Jump to content
Manx Forums, Live Chat, Blogs & Classifieds for the Isle of Man
Cronky

Children's Social Services - Will we ever get it right?

Recommended Posts

21 hours ago, maynragh said:

I will take this statement as an acknowledgement that you are being intentionally obtuse. 

Are you saying that the families were told that Bridget Griffen was going to conduct the investigation and publish it entirely independently? That she was going to be paid by government to do it, but they were not going to have any say on it before it was published? Is there any evidence for that? If that is what they were told why would they then hand over information or make statements to anyone else - anyone who was not clearly under her direction?

If that is not what they were told, why wasn't that (who is in control of the publication) the very first question that was asked!!!??! I fully understand the desire to seek restitution, but given the history there is no logic to what you are saying. Crying about that fact that the government screwed you after the case, when the government screwing you is the basis for the claim is either naive or intentionally deceitful for god knows what reason. 

If these people are serious about doing something about this - and that includes you as the apparent mouthpiece - they need to pull themselves together, stop bitching about it on MF and produce a solid body of evidence to shame the people responsible - and keep doing it till things change. Having a tanti because the people who call the shots - the same people you're trying to tear in to - have refused to drop themselves in it is pointless. 

 

 

 

 

 

Perhaps it would be enlightening if you could just come out and tell us why you have an issue with understanding every response given to your drivel.

Whilst you obviously have such a high opinion of your own intellect, perhaps you should consider why your superior mind is incapable of questioning proven abusers but is fully able to apply itself to attempting to discredit anyone who is capable. 

What is your agenda?

Who is it that you are trying to protect?

Why do you have such issues with abusers of children and their parents being exposed?

I would bet that your pay-day will be on the 24th this month as the 25th is a Saturday and that next month you will be paid a week early along with other government employee's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I for one have not got a clue as to what you keep calling an "abused family" is FFS.

Can you give an example of one?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks dilli.  No. Doubt STT will now regurgitate all his past posts...:rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Neil Down said:

Thanks dilli.  No. Doubt STT will now regurgitate all his past posts...:rolleyes:

Sorry Neil. I just can't let this shit go.

STT is so full of hate that he has got himself onto some kind of mental roundabout.

He's gonna feel a twat when he is eventually outed, 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Speak The Truth said:

Perhaps it would be enlightening if you could just come out and tell us why you have an issue with understanding every response given to your drivel.

Whilst you obviously have such a high opinion of your own intellect, perhaps you should consider why your superior mind is incapable of questioning proven abusers but is fully able to apply itself to attempting to discredit anyone who is capable. 

What is your agenda?

Who is it that you are trying to protect?

Why do you have such issues with abusers of children and their parents being exposed?

I would bet that your pay-day will be on the 24th this month as the 25th is a Saturday and that next month you will be paid a week early along with other government employee's.

I would be interested in the DHSC publishing information showing from all child protection cases, how many kids are found to be being abused or put at risk of harm every year and how many cases do not result in further action.  The 8 cases that you always champion - your own presumably one of them - would then be put into perspective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, dilligaf said:

Sorry Neil. I just can't let this shit go.

STT is so full of hate that he has got himself onto some kind of mental roundabout.

He's gonna feel a twat when he is eventually outed, 

He’ll probably end up being sectioned long before then...

Edited by Neil Down

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, dilligaf said:

He's gonna feel a twat when he is eventually outed, 

Why would you want to out someone? You should be at the Awards for Excellence. I’ve had 5 awards now just for turning up. I got one just for having a poo in under four minutes. The big award is still out there too ;) Government is brilliant as you know. Tonight is our night to shine. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, TittySmith said:

Why would you want to out someone? You should be at the Awards for Excellence. I’ve had 5 awards now just for turning up. I got one just for having a poo in under four minutes. The big award is still out there too ;) Government is brilliant as you know. Tonight is our night to shine. 

You won't shine too bright if the old saying is true, that one cannot polish a turd.;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Speak The Truth said:

Perhaps it would be enlightening if you could just come out and tell us why you have an issue with understanding every response given to your drivel.

Whilst you obviously have such a high opinion of your own intellect, perhaps you should consider why your superior mind is incapable of questioning proven abusers but is fully able to apply itself to attempting to discredit anyone who is capable. 

What is your agenda?

Who is it that you are trying to protect?

Why do you have such issues with abusers of children and their parents being exposed?

I would bet that your pay-day will be on the 24th this month as the 25th is a Saturday and that next month you will be paid a week early along with other government employee's.

1. Because you don't answer any question put to you.

2. I've considered your point. I'm not trying to discredit anyone, I've merely pointed out the logic flaw in your approach. Your point does not make any sense. 

3. I don't have an agenda. The topic of the thread asks the question - will we ever get it right? The answer is no. At the most fundamental level if we keep voting for politicians who actively implement socially destructive policy frameworks, we as a society will never 'get it right'. Indeed it could still get much much worse. My interest would be in trying to prevent that, but I understand that foaming at the mouth and ranting at politicians / civil servants on an anonymous internet forum isn't going to help. Presenting the evidence would, but you don't seem to agree for some reason.

4. I am not trying to protect anyone in the sense that you intended. In theory the only reason to discuss it is with regards to my own family - should they ever require the support of social services (having lived through such a scenario myself I am not so naive as to think it could never happen to my own kids despite their apparent current security).

5. I do not have any issue with people being exposed. I understand that people providing evidence may not want their identifies published, but I don't think that is necessary.

6. I haven't had a 'pay-day' for nearly ten years, but if you want to send me some money that's great.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dilligaf said:

I for one have not got a clue as to what you keep calling an "abused family" is FFS.

Can you give an example of one?

Easy question to answer.

For obvious reasons I will not name one but I will give an example.

A child is reported by teachers as having bruise's that are unexplained. The parents are then summoned to either a police station or Murray House. After a five minute meeting the parents are separated with the father being asked to explain the bruise's whilst the mother is being told that the bruises could only have been caused by assault.

These interviews are not recorded, except for the written report of the social worker.

The father is told he must leave the house or the child will be taken into care, he does so and, social workers report, in their files, that the fathers leaving of the family home is an indication that he has done wrong.

A week goes by and the child still has bruises, including fresh ones.

A restraining order is placed on the father, the mother will not facilitate or agree with any form of contact between the father and the child.  

Because 'professionals' say there is a risk - the courts support ss and the mother.

The mother, in evidence, states that she is fearful for the welfare of her child after learning from ss what the father has done. She is granted full custody, the father has no parental rights, the child has lost their father and a family is ripped apart.

And all the time the bruise's keep appearing.

Turns out that the child is very robust whilst playing football, is the daredevil of their class when climbing trees, swinging from climbing frames and being a child that pushes their physical boundaries to their limits.

They barely spent a day without a cut, a scrape or a bruise.

Even a year after the father was removed.

And during all this, ss never admitted or explored the possibility they may have got it wrong.

Why would they?

The initial social workers have gone to a different jurisdiction after questions were raised and as agency workers it was just easier to move on than to have to answer questions.

 

27 minutes ago, Boo Gay'n said:

I would be interested in the DHSC publishing information showing from all child protection cases, how many kids are found to be being abused or put at risk of harm every year and how many cases do not result in further action.  The 8 cases that you always champion - your own presumably one of them - would then be put into perspective.

Perhaps you should first ask -

As the result of the investigation, considering the findings, why has there not been a full investigation into those findings and action taken against those proven to have been guilty?

Why have the relevant Registration Authorities for those social workers not been informed of the findings?

Why has there been no apology for the eight families that gave evidence?

Why, given the findings, is there not now a full, public enquiry into the proven abuses with powers to investigate all other families that ss have been involved with without the restrictions imposed by Bell, Quayle and the other politicians who were aware of, but chose to ignore, the abuse their gravy train condoned?

Why do family courts not question evidence given by ss?

SS publishing information is a pipe dream - they exclude anyone who dares to question them from meetings and involvement. 

This includes other significant professionals employed by the same government. 

If you need to ask why those professionals do not challenge, you need to ask how many would put their conscience before their pensions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your example appears to be a relationship dispute between a couple where she has used an excuse to stop him  seeing his kid? 

There's more to that story that  you are letting on.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, notwell said:

Your example appears to be a relationship dispute between a couple where she has used an excuse to stop him  seeing his kid? 

There's more to that story that  you are letting on.

the "no names" bit is probably because it's him. His rants would start to make some sort of sense now

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Speak The Truth said:

Easy question to answer.

For obvious reasons I will not name one but I will give an example.

A child is reported by teachers as having bruise's that are unexplained. The parents are then summoned to either a police station or Murray House. After a five minute meeting the parents are separated with the father being asked to explain the bruise's whilst the mother is being told that the bruises could only have been caused by assault.

These interviews are not recorded, except for the written report of the social worker.

The father is told he must leave the house or the child will be taken into care, he does so and, social workers report, in their files, that the fathers leaving of the family home is an indication that he has done wrong.

A week goes by and the child still has bruises, including fresh ones.

A restraining order is placed on the father, the mother will not facilitate or agree with any form of contact between the father and the child.  

Because 'professionals' say there is a risk - the courts support ss and the mother.

The mother, in evidence, states that she is fearful for the welfare of her child after learning from ss what the father has done. She is granted full custody, the father has no parental rights, the child has lost their father and a family is ripped apart.

And all the time the bruise's keep appearing.

Turns out that the child is very robust whilst playing football, is the daredevil of their class when climbing trees, swinging from climbing frames and being a child that pushes their physical boundaries to their limits.

They barely spent a day without a cut, a scrape or a bruise.

Even a year after the father was removed.

And during all this, ss never admitted or explored the possibility they may have got it wrong.

Why would they?

The initial social workers have gone to a different jurisdiction after questions were raised and as agency workers it was just easier to move on than to have to answer questions.

 

Perhaps you should first ask -

As the result of the investigation, considering the findings, why has there not been a full investigation into those findings and action taken against those proven to have been guilty?

Why have the relevant Registration Authorities for those social workers not been informed of the findings?

Why has there been no apology for the eight families that gave evidence?

Why, given the findings, is there not now a full, public enquiry into the proven abuses with powers to investigate all other families that ss have been involved with without the restrictions imposed by Bell, Quayle and the other politicians who were aware of, but chose to ignore, the abuse their gravy train condoned?

Why do family courts not question evidence given by ss?

SS publishing information is a pipe dream - they exclude anyone who dares to question them from meetings and involvement. 

This includes other significant professionals employed by the same government. 

If you need to ask why those professionals do not challenge, you need to ask how many would put their conscience before their pensions.

You have given a perfect example of why there should have been a FULLY independent investigation, and then a perfect series of questions and statements that reveal why you're not going to achieve anything. 

You've given one version of a story that clearly (even from the way you've written it) there are multiple other versions of. The mother's version, the child's version, social services and teachers versions - all with their own interests applied in the telling. Unless all of those versions are recorded and compared by someone who is truly independent of the entire story (i.e. clearly not the government or anyone employed by the government), you're never going to achieve any useful truth from that situation. That is clearly tragic if we accept the basic premise of a family broken unnecessarily (which may or may not be the case). Even if we accept that government staff could not be forced to take part in a fully independent review, that does not minimise the right to collect the versions that are available, or the power of any that are - which in itself would likely force a better response than you would otherwise expect. You seem incapable of seeing it objectively though. As others have said, presumably because you are yourself an aggrieved party. 

If the evidence you claim does indeed exist then I'm afraid those involved have made it too easy for the government to sweep it under the rug - because you're talking about small numbers of already marginalised people (the fact it could happen to anyone is irrelevant and ignores the sad fact that different demographics are probably treated differently). It's understandable that those involved may have been naive in hoping that the truth would be published given what was said and what they've been through, but what is not understandable is for you to then rant about it afterwards. If you're serious about changing things stop wasting your time here. Reproduce the evidence on your own terms, ensure it's all verifiable and use it. Unfortunately your current approach will inevitably lead people to assume the evidence you claim does not exist, or is as robust as you claim (the story you've given above being a perfect example) - and so it has been so easily dismissed.  

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, maynragh said:

You have given a perfect example of why there should have been a FULLY independent investigation, and then a perfect series of questions and statements that reveal why you're not going to achieve anything. 

You've given one version of a story that clearly (even from the way you've written it) there are multiple other versions of. The mother's version, the child's version, social services and teachers versions - all with their own interests applied in the telling. Unless all of those versions are recorded and compared by someone who is truly independent of the entire story (i.e. clearly not the government or anyone employed by the government), you're never going to achieve any useful truth from that situation. That is clearly tragic if we accept the basic premise of a family broken unnecessarily (which may or may not be the case). Even if we accept that government staff could not be forced to take part in a fully independent review, that does not minimise the right to collect the versions that are available, or the power of any that are - which in itself would likely force a better response than you would otherwise expect. You seem incapable of seeing it objectively though. As others have said, presumably because you are yourself an aggrieved party. 

If the evidence you claim does indeed exist then I'm afraid those involved have made it too easy for the government to sweep it under the rug - because you're talking about small numbers of already marginalised people (the fact it could happen to anyone is irrelevant and ignores the sad fact that different demographics are probably treated differently). It's understandable that those involved may have been naive in hoping that the truth would be published given what was said and what they've been through, but what is not understandable is for you to then rant about it afterwards. If you're serious about changing things stop wasting your time here. Reproduce the evidence on your own terms, ensure it's all verifiable and use it. Unfortunately your current approach will inevitably lead people to assume the evidence you claim does not exist, or is as robust as you claim (the story you've given above being a perfect example) - and so it has been so easily dismissed.  

 

U

 

 

 

A very good reply to this long drawn out saga that sort seems to want to prolong for no apparent reason other than bitching on here which as you succinctly point out will get you no fucking where.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have no doubt been browsing the posts whilst protecting your identity by not logging in.

I appreciate that without the say-so of Howard you will probably not post on this forum, but, perhaps you could ask him if you could re-engage and answer my last question.

It would also be enlightening if you could explain why, when in 87.5% of the questions asked by the 'Independent' Investigation found serious failings, to put it politely, by 'professionals employed by your government only small tweaks are needed to rectify the problems?

Given that in 6 of the cases it was fully proven that employees had, to be polite, abused their position of trust - can you confirm what disciplinary action has been taken against their employees implicated and the managers who turned a blind eye to the complaints?

Can you also inform me, given that, with regards to 36 of the possible 48 findings, what action has been taken by yourself and your elected colleagues, have taken to ensure that the partial evidence to prove will

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×