Recently on SNJ's Facebook page, someone accused us of being too hard
on local authorities who were 'trying their best'. Actually, I know
first hand that many, many people working in LAs really are working
diligently and with very large caseloads. I would encourage parents who
have had a good experience to tell us about it, so we can herald good practice.
However - there's always a however, unfortunately - too often parents
are still being told the wrong information or LAs are not playing by
the rules (i.e, the law). Too many in SEND and in social care
departments are still behaving as if the Children and Families Act was
just a bad dream, best ignored. This is very perplexing to me as the law
is clear to read and to follow, so what's happening to make compliance a
bonus rather than the minimum expected?
Recently, I heard about something happening to a number of families
regarding attempts to get social care help, that needs to be
highlighted. Hopefully those who ARE doing good work in LAs can make
sure it doesn't happen in their departments.
Nathan Davies of solicitors HCB, has written to explain what, in his experience, has been happening.
Threatened with care proceedings after asking for support...
It is common, in my experience, for parents of children with autism
to feel that concerns expressed to local authority professionals are
often discarded, or that there is a distinct lack of understanding of
the condition itself. This leads to disputes and disagreements between
the parties. These issues tend to arise once parents have realised that
they cannot continue without extra support or an alternative placement
be sourced for their son or daughter. The request being made is often
the trigger point for intervention in some form by the authority;
usually via its social services department.
The prevalence of social services intervention has steadily risen in recent times. In practice, the possibility of it being
initiated by the authority remains on the increase, despite this being a
highly controversial, and often inappropriate, tactic.
Your word against theirs
The problem parents in this position face is that it is often their
word against that of school staff or local authority professionals and
that is never a good starting position. The root issue however, is the
aforementioned lack of understanding of the condition itself. Those on
the high-functioning end of spectrum often present very differently
across a variety of settings. The fact that a child presents as very shy
and reserved in school and then explodes into one exhibiting
challenging behaviour at home, is very hard for some professionals to
fathom and can lead to them questioning parenting ability.
Parents struggling to cope and requiring additional support in the
family home, are often deterred by the threat of intense scrutiny and
criticism by social services. The possibility of raising child
protection issues or launching even care proceedings (in extreme cases)
are tools local authorities are increasingly using, especially during
these times of austerity and public sector cuts. But cuts can in no way
be an excuse for such unnecessarily heavy-handed approaches being
employed.
Nathan Davies
Professional guidelines
The Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC) has guidelines
relating to standards of conduct, performance and ethics each registrant
must uphold (this includes social workers). One of the pillars of
practice is for the professional to ‘work within the limits of their knowledge and skills’.
Given this, it is fundamental to ensure that each professional is
appropriately trained and/or knowledgeable to a reasonable degree in
autism to discharge their duties to the child and family appropriately.
If this is not done, one cannot expect a proper assessment of their
social care needs to be undertaken; thereby polluting the entire
process. Without such understanding of the condition, the HCPC
guidelines specify that the matter should be referred to another
practitioner if what the chid needs would be beyond the scope of their
practice but this is rarely, if ever, done. It cannot be emphasised
enough how important this is, especially when it is a requirement for
each HCPC registrant to ‘promote and protect the interests of service users and carers’.
Below are some anonymised case examples which show how these strategies are being used by local authorities throughout the UK:
Case Study 1:
This concerned parents in England of a child with high-functioning
ASD. Given her high-achievements at school, the child had attended
mainstream school well into her teenage life (without an EHCP). Even
when concerns were raised over challenging behaviour in the home as a
result of her inability to cope at school, these were immediately
treated as the parents over-exaggerating the child’s difficulties, even
after they had secured a diagnosis for her from a multi-disciplinary
team in the private sector.
The local authority, when requested to assess her additional learning
needs, took action; they proceeded with social services intervention, a
flawed and malicious assessment and subsequently placed the child on
the Child Protection Register. After seeking legal advice, the family
challenged the authority, ultimately leading to a retraction. The child
has now been issued with an EHCP with the SEN Tribunal agreeing that a
specialist ASD placement be named.
Case Study 2:
This related to a family in South Wales, who again experienced great
difficulties with their local authority. The child had a diagnosis of
Pathological Demand Avoidance but the parents had been unsuccessful in
securing a specialist placement for their son via the Tribunal process,
with the assistance of an advocate.
Given the extreme levels of aggressive behaviour in the home
environment (and his inability access a school at all), it was
imperative for the authority to accommodate the child, pursuant to
section 20 of the Children Act 1989. The authority did so, but
thereafter sought to target the family with a variety of unfounded
allegations, unlawful s.47 investigations and blame for the child’s
behaviour was attributed to perceived ‘bad parenting’, a manifestly
unreasonable position to hold.
These issues were appropriately resolved in the parents' favour, who
were issued with a comprehensive and unreserved apology from the
director of social services. The child now attends a suitable local
provision and is thriving.
We need to be aware...
Unfortunately, scenarios such as the above are becoming more common
and intimidation of parents who are simply trying to get help for their
child is often difficult for many to comprehend. Parents being penalised
or vilified for seeking support for their disabled child is not right
in any society, yet it appears that in 21st century Britain
this is perfectly acceptable in some LAs. Awareness of this issue being
made known to the public can only help parents in similar situations.
A
stage 2 complaint from 2010 showing serious failings in the Children
and Family Department at Cyngor Gwynedd was upheld by Independent
Investigators.
From
2014, meetings and decisions made concerning a child's future were
being held behind closed doors by managers and a social worker without
the knowledge of the parents or professionals involved in the case.
Worse
was the fact that a social worker and other professionals were being
ignored....as they raised concerns the child's needs were not being met.
A social worker who acted without thought for the code of ethics that he has agreed to uphold.
Or
worse - a social worker who has been instructed by managers to behave
so....inappropriately and against the interests of a vulnerable child -
the client.
The jury is still out.
A
failure of the children and families department to deliver the services
granted by Gwynedd social services and when they finally appeared -
after having their arm twisted by a solicitor - were shockingly bad.
So
bad that a complaint was raised and which Aled Gibbard closed -
against statutory policy - and also without informing anyone !?!?
Kenealy Jones - you said a search was made for the letter to Mr Gibbard he claims he never received. Did you look in the bins ?
I have sighted your email to your colleague, Aled, voicing your concern about where this case could go.
The
service(!) provided involved the support worker - yes him of the grunts
and no feedback - leaving the client alone in a car when he attended to
his own bits and pieces.
You did read the risk assessment, Iolo - yes ?
Is it council policy to leave vulnerable clients alone when in their care ?
All of this even before I asked the #Plaid_Cymru MP, Liz Saville Roberts for support.
Liz, who shook my hand, looked me in the eye and said "vote for me... and contact me if you ever need help".
MP's tut - some of them will say anything to get your vote.
Ah yes - I cancelled the meeting with the social worker.
The partner had become ill with the stress and nastiness of it all and
my daughter had just suffered a miscarriage - all this and dealing with
the light and dark side of PDA - it was a relief to use the time to calm
down and think...
The social worker turned up anyway.
Lowri Williams, customer care(!) wrote later "...the Service felt that cancelling the meeting was not appropriate,"
Mr Haydon also wrote a report to his managers describing the meeting with me.
Jamie, I have seen a copy of your report and I hardly recognise your version of events.
Will the report be updated to include how you foot shuffled and spent
most of our exchange staring at the floor like a scoolboy , mumbling -
"You haven't made a complaint about me, have you ?"
Will you update the report to include the fact that your managers,
Melvin Panther and Sharron Williams Carter sent you to my house knowing
that I had raised issues with your bad behaviour and the meeting
cancelled - without informing you ?
Do you think that is "appropriate" behaviour from your managers, Jamie ?
Jamie, in your report you call me 'agitated' when I answered the door -
that was a mixture of horror and anger at your presence until I realised
that you had been set up.
What manager would send an employee out to visit someone who was upset and not even advise them ?
Were they hoping for confrontation ?
Though the parents 2nd stage complaint against Cyngor Gwynedd Council
showed serious failings within the Children and Families Department and
was upheld by independent investigators in 2010 nothing has changed.
I have read through the report and noticed that many names involved back
then are now ensconced as managers in Gwynedd social services, though
it is not for me to say if these same people are now acting out of spite
or have always been so unprofessional.
My experience working in the mental health field with dementia, learning
difficulties, challenging behaviour and acquired brain injury was no
use to me at all in this case and I was playing catch up for the first
year learning about PDA, the boy's complex needs and gaining his trust.
I stood back and watched as first the Council got in contact and after
discussions agreed that support may be available and a social worker
would be assigned. Everyone was wary because of the behaviour of social
services in the past but it was agreed that help towards social skills
and integration was more important.
A social worker was allocated and a support worker was granted.
Unfortunately the support was still not provided and so in desperation a
solicitor was contacted and only then was a support worker assigned.
The first social worker was replaced by a second , this time from
Children and Families, as the disability team would not assess, due to
the boy having too high an IQ. This social worker introduced himself as
having no experience of Autism and was not a disability social worker
but said he was there to help.
He did not endear himself to anyone over the next period by comments such as -
'We are really doing the education departments job'
'What to do you want a core assessment for? I don't see what use it will
be, can you explain to me how you think it will benefit *****? '
'I'm a very busy man you know' (when he failed to phone back)
'This service is really for people that need a social worker'
But he was all my partner had to work with and the fact the boy was,
finally, going to get help with socialisation and independent living
skills was enough for me to still my misgivings and keep my professional
mouth shut.
The help and support that eventually began was anything but.
Communication was poor and I mean mono-syllabic from the support worker
when asked for feedback. One day he just grunted at me when I tried to
engage him.
Different days different times and sessions that were arranged with less
than 24 hours notice - and sessions were strictly on a take it or lose it basis.
The stress of dealing with this 'care support' had a knock on effect in
dealing with other aspects of care and we all suffered for a period.
So a letter of complaint was sent to Support Services at Cyngor Gwynedd
Children and Families Dept asking for continuity of times and reminding
them that due to the boy's complexities the family had no idea of where
he was taken, what subjects were discussed or how he engaged with others
if at all and simply a plea for feedback to help us to help him
progress with socialisation.
It is called team work and every professional in the care field will
recognise its importance for the child and family - except, it appears,
at the Children and Families Department of Gwynedd council.
A letter was duly received apologising for blah blah blah and informing
us that we had to ask the social worker to ask the support worker to
communicate with us re the sessions !!!! But they did take on board our
need for certain times to avoid clashing with the child's education.
To be fair we were allowed the same time and day every week which
removed so much stress and I am grateful for that. Imagine being
grateful for a regular weekly slot from a children and families
service(!) but I truly was.
The feedback from the support worker however did NOT materialise.
(Another social worker was asked further down the line again if we could have some feedback - again nothing)
In fact we did receive reports written by the support worker eventually.
We asked Social Services for their file on the family and they were
included. So much interesting information (and mis-information) But
that is for future posts.
My misgivings and worry about what I considered unprofessional and
totally unacceptable behaviour turned to anger when I returned home and
found my wife crying. She had had a phone conversation with the social
worker which had caused her upset.
Then after I listened to the recording of the conversation I became quite upset, too.
A meeting between the social worker and my wife had been arranged but I
wanted to be there for support so I emailed Cyngor Gwynedd Customer Care
to raise my concerns about their social worker, Jamie Haydon and cancel
the meeting.
My email and first contact with Cyngor Gwynedd Council was dated 29th Feb, 2016.
More on Gwynedd Council here - https://gwyneddsfailingcouncil.blogspot.co.uk/
