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

jetplane

Sambucus_Nigra wrote: »

I think you are missing the point that once on SS's list you are always on the list.

Yes there is always a record even if is dormant, and yes when they enter your life it can be a nightmare.

And being on the list for not having a HV round, and for not sending a child to nursery - is complete madness.

Agree and I can not think why a SW would visit for this as a standalone issue.

You are implying that there is a fuller picture - what do you know that the OP needs to be aware of?

There is always a bigger picture. I am not implying anything other than we live in a nanny state where anyone who does not follow the norm is looked at twice.

lessonlearned

barbarawright wrote: »

Is this the sort of thing you said to your health visitor? It would certainly ring alarm bells with me.

This is exactly my point.

A totally disproportionate reaction. This would give rise to concern especially in a household where there are young children and health professionals are denied access.

fluffnutter

Snoopinggoose wrote: »

..because the health visitor felt her nose had been pushed out of joint..

... mostly being nosy self obsessed think they know it alls, when they don't have kids themselves the majority of the time anyway

... then that's my perogative

... this is all down to some jobsworth

You sound a nightmare. I knew a couple who sound a bit like you. Always ranting on at the health profession, their daughter's school teachers, the local church, you name it, they 'had a point of view about it'. They knew best, they knew their rights, and God forbid anyone who tried to tell them differently. They were an exhausting pair whom everyone spent most of their time trying to avoid.

If you go through life looking for a fight, you'll find one.

Helen2k8

Skim read here. I can understand OP's initial frustration AND their reaction here. Like it or not, a forum is a safe space to really shout out how you feel. I have had many a rant and rave, and people coming across as patronising or smug make me even worse.
In real life, I apologise if someone walks into me...

I don't understand why an optional service raises red flags.
I do understand why it's a bad thing to be in the system - I'd like to think SS and HVs are good, kind people, but not all of them are. It only takes one to hang on to an idea (have you seen Denise Roberts on the TV and all the parents she has to help through family courts etc?).

OP - I don't know what's best. If you complain, it goes against you. If you don't, they walk all over you Maybe you can ask your GP if they've heard anything from SS...?

Mojisola

Helen2k8 wrote: »

If you complain, it goes against you. If you don't, they walk all over you

There is also the option of just letting them visit, be polite and let them see there's nothing wrong.

lessonlearned

Molly41 wrote: »

If you read Lesson Learned posts you would see that she also has a husband who is very ill so has a very good idea what you are going through and the additional stress this puts on family life.

This is why I posted. I know exactly what it is like to have to cope with someone who has a degenerative illness and the additional strains this can put on family life.

Add two very small children into the mix and you have a recipe for exhaustion and stress.

Like anyone else who has had children I too had to deal with all manner of health professionals over the years. Some were lovely, some less so.

Snoopingoose - If you feel you really can't work with your allocated health visitor then ask if you can see another one, or pop along to the clinic every so often.

With regards to nursery school I think that some 3 year olds thrive and some may not be quite ready, in which case there's always the various mother and toddler groups.

I think from a healthcare perspective the Social Services have, in this case, taken into account the lack of HV visits, the lack of nursery school or similar, the poorly partner and decided to just keep a watchful eye. It is purely for you and your family's benefit.

Your disproportionate reaction to what you see as criticism is an indicator that you could be under stress or perhaps suffering from post natal depression. Social Services will have registered this and therefore will be vigilant.

Whilst there are some who may see this as the "Nanny State" going too far, the State, in the guise of the medical profession and Social Services, do have a duty of care to protect it's most vulnerable citizens. Children are, by definition, vulnerable and society at large has a moral obligation to see that they thrive.

Snoopingoose - it is not me who is on my high horse, it is you. You are totally over-reacting to the comments on this thread, displaying markedly agressive behaviour. This would be a red flag to any medical professional.

The Social Services have been called in because somewhere along the line, someone - rightly or wrongly - has expressed concern.

It really is in your best interests to co-operate and work with them before the situation escalates.

POPPYOSCAR

jetplane wrote: »

Maybe I am also an experienced social worker or health visitor, I must have missed that post? Not a box literally on a piece of paper, metaphorically speaking, as sometimes these boxes are ticked in ones head. In my experience where a family chooses not to engage it always raises a flag, that flag may not stay up but it always warrants a second look and due to safeguarding procedures sometimes there is other information that leads to a referral.



I don't know if the apparent idiot you refer to is your friends HV or the OP's HV and whilst I agree, we do not have the full picture. When the SW visits it will be no concerns and case closed and then the OP can make her complaint.

You have not read the whole thread obviously, the SW has already been and the OP has stated that she has said that because they do not want to send their child to nursery she is referring it to the education welfare.

POPPYOSCAR

Helen2k8 wrote: »

Skim read here. I can understand OP's initial frustration AND their reaction here. Like it or not, a forum is a safe space to really shout out how you feel. I have had many a rant and rave, and people coming across as patronising or smug make me even worse.
In real life, I apologise if someone walks into me...

I don't understand why an optional service raises red flags.
I do understand why it's a bad thing to be in the system - I'd like to think SS and HVs are good, kind people, but not all of them are. It only takes one to hang on to an idea (have you seen Denise Roberts on the TV and all the parents she has to help through family courts etc?).

OP - I don't know what's best. If you complain, it goes against you. If you don't, they walk all over you Maybe you can ask your GP if they've heard anything from SS...?

Well said.

fluffnutter

I think she should write to the Daily Mail. They love this kind of thing. Outrage! Disgust! Wicked SS riding ramrod over 'decent' parents! Nanny state! etc. etc.

POPPYOSCAR

lessonlearned wrote: »

This is exactly my point.

A totally disproportionate reaction. This would give rise to concern especially in a household where there are young children and health professionals are denied access.

The OP has not denied access she has declined to accept HV visits and to send her child to nursery AS IS HER LEGAL RIGHT.