I have had experience of supporting and recruiting Kinship carers so I was dismayed when I read 'Department for Children, Schools and Families-commissioned research has found social workers need to be more pro-active in exploring the potential of kinship care'. Chance would be a fine thing.

I had one auntie willing to look after her two nephews for £50 per week when their mother abandoned them in favour of her drug habit, and a senior manager refusing to support this because 'We cant have people dictating how much we should pay them!' The boys were placed in a residential home costing £1500 per week for both. (I was able to get a deal of two for the price of one and a half.) The lads were there for 18months until mum returned. I would have assessed auntie as a Foster carer let alone a Kinship carer.

On another occasion I was castigated by a manager for informing a Kinship Carer about a web site which gave lots of information about finance (dont ask what the site was I've forgotten but I think it was to do with Grandparents). The site included information on the Munby ruling if I remember correctly. The managers concern was that "if the Kinship carers got what foster carers got the council would be bankrupt in no time"

Then there was the Kinship Carer who was persuaded to take out a Residence Order. When I asked the Manager about a Residence Order Allowance he said that I should not discuss this with the carer. OOps I'm sorry I accidently left that leaflet on the table when I'd used it as a coaster under the cup of tea!

Kinship assessments should take no more than six weeks! Foster care assessments should take no more that six months! Everybody in the team should carry at least three assessments! Take my advice make sure Kinship assessments are shared equally through the team

Why am I not surprised that DCSF research seems to blame Social Workers? Do people think we are stupid or something or is it just that Social workers are the easy target? I wonder how quickly the Daily Mail will dig out this piece of (?) Research(?)

To be fair I haven't read the research finding only CC online article so far.

Dont get me started on Kinship.

Outrageous !   While I dont really agree with family members being paid to raise their children, grandchildren, nieces, nephews etc we have to remember that todays family isnt as close or supportive as in the past. Im aware of a lot of grandparents raising their grandchildren with little or no financial help (usually if the parent (s) are drug users) and I dont think thats right either. But to place children in care at that cost is just plain silly. Something needs to be sorted out.

I feel that if it saves the children or whom ever else the informal carer is caring for the heartache of being away from there family, why should they not be paid it costs money, people have to leave there jobs and can not be expected to live on thin air, It would also save the government money and help take people above the poverty line and maybe help them feel like they were not being taken advantage of.

Of couse no one family member wants to be paid but would you expect others to take on the hours of 168ish a week and not get paid for it I doubt it very much. I doubt that anyone else would either so why should family members be expected to give up there life and there jobs and more just because the government are trying to save money off there backs and in the end it will cost more as people lose their homes their health and require support themselves.

 Crazy.

 Time for this government to recognise a persons worth and look after them.

 It's got to be worth making the investment in kinship care - surely it will pay off in the long run.

 Hi, sonyaw331 - welcome to CareSpace. I just wondered why you had added so many tags to your comment? Or was it some sort of system error?

Simeon 

We all need to be needed and we have usually got a view on any given situation. The way it could be resolved is I believe reasonably simple:

If a 'Family Group' meeting were arranged (with a common sense sort of chair person), and if the department could provide suitable resources it may be possible for the family to suggest solutions themselves. Perhaps Grandad or grandma could be mentor, Uncle Bob and Auntie Vera take the children to school, Mrs Smith, the good neighbour provide a bed, The Social Worker or support worker help with transport if needed and help organise contact - not necessarily supervise all unless as part of an assessment - and a timescale to meet targets and requirements.

There would inevitably be pitfalls certainly during the initial family meeting with issues of blame, recrimination, old vendettas and possibly an unwillingness of parental agreement. This is the reason for a strong common sense chair (and it might not necessarily need to be a social work chair person, though there might be a need for social work input to explain the legalities etc.) There is the possibilty that any financial support may be misused or become dependent on physical support. There are lots of risks but, if the social worker has done their homework and has looked to the family at an early stage as the research suggests and if the manager listens to and trusts the social worker it might, just might work and children will be protected or supported as needed.

Pie in the sky? Probably, but, the sooner we get away from the premise that social workers know best and their managers know even better and their managers know even better, the happier children will be I believe.

Yes, I'm not naive, I know that it wont work in all cases. I have been there with collusive families and friends. I have also been with families who just need the encouragement to 'Get it Right'.

I am getting to the point where I think people generally are losing the drive and enthusiasm of previous years (called the olden days) and feel that if the state is doing it then 'why bother? "Nobody listens anyway!"

It's all to do with power. Give it back to the people. It will happen that way in the end and it might just work?!?!

Sorry about that rant but as Ken Dodd says "By Jove I needed that" 

Nice rant Spartacus!

What you say makes good sense. The root problem is the prevailing fear of innovation. Family group conferences, kinship assessments and or even, dare I say it, a social worker just doing their job and engaging with the extended family, are time consuming and complex in the short-term, but in the long term they can not only shift power back to the family but also save time and money for professionals. Opting for tried and tested residential or foster care carries less risk for the social work managers. hence the attraction.

Having said this, there are examples in some parts of the country where FGCs are becoming increasingly embedded in the fabric of child care decision-making. This may be propelled by good practice, but let's be honest, it's also a reaction to financial pressures, where certain authorities take the long view and see kinship care as a cheaper option. No problem for me, if it's a better decision for the child, and maybe this is an example of financial pressures stimulating innovation.

The term also used, and which may sound less threatening to families, is Family Group Meetings. A 'meeting' sounds more acceptable to many people than a 'conference.' Yes, they are extremely helpful and a number of courts / Judges will have expected one to be held prior to going into Care Proceedings.

I dont like to sound pedantic Rupert but I did suggest 'meeting' rather than conference. However, even 'family' may be unwise if we are looking at friends as well as family. Perhaps initially it could be called a group meeting with the (sensible) chair recording whatever it evolves to. I do take the point that it needs to be handled very sensitively. I know that on one occasion we used the term 'family get together' to good effect. 

why was it that a grandmother was allowed to care for all three of her grandchildren for two years,only for social services to come in literally one month before the final hearing and remove them?If you say kinship assessment takes 6 weeks,how come this one took 2 years?This really is an "odd" case,psychologist even said the care package put in place was "impossible" to keep up.So many things here don't make any sense.

Hi Mary P,

I cannot comment on the case you refer to specifically but perhaps it was a 'Private Fostering' arrangement already in place which social services agreed with. Perhaps it was a Residence Order.

I'd be interested in knowing a bit more. There is so much which goes on and which social services are not always aware of and over which social services have little control.

It is interesting that you say a psychologist even said that the care package was 'impossible' to keep up. I suppose the Solicitor said something similar as well as the school and health while the social worker was somewhat marginalised!

I have some sympathy with your view margaretthatcherschild and, as you can see, I generally supported Auntie, but it was a little bit more complicated than the issue of money. I only used the example to highlight how some managers seem to miss the point of Section 1 of the Children Act.

I had two young boys who had been placed with their paternal grandmother as the birth parents were both heavily involved in substance misuse and offending