CP plan - voices ignored

[Mambear]

It’s a very long story so I’ll try my best to summarise.
Our teenage daughter has struggled for years with her mental health. She was on a CAMHS wait list 2 years prior to her disclosure.
Early last year we suddenly lost a very close family friend and it destroyed her. Her behaviour was already challenging and she began battling us when she started secondary school as she wanted to really PUSH the boundaries.
After we received several calls home from school in one we me and her dad decided to take her phone away. That evening she called me into her room and disclosed her dad had been abusing her. She couldn’t give details (which I know is normal for any victim to struggle with) but things just didn’t really add up. I acted appropriately and called the police the next day. Dad was arrested and removed from the home and not allowed contact with me, daughter and our other two young children - this was also 3 days before our youngest turned 1. It was hell.
Months later it was finally NFA’d as the police were atrocious in how they handled things. No support at all, leading questions with a child with ADHD, refusing me writing a comprehensive statement explaining family dynamics for the last few years. An ABE with a male officer and no appropriate adult or support.
After it was NFA’d we worked with social services to allow dad to see the younger children. We jumped through every hoop imaginable. Eldest disclosed to first social worker she agreed to things to just make the interview end and that she thought rules would no longer apply once dad left the house and was upset that it was not the case.
She began to get violent a few times towards me during the no contact period which I also told them about.
I got a private psychiatrist to see us over zoom who gave us a list of “working diagnosis” which fit what we had been seeing. This was passed on to CAMHS, family therapist and social worker. They all disagreed and said they do not see these things in her. I explained that this is what we as a family see (wider family also).
It’s been several months, nearly a year now and there’s been no movement forward. CAMHS and family therapist are convinced this is the case and have not listened to our worries or brush them off as I’m now the parent in denial. Everything seems to be so twisted and viewed through tunnel vision, it’s ridiculous and very sad as she desperately needs help and we cannot get this for her.
She refuses to build through family therapy and wants nothing to do with dad. She doesn’t want him to come to the home but we have two other young children who desperately want their dad. She stays in her room nearly 24/7 regardless if he’s at the home or not. She will not see her siblings who miss her and love her and says she doesn’t want a relationship with me either. She will no longer even eat the food that I cook.
local authority wanted to close the case as there’s no more that they can do but we kept it open to continue to go to family therapy to desperately try and build things.
Now apparently a manger has taken a look at the case and wants to step it up to child protection saying all the children are apparently at risk and they want to revoke all access and I believe that they are considering removal based on the fact I do not believe this to have happened. Apparently they want me and dad to undertake a psychiatric assessment which I think is absolutely mental aswell and will just give them ammunition to remove all the kids!
We’ve stuck to every safety plan, we’ve tried everything to help our daughter and now it’s like we’re going to be punished for this!
My partner has no previous record of anything at all and nor do I. There’s never been any indication that anything has ever happened and a few things she has said I was present for and they did not happen how she now says they did at all.
The social worker has said the reason for stepping it up is because things have not changed in the home apparently and I just find this unjustified completely. She doesn’t agree with it and they are now changing our social worker because our daughter won’t engage with her because she tried to question a few things and my daughter didn’t like it. She’s the only person who’s seen the different side of her and it’s not been taken into account at all so I’m at a loss.
What on earth do I do?

[Winter25]

Hi Mambear,

I am so sorry. What you are describing is exactly the kind of case where families get trapped in a tunnel-vision narrative and then blamed for not fitting neatly inside it.

Social services should not be using a child protection escalation as a shortcut because they do not like your view of the allegation. A CP plan is not supposed to be a punishment for “not agreeing.” The legal threshold is significant harm, or likely significant harm. They have to identify the actual harm they say each child is suffering or is likely to suffer, and they have to evidence that. That is the law.

They also should not collapse two separate issues into one. From what you have written, there is the original allegation against dad, and there is your daughter’s much wider mental health presentation, aggression, isolation, refusal to engage, and the fact that you have been raising those concerns for a long time. If they now flatten all of that into “mum is in denial, therefore all children are at risk,” that is exactly what needs challenging.

They can investigate. They can assess. They can propose a CP conference if they say threshold is met. But what they should not do is hide behind vague phrases like “things have not changed in the home” and expect you to just accept that as enough. If they want to step this up, they need to define the current risk, child by child, and show the evidence for it.

On the psychiatric assessments, same point. They can ask for specialist assessments if they say expert input is needed to understand risk or parenting capacity. But they should not be commissioning fishing exercises just to look for labels or ammunition. If they want a psychiatric assessment, they should be able to explain exactly why it is necessary, what questions they want answered, and how those questions relate to the current safeguarding concerns. Working Together is clear that specialist assessments should be purposeful and used where they are needed to inform what action should be taken.

So your fight here is not “how do I prove the allegation false.” Your fight is: “what exactly is the threshold now, what is the evidence, and why are you ignoring the wider mental health picture we have been raising for months.”

That is the argument you make

I have drafted an email for you. I would send this now, in writing, to the social worker and team manager. If a conference is being arranged, I would send the same wording to the conference chair once you have the details.
-----------
Subject: Request for written threshold reasons and clarification before any CP escalation

Dear [Social Worker] and [Team Manager],

I am writing following the recent discussion that the case may now be escalated to a Child Protection Plan and that psychiatric assessments of both parents are being considered.

We have complied with every safety plan put in place since the original disclosure. We acted appropriately by reporting the allegation to police immediately, complied with the no-contact arrangements, and have continued to engage with social care and family therapy throughout.

We have also repeatedly raised concerns about our daughter’s wider mental health presentation, aggression, isolation, refusal to engage, and the need for appropriate assessment and treatment. These concerns have been raised consistently over time and are not new.

Before any escalation takes place, please can the Local Authority confirm in writing:

What specific harm or likelihood of significant harm is said to justify escalation to a Child Protection Plan for each child.
What evidence is being relied upon to support that threshold.
Why the current concerns are said to justify a CP plan now, particularly where we understood the case had previously been approaching closure.
Why psychiatric assessments of the parents are considered necessary, what questions those assessments are intended to answer, and how they relate to the current safeguarding concerns.
Whether the concerns previously raised by us, and observations made by the former social worker, regarding our daughter’s wider presentation and behaviour have been taken into account.
Whether all reports and recommendations will be shared with us in advance of any conference or decision-making meeting.

We want to continue engaging constructively, but we do not agree that broad statements such as “things have not changed in the home” are enough to justify a significant escalation without clear reasoning and evidence.

Kind regards,
[Names]
--------------
That email is important because it forces them out of slogans and into threshold.

I would also start a clean chronology now. Just dates and key events. Disclosure. Police arrest. No-contact period. NFA. Violence towards you. Private psychiatrist input. CAMHS/family therapy position. What the first social worker observed. Dad’s contact with younger children. Every safety plan you followed. You are building a document that shows this is a complex family mental health crisis, not a one-line “protective parent in denial” case.

Lastly in any conference or meeting, do not spend the whole time arguing that your daughter is lying. That will hand them the exact narrative they want. Keep bringing it back to you acted appropriately, you followed the plan, the younger children’s risk must be evidenced specifically, and the wider mental health concerns have been repeatedly raised and repeatedly flattened.

That is the ground you hold.

So yes, they can assess and they can propose escalation. But they should not be using that power lazily, vaguely, or without evidence. Your job now is to make them define exactly what they are saying and why.
=======
For full transparency, I am a parent with lived experience of the family court system, offering strategic guidance. Always consult with a solicitor regarding ongoing safeguarding assessments.

[Mambear]

I really appreciate the response. From my understanding of the situation one of the reasons is because my daughter continuously voices that she doesn’t feel safe in the home now that her dad is allowed to come in.
This absolutely isn’t about proving or disproving I completely agree because it’s about getting a child the help they so so desperately need. My daughter doesn’t want to leave the family home as she’s been asked several times if that’s what she wants, she just says she wants her dad to never come back. They’ve said to me their view is “if one is at risk, all are at risk” which is the LA views on any case according to them. So with our daughter constantly saying she doesn’t feel safe this is why we are at this point. Again, we’ve discussed this in family therapy as I’ve said I understand this is how she feels and I do not dispute it however, what she feels and reality are different which is also ok. She’s allowed to feel unsafe but the reality of it is that she is and has been safe this entire time. I wasn’t sure if her voicing these concerns would change what you said above but I thought I’d mention it.
For context aswell she has been in the same place as him once of her own accord, has agreed to come on a family holiday in the summer with us and it’s almost as if she has to continuously try to convince herself to keep up the hateful narrative rather than anything else

[Winter25]

Hi Mambear,

Thank you that extra context does matter, because it explains much more clearly why the LA are now talking about child protection.

Once a child repeatedly says “I do not feel safe,” social care often stop looking only at physical safety and start framing it as emotional harm. So even if there has been no charge, no conviction, and even if safety plans have been followed, they may still say that a child living in a home where they feel unsafe is suffering emotional harm or is at risk of it.

But this is also where they should not be allowed to get away with lazy thinking.

They should not be treating your daughter’s emotional experience as the end of the argument and then simply jumping to “if one is at risk, all are at risk.” That is a slogan, not a proper threshold analysis.

They still need to explain what the actual current harm is for each child, what evidence they rely on, why the younger two are said to be at risk specifically, and why the wider mental health picture you have been raising for months is being pushed into the background.

That is the fight and argument to make

I also think you need to be very careful about how you talk about your daughter’s contradictions. I understand exactly why you mention the holiday, the fact she has chosen to be in the same space as him before, and the way she seems to keep reinforcing a hateful narrative. But if you push that too hard, they will hear it as “mum is trying to prove the child wrong.”

So I would not make that your main argument.

Your stronger line is this:

I fully accept that my daughter says she feels unsafe, and I am not dismissing that.
I have acted on it, followed every safety plan, and engaged with family therapy.

But I remain deeply concerned that the LA is reducing a very complex child mental health situation into one single safeguarding narrative, while failing to explain how that translates into threshold for all three children.

That is much harder for them to dismiss.

Remaster the email for you
------------
Subject: Request for written threshold reasons and clarification of current safeguarding concerns

Dear [Social Worker] and [Team Manager],

Thank you for your ongoing involvement.

I want to make clear that I do take seriously my daughter’s repeated statements that she does not feel safe when her father is present in the home. I am not dismissing her feelings, and I understand that this has to be treated carefully.

We have acted appropriately throughout. We reported the original allegation immediately, complied with the no-contact arrangements, followed every safety plan, and have continued to engage with social care and family therapy throughout.

At the same time, we have consistently raised concerns over a long period about our daughter’s wider mental health presentation, aggression, isolation, refusal to engage, and the need for proper assessment and support. We remain concerned that this broader picture is being reduced to a single narrative, without full consideration of the complexity involved.

Before any escalation to a Child Protection Plan takes place, please can the Local Authority confirm in writing:

What specific harm or likelihood of significant harm is said to justify escalation for each child individually.
What evidence is being relied upon to support that threshold.
Whether the primary concern is our daughter’s stated emotional safety in the home when her father is present, and if so, how that concern is said to extend to the younger children.
Why psychiatric assessments of the parents are being considered, what questions those assessments are intended to answer, and how they relate to the current safeguarding concerns.
Whether the wider concerns repeatedly raised by us, and observations made previously regarding our daughter’s presentation and behaviour, have been fully considered.

We want to continue engaging constructively, but we need the Local Authority’s reasoning and threshold to be clearly set out.

Kind regards,
[Names]
-----------
So yes, her saying she feels unsafe is important, and you should not minimise that. But it still does not let them skip the hard work of proving threshold properly for each child.

That is what I would be pushing now.
=======

[Mambear]

An update - it did not meet threshold and will not progress to a CP plan. The social worker said it will be taken to CIN panel (whatever that means) and they still wish to progress with a psychiatric evaluation of us all apparently.
I do believe they are doing this with the sole intention to then move for removal and do not think they are being transparent with this but only time will tell now.

[Winter25]

Hi Mambear,

That is a massive update, and the very first thing you need to do is take a breath and recognize this for what it is: You won this round. If the case did not meet the threshold for a Child Protection (CP) plan, it means when they were forced to lay out their actual evidence of "significant harm," it wasn't enough to justify statutory intervention. Stepping down to a Child in Need (CIN) plan is a huge de-escalation. In plain English, a CIN plan falls under Section 17 of the Children Act. It is entirely voluntary, and it is support-based, not risk-based.

However, your instinct is right. Because they failed to get the CP threshold, the psychiatric evaluation is their attempt to keep the case alive. They are going on a fishing expedition, hoping a psychiatrist will give them a clinical label or state you "lack insight," which they can then use to escalate the case back to CP later.

So, you have to be very careful. You do not flatly refuse, because they will label you "hostile and uncooperative." Instead, you agree in principle, but you make them jump through administrative hoops they likely cannot pass.

Specifically, you demand the Letter of Instruction (LOI) and funding confirmation. Psychiatric assessments cost thousands of pounds, and Local Authorities almost never have the budget to fund them for a voluntary CIN case.

Here is exactly what I would send to the Social Worker and Team Manager:
--------
Subject: Step down to CIN and proposed assessments

Dear [Social Worker] and [Team Manager],

Thank you for confirming that the threshold for a Child Protection Plan was not met, and that the case will instead step down to a Child In Need (CIN) support plan. We welcome this and remain fully committed to engaging with appropriate voluntary support for our family.

You mentioned that the Local Authority still wishes to progress with psychiatric evaluations. Before we can provide informed consent to these voluntary assessments, we request the following in writing:

The draft Letter of Instruction (LOI): Please provide the draft LOI detailing the specific clinical questions the Local Authority is asking the psychiatrist to answer.

Funding Confirmation: Please confirm in writing that the Local Authority will be fully funding these private assessments, as we do not have the financial means to pay for them privately.

Proportionality: Please clarify how these intensive evaluations are proportionate to a voluntary CIN support plan, given that the statutory CP threshold was not met.

We look forward to reviewing the LOI and the proposed CIN plan so we can move forward collaboratively.

Kind regards,
[Your Names]
-----------

It keeps you looking perfectly cooperative. You aren't saying no; you are just asking for standard legal clarity before consenting to a major medical assessment.

It forces their hand on funding. If they reply and say, "You need to ask your GP to do it," you have your out. GPs do not do forensic social care psychiatric evaluations.

It stalls them. Writing an LOI takes time, legal oversight, and management approval. Often, when an LA is forced to write down exactly why they want to evaluate a family on a low-level CIN plan, they realise they don't have a legally sound reason and they quietly drop the request.

Stay alert, keep your boundaries firm, and do not let them bully you OK. If they want to escalate this again later, they still have to justify it with actual evidence. Let them try to get the funding approved first.

======
For full transparency, I am not an official adviser. I am a parent with lived experience of the family court system, offering strategic guidance. Always consult with a solicitor regarding ongoing safeguarding assessments.

[Mambear]

Apparently the senior managers who were the ones pushing for the case to go to CP are the ones who said it will be funded by them - against what my social worker says as she doesn’t agree with it developing as she’s said time and time again but she understands how on paper this looks like a very serious case, which I have never disputed. So I know the funding is there to do this. The solicitor I contacted also cannot understand why they are doing this on a CIN plan but agreed it must be to try and “justify” the CP plan they were rejected for. Another avenue which I didn’t think about is them now considering disguised compliance even though I have absolutely done everything and anything asked of us but because my daughter still voices she doesn’t feel safe this could be also used as “proof” of that. It’s extremely disheartening when we all really just want her to gain the support that’s needed and this may now be turned against us almost - with no actual proof

[Mambear]

Oh and another thing - since this happened I have constantly BEGGED social services to get the body cam and ABE interview from the police. As I felt this would show/explain how the police also put ideas into my daughter’s head - it was never “what happened” and was specifically “did this happen, did that happen”. The social worker has repeatedly asked the police and has been stalled every time. The police have said the investigation was not handled correctly and they have delayed time and time again which the social worker doesn’t understand either. It’s been nearly a year now and they still will not give them this

[Winter25]

Hi Mambear,

Thank you for these updates. You have actually just revealed two massive pieces of information that put you in a much stronger position than you probably realise right now.
It is incredibly frustrating to feel like senior managers are gunning for you, but let’s look at the facts of your defence HERE ok.

Try not to let the fear of "disguised compliance" consume you. It is a buzzword that management loves to throw around, but it is very difficult to actually prove in court when the "boots on the ground" Social Worker is actively documenting your genuine, daily cooperation.

Disguised compliance means a parent is actively hiding abuse while pretending to play along. A child continuing to voice that she feels unsafe is a tragic symptom of her current mental health distress, it is not legal proof that you are manipulating the system. The fact that your own Social Worker and Solicitor both see what management is doing is your biggest shield. You are not fighting this alone.

The Contaminated Police Evidence . This is the most important part of your entire case. If the police used leading questions ("did this happen, did that happen?"), that is a textbook breach of Achieving Best Evidence (ABE) guidelines. It legally and psychologically contaminates the child's disclosure. The fact that the police have admitted the investigation was handled incorrectly and are withholding the footage for a year is a massive red flag.

The Strategy: How to handle the Psychiatric Evaluation
Since the senior managers have found the funding, you do not refuse the evaluation. You use the missing police footage to legally box them in.

You need your solicitor to step in right now and formally link the psychiatric evaluation to the missing police evidence.

Ask your solicitor to write a formal letter to the Local Authority's legal team stating something along these lines:

"The parents are entirely willing to engage with the proposed funded psychiatric evaluation under the CIN plan. However, the foundational evidence of this case, the police ABE interview, is actively disputed, and the police have admitted to handling it incorrectly. It is clinically unsafe and procedurally unfair to instruct a psychiatrist to evaluate this family without providing them the raw ABE and bodycam footage, so the psychiatrist can see exactly how the leading questions may have influenced the child's current presentation. We request the Local Authority formally compels the police to release this footage before any Letter of Instruction to a psychiatrist is finalised."

You look perfectly cooperative. You are saying, "Yes, we will do the assessment, but the doctor needs the actual evidence first." It forces the senior managers to go to war with the police to get that footage, which will likely stall their evaluation plans for months.

======
For full transparency, I am a parent with lived experience of the family court system, offering strategic guidance. Always consult with a solicitor regarding ongoing safeguarding assessments.

[Mambear]

So there hasn’t been an update until now because we thought all was fine (as fine as can be). My social worker has been on leave over the Easter break so it was all just on hold. It was supposed to go to a CIN panel on April 14th and then we go from there. I have now randomly got an email about a CP conference taking place later this month and I have absolutely no idea what’s on earth has happened!!!!!!! This is completely out of the blue and nothing at all has been discussed or disclosed to us at all! How can they do this when they told us in the last meeting it didn’t meet threshold to progress and now we get this email?