The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman (LGSCO) has released its latest round of decisions about child welfare complaints the watchdog received.
The ombudsman also publishes this notice with each set of complaints it shares:
“Please note: our decisions are published six weeks after they are issued to councils, care providers and the person who has made the complaint. The cases below reflect the caselaw and guidance available at the time of issue and the individual circumstances of each case.”
Below are summaries and links to those complaints which we think will be of interest to our readers:
City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council
Services provided during a child protection plan
“There was fault by the Council in that it delayed in its consideration of Ms C’s complaint under the statutory children’s complaints procedure. The consideration of the complaint was thorough and agreed action was taken on some of the upheld complaints but the Council will now take further action to remedy some parts of the complaint for which no remedy was previously offered.”
Allegations that a social worker lied in court, treated the family badly and refused to implement a judge’s orders
“We will not investigate this complaint about the actions of a social worker. These matters are not separable from those that were or could have been raised in court. Mr X has a right to return to court it would be reasonable to use.”
Children’s social care services ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’
“The Council was at fault in delaying the consideration of Mrs B’s complaint at Stage 2 of the statutory procedure for children’s services complaints. It has agreed to begin Stage 2 and to offer to make a payment to Mrs B.”
Council wrongly decides to conduct a child protection investigation
“Ms X complains about the Council’s decision-making in relation to a child protection investigation that she says was not justified. The Council is at fault. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mrs X and pay her a financial remedy.”
Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council
Council wrongly interferes in family affairs and imposes contact arrangements on the family
“Mr X complains that the Council failed to safeguard his children from their mother, facilitated his child’s removal from him and wrongly advised him to lie to his son. He also complains that his complaint was not handled adequately. The Council is at fault and has caused injustice. It has agreed to apologise and provide a financial remedy.”
Researching Reform 
The Manchester complaint illustrates what is wrong with “the system”. Of course the Ombudsman cannot interfere with what goes on in court but the casual advice to the parent that “they could go back to court” takes no account of the fact that most bereft mothers and fathers have no idea how to do this ,or how to fund such an action.
Legal aid is rarely available to deal with appeals or complaints in the family courts.
What should be done?
The democratic right to protest with freedom of speech should be restored to parents and other family members.They should be allowed to protest on the internet,on TV, to the Press,and at public meetings.At present they face jail if they dare to do any of these things on the grounds that by identifying themselves they are breaching the privacy of the baby (or young child) that has been taken from them !
The parties in any family case should be free to go public if they choose to do so .
Surely we all believe in FREE SPEECH, FREE SPEECH, FREE SPEECH, !!
LikeLike