Question about social services procedures in the early 1990’s

Batman_100

Hi. 

I’ve recently been talking to a friend who’s interested in tracing some long lost relatives. She’s given me some details of her early life and there’s a few things which don’t quite add up. 

When my friend was a toddler in 1993 she was taken into the care system as her mum was unable to look after her for complex reasons. After a short time with a foster family, her dad, who had recently separated from her mum, applied to have her removed from the care system and for her to live with him. 

But then her grandparents, who never got on with her dad, raised an objection to this which caused her to stay in the care system significantly longer. She believes she wasn’t allowed to live with her dad because at the time social services were very hostile towards the idea of a single parent household being headed by a man, and also because of concerns about how he would have managed financially if as a single dad he couldn’t claim child benefit. 

In order to get a better understanding of this, is anyone able to help answer some questions? 

Firstly, were social services actually that hostile to single dads in the early 90’s or had attitudes changed by then? Secondly, she knows her dad lost his job in the recession in 1992 so could have been struggling financially at the time. But would this have been strong enough grounds for her grandparents to object and for social services to agree to her not being placed in his care? Or would it most likely have been the case that her dad had other more serious personal issues which led to him being refused care of his child? My friends parents were married when she was born so he would have had parental rights. 

And finally, I know that historically only mothers were allowed to claim child benefit, but this isn’t the case today. Had the rules already changed by the early 90’s or were there any special rules which allowed child benefit to be paid to the father in exceptional circumstances? 

Thank you to anyone who’s able to help with this. 

sevenhills

Batman_100 said:

Firstly, were social services actually that hostile to single dads in the early 90’s or had attitudes changed by then?

My daughter was born in 2000 and I believe her mum got an easy ride when being assessed by CAFCAS, I wouldn't use the word hostile in any decade, but its down to the individuals dealing with the case. Staying with mum was always the easiest option.

[Deleted User]

 She can apply to read her care files under data protection. That will give indications of the reasons social workers made their decisions at the time. 

For example https://liverpool.gov.uk/adult-social-care/access-your-social-care-records/

gizmo111

She believes she wasn’t allowed to live with her dad because at the time social services were very hostile towards the idea of a single parent household being headed by a man, and also because of concerns about how he would have managed financially if as a single dad he couldn’t claim child benefit. 
Child benefit makes up such a small proportion of household income unlikely to have been a major factor.  Why does she believe they were hostile - has her Dad told her this?  Did he pursue her return to his care through the Courts?

In order to get a better understanding of this, is anyone able to help answer some questions? 

Firstly, were social services actually that hostile to single dads in the early 90’s or had attitudes changed by then? Secondly, she knows her dad lost his job in the recession in 1992 so could have been struggling financially at the time. But would this have been strong enough grounds for her grandparents to object and for social services to agree to her not being placed in his care? Or would it most likely have been the case that her dad had other more serious personal issues which led to him being refused care of his child? My friends parents were married when she was born so he would have had parental rights. 

I know several cases where children were placed with father's in the 80's, unlikely finances alone would have been an issue.  Who did grandparents object to?  There must be more to this and if she cannot get a full explanation from her parents and grandparents then she should as suggested above get her records - in fact she might want to get them whatever the family narrative is.

TBagpuss

As above, she should be able to access her own file, although it's possible some elements may be redacted to protect the privacy of others.
In the early 1990 there were no formal legal provisions hostile to dingle dads but the personal attitudes of social workers may have been hostile, however, it's unlikely that this would have prevented a placement with dad in a situation where the alternative was remaining in care (it might well have played a part if there was a conflict between mum and dad) 

What I can say from my experience of  working with families in the care system is that it is very, very common for a parent or parents to minimise or understate the issues which they have, whether because they do not recognise the impact of their actions or situation on their child and their ability to care for the child, or because they are not willing to admit to the issue. For instance, parents who had very significant issues with drug or alcohol abuse resulting in neglect, who would claim that the only reason social services were refusing to allow their children to live with them was due to their being insecurely housed, or parents where the children had suffered severe neglect who would say that social workers removed them just because 'the house was a bit messy'   

That said, there are also cases where the personal views / prejudices of a social worker means that parents have to go to court to get their children returned. 

Does your friend know whether there were court proceedings in their case? If so, then there would have been a court appointed Children's Guardian / Guardian Ad Litem whose job it would have been to put the child's views and welfare to the court. Guardians are often pretty good at identifying and pushing back against social workers where they are yielding to prejudice, but they don't normally get involved unless there were court proceedings.  

It's possible that their father was in a situation where there would have been concerned about his ability to care for her, and if there was no support from grandparents / wider family that could have been a factor in the decision. 

gizmo111

OP - your friend needs to be really sure what she is trying to achieve and make sure she is emotionally strong enough before she reads them, as very often they are hard reading, for obvious reasons.

Batman_100

_shel said:

 She can apply to read her care files under data protection. That will give indications of the reasons social workers made their decisions at the time. 

For example https://liverpool.gov.uk/adult-social-care/access-your-social-care-records/

Thank you. She never thought about doing this. It’s an option we’ll have to explore. 

Batman_100

TBagpuss said:

As above, she should be able to access her own file, although it's possible some elements may be redacted to protect the privacy of others.
In the early 1990 there were no formal legal provisions hostile to dingle dads but the personal attitudes of social workers may have been hostile, however, it's unlikely that this would have prevented a placement with dad in a situation where the alternative was remaining in care (it might well have played a part if there was a conflict between mum and dad) 

What I can say from my experience of  working with families in the care system is that it is very, very common for a parent or parents to minimise or understate the issues which they have, whether because they do not recognise the impact of their actions or situation on their child and their ability to care for the child, or because they are not willing to admit to the issue. For instance, parents who had very significant issues with drug or alcohol abuse resulting in neglect, who would claim that the only reason social services were refusing to allow their children to live with them was due to their being insecurely housed, or parents where the children had suffered severe neglect who would say that social workers removed them just because 'the house was a bit messy'   

That said, there are also cases where the personal views / prejudices of a social worker means that parents have to go to court to get their children returned. 

Does your friend know whether there were court proceedings in their case? If so, then there would have been a court appointed Children's Guardian / Guardian Ad Litem whose job it would have been to put the child's views and welfare to the court. Guardians are often pretty good at identifying and pushing back against social workers where they are yielding to prejudice, but they don't normally get involved unless there were court proceedings.  

It's possible that their father was in a situation where there would have been concerned about his ability to care for her, and if there was no support from grandparents / wider family that could have been a factor in the decision. 

The problem is she’s never known her dad or paternal grandparents. All she knows about them is bits of information she was given by her mum years later and sadly she’s been estranged from her mum for several years now. 

All she can piece together from this secondhand information is that when she was taken into care, hat dad wasn’t deemed suitable to look after her either because of prejudices against single dads at the time, financial concerns, spurious allegations made by her grandparents or any combination of these. 

She’s already spoken to old friends of her mum who knew the family back then who’ve confirmed he moved out of the area years ago and she’s unable to find any presence on social media. 

She knows that he did start attending services at his local CofE church about the time she went into care when he was coming to terms with his marriage breaking down and and she thinks some of the claims made by her grandparents might have been based around this. It sounds far fetched, but because Waco was in the news at the time, they may have thought his new found interest in religion was a cause for concern. 

But she has accepted that in all likelihood she doesn’t know the full truth yet and information given by her mum may just be speculation or be blatantly untrue as her mum has a history of poor mental health. 

Seeing if she can access copies of her old files may be the best way foreword and to be prepared for some potentially uncomfortable reading. 

RAS

Hi
Your friend may find Lemn Sissay's experience of care informative although it was difficult. www.lemnsissay.com

It would probably be good for your friend to get her social services paperwork so she understands the reasons she was taken into care.

Given that she's already tried to locate her father, has she considered:

Using the information from her parent's marriage record to try and trace her father's birth, and any siblings he had?
Using the Salvation Army tracing service?

princeofpounds

There's a very real chance any accusation from the grandparents were not spurious, given the decisions that were taken. Not sure the prejudice argument really cuts it either (it may do in a parent vs. parent custody dispute, but less likely in parent vs. care). No-one is going to be interested in someone showing an interest in the CoE, Waco or no Waco.

Of course, it's possible. But a lot is pointing towards an incomplete picture of what was going on at that time, and there is a risk that she may not get the answers she 'wants' if she delves in to it. 

Hope it all goes well though.