|
|
 |
| |
Child protection: morale high, staff workloads safe
• THE description of a “damning report” into Islington’s child protection services was almost completely wrong (Baby P report sounds alert on caseloads, April 17).
The report was a fair and balanced assessment of how Islington’s children’s services are managed in light of recommendations recently made by Lord Laming following the tragic case in Haringey.
Membership of Islington’s health review committee is evenly split between Labour and Lib Dem councillors but it has a Labour chairman. Late last year, the committee unanimously asked the question: “Could a Baby P tragedy happen in our borough?” and we have been closely examining child protection over the past six months.
The latest report confirms that Islington is in a much stronger position than many other boroughs.
Almost 90 per cent of our children’s social workers are permanent staff. Just a few years ago, more than a half were temporary and agency workers.
There is a good proportion of senior and well-qualified social workers.
Our child protection staff have very safe workloads – with an average of just nine cases per social worker at any one time.
Essential work is done very quickly – especially initial assessments of children at risk and home visits to children in need.
Morale among child protection staff is high.
Not everything is perfect, however. Islington’s child protection staff still have too much paperwork. They need higher levels of administrative back-up so they can concentrate on working directly with children and parents. The staff working environment could also be much better.
There are some weaknesses elsewhere in Islington’s child protection system. But the potential problems lie not with the council but with the police service (the turnover in specialist officers is too high); with accident and emergency at the main hospitals (their staff cannot identify children who might be on the at-risk register); there is an acute shortage of health visitors – a long-term problem which the Primary Care Trust has still not resolved; finally, there are blockages in the information-sharing systems involving GPs, adult mental health services and child and adolescent mental health.
It is not often that I find myself defending one of Islington Council’s services. But child protection is far too important to be bogged down by political squabbles. All parties on the council are united in the determination to make sure children in Islington have the best protection we can provide.
But we also need accurate reporting by the local press to make sure that child protection is considered in a calm and objective way.
Cllr Paul Convery
Labour, Caledonian ward
• I WAS shocked by the article about child protection services. When I compare what was in the report with the article in your paper I have to wonder whether your reporter read the same report I did.
The article is not representative of the report from the former assistant director for children’s social care that went to the health and well-being committee, of which I am a member. The report that went to the committee is certainly not damning. The chairman of the committee, Councillor Paul Convery, made this clear in his statement at the meeting when he commented on your “slightly frivolous” article.
In your article the impression is given that there are problems with social workers’ caseloads. This is not the case. The officer’s report makes this clear, stating that “caseloads of Islington social workers are not excessive”.
Your article also suggested that there is a problem with morale among social workers. Again, the officer’s own words contradict this as he states quite clearly in the report “morale in the children-in-need social team is positive”.
Your article is an insult to the hard work of social workers who have played a vital role in turning around a service that was once considered one of the worst in the country and is now acknowledged as an example of best practice for other councils.
Cllr Tracy Ismail
Lib Dem, St George’s ward
• I APPLAUD the Tribune for bringing to the attention of readers how bad Islington’s child protection services have been, not only in relation to heavy caseloads but also in the inadequate level of training for social workers.
On a number of occasions in recent years I have expressed my concerns to council officers and executive members about the poor standard of child development training within child protection.
Indeed, drawing very much on my involvement in a number of Islington cases I made particular reference to this in my evidence to the Select Committee Inquiry on Looked After Children when I was asked to attend as a witness last June.
This is therefore not something new, and as an advocate on behalf of vulnerable families in the borough, I am disturbed that I have to keep raising this issue. Hopefully, this will be the last time.
Trevor Jones
National co-ordinator, Parents Against Injustice
Hanley Road, N4
• I KNOW there are excellent social workers in the profession and I have great admiration for the work they do. I also appreciate the responsibility, stress and workload that goes with the job.
However, I have recently had discussions with a senior social worker from Islington’s child protection team, concerning a false allegation which was made regarding myself and my child.
The social worker involved placed me “under suspicion” before establishing any facts. In my opinion this is not an intelligent or sensitive way to conduct an inquiry.
In a later discussion, after explaining that the case was closed, the social worker asked me a personal question, which I had already answered previously and now felt irrelevant as the case was closed.
I was left feeling uncomfortable and annoyed with the experience.
I would like to make it clear that I have no problem with a social worker “chasing up” an allegation. However, I took offence at the conduct of this social worker.
I have now written to the social worker and have received a few apologies. While speaking to friends I’ve discovered that three of them have had similar experiences with Islington social services and these incidents were all dealt with unsatisfactorily.
If anyone feels disgruntled with the actions or behaviour of a public service worker, I would strongly recommend writing to the person concerned and requesting a written response.
If people “suffer it”, it will not improve or change and could get worse.
Police brutality, for example, is decreasing and less acceptable because people stood up to it. It is best not to let something serious happen before speaking out. It is also healthy to get it out of your system.
NAME AND ADDRESS SUPPLIED
• THE branch officers of Islington Unison were pleased to see the article on the issues facing social workers who work with children and families in the light of Baby P.
The article quotes from outgoing assistant director David Worlock’s report, which examined the issues facing social workers, including some things we feel are vital, such as increasing admin support for social workers.
Unison has made the following proposals to the children’s social work taskforce nationally and to Lord Laming: child protection visits to be done by two practitioners; more social workers and support staff; national caseload management standards; more resources; a cull of bureaucracy: re-establishing homecare services for children and families; the complete overhaul of the integrated children’s system; better support and more reflective practice; a review of legal processes; and measures to rebuild morale.
Mike Calvert
Deputy branch secretary,
Islington Unison local government branch
|
| |
|
|
 |
YOUR COMMENTS:
Care Proceedings have osculated as much as 35%, since the tragic death of Baby P,and other Local Authority failings up and down the Country.
If common sense doesn't prevail,there will be many more Parents that will suffer injustice,and gross miscarriages of Justice, at the hands of the Family Courts.Babies are being taken from Hospitals, within the West Midlands, within hours of Birth, Social Services have very little evidence, to support such drastic action,and should consider the Kin care clause, mentioned in the Public Law Guidelines, by placing Children with an immediate Family member, such as Grandparents, while CPS investigations are taking place.
There is another worry, with the new Legal Aid payments, with regards to barristers,Parents may be forced to represent themselves,they don't have the knowledge of this very complex side of the Law.Good Mackenzie friends,are very few and far between.Local Authority's will have a real Baby boom.
ALISON STEVENS |
| |
| |
|
|
|
