Chit Chat
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
18 Mar 15
00:42
Joined:
Date Joined:
20 Dec 10
Lesson must be learned.
This must hot happen again.
^^^Meaningless soundbytes of the past.
.http://www.itv.com/news/london/2015-03-16/haringey-social-services-admit-failing-baby-with-broken-arm/
A baby was left with a broken arm and ribs after being abused or neglected by relatives following a series of failings by social workers at the same council that let down Baby P.
The 11-week-old, known as Baby D, was unable to move its left arm and taken to hospital, where doctors discovered the tot had a fractured arm and several possible old rib fractures.
The family had a "history of violence", including suspected drug and gang activity, and was well-known to children's social services.
But social workers failed to take these risk factors "seriously enough", a serious case review found.
Today Haringey Council admitted more could have been done to protect the vulnerable baby.
The report found the baby's mother, known as Miss F, was "vulnerable", had suffered neglect and violence, and had been taken into care.
She was just 17 when she became pregnant, and the baby's father, known as Mr H, was 34.
Along with its mother, the baby lived with its grandfather, known as Mr J, and 14 year-old uncle Child L - who both had a history of violence and criminal behaviour.
Baby D was seen by hospital doctors on 29 April 2013 and found to have a fractured left arm and five old rib fractures, believed to date back to when the baby was just one month old.
The baby's parents were arrested for neglect and causing or allowing grievous bodily harm to take place, although the criminal case against them was later abandoned following problems with a key witness.
Baby D was taken in to care. The court was unable to say who had inflicted the injuries, but found there is "real possibility" the baby's mother, grandfather or uncle could have been the perpetrators.
Despite being well known to the authorities, the SCR found that social workers failed to appreciate the possible danger the baby was being exposed to.
Despite the plethora of information, risk factors and family history, professionals treated this as historical and not relevant to the current situation.
It also criticised a lack of information sharing between agencies and said a "culture of meeting targets and timescales has resulted in a lack of critical analysis when conducting assessments.
Peter Connelly, known as Baby P, died in 2007 aged 17 months after suffering more than 50 injuries over eight months.
Haringey Council's children's services were heavily criticised for not doing more to protect him.
Collectively, we sincerely regret that there were several areas where we could, and should, have done better.
With hindsight, there were many episodes during D's first three months, and earlier during the child's mother's pregnancy, when front-line staff could have acted differently.
We cannot say that if they had done so, the abuse would not have happened. But we can say that many of our agencies could and should have responded differently.
Sir Paul Ennals, chairman of the Haringey Local Safeguarding Children Board
A knighthood no less.
This must hot happen again.
^^^Meaningless soundbytes of the past.
.http://www.itv.com/news/london/2015-03-16/haringey-social-services-admit-failing-baby-with-broken-arm/
A baby was left with a broken arm and ribs after being abused or neglected by relatives following a series of failings by social workers at the same council that let down Baby P.
The 11-week-old, known as Baby D, was unable to move its left arm and taken to hospital, where doctors discovered the tot had a fractured arm and several possible old rib fractures.
The family had a "history of violence", including suspected drug and gang activity, and was well-known to children's social services.
But social workers failed to take these risk factors "seriously enough", a serious case review found.
Today Haringey Council admitted more could have been done to protect the vulnerable baby.
The report found the baby's mother, known as Miss F, was "vulnerable", had suffered neglect and violence, and had been taken into care.
She was just 17 when she became pregnant, and the baby's father, known as Mr H, was 34.
Along with its mother, the baby lived with its grandfather, known as Mr J, and 14 year-old uncle Child L - who both had a history of violence and criminal behaviour.
Baby D was seen by hospital doctors on 29 April 2013 and found to have a fractured left arm and five old rib fractures, believed to date back to when the baby was just one month old.
The baby's parents were arrested for neglect and causing or allowing grievous bodily harm to take place, although the criminal case against them was later abandoned following problems with a key witness.
Baby D was taken in to care. The court was unable to say who had inflicted the injuries, but found there is "real possibility" the baby's mother, grandfather or uncle could have been the perpetrators.
Despite being well known to the authorities, the SCR found that social workers failed to appreciate the possible danger the baby was being exposed to.
Despite the plethora of information, risk factors and family history, professionals treated this as historical and not relevant to the current situation.
It also criticised a lack of information sharing between agencies and said a "culture of meeting targets and timescales has resulted in a lack of critical analysis when conducting assessments.
Peter Connelly, known as Baby P, died in 2007 aged 17 months after suffering more than 50 injuries over eight months.
Haringey Council's children's services were heavily criticised for not doing more to protect him.
Collectively, we sincerely regret that there were several areas where we could, and should, have done better.
With hindsight, there were many episodes during D's first three months, and earlier during the child's mother's pregnancy, when front-line staff could have acted differently.
We cannot say that if they had done so, the abuse would not have happened. But we can say that many of our agencies could and should have responded differently.
Sir Paul Ennals, chairman of the Haringey Local Safeguarding Children Board
A knighthood no less.
Show More
I hate this blame Social Services culture, what about blaming the hideous perpetrators of the crimes? Unless you remove every Child at Risk or sit a Social Worker in every vulnerable Child's house, how do you stop these things happening? Simply not viable but putting the boot in to Social Services is so easy.
Simply not viable but putting the boot in to Social Services is so easy.
It's even easier to put the boot in when they admit their negligence like in this statement from their Chairman.
Collectively, we sincerely regret that there were several areas where we could, and should, have done better.
With hindsight, there were many episodes during D's first three months, and earlier during the child's mother's pregnancy, when front-line staff could have acted differently.
We cannot say that if they had done so, the abuse would not have happened. But we can say that many of our agencies could and should have responded differently.
– Sir Paul Ennals, chairman of the Haringey Local Safeguarding Children Board
It's even easier to put the boot in when they admit their negligence like in this statement from their Chairman.
Collectively, we sincerely regret that there were several areas where we could, and should, have done better.
With hindsight, there were many episodes during D's first three months, and earlier during the child's mother's pregnancy, when front-line staff could have acted differently.
We cannot say that if they had done so, the abuse would not have happened. But we can say that many of our agencies could and should have responded differently.
– Sir Paul Ennals, chairman of the Haringey Local Safeguarding Children Board
So Social Services take the kids away and put then in a home where they can be abused by Asians or MPs.
It may be an asian kid, but I doubt it.
the thing is if you talk to people about their experiences with social services, the overwhelming opinion is that they are incapable of recognising someone who is NOT a risk to children. anyone seen as (to use their language) a 'risk' or a 'concern' is put through the ringer for weeks and sometimes years on end, being forced to comply with endless assessments which take forever. You have no rights, you have no come back, there's nothing you can do. Just look at these teachers who are getting suspended cause their dad got in a fight in a bar in the 80s. Its ridiculous! But then every now and then you see stories like this and you realise that in fact, they're not capable of recognising someone who IS a risk to children either. So you have to ask, what exactly are social services getting right?? Its the same all over the country, this case might be in London but Birmingham childrens services (just for example) is still under the watch of an outside invigilator to make sure they're functioning properly. Rotherham council have all resigned because they couldn't get it right either. Its one of the biggest scandals within our public sector and yet all you see is social workers getting put on pedastals with halos above their heads and poor gullible souls like big_issue fall for it hook line and sinker. It's a absolute disgrace and a future disaster waiting to happen!
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539