way to the director of social services and the Chief Executive of the authority will be evidenced.
The local authority even tried to say that the witness was mentally ill and deluded in their desperation to cover things up. The claims are so far reaching that a psychiatrist was sent to examine the main witness to see if he was deluded. After assessing the witness and some of the evidence produced, the psychiatrist concluded the witness was very sane and far from deluded.
This is a case showing extensive criminality by a local authority to cover up child abuses and the negligence of its social work team, including safeguarding.
It is expected that press and TV will be covering the event.
LikeLike
Hi Edmond, thanks for your comment. Is there anything online about this case? I would be interested to read about it, if that’s alright?
LikeLike
THE MOST FREQUENT REASONS FOR CHILD REMOVAL FROM PARENTS (INCLUDING BABIES AT BIRTH !)
1:- Domestic Violence even when restricted to shouting and even when the violent parent separated years agoThe theory is that if children see their parents argue and (God forbid!) shout at each other they will suffer significant EMOTIONAL ABUSE and should be taken away to the illusory safety of the extremely dangerous State care system! .If this rule was applied in Italy there would be no parents left with children at all !Even in the UK ,show me a couple who have been together 3 years or more who claim they never quarrel or shout at each other and I will show you two liars !
2:- Borderline personality disorder or narcissistic traits ! Usually diagnosed by a psychiatrist or psychologist who habitually gives evidence to the family courts in favour of social services and with few if any private patients.Parents are routinely refused a second opinion and if they get a highly favourable report from a top expert paying privately it is usually ignored even when it is more up to date .
3:- Hostility and refusal to engage or work with professionals.It is however difficult to work with persons who tell you their intention is to take your newborn baby or young children and give them to strangers for adoption !
4:-A parent who was abused in childhood or who was brought up “in care” is often deemed to be an unfit parent because of the danger that they had no parents in care and learned nothing of parenthood or that they would in turn repeat the abuse they had suffered as a child by abusing their own children !
5:- A father (and sometimes a mother) with a criminal record of violence that was against other adults but never against their partner or their children is still judged too much of a danger to care for children even if the offences are several years old;
6:- An untidy house,children who stay up late, or a chaotic lifestyle that does not fit in with the way our politically correct social workers think we should live !
7:-Absences from school or reports from school that a child was heard reporting ill treatment to another child.Such cases are of course worth investigating but never warrant the immediate removal of the child by social services as happens only too often.A child returning from school with a bruise, or a child accidentally breaking or fracturing a limb is nearly always held to be the victim of an “unexplained” injury,and that soon translates into a non accidental injury for which parents are blamed and the child removed into “state care”( where abuse is commonplace) even when there is no previous pattern of bruises or injuries.
8:-Anonymous tip offs now descibed as “referrals reporting physical or sexual abuse of a child with no further evidence,” that often result in the immediate removal of a child often based purely on hearsay and gossip.
9:- Parents who “put their own needs before those of their children” .A “mantra” that is repeated in a monotone by social workers when they can think of no other criticism of parents to make .A completely meaningless phrase that gives a false sense of superiority to the person making it when really it is just their unsubstantiated opinion.
10:- And perhaps worst of all…… Babies are removed at birth for “RISK OF EMOTIONAL ABUSE”;Yes you read correctly, Social workers actually do claim to predict the future and for parents it is always a bleak one when the “SS” consult their tea-leaves or their” crystal balls” ! Gypsies can be quite accurate through generations of practice when they predict your future but social workers and judges?? UGH !Mothers suffer the worst possible punishment inflicted in the UK since hangings were abolished.(That is what the President of the family courts Sir James Munby said in a recent case!) The removal of their new born babies at birth to be given away for life to complete strangers for adoption is far far worse for parents than any prison sentence !……………
LikeLike
Hi FA, there are cases which don’t match the scenarios above, I know of children left in the care of very violent parents because as you note, the crimes were against other adults. It does happen. But more than anything, comments like yours remind me that when families go through the process of court they are so isolated that they think their experience is the only ‘kind’ of experience out there. The reality is, there is no unified formula going on, they just aren’t organised enough for that. So what you have is a unified mess, with wild variations of competence which lead to poor judgments, and they can affect men as well as women,
LikeLike
Yes Natasha iI agree there are cases that do not match the 10 scenarios I outlined above.I only described them as the “most frequent” and that I think is accurate.Apart from no 7 “absence from school” none of the other 9 scenarios necessarily involve criminal behaviour as a rule yet the punishment of the loss of a child or children can be worse for a parent than any jail sentence.
LikeLike
I would still dispute ‘most frequent’. After eight years of assisting mothers and fathers inside the system, and being part of a large network also assisting, it’s clear that both mothers and fathers in staggering numbers, are faced with unjust outcomes.
LikeLike
Why do those in charge of the kids welfare turn a blind eye or cover up when things go so appallingly wrong? It’s simple! They are earning big bucks, they have mortgages and maybe sending their child to private school and live fairly lavish lifestyles. They think it will go on forever, they are the untouchables, they are never wrong, they believe their own reality, they are in important jobs and get respect!
So they max out their credit cards and live beyond their means and then…..something happens…..that if known…..will rock their world.
An oversight, something they should have done but didn’t. Maybe a deliberate decision not to do something. Maybe ignoring a colleague’s error. Maybe just being too lazy. Maybe thinking she/he has brought it on themselves! Who are they anyway? They are nothing to me! I don’t care! So the rotten seeds are cast to the wind and so what? Who would believe them anyway? Kids lie!
The arrogance of the those who failed these children. They have done nothing wrong! They didn’t know! They don’t need to apologise to the victims! They don’t need to be sacked! They shouldn’t be prosecuted!
If that happens, if the truth comes out, then I won’t be able to get my fat salary, drive my car, pay my mortgage, pay my childrens school fees, enjoy my lavish lifestyle, pay off my credit cards. I’ll be discredited too and my family embarrassed! I better blame someone else or just keep my mouth shut or just say it never happened! That’s it! That’s what I’ll say, it never happened!
LikeLike