MISCONDUCT!! and now seeking plo( to discuss differences)

Post Reply
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2014 6:30 pm

MISCONDUCT!! and now seeking plo( to discuss differences)

Post by unjustified » Thu Jan 16, 2014 12:18 am

to discuss differences apparently but i have a funny feeling their being sneaky and will try for interim care order :cry: i love my child and he loves me this is so wrong!!

in response to my current dealings with childrens services, i have worked with them to the best of my ability since the initial concerns were raised
original concerns:
home conditions fluxuating
get sleeping pattern in order
to engage with services
conclude section 47 enquiry
conclusion of original conference:
put on child register, under category of neglect, at risk of significant harm

i have worked with them up until the point of christmas week, but then things started getting disfunctional after disagreeing with the type of questioning they are coming in to my home with, they got informed by the head of 1st conference that they are to help my situation and not criticise me and that although they may percieve me as aggressive that it is actually frustration at the amount of services involved in my life for the last 5 years! it has already been evidenced over the past several conferences that i suffer from anxiety the fact has never been hidden when i have engaged with services and the fact that these workers are now coming into my home with questionaires around anger management and anxiety is totally inappropriate as "they were told they have to help my situation and not criticise me" also before i even got told about this questionaire i was being accused of unfounded emotional abuse in the form of holding my child's development back, but the emotional abuse they are entering my home to discuss is shouting and abuse

i also refer you to the welsh governments own views on:
The use of the Questionnaires and Scales in practice
When should I use a questionnaire/scale?

6.3 On occasions, it was also considered insensitive to present a questionnaire when needs
in a particular area were very evident. In practice it often offered a way to obtain a
fuller understanding or established a baseline for measuring improvement.
refer to human rights act 1988:

the worker trying to conduct this line of questioning would not give me a reasonable understanding of why i had to fill out this questionaire, infact it was only devulged to me by himself that he was infact my worker and not childs 10 days ago,
basically just told me when i asked why i need to do this i find it in-appropriate?"come and sit down and do it, it will be fun" i do not find it appropriate and it is trying to feed words into your own mouth so to speak, these questions do not ask you do you get angry, No.1 asked when u get angry do you c. lash out, b. get frustrated question No.2 asked how loud do you shout between 0-10

now if you add those 2 answers up it will give these services an answer that when you get angry you lash out and shout at your child, totally inappropriate, god knows by the time i had finished doing this questionaire what they would of been trying to make out i was doing to my child.

also it is worth noting that when asked out of 10 how loud do you rate your shouting at your child i
asked questioner to explain how loud do u rate each number and he didnt give me an answer, so i couldnt answer the question as i didnt understand how loud number 1 was

6.6 Whenever a questionaire is introduced, it is not just a matter of considering its
appropriateness, but explaining its purpose and potential relevance. The respondent
should also be able to comprehend where it fits into the assessment as a whole and how
it may be able to extend understanding of the current family situation.

7.5 If there has not been an opportunity to do so, the practitioner should remember to explain
how using the instrument fits into broader assessment work, whenever appropriate.

does not acknowledge professional concerns(this is because i do not feel questioning me about anger management is appropriate in the contents of their questions) has declined the support of additional services(bare in mind that there is already 2 social workers involved, 3 rapid response workers and 2 school teachers and a school nurse to see, plus conferences to go to, core group meetings and speech and language sessions). one of the rapid response workers asked me to let them come twice on new year's week, really busy holiday week

The process is entirely voluntary and informed consent is mandatory, so families do not have to engage and if they do they can choose what information they want to share. Children and families should not feel stigmatised by the CAF; indeed they can ask for a CAF to be initiated.

everytime since the questionaire the intervention team come to my home they just generally talk to me and say how is your day etc... and their not moving on because i do not agree with the questioning and still they are pursuing it, the last time i had to question him as he was leaving i said is there anything that needs to be done now that hasnt been done as i dont want to go to core group meeting next week and get told your not engaging in services, how can you engage with services when they come into your home and dont do anything apart from get your back up because they are badgering you about emotional abuse? also i was asked to continue this work when my child was not at home because he is very busy due to behaviour problems.(my boy is the one being assessed)

All such conditions fall within the Mental Health Act 1983 s1(2), which defines
‘mental disorder’ as including ‘any disorder or disability of mind’. Additionally, a
mental disorder will generally amount to a disability within the definition in the
Equality Act 2000 s6,5
and accordingly any difference in treatment of such persons
will be liable to challenge as unlawful disability discrimination – see, for example,
Governing Body of X School v SP and others.

A failure to carry out a lawful assessment according to the Assessment Framework
may result in the court requiring that a new assessment be undertaken.32 A failure
to involve a disabled child in his or her assessment may also render the process
unlawful, as was the case in R (J) v Caerphilly CBC33 where it was held that severely
challenging behaviour exhibited by a young man did not absolve the authority of
its duties to engage him in the assessment
being told that i have to do the questionaire and can not progress until it is completed or will be seen as not engaging with services

i have been informed by one worker that neglect is emotional abuse, which is wrong, emotional abuse falls under the category of neglect and should not be used in this manner, i do believe if there are no issues with emotional abuse they should not be questioning you about it as they just use it as a weapon against you

home visit off worker questioning the understanding of what childs emotional needs are, felt this was inappropriate as child has not had a development assessment, without knowing what psychological problems Child has how do I or they know what needs he has....Other than warmth to be clean and cared for an loved

whilst my child was placed with dad(only temporary to get home upto scratch) i was told in core group in front of teacher and brother that i cant take him home due to unexplainable bruising(which they got corrected on) or they will get a plo ...

sooooo they came up with this (which is still illegal)
that i can not take him from grandparents house or take him to my own home or the local authorities would seek legal action in the form of a public law order to seek court action (threatening behaviour towards myself)
the law quite clearly states that if no court action is being taken that a child is to be returned home within 72 hours.

Lord Justice Munby also took the opportunity to make some very general – and
important – observations about heavy handed interventions by local authorities in
cases of this nature: of an attitude (which he considered [at para 50]) was ‘shared
by too many other local authorities’: that they were not merely ‘involved’ with such
families but that that they had ‘complete and effective control … through [their]
assessments and care plans’ [at para 51]. Of this attitude Munby LJ observed that
‘it needs to be said in the plainest possible terms that this suggestion, however
formulated – and worryingly some local authorities seem almost to assume and
take it for granted – is simply wrong in law.’ He continued:
52 Moreover, the assertion or assumption, however formulated, betrays a
fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of the relationship between
a local authority and those, like A and C and their carers, who it is tasked
to support – a fundamental misunderstanding of the relationship between
the State and the citizen. People in the situation of A and C, together with
their carers, look to the State – to a local authority – for the support, the
assistance and the provision of the services to which the law, giving effect
to the underlying principles of the Welfare State, entitles them. They do not
seek to be ‘controlled’ by the State or by the local authority. And it is not for
the State in the guise of a local authority to seek to exercise such control. The
State, the local authority, is the servant of those in need of its support and
assistance, not their master.

was told when i met social worker first time manager wants kid removed
also cryptic message off another worker "been registered 3 times and we wont be going through it another time" 1st time not my fault

and as for seeking interim care order will this stand up in court?

should this not count if their going to try to go straight to court and not work with me to resolve the issues in plo?
The work of authorities under CA 1989 Part III should
be directed at (among other things) avoiding the need for care proceedings under
CA 1989 Part IV by providing effective family support.

at my whitz end please help frg :(
Last edited by unjustified on Thu Jan 16, 2014 5:31 am, edited 2 times in total.

Posts: 2
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2014 6:30 pm

Re: MISCONDUCT!! and now seeking plo( to discuss differences

Post by unjustified » Thu Jan 16, 2014 12:48 am

just a quick reply they are wondering why i am reluctant to engage with their services

also must state they said to my parents last week that will be going for plo to seek removal(in my presence) and asking him about placing child there, but i feel this is misconduct as they said today they are going to plo for indifference of opinion but i feel their pulling the wool over my eyes and will go straight interim care order which is i feel misconduct in its self.(let alone everything above)

User avatar
Suzie, FRG Adviser
Posts: 2157
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2011 2:57 pm

Re: MISCONDUCT!! and now seeking plo( to discuss differences

Post by Suzie, FRG Adviser » Fri Jan 17, 2014 5:54 pm

Dear unjustified

Welcome to the Parents' discussion board. My name is Suzie, one of the Family Rights Group online advisers.

I am sorry to hear that you are finding about the current involvement from Children's Services so distressing.

Under the circumstances, can I suggest you speak to a solicitor from the http://www.lawsociety.org.uk as soon as possible about the Local Authority's plan to enter into a pre proceedings agreement with you to see if you can make the required changes so they do not have to make an application to the court in relation to your child.

If you have already been given a copy of the PLO (Public Law Outline) letter, you will note it recommends you take it to a solicitor without delay, so they can advice you about the best way forward.

Should you want to speak to an adviser about your situation to see if they can answer specific questions you may have, can I suggest you contact our advice line on 0808 801 0366 Monday to Friday 09.30 am to 03.00 pm.

Best Wishes


Post Reply