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

notanewuser

suki1964 wrote: »

Where they say that have a four year old

It's the 4 year old not being in nursery that's the issue, isn't it?

suki1964

johnnyl wrote: »

nonsense

in such examples actual evidence of physical abuse was ignored. At no point has anyone been killed because they opted out of a system with a valid reason.

And how best to hide abuse by stopping outsiders seeing what's happening within the home

I'm no way saying the op is abusing her children. What I am saying is that refusing hv and not being seen to socialise the older child will be sending alarm bells

suki1964

notanewuser wrote: »

It's the 4 year old not being in nursery that's the issue, isn't it?

I would say its a mix of both as my post above

johnnyl

Own_My_Own wrote: »

Go and have a cup of and calm down. Your'll make yourself ill, with all this excitement.

what makes you think that I am not calm.

I have highlighted the words because they are key and being rather conveniently ignored.

At no point should excersizing your legal right result in you becoming subject to suspicion otherwise it wouldnt be a legal right. Its sheer common sense, these people have to put their evidence forward or mind their own business.

johnnyl

suki1964 wrote: »

And how best to hide abuse by stopping outsiders seeing what's happening within the home

I'm no way saying the op is abusing her children. What I am saying is that refusing hv and not being seen to socialise the older child will be sending alarm bells

if they hadnt already explained their decision, to somebody who had been seeing their kid then I would agree. However this wasnt the case.

The person had already been seeing the kid and had a basis to make a judgement from. There either was or was not evidence at that point.

The decision to opt out of that service is not evidence of anything other than not wanting that service. It was explained why that choice was made.

In the absence of evidence then the person simply does no want that service, as per what they have already said.

Nicki

I don't actually know any family without other issues in play who is still having regular home visits by a Health Visitor by the time their child is 4. A lot of mums have gone back to work 3 years prior to that, and even for SAHM mums outside of the usual weigh ins which take place at the clinic, contact with Health Visitors usually takes the form of a developmental check which is at yearly or eighteen monthly intervals, and unless you request to see them for another reason, you are left alone.

Which leads me to suspect that there is a bit more to the story than has been disclosed. OP was for some reason on a home visiting regime by her HV which she has tried to cancel. Whatever that reason was, if she isn't going to have support from the HV, then SS do need to do a double check to make sure the children are not at risk.

Tupperware_Queen

johnnyl wrote: »

what makes you think that I am not calm.

I have highlighted the words because they are key and being rather conveniently ignored.

At no point should excersizing your legal right result in you becoming subject to suspicion otherwise it wouldnt be a legal right. Its sheer common sense, these people have to put their evidence forward or mind their own business.

The OP does indeed have a right not to send their child to nursery, or to refuse access to those they do not want to visit their home.

HOWEVER the Health Visitor has a legal duty to report these circumstances.

Rights and duties are a delicate balancing act.

If the OP responds to any requests for information and/or visit from Children's Services, they will be able to see the children are healthy and happy, and there will be no more to it. If the OP refuses access, then the whole situation will ring alarm bells left right and centre, leading to more 'hassle' and 'interference'.


And this is not to mention the valuable support which can be received from a Health Visitor, regardless of how many children you have had - I had severe post-natal depression with my second child, and my Health Visitor was fantastic.

Person_one

Nicki wrote: »

I don't actually know any family without other issues in play who is still having regular home visits by a Health Visitor by the time their child is 4.

The younger child is only weeks old.

bagpuss38

On the opposite end of the scale would the OP be complaining if the hv had not been as efficient, social services cant win, they are damned if they check and damned if they dont.

They only check on you for a short time and the visits can be very helpful.
You may have a large family and support network but unless they are all made up of primary school teachers, a doctor and other professionals how can you question a qualified person coming just to check you are doing ok.

I'm sure you have a good reason for shutting your child off form the real world.

babyjane76

I manage a pre-school and am the designated person responsible for child protection and feel the HV would just be following procedure as she has to do.

In all safeguarding training we are taught that it is not our job to make a judgement but if we have any cause for concern (and someone withdrawing their child could be seen as such) we should report it to social care. It is then their job to decide whether or not the matter needs investigating and what to do.

Sometimes your concern can just be a small piece of a puzzle, social care may have had other concerns reported that you weren't aware of. (not saying that is the case here OP)

I have reported lots of concerns to social care some have been investigated some not, in some cases social care have supported the families sometimes the case has been closed.

What I would say though is I would rather report 100 incidents where there was no cause for concern found than miss 1 and a child be put at serious risk. The HV was just doing their job