A Truth about Child Protection

There is no secret that there is much about Child Protection services which I have objected to in this blog and elsewhere. Now there is an issue which keeps presenting which I am unable to understand. This week I watched on the SBS Insight program a group of people talk about Child Protection and how it has impacted peoples lives. What struck me was the refusal for people to talk about the real reason why Child Protection fails our community, parents and children.

It would be helpful if Social Workers practiced according to Social Work principles but then there is the more important need for the community to become more involved in the issues concerning the protection of children and the education of parents who are struggling. Every day I work with parents from all socio economic backgrounds who have struggled with the job of parenting. Most people would acknowledge that it is the hardest job to do and that the outcomes are not always what they would like. I work with parents who wonder about how their children have become drug addicts, abuse alcohol or are violent. Parents sit before me wondering how their child/ren have become this self centred, egocentric being that apparently doesn’t reflect any of the parents standards.

Somehow, according to the parents, society has failed them, children have too much freedom, we are unable to discipline them as we were disciplined, they spend all their time in their bedrooms and they no longer know how to associate with their own peer group. Kids these days are not only confronted by bewildered parents who feel hopeless and helpless, they are made to feel responsible for the confusion that sits in their lives. If their behaviour is deemed too difficult to manage then we drug them and label them as having a behavioural disorder or ADHD. We give them drugs and later tell them that taking drugs to solve your problems is not the solution. As parents we fail to take responsibility for how our children are interpreting their world.

What has any of this got to do with Child Protection? The connection is simple. As a society we don’t care about how children are raised because we fail to acknowledge the importance of parenting. Doesn’t it make sense then that if a parent calls a Government Department to seek help because they are struggling with this thing called “parenting” that we would have at our finger tips state run programs designed to help parents.

Rather than asking parents to take responsibility for their behaviour and the impact that has on children it is in the governments best interest to blame the parent rather than offer real help. The representative from FIN, on the Insight program, was correct when he identified the failing of governments to fund programs which help parents.

Why don’t we have a group of specialist who work intensely with parents, not just in their homes but in a class room setting? Why don’t we work with parents at a therapeutic level to help them understand what has brought them to this point? We need to understand the barriers which present us from parenting appropriately. In the groups I run I hear clients state that they don’t hit their children because they remember what it was like to be beaten by a parent. However they don’t acknowledge all the other attributes which make a good parent. They often are unable to manage other behaviours which damage children and relationships.

I wonder what it would be like if Social Workers in Child Protection had the skills to enquire about parents experiences and then to build a relationship based on support and care that would enable the client to trust them enough to enable a substantive working relationship? If Social Workers had the time and the skill set to spend with clients so they could connect differently with their children the outcomes would be different and more children would be able to remain with their parents.

Social Workers in general (within the Child Protection Agencies) do not have the skills required to provide this sort of intervention.

The Child Protection Manual–Families SA

Over the past couple of years I have written about Child Protection issues facing my clients and those that affect my practice as a Social Worker. I thought that it was about time that we have a considered look at the very manual purported to be used by Families SA.

For those of you who are interested in reviewing this manual you will find it here. Vol 1 and Vol 2.

What I find fascinating is that this manual, I believe, is an accurate guide of Child Protection Services and the principles which underpin Social Work. The question has always been what aspect of this Manual are not understood and why is it that Social Workers fail to understand these principles. For the purpose of this blog I will point to only a few of these conflicting areas. Remember that there are many competing ideas and there will be some who work for Families SA who will disagree here. If you do then I encourage you to write your comments at the bottom of this post.

The governing principle is without dispute:-

Children and young people are entitled to be free from harm, have their rights upheld and their welfare promoted. For a child who has been, or is at risk of maltreatment, safety encompasses freedom from threat of danger, harm or loss. It also includes protection from physical, sexual and psychological harm and neglect and is essential if the child is to develop and reach independence.

Regarding the best interest of the child the Manual states:-

The importance of exercising the powers of the Act in the best interest of the child are recognised and consistent with the Family Law Act. If there is conflict of principles or interests, the best interest of the child shall prevail.

I doubt whether these is anyone who would disagree with either of these statements. What I have found confusing is the mantra offered by most Social Workers that they are acting in the best interest of the child. What the next part of the section “Best Interests” it goes on to say:-

This requires a sensitive judgement, based on skilled assessment, to
balance the struggle between the competing demands of immediate safety with the long-term psychological wellbeing of the child.

The key words are “sensitive” and “skilled”. What does “sensitive” mean in this context? It is complicated and requires a unique set of knowing's that go way beyond just acting in the best interest of the child. In fact in order to act in the best interest of the child the worker has to have a range of sensitivities. This includes the parents history and their capacity to change, cultural considerations, support and resources, understanding of the parents strengths, relationship building etc. Crossing over with these sensitivities are a range of skills, empathy, communication, reflection, listening, assessment, non-judgmentalism, counselling, mediation, advocacy, brokerage. There are also a range of further understandings including, family relationships, child development (not just attachment theory), system theory, strengths perspective, distribution and use of power, domestic violence, anger management, mental health, disability, working with diversity, working with indigenous clients and culturally diverse clients.

Herein lies the first problem. In order to fulfill the role of a Social Worker in child protection you are going to need a wide range of skills, training and supervision to meet the most basic requirements as outlined in the Family SA Practice Manual. When Social Workers are bereft of these skills they will make poor decisions and not only leave children at risk but also fail to assess the families capacity to care for the child. The end result is often a greater focus on risk management rather than an effort to practice according to the principles which underpin Social Work and which are supported by the Practice Manual.

The Manual mentions that the governing principle of Child Protection is in accord with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. The manual refers to the convention by stating the following:-

The preamble to the Convention recognises the rights of all members of the family and recognises the family as having prime responsibility for the growth and well-being of all members, particularly children.

Why is then that in many cases the family is ignored as being even relevant and on too many occasions we see children being removed without any or very little consultation with the family. In a recent new paper article from the UK it was reported that in some council areas there was a significant reduction on removals because a change in policy which focused on family preservation was proving more effective than removing a child. What changed was a change in practice by the Social Workers. One wonders what that must have saved the government in terms of out of home care?

Now lets move to what the legislation is actually saying about what is in the best interest of children:-

In determining a child’s best interests, consideration must be given to the following:
(a) the desirability of keeping the child within the child’s own family and the undesirability of withdrawing the child unnecessarily from a neighbourhood or environment with which the child has an established sense of connection;
(b) the need to preserve and strengthen relationships between the child, the child's parents and grandparents and other members of the child's family (whether or not the child is to reside with those parents, grandparents or other family members);

I can hear some Child Protection workers screaming that this all seems to pick out issues around the families and their rights and isn’t focusing on the child. The focus on the child and their wellbeing is a given and never needs to be discussed. What I am discussing her are the competing ideas which are part of the equation but rarely considered. I am arguing though that if considered in many cases a better outcome for the child is likely to be found.

If these principles were upheld I am sure that Kim’s Story would not have been needed to be told. Recently Kim told me that he mother was going to be in the same town as Kim was having access with her child. Uncertain and fearful of the department, Kim didn’t know whether she should tell her mother where she was meeting with her child. She rang the Social Worker and asked if it was okay for her mother to meet with her daughter during access. The Social Worker clearly hadn’t read the manual because he said no, they needed more time and prior notice. What for? Some how family connections are not that important. Kim’s mother blamed her for this decision and is not talking to her. How is this decision going to strengthen family connections?

It is worth noting that no where in the Manual does it mention that the child is the client even though I have had Social Workers tell me that this is the case and that the parents in fact don’t have any rights. That is not true. The Manual doesn’t mention clients at all but rather focuses on family connections as being paramount. At no point does the Manual mention Attachment Theory as being critical in making an assessment even though this is a primary tool used by Social Workers to justify the removal of a child.

Under Partnership this is what the Manual has to say:-

Partnership

When a child protection notification leads to Families SA intervention, the parents have a right to an open and honest approach from social workers who should provide a clear explanation of their powers, actions and reasons for concern. They should strive to maintain a constructive relationship with parents at all times. Participatory case planning will facilitate family members sharing the responsibility for intervention outcomes.

Partnership is working with parents/caregivers and their networks to enable them to carry out the responsibility shared by both the State and parents/caregivers to promote the welfare of children. It is not about equal power, but about working together toward a common goal. It involves attitudes, skills, policies, decision making, services, accountability, and openness. It seeks to build on existing strategies of families, acknowledge power differences, and to work positively withdifference. (Morrison, 1992).

Children and families are best served within a context of multi-disciplinary teamwork, co-operation and commitment to the protection and wellbeing of the child. Families SA should facilitate interagency collaboration and ensure clear communication between government, non-government and community services and networks to ensure best outcomes for children and their families.

All of this makes for good practice but so many times I see Social Workers giving up on clients because it all seems too hard. This is the worst form of Social Work I can imagine. What we need to understand is that the reason why people give up is because they don’t have the skill set to work with the client in the first place. This says more about the worker than it does about the client.

Under Outcomes the manual states:-

The focus of services will be on preserving families whenever possible and Families SA will work with families to strengthen their parenting capacity and to ensure family responsibility for the care and protection of their children.

When Social Workers fail to identify strengths and are unable to provide a skilled assessment of clients then it is only inevitable that they will make mistakes and harm children.

It is evident from just the first few pages of the manual that the principles are not followed and that the practice frameworks of many Social Workers (not all) are the antithesis of Social Work and the Manual that is their to guide them.

Peoples Voice Publishing - Recipes for Survival

My wife and I have started a new business which publishes stories of people who have been the most marginalized in our community. The business is called Peoples Voice Publishing. Last month we launched our first book which is titled “Recipes for Survival”. This book is a compilation of stories told by those who experienced out of home care such as foster care and institutionalized care. Some of the stories and poetry will make you laugh and cry.

We are planning a few books for next year but at the moment we are working towards publishing the stories of those people who have had their children removed from their care through child protection services.  This is an opportunity for these people to tell of their experiences and how having their children removed has impacted them. We don’t expect people to have any great literacy talent because we understand that this a gift all may have but we are prepared to hear their stories and transcribe them if necessary or we will edit what they write but still maintain the integrity of the story.

If you would like to view the launch of “Recipes for Survival” please go to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2GLdQtpol-k for part one. Or go to my youtube channel ttonks51 for all the videos of the launch. This will give you some idea of what we will be doing with the next book.

If you would like to contribute please contact me on tony@respectfulworkplace .com.au or phone me on 0414883153.

We are looking forward to hearing from you.

Social Workers as middle class professionals

Today my wife attended a meeting in which there was a Social Worker representing a government initiative that would represent a very marginalised group. It became evident from my discussions with my wife that the people this Social Worker was to be representing were not thought of as being important enough to be considered before others. This group of individuals of which my wife is one were introduced last to the group after all the professionals in the room had been introduced. To some this may seem like a small issue but to those present and to my wife this was significant enough to cause some distress. I see this as a failing of some social workers, that is there inability to consider the place their clients play in the process. Often we seem to think that our place, the professional, is more important than the clients. We forget that it is the client whose needs are important and often we forget to ask them what their needs may be. We have been doing that with indigenous people since we arrived here.

It would be somewhat refreshing to now have the focus placed back on those we serve rather than focussing on the "us" as the expert in peoples lives. To in fact put them as first in everything we do. What would cause us to not do this? Are we afraid that we will be diminishing our sense of professionalism and power by empowering others to take control of their lives and to acknowledge their existence as primary and ours as secondary?

The lesson to be learnt is that when a group of stakeholders are present and some of these stakeholders are consumers or clients acknowledge them before any others.

Is Social Work Art?

 

Recently my wife was asked by the South Australian Art Gallery to present at a forum on one of Tracey Emin’s work (The Bed). Before this event I was not aware of Tracey Emin and certainly didn’t know anything about her impact on contemporary art. I discovered that she is a little confrontational, to put it mildly, and uses her art to express the pain she has experienced in her life. So what does any of this have to do with Social Work? While I was listening to the speakers I began to wonder, according to their definition of art, which was basically that “if we call it art then it’s art”. I am not sure that many Social Workers would call what we do “art”. However the notion is worth exploring.

Like Emin, we listen to peoples stories and attempt to make some sense of what they tell us and then to give it meaning. This isn’t all that different from what Emin has done with her art. She has taken the raw pain and expressed it in the most powerful way she could find. She isn’t afraid of the criticism she may receive because she vehemently believes that she has the “right” to express herself how she wants. This is a very public display of self. Our clients are not going to express themselves in this way, but we are the public to them. They often tell us some of the most horrific aspects of human existence. We are placed in a position of extreme power. We can offer a judgement of them or we can listen and understand the extent that the story has impacted them and honor their honesty and courage for allowing us to enter their world. On reflection maybe we are the curator and the client is the artist? It could be that we are both artists collaborating on having a story told with understanding and meaning. We are a partnership. The client is able to tell the story and we find the way by which the story gathers meaning and purpose.

We can become the public voice for the client by advocating for them and developing conversations which conjure different understandings. We also have the skill to enable the client to explore their stories in an environment which is powerful, deliberate and purposeful. It is like we bring along the artists equipment, because without the tools for an artist to present their story there is no expression of the real impact of the story. After all a story without meaning is just a story and will have very little impact on the story teller and those who are listening to the story. Through meaning comes understanding and power.

As Social Workers our art is to explore the story so that the emotions which accompany the story can be experienced and heard, by the client and the Social Worker. It is important to understand the story that we can feel the emotions and participate in the experience as much as we are capable. We don’t have to have experienced Emin’s rape and years of loneliness and abuse to experience her pain. If we look hard enough we will be able to see it in her work. If we use our skills we will be able to see the same level of distress in our clients. We will therefore be better equipped to understand our clients and help them through the emotional pain. 

What is interesting about Emin’s work is that she has people critiquing it and she has therefore become a very public person with her pain exposed for all to see. Unlike Emin’s “public” our role is not to criticise or judge but as our clients “public” we have to be able to interpret the story which endorses progress and growth, strength and an inner power. Our art is expressed in the manner in which we unravel our client’s story and interpret in a way which offers renewal.

To have partnerships such as this is true “Art”.

The House of Horror – An Alternate View

 

There has much been written and reported about the terrible conditions in which children were found living in an outer suburb of Adelaide. The parents involved have been sentenced up to six years for the abuse which occurred there. The government has undertaken an inquiry into how key child protection authorities were unaware of what was happening but the inquiry was placed on hold until the police had declared that the matter has been fully investigated. Apparently this has only happened recently even though the matter was first brought to public attention in 2008 and it has been sometime since the parties concerned have been sentenced.

“The House of Horrors” is an unfortunate term used by the media to define public concern at what happened in this home. The main protagonist according to the media is Tania Staker who, as the mother of twelve of the children in the house, but not the biological mother of those who were most at risk, is the major focus of the media coverage and is portrayed as an evil woman who needs to be hated and reviled for what she allowed to happen in this home.

It is about time that I talked about my experience of Tania and what working with her meant, as well as the conflicts this presented in terms of my own practice as a Social Worker. But to start with, I need to make a firm statement that at no point do I condone the behaviour of any of the adults in this home nor do I condone the abuse meted out to these children. What happened should not have happened and these children should have been protected. However, they weren’t.

Soon after the children were removed from their home I was contacted by a colleague who was doing some advocacy work with Tania. At this point it wasn’t clear what had happened except that the conditions of the home were appalling and that a number of children were removed. In the first instance Tania and her children were removed and placed in a home especially designed to house so many children. At this point Families SA (FSA) clearly were not concerned about Tania and her ability to care for her own children. Nor were there any allegations made against Tania in regard to her treatment of the other four children. My understanding, from conversations with Tania, was that there were no care issues in regard to Tania’s treatment of her own children until the allegations were made against her by children who were not her responsibility. If she was as wicked a woman as the media had us believe, then why weren’t her children removed from her at the moment the house was raided by police and child protection officers?

While the blame is levelled at Tania there are a number of issues which have not been addressed. For example, Tania and her ten children were living in Geelong for a number of years. During that time they were known to child protection services primarily because of the violence of the children’s father. The level of violence was of the most extreme nature. This in and of itself should have been enough for child protection services to have been involved and to have put in place some protection for the Staker children. It didn’t happen. The inability for states to share files and to follow up on families who move from one state to another is a failing of the system. At what point were FSA notified of this family? If it was prior to the raid why didn’t they take action earlier? If Tania Staker knew her children were likely to be removed because she was not providing adequate care I am convinced she would have done whatever was requested of her. Her children are extremely important to her.

To some extent the failure of the system is culpable and someone needs to take responsibility for this failure. Perhaps the Minister?

I know that this matter was initially seen as a political issue because it was an opportunity for the government to demonstrate that they were taking strong action against child abuse I also know that the planning and most of the decisions which were made regarding the removal of Tania’s children were coming from above the regional manager of FSA and that there was political influence which wasn’t necessarily in accord with the managers, supervisors and Social Workers who had to do the ground work and finally remove the children. I know that there was much discontent around the way all of this unfolded. At this point the level of abuse was unknown yet the political involvement indicates that the number of children involved made the case special and needed to be handled in a different way. It needed to be public and it needed to be seen as strong and impressive.

The final allegations made against the adults living in the house set the stage for Mr Rann to stand strong on his fight against crime and now he had child protection too for his “tough on crime” mantra. What makes this particularly sad is that the media jumped in to support him by helping to present a scapegoat – a woman who presents poorly in public and who has the public face of a woman who is to be hated.

Let me tell you what I know of the true Tania Staker. Tania is a loving and caring woman who has lived with violence and every type of abuse you can imagine her whole life. Tania sought love in her children because it was from them that she was loved unconditionally, particularly when they were very young. After her children were removed there wasn’t a time when Tania didn’t cry because she was grieving for her children. For what it is worth, I like Tania. The pictures depicting her in the papers were not the Tania I knew.

I can remember, quite early in my contact with Tania, that I returned home from visiting her and my wife asked me how my day was and I broke down in tears. I had heard some stories about what had happened in the house and what was allegedly Tania’s involvement. It didn’t match with the woman I knew. I couldn’t believe that this was happening, I was in total confusion and I was deeply distressed. How could I like a woman who was so vile and abusive? I have trained myself as a Social Worker to see through the behaviour and acknowledge that the behaviour is not “the person”, that people represent more than just their behaviour. I have been working with violent men for many years and found that this was very helpful in developing different ways of working with them and was a way by which I wouldn’t judge. It also gave me the ability to be confrontational, respectful and creative. But with Tania I was completely lost.

I came to realise that regardless of the stories and the way she was presented in the press I had to follow my assessment and what I saw and experienced of her. I had to firmly stick to my Social Work principles and I had to acknowledge that it was my view which was important to me and that is what determined my practice. There was one problem that I struggled to deal with until recently. Most people I met couldn’t see through the image that was presented by the stories and what happened in that home. Does Tania deserve to be understood? Is there a certain set of behaviours where you no longer express any understanding?

I once said to Tania – “It appears to me that your life has been full of violence.” She began to cry because this was a statement of fact and was probably the first time it had been acknowledged. I had heard about the pattern of drinking and violence she had experienced from the day she was born until the very present. I wondered how a person lives through that level of violence and how one sustains a sense of self, unless of course you try to invent that over and over again in each child you have. There is no doubt that Tania attempted to give her children as much love as she could, and there is no doubt that she loved them. It is interesting that there have never been any allegations levelled at Tania about her children being abused. I can tell you that the feelings she held towards the younger children of the other family were different to those she felt for her own children. But where were the parents of those other children, particularly the mother? I know where the father was, he was abusing Tania. The space Tania found herself in was one of confusion and fear. She spent time at the hotel gambling and attempting to forget not only what was happening in the home but also the traumas of the past. It was a place that few of us would understand. There were six adults living there and Tania was being abused by most of them, particularly her partner at the time, the father of the children who were taken to hospital. She told me one story in particular of a situation where she was being violently abused by her partner in front of the younger children and how they were encouraged to be involved in the abuse. For Tania, too, it was a ‘House of Horror’.

There is no doubt in my mind that Tania was the scapegoat and yet her story has never been told. I was never told anything about the allegations which brought her before the court because her lawyer believed this would be unhelpful. Tania desperately needed someone to talk to about these events but complied with her lawyers’ wishes.

At no point did anyone talk to me about the work I had done with Tania. No one was interested in an alternate view, not even her lawyer. At no point did FSA invite me to the many meetings Tania had with them. I was irrelevant to Tania’s story. I offered nothing which would enhance their distorted view of her. No one was prepared to stand by her and explain the circumstances which lead to the abuse.

Why is it that we have the recurring image of Tania giving the fingers up sign to the media? Why don’t we have a picture of the mother of the children who were abused or pictures of the four men who were present in the home at the time? We are obsessed with mother-blaming and are reluctant to look to the men who are often perpetrators of violence and who, in this case, were responsible for what eventually occurred.

One social worker was assigned to work with the Staker children and Tania. I doubt if that worker knew anything about Tania’s past and what happened to her in that home. I wonder how she survived the conflict she must have felt between the way Tania presented and what was reported. It is very confusing I know to be landed with two sets of conflicting information. I can only imagine that acting as a Social Worker in this situation would have been very stressful. At one level there was the political push to have this matter resolved quickly, at another you would know that it would be unwise to present the alternate view and to advocate for Tania and her children.

The best indication I had as to what was happening to this worker was when I was present at a Care and Protection Meeting and I Tania’s Case Worker was present and she refused to look at me. I was the enemy, when really I was doing my job. It was at this meeting that I was told that I couldn’t make any statement at all. This was a new rule brought in to silent me in this particular case I believe. I actually didn’t realise that I was so important.

I often wonder about the children. I know that some of them had abusive experiences while in state care. For the younger children I hope they have a better life and get to know their mother at some stage even though I have my doubts that the State will ever allow that to happen. Some of the children will be damaged for the rest of their lives unless the appropriate services are put in place. My guess is that the State figures it has done its job because the adults are jailed. What are they going to do when these adults and particular Tania wants to meet with her children? She is not a danger to her children and needs to have appropriate access to them. Perhaps that is why they have sent her to Pt Augusta to serve her sentence.

My greatest fear was that by presenting my view of her would have destroyed my credibility as a Social Worker. I no longer care about that. I do the best I can and if people don’t like the way I assess clients and the way I see my world and that of clients, then I frankly don’t care.

The writing of this should have been done a long time ago. I apologise to Tania and her children for not having done so.

Open letter to Minister Rankine

I have decided to include an email that I have sent to Minister Rankine who is the Minister responsible for Child Protection in this state. I know that I have taken all the proper steps at this stage to have this matter resolved but have failed dismally when it comes to having someone recognise the injustice. Hopefully the Minister will have the guts to do something about it. Stay posted for any updates.

Tony

Dear Minister Rankine,
I have been working with the parents of A for over two years. My role has been to work with the parents so that they could have their daughter returned to them. My goal is to give those who are most disempowered a voice when they are least likely to be heard.  During this period I have had a number of conversations with David Waterford and Roger McCarron regarding this family and the injustice surrounding the removal of A. Over the journey I have raised many of B and C’s concerns regarding the care arrangements of their daughter. To say that I am frustrated, annoyed and angry by the way this family has been treated is an understatement. I have been grateful for the time David and Roger have afforded me by listening to my continual stream of complaints but all of this has come to nothing.

The primary issue here is that your department failed to understand the mental wellbeing issues surrounding B at the time B called your department for help, particularly her Post Natal Depression. I won’t go through the long and drawn out history of this case but it is important to understand that at this point in these parents life, they have a good relationship, there are not mental health concerns and they have secured long term accommodation. There is no drug or alcohol abuse. There is no domestic violence. Their home is immaculately kept. B is undertaking a bridging course at Flinders University so that she can enter university next year to study Social Work. Given these circumstances alone the child should be returned to her parents. I have observed these parents with their child and I can assure you that they are more than competent loving parents who would never harm their daughter.

The child is now living with her maternal grandfather and his partner. We have raised a series of concerns regarding the grandfather which were never investigated at the time that the child was placed with him. None of these concerns have been treated seriously by your Department. Recently it was reported by the child that she had made reference to the grandfather’s penis . It was discovered that he still showers with the grandchild, who is four. We mentioned the inappropriateness of this to your department. They stated that they had discussed this with the grandfather and then provided an excuse for this sort of behaviour. It was also disclosed by the mother that the grandfather was known for flashing himself at the women who use to live next door to him when B was a child. We also know that this man was extremely violent to his ex-wife, B’s mother. We also know that this wasn’t investigated until last year after we raised the issue and the psychologist who provided a review of the situation had to ask him about this. It is evident from his response that he doesn’t take any responsibility for his behaviour and still blames his ex-wife for his behaviour. Your department failed to understand that the potential for violence from this man is extreme and that the child is potentially at risk from a number of fronts.

Last year we were seeking to have the child have an overnight stay at Christmas. At that time the parents were seeing their daughter weekly on a Friday. The department decided that they needed to have a review of the child situation to see if this was appropriate. The review was presented to the parents at the Marion office and was the worst moment I as a Social Worker have ever experienced. Even though the attachment was now viewed as satisfactory and the report in general was favourable the Psychologist in her limited experience and limited practice wisdom recommended that contact be cut from one full day per week to two hours a fortnight. This was so out of left field that none of us in our wildest dreams would have thought that the department would make such a suggestion. Remember that this was meant to be a review to see if over-night access was appropriate for Christmas. It is difficult to describe the level of betrayal I felt from David Waterford. Why were these parents punished for wanting to spend Christmas with their daughter and watch her open her presents in the morning when she woke up. They have not had that joy for many years. Why would you deprive them not just of that but take away their time with their daughter? Particularly when your own report doesn’t identify any risk factors. It appears to me that your department is so risk averse that you are afraid to make changes that are in fact in the best interest of the child. You have inexperienced staff who are making decisions which are counter to your mandate because they are fearful that they may be making a mistake but when they do, as they have in this case, they haven’t the courage to admit the error but instead retreat further from the parents and try to alienate them all in the guise of protecting the child.

The parents, in an effort to prove that they are good parents and that the issues where presented by the department at the outset were changed, asked an independent Forensic Psychologist to assess them. They had to borrow $1,300 for this assessment. You will find the report attached. In this report it confirmed all that I had been telling David. However your department saw fit to rip shreds of Dr White and his report.

I had posted here David Waterford’s response to the report but due to such a negative response I have chosen to remove it from this post.

It is clear that conversations with David and your department are fruitless and the risk aversion your staff display will always remain as a barrier to productive and professional social work. I am asking you to review this matter and to take definitive action which will ensure that this child is protected and returned to her parents. I have asked David to conduct an independent review of this families current situation but he has failed to do so. I urge you to accept the notion that occasionally your staff get it wrong. I urge you in good conscience to rectify this gross miscarriage of justice and to accept that peoples circumstances can change, and that when that happens those people need to be rewarded, and that ultimately children need to live with their biological parents if their parents can provide them with a safe and nurturing environment.

Unfortunately the legislation doesn’t allow parents who have changed circumstances to return to court so we are reliant on your good will and professionalism to ensure that parents like B and C have your support so that you can return to court and amend the current order.

This is my final effort to engage with your department to resolve this issue. If this child isn’t returned to her parents she will be damaged for life and those responsible will be you, David and those who have worked to keep her away from her parents. There will be a time when A will talk about her experiences in care and the confusion which will exist for her as to why she was kept with her aging grandparents and not living with her capable loving parents. We are not able to hold you accountable for any action you have taken which will damage this child but we can find ways to make this issue more public. Only you can decide what damage that may cause.

I would like a meeting with you so that we can all decide and a way forward.
I am looking forward to your response.

Regards,

Tony Tonkin BSW MAASW
Accredited Mental Health Social Worker
Web www.respectfulworkplace.com.au
Blog http://socialworkchallenges.blogspot.com
Ph Mob 0414 883 153