Skip to main content

Social Worker's Comments

I have transcribed the comments in yesterday's interview from the ex-Social Worker as they confirm that the courts should not rely on Local Authority Assessments.

Journalist: This woman left the profession after ten years she is concerned that government targets for numbers of adoptions could lead to families being wrongly split up she has asked to remain anonymous

ex-SW: I think the court system fails some families. I would say a small number.
I went into social work to support families to stay together
but I became increasingly aware that people couldn't trust the system
I think that having targets for numbers of adoptions is ridiculous
I don't think it should happen. There's a possibility that mistakes are made in assessments and that some children are taken away that shouldn't have been.

Journalist: Those mistakes equate to years of heartache ....


tfc said…
I found the assessments were based on encouraging the social workers theory. So if a sw had a theory thr parents own comments were ignored. Say the child was traumatised by going into care and became withdrawn. Well one's own explanation would be ignored whilst the sw would make a case out of the parent and child having a bad relationship.
Also good comments by other workers in assessments would be ignored and the sw would just use her own comments.
It is totally biased. Also if the social workers are behaving in a bullying and intimidating way it can really affect assessments,especially if one is vulnerable with a mental health problem or learning disability. Their harshness treatment of the parents and spite, can turn one into jelly. The anxiety one displays will therefore be used against you.

This is confirmed by the governments latest guidelines on dealing with parents with learning disability.That the parents suffer great fear of losing their children that this can lead to abnormal conditions and abnormal responses in assessments. Especially when the centres are an alien environment to very young children and one can't explain what is going on.

When I explained my position to a contact staff,I was told well just realax and try and enjoy your time with the child. There was no acknowledgement from social services of the stress these assessments cause.It is like being under exam conditions and you don't know if you will pass(and that pass depends on if you lose your child, or if trivial things will be used against you.

I actually played with my child constantly as I was frightened if I had a sit down once I would be criticised for not playing with my child enough.

This is how malicious the whole thing became.

One of the staff told someone close afterwards that the assessments were not as bad as the sw was making out.In fact when X came home they said my contact was of a high standard. But no will speak up and actually say this in court. As social workers seem to have unaccountable power over other workers.

In fact when X came home they said my contact was of a high standard.

They system is crazy and illogical and there is nowhere for parents to turn if things turn malicious. The SS complaints system is geared to protecting their own workers. one finds that parents are treated with equal hostility and maliciousness from complaints officers and you are thwarted at every turn from getting your complaint dealt with fairly and impartially.

Popular posts from this blog

Statement re false allegations from Esther Baker

Statement by John Hemming
I am pleased that the Police have now made it clear that there has been a concerted effort to promote false criminal allegations against me and that the allegations had no substance whatsoever.
I would like to thank Emily Cox, my children, Ayaz Iqbal (my Solicitor), my local lib dem team and many others who supported me through this dreadful experience. There are many worse things that happen to people, but this was a really bad experience.
It is bad enough to have false allegations made about yourself to the police, but to have a concerted campaign involving your political opponents and many others in public creates an environment in which it is reasonable to be concerned about ill founded vigilante attacks on your family and yourself. Luckily there was a more substantial lobby to the contrary as well, which included many people who were themselves real survivors of abuse, which has helped.
I am normally someone who helps other people fight injustice. …

Homelessness vs Selling Books

Candidates in elections tend to find themselves very busy with lots of things to do.  It is, therefore, necessary to prioritise things to ensure that the important things are dealt with.

To me the issue of homelessness and rough sleeping is an important issue.  Therefore, when Birmingham's Faith Leaders group contacted me to ask me what I would propose and whether I would work with them to make things better I was pleased to respond with my views and indicate that I would work with them after the election.

The Faith Leaders Group (Bishops and other religious leaders in Birmingham) have now sent out their report.

Sadly, according to their report,  I was the only candidate for Yardley to respond.  The group in their report said:

"Particularly disappointing was the lack of response from some of those candidates seeking re-election as MP for their respective constituencies."
It is worth looking at the priorities of my opponent.
Interestingly today she has decided to be at th…

R v SUSSEX JUSTICES ex p McCARTHY [1924] 1 KB 256

I have only just found this one which I think is accurately reported below (but if it is not please give me an accurate report).


R v SUSSEX JUSTICES ex p McCARTHY [1924] 1 KB 256

November 9 1923

Editor’s comments in bold.

Here, the magistrates’ clerk retired with the bench when they were considering a charge of dangerous driving. The clerk belonged to a firm of solicitors acting in civil proceedings for the other party to the accident. It was entirely irrelevant that there had been no evidence of actual influence brought to bear on the magistrates, and the conviction was duly quashed.

It is clear that the deputy clerk was a member of the firm of solicitors engaged in the conduct of proceedings for damages against the applicant in respect of the same collision as that which gave rise to the charge that the justices were considering. It is said, and, no doubt, truly, that when that gentleman retired in the usual way with the justices, taking with him the…