Now I know that this may well be quite controversial but I have become increasingly concerned over the years regarding the NSPCC's 'withdrawal' from frontline Child Protection - that was, I believe, their original remit / reason for existing. I remember the days of the NSPCC uniformed Inspectors and their presence within local neighbourhoods and I have to say that they performed a really useful function - probably more so as they dropped the uniform and were seen as often being more helpful and approachable than local authority social workers. The NSPCC now seems to run a whole range of diverse 'Projects' which come and go - largely, it seems, dependant on local authority funding. The only frontline work (if you can cal it that) they now perform seems to around the investigation of professionals alleged to be involved in abuse. Their 24-hour Helpline is purely a 'filter' for calls to come direct to local authority social work departments 0- they do not go out and investigate and when was the last time they initiated Care proceedings. Their huge success, though is around fundraising - I have no doubt that they continue to persuade the general public that they remain a frontline investigation service when the opposite is nearer the truth. I also understand that staff are employed to 'look after' major contributors. So, my question is whether the NSPCC is still relevant or should tney 're-discover' their origins and go back to more direct frontline work?

Hi Rupert, what you say doesn't sound controversial to me. In my neck of the woods (where NSPCC was born I believe) it has been a bone of contention by a great many of my colleagues that the presumption by the general public is that if they phone NSPCC they expect NSPCC to respond. As you will know all NSPCC do is produce quite good (expensive) advertising campaigns asking for more money to allow them to ring 'Social services' to ask LA's to investigate. Or charge LA's vast amounts of money to investigate fellow (?) professionals as if they are the people who know best. When we visited under section 17 or section 47 the person was often horrified that NSPCC had passed the information on to the Local Authority. I do believe that it is this myth that the public are sold that makes NSPCC the organisation it has become. I have to say that they often do good research but trying to get at it is like pulling teeth and the prices they charge for resources or assessments (no better than many I've done) is preposterous. It is all about money!

he NSPCC in my opinion has lost its way and become a burden rather than a support for the LA the LA is pulling funding away from the NSPCC in certain areas as they have now realised the work they do is no longer supporting the emotional wellbeing of children. The money which is given by the public should be transperant with the NSPCC going public on exactly what and where the money is used. I agree that much research is undertaken by the charity which is a positive but you cannot ,uinless you pay for it or you work for them, have access to it. Currently the buzz words are Domestic Violence and money is being ploughed into schemes for both children and adults but this will stamp out abuse.

I completely agree with your comments Robert. Although I regularly give money to charities, I refuse to support the NSPCC as I have no idea what they do with their money. I also agree that the public do not know what services they provide and like spartacus have visited some families who were very annoyed that it was the LA who attended rather than the NSPCC. It really annoys me that the NSPCC are portrayed as the paragons within the field of child protection whereas LA social workers tend to be vilified.

So what do you think about the people who work for the NSPCC?

Lins:

So what do you think about the people who work for the NSPCC?

A bit like the 'Curates Egg' - good in parts. Some of my ex colleagues have worked for NSPCC for a while but moved on when they realised that they were not social workers any more. I think my concern is the Hierarchy/Corporate/Fund Raisers and the - sometimes - holier than thou (we are the ones who really care for children not like the local authority) attitude.

I suppose it would be too much to believe that NSPCC might read or care what social workers here might think!

The reason I ask is because I am a Social Worker working within a team at the NSPCC and I feel you are right in your suming up. I am now wanting to leave a job I had so many high hopes about because I want to be treat like a SW and have my hard earned qualifications recognised. Such a shame when I turned down a job in the LA following my relocation because i thought I would be able to make a difference.

Lins, I feel for my former colleagues working in the Local Authority as it seems to have changed out of all recognition since 1988. I am looking forward to Stafford on 25th September to see what it brings. I am also encouraged by the 'Putting People First' (personalisation agenda) government proposals. So all is not lost for the social work profession methinks.

No experience is wasted and on the evidence of your posts on this site I believe you are already making a difference.

I no longer contribute my £2 a month direct debit.  When I FOI'd them, I was informed that 78% of their income goes on the tv advertising. When I asked what % of your income goes on direct protection of real children, I was told, 'Erm...the adverts...that's direct child protection.' 

 

i agree with everyone of the comments. i work in child protection and the few times (and it's been very few, thank god) that i've had any dealings with the nspcc, it's not been positive. they should be done under the trade description act. the commercials on tv are dangerously misleading. if joe public knew how little they help children like ' jonny that doesn't cry cos no one comes' the funding would dry up.

 

Hi Libby sorry but I have to take issue with your comments. I work for the NSPCC and yes I too ave my doubts about some of the work they do to protect children but i work within a therapeutic team who work with children who have suffered abuse and my team do some good work with the children as I do. I monitor and evaluate the work that I undertake and have solid proof of this. i also work very closely with the LA who are in overall control of the crae plans and can give them information regarding issues such as contact which supports them in their work. I also help look at what is the appropriate placing for a child when considering forever families.  Others members of the team work within the schools with volunteers to tackle issues regarding teenage pregnancies. I have come from a LA team prior to joining the NSPCC and feel that they do fall down in some areas but not all and should not be scapegoated as the cause of child abuse. 

Hi all I have just qualified as a social worker and have started work with the LA team I did my 2nd year placement with which I am really enjoying. My final year student placement was with an NSPCC team working with adults who had either been convicted of sexual offences against children or displayed sexually harmful behaviour. I found the placement extremely difficult and a lot of my difficulties arose due to how uncomfortable I felt with the whole NSPCC ethos and how far removed they are from front line work. It appeared to me that a lot of time was spent lambasting LA social workers under the guise of improving practice, which is all very well as often practice does fall below an acceptable standard in busy LA who dont have the luxury of handpicking cases dependant on being paid vast sums of money for assessments. However, their constant criticism did very little, other than to create a bigger divide between the LA and the NSPCC. The team I worked with did excellent work with adult offenders but the whole experience made me even more resolute in my decision to work for the LA.