Read the NSPCC report as regards delay in child witnesses coming to Court.
The NSPCC put forward suggestions, but have always failed to anser why they retreated behind their own significant failure in the Climbie case (oh no not well publicised and no they were not pilloried) ? All forgotten now is it ? Everyone needs to read up on the NSPCC's involvement (or shall say total lack of).
Do you all remember my thread a few weeks ago ? When a 4 year old was 'encouraged' to give evidence after the Baby P case (the charge of rape) 2 years plus after the event. The NSPCC and others, deemed as the great and the good, (some) even went on record as saying this child had done a 'public service'. Do they not live in the real world ? Cases are taking longer and longer to come into Court, making the children in question older and older. It's not rocket science. The convicted in the rape (Baby P's mother's partner) is going to appeal (using breach of his Human Rights) as regards the rape, and is citing the evidence of the 4 year old. No it's not in the public domain as it's not sensational enough now.
All the NSPCC do is talk the talk 'after the horse has bolted'. When was the last time they brought a case to Court ? They can, they are a front line service supposedly.
As a an employee of said agency who spent many years in Local Authority I'm clear I simply do not agree with your point of view.
As you advised, people may read up as they wish regarding the Climbie inquiry, NSPCC are far from being the sole agency who came in for criticism, to date they remain the only agency who held their hands up.
Your point of cases taking longer to reach Court equating to the Child becoming older is at best naive, cases ARE taking too long and families are suffering as a result.
Thankfully, Goverment action is currently seeking to improve this situation, due to influence from many sectors, not just NSPCC, which has included genuine consultation with those directly affected by such delays.
Your comment appears only to want to agency bash, but I don't suppose you would offer a reason as to why you appear to be so personally affronted by NSPCC.
Ghost: As a an employee of said agency who spent many years in Local Authority I'm clear I simply do not agree with your point of view. As you advised, people may read up as they wish regarding the Climbie inquiry, NSPCC are far from being the sole agency who came in for criticism, to date they remain the only agency who held their hands up. Your point of cases taking longer to reach Court equating to the Child becoming older is at best naive, cases ARE taking too long and families are suffering as a result. Thankfully, Goverment action is currently seeking to improve this situation, due to influence from many sectors, not just NSPCC, which has included genuine consultation with those directly affected by such delays. Your comment appears only to want to agency bash, but I don't suppose you would offer a reason as to why you appear to be so personally affronted by NSPCC.
Some of us are affronted by the NSPCC because of its all too frequent attacks on statutory services in pursuit of its own dubious agenda. We are affronted by its courting of vacuous celebrities and its ethically questionable advertising. Some of us find it distasteful that for a supposed charity, it pays its executive employees inflated salaries and then winges that the Government does not do enough to support families and children. Maybe we are just affronted that the NSPCC is good at casting aspersions on to others while hiding its own failures.
Well said, Mary
& Nihat ...
Nihat Erol: Some of us are affronted by the NSPCC because of its all too frequent attacks on statutory services in pursuit of its own dubious agenda. We are affronted by its courting of vacuous celebrities and its ethically questionable advertising. Some of us find it distasteful that for a supposed charity, it pays its executive employees inflated salaries and then winges that the Government does not do enough to support families and children. Maybe we are just affronted that the NSPCC is good at casting aspersions on to others while hiding its own failures.
I really hope that 2010 will see a brighter future for Social Work and Statatory SW's (who do such a difficult job)!
I agree with Nihat, as a Local Authority Social Worker (Team Manager for a Child Protection Team) I too am affronted by the NSPCC and their complete lack of support for front line Social Workers who actually work in child protection and protect children, something that the NSPCC claims to do.
I am also astounded that the NSPCC actually want to be paid for their services i.e. therapeutic work with children, yet they claim to a Children's charity!! other than making referrals to Local Authorities, what exactly do NSPCC do for children? research? lots of agencies do that!
NSPCC is suppoused to have powers to undertake Section 47 enquiries, when was the last time they used such powers?
I found this http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/1061049.stm from a decade ago and wonder what has changed.
I find it really hard to know what the NSPCC really does as it just depends where you live. I favour universal services rather than postcode lottery myself so perhaps NSPCC and LA's should merge to get that Universal service but as with schools and social work merging who would manage??
What hypnotic power do they have over the celebrities anyhow??
As someone who was principally trained in Community work our aim was to get things going and do ourselves out of a job and naively I thought that's why we opted for Universal services or am I just incredibly naive or idealistic
Oh well just plod on
It's hard I know ...but you have to try.....go on
quote user="Mee"]
I agree with 'Mee'
As a SW on a child protection team we receive referrals from the NSPCC when the public have contacted their agency believing that they will carry out an investigation. No, it gets passed on to the LA children's teams.
I'm fed up with the NSPCC being the people who get credited with protecting children with their advertising. I said to a charity collecter on the street who asked me for money for the NSPCC that if I tried to raise money with a badge stating that I was a social worker I'd gets eggs thrown at me.
Well done to all of those who have been quoted in todays CC as responding angrily to the MOST recent NSPCC's criticism of social workers. Please keep this thread up as your views are well worth reading. Thanks for saying it so well, far better than I could.
I completely agree with Nihat and Mee that on the front line there is no support from NSPCC accept that of making referrels to Duty & Assessment teams (which are quite alot i must say). Not within my career have I come across a s.47 investigation by this organisation, and i dont see anyone really pointing the finger asking, why not? You have the powers to do so like LAs. Although, im many case they d provide a supportive service which is clearly needed.
S ;-)
Hi everyone, the above thread is running over in childrens services in response to thier inflammatory piece in Wednesdays press. Below is my response, in that thread. There are others alomg the same line.
" Am I the only Social Worker that has dealt with those lengthy referalls, made by the NSPCC that come into access / referral teams? I have never read such utter, judgemental, subjective drivel in all my life!!
I have never known of on of these referrals to have had any basis for further action; of course an initial assessment has been completed but 100% of the time it has been NFA'd.
These referrals, which are always anonymous, are taken by a large bunch of very well paid QUALIFED SOCIAL WORKERS that sit in a call centre in Salford and who never leave the comfort of their desks to meet anyone. They also have the audacity to send out a feedback document. I have been scathing in the extreme when i have completed these. I have it on close authority from from an ex insider at the NSPCC that they are under instruction to (much like the infamous Iraq dossier) to beef up their evidence!! if they don't it is brought up as a serious practice issue in their supervision!!!
Furthermore I have had experience of one of their counselling projects!!! Jumping Jesus Jones!!! They closed the case as they were struggling to get a 10 year old lad to meaningfully engage with them and that he didn't attend appointments; they never thought that by taking their work to him and his carers there might have been a better outcome. They also tried to undertake academically based reasons for poor attachment with his carer; this poor woman had no academic background at all and struggled to understand the concepts and theories.
Finally they had the audacity to call me to a meeting and tell me that i needed to take the case to child protection and wanted to know what the outcome of my beloved core assessment was. Imagine their corporate surprise when I slammed my book shut, lectured them on the uselessness of the core assessment, adding that I could have gone down the formal road but my experience told me that the youngster in question was in need of therepeutic intervention, not tick box intervention, and that for the last 7 weeks I had been taking him out on a daily basis and doing the work with him that they should have done!!! I added that my work had been effective in holding the family together, if I had gone down the formal assessment route the family would have fallen apart and I would have had to accommodate the youngster!!!
As I left their manager let me know that I had amde very valid points but they feel that they need to push the envelope of practice!!! I nearly drove my car through their building I was so angry!!!
I read of their comments in the paper, they made my blood boil. I felt like contacting them directly to let them know of their staggering incompetence and to tell them to get of their batty's and meet the public, I have used this forum instead!! "
As a foster carer I'm not sure about NSPCC referrals, but I find their adverts a nightmare and very upsetting for my LAC. I also hate their door to door and town canvassers, who know very little about the issues and seem to be in it for their commission.
However, I think the issue of neglect is an important one. I agree that empowering communities is the way to go, but it's a long term strategy not a short term one. In my own experience neglected children are the most damaged and most difficult to work with as they have absolutely no self worth or understanding of the need to care for their thing, friendships and relationships. Children who have been physically and sexually abused, I find personally much easier to help, while neglect seems to transcend the generations, even when children are removed and adopted or LT fostered. When I findo out about the histories of neglected children I just cannot understand much of the time why they were not taken into care years earlier -often they have been left starving and filthy for years and only actually been bought in when a new baby has been hurt or some other significant event has happened. I'm not sure of the solution, or the NSPCC's take on things, but I think current practice needs to change.
And what about the NSPCC's 'Full Stop' Campaign - very clever appealing to the general public and its wealthy benefactors to give to erase child abuse - Oops!!! though - it has now admitted that it can't stop it - well there's a mega surprise isn't there?
I understand that they also emply people just to 'service' their larger contributors.
No - they are no longer a 'front line' service and they are now even withdrawing some of their services (probably not making enough money) from certain areas in favour of less but larger teams.
I challenge them to say when they last brought a Case to court - how many in each of the past 10 years? I feel that they mislead the public quite deliberately and that it is now time their Royal Patronage ceased.