Social Services Complaint

hazydays

forchristsake wrote: »

If they were given more support...from the beginning - maybe it wouldnt have got to the point where they wanted him to go?

Maybe after fighting with social services and getting nowhere the situation got worse to a point they couldnt help the boy anymore?

Maybe ...just maybe

This is exactly my point, I never wanted my nephew to go. Support was greatly needed. after everything he had been through before he came to me, it was already noted that there were going to be problems.That he would need support. I've have never been through anything like this before and wouldn't know what to expect. All i wanted was to the best for him, as he was only 6/7 when this all happened.

s/s acknowledged in the first assessment nearly two years ago, that he needed help and support. If this had all been done properly, we wouldn't be where we are now. Through lack of support s/s pushed and pushed us to the edge. I not only had my nephew to consider, but my own children. Was it really fair for them to go through all this, as it effected them too. I am not trained to deal with the issues my nephew had. information was withheld at the beginning, hence the fostering option. s/s just wanted a quick fix and wanted to save money. We were very naive and believed and trusted everything s/s told us. But in hind site we were so wrong to trust what they said.

It is so frustrating, as i am one of the good people, I have caused him no harm. I took him in. With the behaviours etc., bearing in mind this was on a daily basis. like a dripping tap. Nothing I did would make him listen, or stop what he was doing. this having an effect on my other children. This has nearly broke my marriage and my family, and what for? All I have tried to do is the right thing. I have been portrade in a bad light. which i think is unfair. What gives the s/s the right to put what they like in reports when it is clearly untrue. I have made it clear i am unhappy with it. then I am avoided so it it is never dealt with.

As i said it is complex, but I am trying to make sense of all this !!!

hazydays

gizmo111 wrote: »

No they do not have shared PR on a S20.

I have been told by s/s that pr is shared with the local authority, now he is a looked after child.

hazydays

forchristsake wrote: »

Ok....

we all say social services have to act like this...or that, have procedures, policies etc etc. Do they always adhere to them? I think not! Baby P being one example!. Social services are not always blameless.

If a child goes into foster care - whether it be a section 20 or other - the child is still a "looked after child" and yes, social services have shared PR.

The parents are obviously out of the picture and not competant to look after their son.

I think what the writer is getting at is

1. There options were not explained to them fully in the beginning. They should have been given all their options in regard to this child - not just told you have to take a residency order!

Arnt social services meant to do whats in the best interests of the child and not what is cheaper and less work for them?

a residency order and them clearing off with what was an emotinally challenged child seems a little naive and poorly planned? Where are the risk assessments, impact on family?

What it really was .... tell them to take a residency order - then we can shut the books...less workload on us! Is that what was best for the child?

Is it ok for social services to make continuous errors... fob people off for as long as they can as "lay" people not knowing the ins and outs of child protection laws etc?? and if they do this over a period continuously for longer than 12 months its ok, cant be dealt with as its historic??

Is this how they get away with so much?

Dont worry its happened now - its historic?

This is peoples lives that are at stake - emotions, young minds being impressionable, maybe damaged forever. But its Historic, so nothing can be done?

I am confused

This is what i have been trying to say, thank you, you said it so much clearly

sunshine_1988

Ok........I'm certainly not saying any of this is right, at all. And I don't believe that social services are perfect, at all.

However, what I am trying to say is that complaining to the complaints team won't really get you anywhere for the reasons I stated before.

I think they were right in advising you to get a solicitor as this appears to be a legal matter.

Unfortunately, the reasons why a complaints team wouldnt look at some of the issues is because they are governed by a statutory procedure which limits what they can and cannot address. I am sure that a lot of people would sympathise with the situation but unfortunately some teams just simply cannot help.

Legal isnt my area at all so I am afraid that I cant advise you on getting a solicitor or any legal aid etc....I am sure that someone on here could advise you on that.

Once again, I am certainly not saying that the child does not matter or that nothing will be done because it was historic, I am simply stating what the policy would be....I definately I am not saying this is right at all.

There are avenues for your complaint to be explored and addressed, they do not simply have to be through the complaints team as unfortunately they dont actually have much power.

puddy

section 20, the PR remains with parents or others with PR (ie anyone with an RO, or SGO)

the LA have no PR of this child if the child is under section 20, you are fully responsible for this child along with his parents

gizmo111

hazydays wrote: »

I have been told by s/s that pr is shared with the local authority, now he is a looked after child.

Only if they have an Interim or Full care Order. This child is voluntarily accommodated with your permission, you retain PR - you possibly need legal advice about discharging the Residence Order.
Where are the parents?

Nicki

I don't obviously know the background as to how your nephew came into your care, but I have the utmost respect for anyone who would take in a child with obvious difficulties and nothing which follows detracts from that. I also understand that you would feel very angry and upset that the placement ultimately failed.

That said, when reading your posts, the following thoughts came to mind:

1. Did SS ever promise you a specified level of support and professional input with the child or were things left more vague, with you expecting a degree of support because you were not the natural parent? I am the parent of a very disabled child who has very challenging behaviour and we get virtually no professional support with her, even though she was assigned a social worker on diagnosis and is on the children with disabilities team SW case load. I recall once phoning in desparation because I was trying to get CAMHS input when she was traumatised by something which had happened at school and was eating her own faeces and was told that she could not be seen as a priority case unless she actually attempted suicide (she was 7 years old at the time). The point I am trying to make is that it might not be that SS actively denied you help, but that these services were perhaps not available in your area for the level of need your nephew had at the time, and the fact you were an adoptive parent was probably irrelevant. If thats the case, and provided you weren't promised a specific service which didn't exist, your anger might for that aspect be better directed at local commissioners of services rather than social services themselves.

2. Financially, it sounds from what otters have said that you would have been little better off irrespective of the nature of the placement. I'm guessing when you first took the nephew in you didn't do so with the idea you would make money by doing so, and that you just wanted the money you would have got had he been one of your own to cover extra costs. That you got by CTC and CB. If he ended up costing more due to challenging behaviour, that would also have been the case had he been your birth child with similar difficulties and at that point you DID have parental responsibility for him so presumably you were expected to treat him as one of your own, and did in fact do so. Were his difficulties such that he might have qualified for DLA? If so and you weren't advised to apply, I could see grounds to be upset with SS, but otherwise not really.

3 on the summary of what happened to cause the relationship to break down, my impression is that things had reached crisis point and you were asking for urgent help. If that's the case, I would suspect to prioritise his placement elsewhere, SS would have to paint things in the darkest light possible. Families who are coping don't tend to get help quickly. Lots of things are open to more than one interpretation, and sometimes it is expedient to exaggerate. Its a bit like when couples are divorcing on the grounds of unreasonable behaviour. The petition doesn't make nice reading for the respondent and blows small things out of proportion, but its the only way to get it through the courts.

I can understand how upset you are, but is it possible that by being so angry with social services you are actually putting off grieving for what has happened with your nephew? Reading between the lines, it sounds like you and your family have had a terribly stressful time for some years for reasons other than social services lack of support. I just worry that without knowing what you want the outcome of any complaint to be, that you might perhaps be drawing out the stress of all this and be preventing yourself from recovering and moving on?