Social services onto me about not having child in nursery! Advice needed

embob74

I'm quite shocked at the assumption OP must have something to hide because they asked the HV not to visit any more.
I know many women who have chosen to home school. They may not attend nursery but they do get together in social settings for play dates. It never once occurred to me they were hiding something.
I know of a friend who is a great parent who had quite an unpleasant HV and had to ask her not to visit any more.....like all jobs the workers are human and therefore not all are best suited.
It's shocking that if you don't do the "norm" that the majority think best then you are treated as a bad person.

notanewuser

dizziblonde wrote: »

Aaah so little fuss, so painless... So that's why I still wake up having nightmares about my child having any innocent childhood bumps or bruises and the previous involvement meaning we get flagged up earlier and they take her away - and I have those nightmares night after night after night. It's why I ended up on medication to try to make this tolerable and make sure that my daughter doesn't lose out because them doing this to her mother wrecked her mum's mental health.

I've got no issues with investigations, processes and whatever flow charts professionals need to cling to - I have issues with having a PERMANENT strike against my name which will carry through my children's entire childhoods hanging over my head like a sword of Damocles, and the total ignorance of the absolutely devastating toll this investigation took on my mental health and my confidence in myself as a parent. No doubt the toll it TOOK on my mental health will be counted against me if I ever come to SS attention again as a mark of "bad" parenting as well - you just can't win.

Like I said earlier - I smile sweetly, play along with all the demands - but I shouldn't HAVE to be forced to parent in a backside covering manner, I shouldn't HAVE to think that I go to baby groups at least partly to lay an audit trail of good parenting just in case in the future one of my kids trips while learning to walk and ends up with a bumped head and of course the "known to SS" label comes back to haunt us. There's no right of appeal, no way we can get that removed ever - it's like a toothache - it's always there niggling away in the background... if anything totally innocent happened and we got looked at again - how could we ever trust it would be done fairly in the light of a prior malicious referral - we can't.

People need to get out of this mindset that these referrals have no impact upon people, or that only the "guilty" need worry - they can have an absolutely devastating impact upon GOOD parents.

What on earth were you investigated for?!

Toomuchdebt

I hated my health visitor(she was totally useless) and told her I didn't want to see her any more..what's more I don't vaccinate so didn't bother going to clinic after the first child.I certainly never got reported.I did send them to playgroup though.Sounds like it's a combination of not wanting h/v, not sending to playschool and possibly something we've not been told about.

jayII

dizziblonde wrote: »

Aaah so little fuss, so painless... So that's why I still wake up having nightmares about my child having any innocent childhood bumps or bruises and the previous involvement meaning we get flagged up earlier and they take her away - and I have those nightmares night after night after night. It's why I ended up on medication to try to make this tolerable and make sure that my daughter doesn't lose out because them doing this to her mother wrecked her mum's mental health.

I've got no issues with investigations, processes and whatever flow charts professionals need to cling to - I have issues with having a PERMANENT strike against my name which will carry through my children's entire childhoods hanging over my head like a sword of Damocles, and the total ignorance of the absolutely devastating toll this investigation took on my mental health and my confidence in myself as a parent. No doubt the toll it TOOK on my mental health will be counted against me if I ever come to SS attention again as a mark of "bad" parenting as well - you just can't win.

Like I said earlier - I smile sweetly, play along with all the demands - but I shouldn't HAVE to be forced to parent in a backside covering manner, I shouldn't HAVE to think that I go to baby groups at least partly to lay an audit trail of good parenting just in case in the future one of my kids trips while learning to walk and ends up with a bumped head and of course the "known to SS" label comes back to haunt us. There's no right of appeal, no way we can get that removed ever - it's like a toothache - it's always there niggling away in the background... if anything totally innocent happened and we got looked at again - how could we ever trust it would be done fairly in the light of a prior malicious referral - we can't.

People need to get out of this mindset that these referrals have no impact upon people, or that only the "guilty" need worry - they can have an absolutely devastating impact upon GOOD parents.

Would you rather they didn't visit people when a referral is made?

It's awful that you've had such a bad experience and that it's had such an impact on you, and I hope things improve soon. There possibly should be a right of appeal to get your name removed from the register, only a legal expert can answer that definitively.

In my experience it takes a huge amount of evidence to have a child removed, so you really shouldn't worry about the odd bump and bruise. Child-protection paediatricians are very able to see what is a 'normal' childhood bump, injury, dirt and so on, and what is probable abuse.

It's horrible for you, but surely (in your case) the person who made the malicious referral is the one in the wrong, not social services for following up on it and doing the job they are paid to do?

miduck

johnnyl wrote: »

but there is nothing to investigate. You investigate if the child rolls up somewhere with injuries or makes certain claims.

There literally is nothing to see. How can you investigate someone for doing a perfectly legal thing. If it was such a concern then it would be illegal to do.

What a bizarre post. You decide that there is nothing to investigate based on a few posts on an internet forum. Unlike the HV, you have never met the family, yet you think you are better placed to judge than them? None of us know what the HV has seen, or what concerns she has, but she is certainly in a better position to make such a decision than anyone on here is.

More importantly, child protection is not and should not be wholly reactive. Are you happy that a child be left in a concerning situation until they are hurt or tell someone something is wrong? We can only be thankful that you do not work in child services.

sassyblue

Snoopinggoose wrote: »

Well my point is this, no referral should ever have been made just because the health visitor felt her nose had been pushed out of joint..

At the end of the day health visiting is optional not a requirement and if families choose not to use there services (aka mostly being nosy self obsessed think they know it alls, when they don't have kids themselves the majority of the time anyway)......

at the end of the day this is all down to some jobsworth health visitor who feels she's had her nose pushed out of joint because we don't need them to come

.....I really don't see what the problem is.

I suspect the problem is your attitude.

jayII

johnnyl wrote: »

this has already been addressed, they have only ever been slated when they have continued to ignore actual evidence of physical abuse.

Huh? Do you know everything that has ever been said about social services? Of course they are criticised if they don't follow up on referrals!

I can just see it now, "child x (now badly injured/abused/dead) was referred to SS but they didn't visit."

Joe public's response: "Oh, that's okay then, a visit would have been interfering with the mum's right to bring the child up as she chose..."

Really?!!

Nicki

sassyblue wrote: »

I suspect the problem is your attitude.

I did wonder what the issue was which led OP to think the HV was a nosey know it all (in other words which bit or bits of mainstream advice did the OP ignore and exactly how risky was this to her children). That may be one of the red flags which was raised.

princessdon

Since Victoria C (where there were no schools or education involved) CP has been tightened up. They prefer services involved as schools are often the first to refer and see a problem.

If school was denied and also refusal of pre school services you can see why they rang. Also OP has a new born, this can be a time that HV will observe the family as PND and toddler coping with not being the sole centre of attention.

I do think the HV should have spoken to OP face to face and said they had concerns prior to ringing SS, it's always been best practise to inform parents of intent where possible so they know it is happening, but that's all.

OP was there a reason why the HV was involved? I have met mine only at designated checks when they sent a letter. I never once got any child weighed or attended any clinics. Was there a reason for their involvement.

I see both sides as I work with SS and I have also been reported for abuse (my eldest really needs to chose words more carefully). But I would have reported myself too, given what was said so I have no issues but I felt embarrassed and like I had something to prove on the receiving end and didn't sleep well for ages so I do honestly see both sides.

Want-To-Fit-In

johnnyl wrote: »

this has already been addressed, they have only ever been slated when they have continued to ignore actual evidence of physical abuse.

Excuse me you quoted my first reply and I was replying to you. I dont get chance to sit here and reply straight away.

No Childrens Services SHOULD follow up any report. How do they get evidence without doing so?

Like I saie I opted out of my HV when my first was not even 2 months old. Hes never attended nursery until 2 weeks ago. None of my children have or will be getting vacinations. I suppose Im lucky in the sense I havent been seen by them but it wouldnt annoy me if I was. It would be understandable.