Jump to content
magamamma

baby p

Recommended Posts

I attended Child Protection Training last weekend as part of my job and we were told that it is now standard proceedure that if the RSPCA are called to a house for animal cruelty and children are present, then the RSPCA will inform Social Services.

 

I feel totally sickened this morning after hearing this terrible news and also incredibly angry after sitting through four hours of hearing about how the Government have brought in new proceedures and rulings following the Victoria Climbie inquiry.

 

Talking to the trainer (who is the Head of Child Protection in the area) after the course, he also said he felt very cynical about all these new proceedures.

 

Listening to Lord Laming on the news last night saying that these agencies forget that their client is *the child* and NOT the parents adds to my anger and shame that our society continues to get it so so wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awful, awful thing.

I do feel that removing a child into foster care/care home should be a last resort & that supporting the parents is often in the best interests of the child. Maybe when the risk is high, then foster care and supervised parental visits are in order. BUT... as someone has already said, the child needs t be the priority. Not the parents. How can this have happened? How can noone have spotted that the child was so abused?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This case and the similar one (in Doncaster I think) only recently in which a parent deliberately broke the child's back made me feel physically sick.

 

I was on the child protection team for three years and believe me, although obviously (and thankfully) such gross abuse is the extreme, trying to get social services to remove a child is like trying to get blood from a stone - "but they have to be given a chance to parent" - what, even if the child is living in filth and squalor? "Just because they're heroin addicts / wife beaters / the most appalling person you have ever met - doesn't mean they're bad parents". Well, actually, in most cases yes it does!

BUT. When you DO eventually remove a child / children and, as I say, that happens normally in only the worst cases, the children still never ever want to leave. Because no matter how bad that person is, they are still Mum or Dad and the childs instinct is to stay. If you ever fancy the worst, best, hardest, most heart rending, tear jerking, frustrating and demoralising, high stress high pressure bang-your-head-against-a-wall job, then go on to child protection. You won't regret it.

 

Mrs B

 

Couldn't agree more.

 

I have worked through a few very harrowing cases where children should have been removed, but weren't, and untold damage done as a result. The social workers on the cases were doing their utmost to remove the children as the risks were clear to them. It was their superiors who wouldn't see the wood for the trees. The SWs were fantastic and working themselves into early graves - I have known two resign through sheer frustration.

 

I also work with some children who are looked after, having been removed from their birth families. Their loyalty to the parents who neglected or abused them is rarely shaken. Their anger about the way they have been treated doesn't often seem to affect it. Above all, the child's instinct is to seek the love and attention of their parent, even if the only available attention is abusive.

 

It takes a while to develop the thick skin you need to cope with some of it. At the end of the day I shut a mental 'box' on all the things I may have heard, and go home to my own family who don't need to hear it. It certainly puts my own worries and troubles into sharp perspective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still cannot get my head around how anyone could do this to another living being let alone a baby, I have seen cases of neglect, abysmal parenting, total no idea of how to look after themselves or their child, but somewhere all of these parents have a love for their child. The reports do not say if this poor baby was the victim of another weird belief about child witches.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had only heard bits of this on the news and hadn't read anything until just now.I feel sick. Youngest DD is 20 months, not much older than Baby P. I would kill anyone that laid a finger on her, what was his mother thinking? I read she has other children including a baby which she wants back when she gets out of prison. Apparently all 3 believe they will be out by Christmas. I guess you all know this already but it makes me feel ill.

 

I know someone whose baby had it's leg fractured by twist fracture. Neither adult was prosecuted because the police couldn't prove who did it (the baby was 3 months) the baby was then adopted. She went onto have another baby that died at about 3 months old apparently because the father feel asleep with it on the sofa whilst drunk :cry:

 

This is all so wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had only heard bits of this on the news and hadn't read anything until just now.I feel sick. Youngest DD is 20 months, not much older than Baby P. I would kill anyone that laid a finger on her, what was his mother thinking? I read she has other children including a baby which she wants back when she gets out of prison. Apparently all 3 believe they will be out by Christmas. I guess you all know this already but it makes me feel ill.

 

I know someone whose baby had it's leg fractured by twist fracture. Neither adult was prosecuted because the police couldn't prove who did it (the baby was 3 months) the baby was then adopted. She went onto have another baby that died at about 3 months old apparently because the father feel asleep with it on the sofa whilst drunk :cry:

 

This is all so wrong.

 

That is awful and so terrible for the second child. There are some horrible people in this world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been reading this post since it appeared and haven't commented yet as I just haven't known what to say. I still don't.

 

All i can do is echo what everyone else has said about how awful this is and the obvious mistakes/negliegnce on the part of the agencies involved.

 

Studying child law last year it was impressed upon us that it was "child" law rather than "family" law as the main priority was the protection of the child and obviously something went very wrong in this case.

Following the horrific case of Victoria Climbe and the investigations that were carried out and the multitude of new practices and procedures that were put into place we were lead to believe that this sort of thing would NOT happen again.

Surely, we are right to ask how in the world this poor child could be left to suffer for so long by sooo many people including social workers, drs, nurses and most horrificaly of all his own MOTHER.

 

I have always been opposed to forced steralisation (which can still be carried out under our law but only in limited circumstances) BUT im starting to come around to the idea that such people should be steralised and NEVER allowed near another child never mind allowed to actually give birth to another.

 

Sorry - that was sooo much longer than I expected it to be

 

Stacey

x

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...