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

pipkin71

Molly41 wrote: »

Im a retired midwife and a mother of 4. The attitude displayed in the post above would concern me. Children are everyone's responsibility - society has a role to play. They are not your personal possessions and you have a duty to ensure their well being as does the HV and anybody who comes into contact and has concerns.

If the parent does not want their child to attend nursery and would rather not have health visitor input, that is their choice to make and whilst children are not possessions, they are the responsibility of their parents and it is ultimately their parents who will make the decisions they feel are right for their children.

The health visitor should only refer to social services if there are child protection issues. Requesting no further HV involvement is not a child protection issue in itself.

pipkin71

lindsaygalaxy wrote: »

Is there more to this story? Surely if the other child is 4 then he/she should already be at school or due to go in September?

Working in a school I see children that have 'slipped through the net' and end up going to school late or having very poor social and academic skills.

The legal requirement, once children reach a certain age is that they receive a full time education suitable to their age and aptitude. That does not mean they have to attend school.

Children can have great social skills without attending school. Some can attend school and be painfully shy. The opposite can also be true. A lot depends on the child as well.

pipkin71

squirrelchops wrote: »

I am a social worker within a referral and assessment team - ie I am the person who the health visitor in this case would contact to make a referral.

IMO if I had a health visitor on the phone saying 'Mrs J doesn't send little Toddler J to preschool/nursery and doesn't want a health visitor' then my response would be 'and your concern is?'

However if the health visitor said ' Mrs J doesn't send little Toddler J to nursery despite my attempts and there are concerns regarding Toddler's development' my response would be - 'try again to enagage with family, how about linking them in with a family support worker at the children's centre' and go from there.

If the health visitor said 'Mrs J won't send Toddler J to nursery. I am worried about their development because on the schedule of growing skills Toddler J is behind in multiple areas, baby J also has missed immunisations and the home conditions are awful' I would be more worried. Particularly if then there are other notifications such as a domestic violence report or a parent has a substance misuse issue or some mental health concerns that they are not receiving help for. This would trigger an Initial Assessment by social services.

So, for a social worker to be visiting a family based on what the OP's first post stated does not make sense to me. I certainly wouldn't be visiting a family if they chose not to send a child to nursery - that is their choice. Hence why I feel there is more behind the story than we have initially been told.

An informative post, squirrelchops

Person_one

Its the thread that never dies!

pipkin71

embob74 wrote: »

I believe home schoolers research too as they still have to follow the curriculum. It doesn't have to mean isolation either - a lot of home schoolers meet up.
In Sweden children don't attend formal schooling until about the age of 7 and their education is highly commended.
Just because it's not what you know or understand it doesn't make it wrong.

Home educators don't have to follow the national curriculum

pipkin71

Snoopinggoose wrote: »

Not sure to be honest, the social worker said it would most likely be referred to the education welfare officer! And that would 'probably' be it, presumably I'll get a letter from the social services saying as such?

Education welfare will only get involved once your child reaches the age where they must receive a full time education, and only then, if you choose not to send your child to school.

If they get involved beforehand, you can politely refuse their services and, in any event, you can refuse their visits even if you don't send your child to school but that is a bridge to cross if and when you come to it.

pipkin71

moneysaymoneydo wrote: »

I would be up in arms if my child was attending school and being educated by a non qualified teacher just as i have now read can happen if a parent cant be bothered to put their child to school, home education is fine if the parent is a qualified teacher i suppose except child would not get the interaction it would have in a school environment, but you do have that handful of parents that no better and want to rebel with the norm.

Then you need to be up in arms as many schools can use tutors rather than qualified teachers. Substitute [STRIKE]teachers[/STRIKE] instructors / tutors do not have to have QTS.

Also, following a rule change last year, academies can employ unqualified teachers, which brings them in line wth free schools.

Molly41

pipkin71 wrote: »

If the parent does not want their child to attend nursery and would rather not have health visitor input, that is their choice to make and whilst children are not possessions, they are the responsibility of their parents and it is ultimately their parents who will make the decisions they feel are right for their children.

The health visitor should only refer to social services if there are child protection issues. Requesting no further HV involvement is not a child protection issue in itself.

Sixty Eight people "liked" my post - What does that say?

pipkin71

Molly41 wrote: »

Sixty Eight people "liked" my post - What does that say?

It says sixty eight people out of the 1,179,128 members who use this site like or agree with something you said.

That doesn't make what the health visitor did, correct.

kaya

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) then they should respect that! Nursery is also optional for my child and if I choose not to send her to nursery then that's my perogative..

I really am struggling to see why you can see why concerns were raised, 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 out! And at the end of the day if any of our kids were ill we'd take them to a doctor and in the case of our newborn we regularly take him to clinic off our own back to be weighed etc!

No concerns needed to be raised whatsoever, at the end of the day I'm independent enough to know what I want and I choose not to have the health visitor to come out then that's my choice.

And at the of the day taking my newborn to clinic to be weighed etc IS 'engaging' with services, I really don't see what the problem is.

Yep, sums up my opinion on this matter perfectly