A festive message

 

"Young Scot is the national youth information and citizenship charity. [They] provide young people, aged 11 - 26, with a mixture of information, ideas and incentives to help them become confident, informed and active citizens."

"Young Scot has released its annual festive message starring young people from across Scotland and Scotland’s First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon. The poem written by rising young Scottish talent, Ellen Renton, urges people across the country to look forward to the future after a challenging 2016 and focuses on Scotland being a welcoming nation this festive season."

They say: "You can take part as well! Film yourself reading your favourite line and post it to social media using the hashtag #YSFestive while tagging three friends and challenging them to do the same."

=============
Chain mail style. No thanks.  Co-starring Nicola. No thanks.

No harm to Ellen Renton either because her poem might have been fine except for one thing. People are beginning to find it more and more distasteful when Nicola Sturgeon, the Pied Piper of Holyrood, takes every photo opportunity to surround herself with children and young people.

You have to ask: what has she ever done for children and young people?

The collaborative approach

See https://vimeo.com/97916409

 

Damned was screened two years ago, starring Alan Davies, Kevin Eldon and Jo Brand who wrote the script.

==================

A telling comment in Community Care:

"I`ve been a child care social worker for more years than I care to remember and this clip encapsulates the whole ethos of the job."

"Thank goodness Jo has taken time to look into the sometimes fruitless workings of ‘working together’."

Kate

On the GIRFEC pathway to nowhere

"We’re not asking for much really. We just want a house that has all the bedrooms on the same level so we can get a decent night’s sleep and Zac can feel more secure..."

As for East Lothian Council:

"They recommend cross-boundary models of service delivery to make best use of expertise and resources in an integrated way to ensure that all children and young people are safe, healthy, achieving, nurtured, active, respected, responsible and included."

[Framework for meeting additional support for learning needs (Updated 2013)]

It`s called `Inclusion`. It`s called `Getting it Right for Every Child`. It`s called `Joined up services` and it`s empty rhetoric.

==========================

Liberia is seeking to outsource its primary school system

"Despite a long-standing public commitment to free education, Liberia recently made the controversial announcement that it is seeking to outsource its entire primary school system to a private provider."

"Education Minister of Liberia, George Werner, is planning an unprecedented public-private partnership (PPP) with US company Bridge International Academies (BIA). On the table is a five year contract worth 65 million to manage the country’s pre-primary and primary education system. If the partnership is pursued public funding will pay for BIA’s services and parents will have to fund 5 - 7 $ per term per child, excluding meals. This cost was found to be closer to 12$ to 20$ per child, entirely unaffordable for most poor households in Kenya and Uganda where BIA currently operates 400 nursery and primary schools."

"Bridge Academies delivers a highly structured, technologically driven model of education in which teachers deliver lessons from scripts on tablets. BIA asserts its approach offers students access to quality education they would otherwise not have, self-reporting significant gains in reading and maths attainment among their pupils. A one year pilot programme will be introduced in 70 Liberian schools come September 2016 before the half decade deal is struck. The pilot, not funded by the Liberian government, will be evaluated by an independent study after which the partnership may be discontinued."

"Bridge International Academies is ambitious, seeking to reach 10 million children in the coming decade. Powerful backers support their efforts including Bill Gates, the UKs Department for International Development (DfID), Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg and the World Bank, which wired the company 10 million dollars. This support was starkly criticized by civil society organisations across Kenya and Uganda, who have since cautioned Liberia not to sell what should be a public good. Likewise, the UN’s Special Rapporteur on the right to education, Kishore Singh, characterised the decision to relinquish responsibility of public education to a commercially driven organisation as a `gross violation of the right to education` which undermines Liberia’s commitment to the Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) to free education. "

http://thefuturescentre.org/signals-of-change/7398/unprecedented-liberia-outsource-primary-education-system

A bit of doublespeak from the UN there.

See also http://alicemooreuk.blogspot.co.uk/2016/04/public-private-partnerships.html

Public Private Partnerships

Joan Veon is a business woman who attended many meetings of the United Nations and has written about sustainability and public/private partnerships. She first made the connection between public/private partnerships and the United Nations Agenda 21 at a meeting in Istanbul in 1996.

"Very simply," a public-private partnership is a new entity which allows corporations to take control of government assets. "It was a concept plastered throughout the various United Nations` conferences and their documents and it was a concept that was also talked about very openly after 1996." She sums it up by saying: "It was, if you will, the solution for government that is broke."

"You can call it global corporate fascism; you can call it transfer of wealth; you can say that it uses deception and distortion; you can call it the fleecing of the American taxpayer... "

More than that, Veon discovered at a meeting with Al Gore in attendance speaking about reinventing government that at the centre of reinventing government were public-private partnerships. Democracy would disappear into these PPP arrangements. When thinking about global governance, this is the form that it is going to take.

The United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE)

This year a large UNECE international PPP Forum took place between 30 March - 1 April 2016:

"PPP practitioners, well versed in the traditional PPP model, gathered from all over the world, and were asked to show how their projects were fulfilling the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of ‘People’, ‘Planet’ and ‘Prosperity’. In response to this challenge, many examples were given of how the PPP model can transform and improve the quality of life of socially and economically vulnerable people."

That`s the deception.

http://www.unece.org/index.php?id=42015#/

Scotland

"Scotland wasn’t just the testing ground for this disaster it has a far higher proportion than anywhere else. As Gerry Hassan points out: `Scotland has 40% of PPP/PFI schools with 8.5% of the population. That’s an even bigger scandal than the seventeen Edinburgh schools.`"

http://bellacaledonia.org.uk/2016/04/11/pfi-scotland-2/

With school walls collapsing, the situation has only marginally improved:

"Scotland has been at the forefront of the PPP market since the concept was introduced in the 1990s. PPP policy and guidance is determined by the Scottish Government in Scotland... More recently, Scotland has pursued a non-profit distributing (NPD) PPP structure, which was established to deliver a `regulated` return to the private sector and better value for money for taxpayers...NPD is not a `not for profit` model."

An (NPD) PPP is still a public-private partnership.

http://www.eib.org/epec/resources/publications/epec_uk_scotland_public_en.pdf
Opening up Great Learning: learning for sustainability

 As part of their education, schoolchildren get the sanitised version of the UN sustainable development goals (SDGs).

It is ironic that Number 4 of the recommendations produced by the One Planet Schools Working Group is:

"All school buildings, grounds and policies should support learning for sustainability."

http://www.educationscotland.gov.uk/Images/OUGLLfS_tcm4-853883.pdf

Attachment-informed transformational change

Health and social care providers are under pressure to change the way they work from traditional find-and-fix treatments to predict-and-prevent approaches.

http://www.ibm.com/smarterplanet/global/files/uk__none__smarter_cities__ibm_uk_paper_people_for_smarter_cities.pdf

　

Attachment matters for all allows us to see that in the field of child care, a predict-and-prevent approach which is being developed at the moment is based on attachment theory. This theory asserts that the first few years of life are crucial for child development and depend on the bond that exists naturally between babies and their carers. "In the optimal situation babies experience care giving from one or two adults which is predominantly reliable, sensitive and attuned to their individual temperament and needs."

Of course, if parents get it wrong, a baby will keep making a fuss until they get it right. There is nothing intellectually challenging about this and it is surprising that what has worked for endless generations requires expert guidance these days. However, the early intervention approach favoured by policy makers needs a theory to ground itself on, and attachment theory fits the bill.

The theory has its flights of fancy: "Through facial expressions and verbal cues ... care givers reflect back to their baby what they believe is happening in the baby`s mind. This `affect mirroring` process repeated several times a day from birth enables securely attached children not only to develop a sense of their own internal world but also helps them to recognise others as beings with minds, emotions and intentions." It is the beginning of empathy.

Early childhood aggression and violence has to be unlearned, according to this view, through secure organised attachments otherwise it continues into later childhood, adolescence and beyond. At this point it becomes clear what is to be predicted and prevented. Childhood behavioural problems will be seen as failures of parenting with long term consequences at the societal level:  low educational attainment, unemployment, criminality, drug addiction and so on.

It should be noted that these problems are often associated with deprivation and poverty. There is no question of predicting psychopathy and criminality amongst the more affluent. No-one will be looking out for future banking fraudsters, paedophiles in high places or war-mongering politicians. It is, as if, only the poor have a problem with attachment.

Social work

Social workers come in for some heavy criticism in the report ."As well as demonstrating a lack of knowledge about all child development, not just attachment, there was concern that social workers were often unable to exercise any analytical or critical thinking skills. Because social workers have a statutory responsibility to make assessments that inform key decisions about children’s lives, there was a particular focus on the lack of understanding and assessment skills displayed by them,"

Oh dear ! Social workers have been getting it wrong but there are many children, now grown up, who can testify to that.

The answer, according to the Celcis report, is an understanding of attachment theory. Of course, "some of the effects of attachment interventions may not be apparent until children reach full adulthood and take on for themselves the responsibilities of sustaining employment and parenting."  So all of this must be taken on trust, and note the importance of sustaining employment which comes before parenting.   

Proxy measures 

"Although a variety of assessment measures are available they are time consuming and are usually only used in a clinical or research context. They are not necessarily suitable for front line professionals attempting to make rapid assessments when children are at risk, although they can be very useful as part of a rigorous assessment and intervention programme. There is, however, convincing evidence that certain care giver characteristics are associated with the development of disorganized attachment." They do not say what those characteristics are.

What this means is that it is parents/carers who will be assessed as to their character "as most effective attachment based interventions target the care giver and the relationship rather than the child directly. " If ever there was a dangerous idea, this is it.

Building a web to trap parents

Not only must there be a shared language about wellbeing but there needs to be a shared language about attachment. A whole new industry in attachment training and consultancy is in the making, as if there has not already been enough training in GIRFEC, data sharing and the eight wellbeing indicators. We are told that midwives, health visitors, social workers, teachers , children`s panel members and even sheriffs need to develop this shared language and understanding of attachment. As an example: "Highland Council are creating a Framework for Training across Integrated Children`s Services to support the implementation of Getting it Right for Every Child ."(GIRFEC)

The important practice principles that should inform interventions: "identifying, developing and maintaining secure attachments in children`s lives is a priority; safe touch is an important component." [whatever safe touch is in a care system that abuses so many children]

Armed with attachment-informed practice, professionals will be able to act with great cruelty, all for the greater good, for we are told that:

"It is important to recognise that adults who are unable to provide this kind of sensitive mentalising care may still genuinely love their children. It is also, however, important not to privilege the fact of parental love over other aspects of the child`s needs."

It is also recognised that young people in care can still be profoundly distressed and anxious when detached from their attachment figures.

They may feed and clothe their children, keep them safe and warm, and so on. It does not matter. Parents will be judged on the basis of their general characteristics to have failed in effective mentalisation, whatever that really is. Nobody needs to examine the child. Imagine how difficult it will be for any parent to make a stand against a group of child care professionals sharing the language of attachment, to say, but you do not understand, you have got it wrong. This is the problem with collaboratives. It provides an impenetrable power bloc which no parent can overcome. So we must suspect that that is what it is designed to do.

http://www.celcis.org/media/resources/publications/Attachment-Matters-For-All.pdf

　
　

Grandmother must stop harassing her daughter and paedophile husband

A multi-agency safeguarding hub (MASH) was set up in Devon (2011) in order that the various agencies with a responsibility to identify and assess risks to children could work together in one location.

The stated intent of the MASH is to improve the quality of information sharing and decision making at the earliest opportunity and to reduce the potential risk to children and young people. This was based on the premise that the value is in the collation of an intelligence assessment - gathered from information across health, education, the LA and the police - resulting in a better picture of the child and circumstances on which to inform decision making about further help and intervention. http://www.local.gov.uk/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=b769add1-d151-4f01-9df5-b00c883989d6&groupId=10180

 

So in place of Scottish Named Persons and their multi-agency teams, in Devon there is the MASH.

Here is one of the hub`s extraordinary decisions:

The grandmother of two girls made to sleep in a locked bedroom to protect them from their paedophile stepdad has been banned from contacting them.

She was summoned to her local police station, interviewed for more than an hour and ordered to sign a Police Information Notice after she alerted the Sunday Mirror to the situation last month.

Officers acted when the girls’ mother, who is married to the convicted paedophile, complained of harassment.

She now faces being prosecuted - and even jailed - if she contacts the paedophile or his wife, her daughter.

The grandmother said: "No one will listen to me. His rights seem more important than those of anyone else."

The quiz by Devon and Cornwall officers came days after the Sunday Mirror revealed the move by social services in the county to allow the paedophile to stay in the same house as his step children, on condition they sleep behind a locked door fitted with an alarm to prevent him abusing them.

The sick plan was backed by Devon Multi-Agency Safeguarding Hub, made up of police, probation officers and social workers.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/gran-banned-contacting-daughter-who-5625834?ICID=FB_mirror_main

Parents learning to parent in Curriculum for Excellence

"Jackie Brock is chief executive of Children in Scotland, the umbrella body for the children’s sector, including education, health, social care, early years and childcare. It has more than 430 members and its staff are delivering a wide range of projects and programmes in schools and other settings, with an array of public, private and third sector partners."

She represents some of the bodies who will be working in partnership with Education Scotland and schools to help close the attainment gap and has written an article in Third Force News: "Why rich kids do better at school."

We would like to see Curriculum for Excellence (CfE) updated to underline that it is Scotland’s approach to learning for all – from birth throughout adulthood. If we are to have an unrelenting focus on improving educational attainment, we need to recognise formally within CfE that learning begins from birth and that the pre-formal learning experiences of a child before the age of three – together with the love and support provided by their parents, carers and professionals – provide the crucial pre-conditions for future effective learning.

A commenter hits the mark:

Well that is a sensationalist headline. The article isn't actually about why rich kids do better but how to eliminate the attainment gap and should actually reflect that. .However I have serious reservations about what this article actually states. They are attempting to box up the CfE into measurable outcomes so that children are assessed from birth to adulthood at every potential level. This is fundamentally wrong we need to focus on giving them the opportunity to be who they can and want to be.

The statement I find particularly troubling is - 'that the pre-formal learning experiences of a child before the age of three – together with the love and support provided by their parents, carers and professionals – provide the crucial pre-conditions for future effective learning.' Firstly what does pre-formal mean. I believe it to mean assessment assessment assessment and if they aren't where they are suppose to be in the pre-formal learning experience then somebody will be to blame. [That will be the parents.]

Another article appears in Third Force News on the same topic. This one is by Angela Morgan who gave evidence to the Scottish Parliament`s Education Committee last week as part of their inquiry into how to close the attainment gap.

Focused intervention requires more resources in the classroom – particularly in areas of deprivation, but it cannot stop at the school gates. We need to focus on improving parent/child and child/school relationships and on identifying and, crucially, understanding the underlying causes of why the young person is not engaging.

Finally, these interventions need to happen early and at all stages to stop young people from becoming excluded from education in the first place. [Early and at all stages. Yes the above commenter got it right.]

Read more at http://thirdforcenews.org.uk/families-and-young-people/blogs/we-need-to-close-the-attainment-gap#fGlcdPJ4cCgmKiop.99

The Spring edition of `Early Years Matters` is now available. The first article is about the Children and Families Team who explain what they do and generously proclaim.

We all know that parents and families have a key role to play in supporting the success and wellbeing of their children. The role of the children and families team in Education Scotland is to provide high-quality leadership to enable families to learn together and support children and young people’s learning and development, and to improve outcomes across Early Learning.

Education in Scotland used to be about educating children in school but somehow it has all been re-worked so that there is never a mention of educating children without also referring to families. Families need to learn how to support their children and they need to start early is the constant refrain.

No credit is given to the natural resilience of children themselves.

No thought is given to the fact that children, particularly in the early years, cannot stop themselves from developing and learning. We have all been children who developed in the early years without formal education and should know that. The Families Team claim too much credit for themselves I think and the advice, support and challenge they offer in relation to working with children and families in the early years is, for the most part, superfluous to requirements.

Does anybody else get the impression that the Scottish Education plan is consolidating and the net is closing in around children and families ?

http://www.educationscotland.gov.uk/Images/EarlyYearsMatters8_tcm4-854553.pdf
　

Building the models for early state interference

At one time children made the transition from home to nursery without the authorities making a fuss about it. In more recent times, a little more thought has been put into it, and mothers, or fathers, will be asked to stay with their children for a couple of hours to see how they settle. That might go on for a week and by that time children have made a smooth transition to nursery. Children quickly adapt to their parents leaving and then returning.

It is very strange that this transition by children is now seen as so fraught with difficulty that there are projects springing up everywhere to involve multi-agency action plans around vulnerable children and their families.


John Bowlby

HEART (How Early Attachment Relationships support Transition) is a mult-agency steering group set up in Glenlee Primary School in South Lanarkshire.

Whilst the vision for HEART emerged from recognition of need in the local area, it also contributes to national and local agendas such as GIRFEC, the Early Years Framework and South Lanarkshire Council’s Children’s Services Plan. Likewise it responds to the recent Scottish Government funded ‘Attachment Mapping Exercise’ (CELCIS Report, 2012) which highlighted significant gaps in the understanding of attachment theory and how the multi-agency group around the vulnerable child and family use attachment informed practice.

Members of the group therefore include ‘like-minded’ professionals from education, social work, health and the voluntary sector. The group is ably supported by a critical friends group which includes professionals across all sectors including the Scottish Government.

Their journey is a work in progress:

We are committed to identifying effective ways of building the knowledge and confidence of early years’ staff in attachment informed practice and are exploring ways to support relationships around the child...The programme is aimed at building the capacity of parents, of children from 0 to 8 years old, to promote resilience for their child through developing the basic building blocks of attachment. It is grounded in attachment and resilience research, and provides a framework for early years’ workers to assess the needs of individual children, reflect on practice and identify appropriate areas for intervention.

Fundamental to the aims of the group, the local social work Family Support Team has allocated a Family Support Worker (FSW) to link directly with Glenlee nursery and support the home to nursery transition. At present we are devising a new procedure where every child enrolled in the nursery will receive a HOME VISIT from the FSW and a member of the nursery staff. The aim of the home visits is to: create a relational link to nursery for the child and parent prior to starting, GATHER INFORMATION that will enable a supportive home to nursery transition, and ASSESS the attachment relationship of the child, all of which will be discussed at a transition planning meeting. It is hoped that this process will inform the nursery of possible vulnerabilities and enable early identification of SUPPORT SYSTEMS.

http://www.educationscotland.gov.uk/earlyyearsmatters/h/genericcontent_tcm4838007.as

(1) Home visits
(2) Gathering information
(3) Assessing parent-child relationships
(4) Identifying support systems

A multi-agency team of like-minded professionals from education, social work, health and the voluntary sector have little understanding of attachment theory, which they are merely attempting to formulate, and are unlikely to adequately assess a relationship based on a home visit from a family support worker and a member from the nursery staff, no matter how intimate their questions.

Apart from that, behaviour has many different causal factors and attachment theory is not an uncontested issue. Ignore the many other variables and mistakes will undoubtedly be made.

It is not too difficult to see that HEART is about building the children`s database but will have many negative consequences: mislabelling children with attachment issues and the long-term consequences of doing that, parental stress, undermining parental authority and massive intrusions into family life being some of them.

Changing fads and fashions

It is always well to keep in mind that child development theory keeps changing.

For instance, a lot of bad things have been done in the name of `attachment therapy` and it has to be questioned why `holding therapy` was allowed to go on for so long without outrage from professional bodies.

See https://invisibleengland2.wordpress.com/

The Scottish Commissioner teaches children about their rights

Here is the website that informs children about their rights in pictures.

http://www.sccyp.org.uk/education/rights-in-pictures/children



No doubt the friendly Named Person is there checking that everything is OK.

If you are under 12,  you can see pictures that can tell you about your rights below. If you are an adult who works with people under 12, you can use these pictures to tell them about their rights.

No mention of mothers and fathers who may wish to use these pictures to inform their children about their rights. Is that not peculiar ?

The pictures you use should always be attributed to Scotland’s Commissioner for Children and Young People and Alex Leonard. Alex’s name and the logo of Scotland’s Commissioner for Children and Young People are included beside all pictures and should never be separated from them. http://www.sccyp.org.uk/education/rights-in-pictures/children

 

OK, just did that.

According to this picture, parents should get the help they need to look after their children.




Here come the good guys: the agents of the state.




Indoctrination, or what?

Collaborating to support secure attachments for all Scottish children

The Early Years Collaborative

They believe they have a strong evidence base about what works and with the appropriate methods can ensure that every baby, child, mother, father and family in Scotland has access to the best supports available.

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/People/Young-People/early-years/early-years-collaborative/learning-sessions

According to a learning session by the Early Years Collaborative "We are all born with attachment seeking behaviours such as crying, clinging, imitation and smiling. These behaviours are designed to keep carers close ensuring that the baby`s needs for survival, safety and sensitive care are met."  More controversially they make the point that failure of the attachment process in the first two years could be catastrophic for children: neurologically, physically, emotionally, socially and psychologically.

Whilst no-one would deny the importance for survival of attachment behaviours for babies, the claim that attachment issues  in the first few years of life are easily defined and determine once and for all the long-term development of children is not an uncontested view.  Yet there are many organisations working with the Scottish Government who push forward these ideas.  For example, Scottish Attachment in Action (SAIA) say they have played a key role alongside partner organisations in placing attachment onto the political agenda and have contributed to fundamental policy and legislative changes.  (See the proposals that named persons should be involved with unborn babies.)

Scottish Attachment in Action 

"In February 2014 representatives from the SAIA Advisory Group were included in the invitation from NHS Health Scotland and the Scottish Government to the first meeting of a national round table discussion on attachment. The purpose of the round table was to develop a collaborative approach to supporting secure attachments for all children in Scotland."

The Scottish Attachment in Action (SAIA) is a multi-professional group constituted in August 2009.  It is committed to promoting better experiences of attachment in the Scottish population and effecting positive changes in social policy, education and mental health. The group believes that altering the existing understanding of, and attitudes towards attachment, is essential for improving Scotland`s current record on poor health and socially destructive behaviours.

In other words, behind Scotland`s poor health record the true culprits are the parents who fail to bond with their babies. It is estimated by the Sutton Trust that four out of ten children experience attachment issues. Extreme as this view is, it has become part of the prevailing political ideology.  
 

Ben Goldacre: Evidence based education

 

It might be wondered how there could possibly be a collaborative approach to supporting secure attachments for all children in Scotland since attachments exist between children and their carers within families.

The SAIA provides a clue by referring to an evaluative project carried out in the Jeely Nursery in Castlemilk over a three-year period between 2007 and 2010. "The purpose of the Jeely Nursery project was to meet the particular needs of children exposed in their earliest years to highly adverse social and economic circumstances, including the experience of living with parental substance abuse and addiction. The Jeely Nursery project developed a collaborative strategy that involved children, nursery staff and parents together in ways that helped to build the emotional resilience needed by children to overcome adversity."

So a collaborative approach to support secure attachments has shifted to a collaborative approach to build emotional resilience in children - not quite the same thing. You have to ask why the authorities are studying children in this way instead of tackling the highly adverse social and economic circumstances that are supposed to have produced the problems in the first place? It is difficult to say, because it is unclear whether or not the small group of children being studied remain with their original families.

But it does not end there.  A further project builds on the Jeely Nursery research by working with two primary schools. The main aim of the project is not only to support those children with attachment issues who have moved on from the Jeely Nursery, but to develop a sustainable model which will develop the capacity of teachers to identify and support any children with attachment issues. The project focuses on working with the schools to develop and extend existing practice and to map this practice onto current support structures, procedures and national policies, namely Getting it Right for Every Child (GIRFEC) and staged intervention."

"The next phase of the project which began early in 2012, involved replicating this model of support with all teachers and support staff in both schools... An important finding at this stage of the project was that teachers were beginning to recognise and respond to children who previously would not have been noticed or would perhaps have been dismissed on account of behaviour."

Teachers have been trained to observe certain behaviours as `attachment issues` who then go on to see `attachment issues` in other children. The researchers say: " The responsibility that all teachers have towards every child is at the heart of GIRFEC and it is this connection between practice and policy which we are continuing to build on."

But really should teachers be diagnosing `attachment issues` - or any other type of non-academic issue for that matter -  in order to engage in collaborative support work in the classroom?  Supposing they get it wrong?  Supposing attachment theory has overplayed its hand which is most likely the case?  It would be difficult for any family to disengage from the staged interventions and bang would go their privacy. Perhaps that`s the idea !

Newsletter June 2014
http://www.saia.org.uk/newsletter.html
　

The SAIA are holding a network seminar `Why attachment matters for all ` on 27 March 2015 where they will be looking at `Research from the Jeely Piece Club.`

http://www.saia.org.uk/

Neglect: the perennial issue for social workers

Here comes the moral panic:

Neglect is a perennial issue for social workers, but the recent serious case review of Abigail, a three year old girl with severe developmental delay, has reinforced just how difficult it is for social workers to deal with.

Abigail was never put onto a child protection plan. She was admitted to hospital in November 2012 with malnutrition, anaemia and weak bones, as well as severe nappy rash and head lice. At nearly three years old she was unable to walk. Both her parents were convicted of criminal neglect earlier this year.

Gary Walker, a solicitor specialising in child abuse claims points out Abigail’s case was characterised by an incident-led approach. Because each incident alone wasn’t severe enough to reach child protection thresholds, this created "systemic paralysis, not allowing social workers to go any further in seeking help from other professionals." 

http://www.communitycare.co.uk/2014/11/18/tackling-neglect-longer-job-social-workers/

In the same CommunityCare article, here comes the solution:

"Social workers are not the only people in communities who can help families- it has to come from schools and education and welfare officers."

Children’s teams are now having to rely on agencies like schools, which have contact with the child no matter what, to hold the ring on neglect...

"Teaching assistants are just doing this and getting on with it, but it needs to be shared and recorded."

Hollows says a clear and agreed communication strategy between all agencies would help, but the reality is the responsibility for recognising signs of neglect cannot fall to social workers alone.

Now, if social workers have a problem identifying sustained physical neglect of children, why would the Westminster government introduce the Cinderella Law to make emotional neglect a criminal offence - unless, of course, it is the sharing and recording of information, and the communication strategy which is the important factor? Think about how much more intimate the questioning and recording will be once the integrated services start looking for emotional neglect.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27693587

Meanwhile social services are in a shambles due to the recession.

It’s all good in theory, and hard to object to when it is being presented so persuasively, but the reality is that we have been working collaboratively in a multi-disciplinary team for years, and the ‘new ways of working’ don’t feel new at all. It’s more about rebranding, than a fundamentally new approach.

The new targets being set are so excessively high that it seems people have confused collaborative working with magic!

http://www.communitycare.co.uk/2014/11/12/social-work-diary-call-service-transformation-like-decimation/ 

See also `Undercover social worker`
 http://nationaldeathservice.blogspot.co.uk/2010/06/childs-death-would-not-matter-social.html

Children`s wellbeing - we`ve got the tools

You have to ask: Where do these non-governmental and unelected agencies come from? There are hundreds of them springing up around children. What makes them expert on other people`s children and their wellbeing and why are they allowed to pronounce on anything?  Having said that the Children`s Parliament proudly announces their plans for a survey:

The survey tool is unique because it is a subjective measure of wellbeing. [In other words it is unscientific] This means that it measures how the child or young person is now in the context of their environments and relationships – at home, at school and in the community. So, rather than count what children and young people do or don’t do, or focus on problems or challenges from an adult perspective, our survey looks at wellbeing and rights from a holistic, empowering and positive view of children and young people’s lives, as defined by them.

We have undertaken a first phase of work with the support of an intern funded by the Open University Third Sector Internship Programme. Extensive desk research and small scale piloting has evidenced the efficacy and validity of the tool we have produced in draft.

Now, with the support of a grant from the Scottish Government’s National Voluntary Organisations Support Fund (via YouthLink Scotland) we are undertaking further development work to April 2014. This will see us working with Aberdeen City Council and Midlothian Council to engage with a further 1000 children and young people between the ages of 8 and 18 to further test and then produce a final survey tool.

http://www.childrensparliament.org.uk/childrens-views-of-life-in-scotland.html

When checking out the patrons and board of trustees of these unelected bodies. there is sure to be a Baroness or two, and in this case there is no exception. The patron of the Children`s Parliament is Baroness Smith of Gilmorehill. I am sure we are now all reassured that the Children`s Parliament is an independent body with the best interests of children at heart. After all the Baroness is sure to know all about the wellbeing of ordinary children.

Among the other hangers-on is the trustee, Kate Smith, Corporate Governance Manager for Scottish Widows Investment (Yes, that makes sense) - and let us not forget the Friends of Children`s Parliament: actress Elaine C Smith and Robin Harper, a green campaigner and writer.

Well if the Scottish Government is pushing global citizenship and sustainable development on children, who else would you want?

Since the Scottish Government wishes to profile and database every child in Scotland (GIRFEC) why would they not provide the funding to this assorted group of nobodies or require consent from the rest of us?

(Children’s Parliament is a company incorporated in Scotland No. SC170891 | Recognised as a Scottish Charity SC 026247)

Big smile from Southern Health

Southern Health NHS Foundation Trust has apologised after its care home on Piggy Lane in Bicester failed a Care Quality Commission inspection. It was inspected on January 8 and “raised concerns” in several areas, said the CQC report. Medication was out of date, and staff admitted that they could not always provide safe care because of management and staffing problems.

The report said: “They said they had far too much to do, and this sometimes compromised the safety of the care they could deliver.”Katrina Percy, chief executive of Southern Health, has this morning said: “Obviously I am extremely disappointed that we have not been offering the quality of services we should be. “All of our drive and passion is going into improving the services we offer.”

googleH7IiHJmP9u80UEcGaity&s=1 

Southern Health NHS Foundation Trust is now involved in another investigation into the death of a teenage resident in their care.

For the reality behind the headlines see:
 http://mydaftlife.wordpress.com/2014/03/03/big-charities-the-nas-and-difficult-questions/

The Children`s Parliament

The Children`s Parliament does not advocate on behalf of children because it believes children can advocate effectively for themselves. The name `Children`s Parliament` came from the children attending a European environmental education project in Scotland.

Our work is based on children having fun and engaging in projects and investigations in and across our themes [my emphasis] which reflect the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.

When children come into this space we want them to bring with them their knowledge of what it is like to be a child, their ideas and their opinions, and to be willing to voice and explore them. [my emphasis]

So the `usual suspects`are involved: the European Union (funding) and the United Nations encouraging authoritites to get closer to children by way of psuedo-independent charities. 

Funding for some projects in Glasgow also came from the Big Lottery`s `Realising Amibition` fund. Primary school classes in six schools explored children`s human rights and what it means to be healthy, happy and safe in their home, school and community. [GIRFEC] At the Winter Gardens in Glasgow parents and teachers heard the children voice their aspirations for the future and what adults could do to help them realise their dreams.

How sad. What future have some of these children got in an age of unrelenting austerity?

The Secondary programme involved working with groups of pupils across six secondary schools in North East Glasgow.

Our Children’s Parliament workers and Glasgow Life Learning Assistants establish positive relationships with young people, supporting them to think about their personal goals and ambitions, and to begin planning how they might achieve these.

The Children`s Parliament list their project partners. Amongst them there is the Glasgow City Council, Police Scotland and, surprisingly, the Social Research Unit. This is the independent charity (?) who collaborated with Perth and Kinross Council to introduce the controversial survey to schoolchildren in that area. [See the link HERE ]

Meanwhile The Children`s Parliament are developing their own national survey for children and young people aged 8 to 18 years old.  It will be based on the subjective measure of wellbeing.

This means that it measures how the child or young person is now in the context of their environments and relationships – at home, at school and in the community. So, rather than count what children and young people do or don’t do, or focus on problems or challenges from an adult perspective, our survey looks at wellbeing and rights from a holistic, empowering and positive view of children and young people’s lives, as defined by them. 

The Children`s Parliament

Cathy McCulloch is Co-Director of the Children`s Parliament. She is also co-founder of TASC along with Dr Colin Morrison. TASC provides a range of services which include social research and service evaluation. Their use of language is quite revealing.

TASC has a real interest in people - how they experience their lives and what their dreams, hopes and ambitions are for themselves and for their families and communities. We work with policy makers and service providers to help ensure that the needs and interests of service users are recognised and met.

TASC researched, consulted on, wrote and produced 6 booklets for pupils from P6 to S6 which support sexual health and relationship education in Glasgow Schools. The booklets are used at the heart of the new SHRE curriculum being rolled out in Glasgow.  TASC website

They work with policy makers and service providers.. and set up companies to provide the services and the sex education booklets to implement the policices ...

It`s a bit of a scam isn`t it?

See Sex Education

Getting it right for children and families

The Wellbeing Indicators

Healthy--Achieving--Nurtured--Active--Respected--Responsible--Included--Safe

Each child is expected to be supported in order to fulfil their potential across each of the wellbeing indicators. The Scottish Government in `Getting it right for children and families`explains how the Wellbeing Indicators are to be used by practitioners:

The wellbeing indicators are used to record observations, events and concerns and as an aid in putting together a child`s plan. The My World Triangle and Resilience Matrix are used to gather, structure and help with assessing and analysing information.

Children and young people will progress differently, depending on their circumstances but every child and young person has the right to expect appropriate support from adults to allow them to develop as fully as possible across each of the Wellbeing Indicators.

All agencies in touch with children and young people must play their part in making sure that young people are healthy, achieving, nurtured, active, respected, responsible, included, and, above all, safe.

Only when support from the family and community and the universal services (ie school or health services) can no longer meet their needs will targeted and specialist help be called upon.

Getting it right for children and families

What is frightening about this is that targeted and specialist help to address the child`s needs - across all the wellbeing indicators - will be called upon by the `named person,` not the parent, because it is the named person who has ultimate responsibility for the wellbeing of the child.  The record of observations, events and concerns will be recorded by the named person and shared with other agencies, with or without consent, who will be encouraged to collaborate.
 
What is to happen if a parent disputes the outcome of the assessment by the named person, or does not wish to participate with the targeted specialist help, is never made clear. It is easy to imagine how such a disagreement could be interpreted as a problem with the parent, and hence a risk to a child`s wellbeing, by a named person who might see their view as the only right one.
 
If ever there was a system designed to set up a `slippery slope` of concerns in order to justify interventions and control of all parents and their children, GIRFEC is it.

Note also:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/10531683/Hundreds-of-teachers-suspended-over-criminal-allegations.html

Hundreds of teachers in England have been suspended as a result of criminal allegations against them in the last three years, new figures show.

Scottish Reporter and Evidence2Success

Kenneth Roy has written an article in the Scottish Reporter about the Perth and Kinross Council collaboration with the Evidence2Success survey of local school children.

It was revealed that Fiona McKay, project manager at the Council, had expressed some misgivings about the survey seven weeks before it was given to the children and requested certain changes.  She was told by a member of the Social Research Unit that changing options would invalidate the survey for the purpose of comparison with other populations. However, a couple of questions, those concerning guns and living in a car or out on the street, were removed. Questions asking children about sexual activity were retained.

No answer was forthcoming from the Council about who had access to the completed questionnaires before they were anonymised?

Read More

evidence2success

http://engageforeducation.org/2013/05/naomi-eisendtadt-blog-impressions-of-early-years-strategy-in-scotland/

 

 

Under the heading of Governance Arrangements Evidence2Success discusses its core principle:.

  ..that public systems share accountability for child outcomes, and resources to achieve those outcomes, with local people. This is achieved using two governance structures, which ideally replace the existing local partnership arrangements.

It could not be plainer. Evidence2Success is about political restructuring.

Perth and Kinross Council have recently conducted surveys on school children as part of the Evidence2Sucess project. This is a collaborative project between Perth and Kinross Community Planning Partnership (CPP) and the Dartingrton Social Research Unit (SRU) that aims to enhance the safe and healthy development of children and young people in the area.

The aim is to gather and analyse comprehensive data on children so that decisions can be made about policy and service provision with a particular emphasis on early intervention and prevention.

So who or what is the Social Research Unit?

According to their website the Social Research Unit at Dartington is an independent charity which blends academic rigour with a focus on practically influencing policy at the national level, and how children`s services are designed and delivered at the local level. So this is another independent charity with a political agenda.

One of the trustees of the Social Research Unit is Naomi Eisenstadt who was the first Director of the Sure Start Unit which was responsible for implementing the UK Government`s childcare strategy. She believes the key players in the system should engage in a collaborative approach and this is a promising methodology for ensuring a shared vision. She had this to say earlier in the year to Aileen Campbell, the Scottish Children`s Minister:

Scotland seems to be making a serious and thoughtful investment in early years. The attempts at an overall strategy that includes in a meaningful way all key players, works from the ground up, and is respectful of all contributions should pay dividends in the medium to long term. Engage for Education

Well she would say that wouldn`t she given that Scotland is working collaboratively with the independent charity (?) for which she is a trustee.

We need to ask WHY Perth and Kinross Council are working collaboratively with this particular change agent?  http://dartington.org.uk/projects/evidence2success/

GIRFEC AND CHILD PROTECTION

GIRFEC and the Children and Young People (Scotland) Bill has been criticised for interfering with the relationship between parents and children.

At its heart, the Children and Young People Bill orders the government to intrude into the privacy of every home with a child. By inserting the government into a mandated role of corporate parent, the natural relationship of trust and dependency that exists between parents and their children will be at best damaged and possibly obliterated.

The bill naturally follows from UN treaties like the CRC and CRPD.  Link to  HSLDA

The data gathering and privacy aspects of the Bill have also been criticised by home schoolers in Scotland as reported in the Express:

Under the "scary" legislation, known as Getting It Right For Every Child or GIRFEC, every child aged under 18 will have a 'Named Person' with the legal right to ensure they are raised in a government-approved manner. It will also mean that sensitve personal details about every child - even down to the names of their pets - can be recorded, stored and shared on a central database.

Incredibly, GIRFEC has already been adopted by almost every local authority in Scotland and yet most people - including some MSPs - have no idea of the full extent of its Big Brother-style interference. Alison Preuss, Secretary of the Schoolhouse Home Education Association, based in Fife, said: She added: "Hopefully MSPs will see sense and insist on a completely consent based system for the Named Person and any data processing without express informed consent (except in child protection cases).

"However, I wouldn't rule out a legal challenge to these specific aspects. "GIRFEC implementation by box-ticking bullies is already causing detriment to some families and frightening children, which is frankly scandalous." The Schoolhouse petition, which calls on MSPs to reject the Named Person and database sections of the Bill, has gathered more than 700 signatures in less than a fortnight.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/400779/SNP-bill-to-spy-on-parents-is-criticised-by-families#

There is another aspect of the Bill which has received less attention and that is the effect on decision making and child protection issues when the drive is towards early interventions on the basis of the wellbeing indicators rather than on the basis of significant harm to the child. There is evidence that early interventions lead to more children being removed from their families and placed into care.
　
　
It is emphasized in the Education and Culture Committee 10th report 2013 how important it is to listen to children. However, the committee admitted that they spoke only to a relatively small number of young people. Perhaps that is why there are some inconsistencies in the inquiry report. For instance there is this paragraph:

We have been told repeatedly about the importance of placing children at the centre of decision making and taking their views into account. A recurring message from many of the young people in care we spoke to, which goes to the heart of this section, is that they felt they had been left too long at home when they should have been taken into care earlier.

 This does agree with the push towards earlier interventions but on the other hand we have this:

When we met children and young people with experience of care, several felt very strongly that social workers and other authorities had failed to explain why they were being taken away from their family... Distressingly, the young people had blamed themselves for being separated from their family and had felt as though they were being punished.

So there are children who feel they should have been taken into care earlier and other children who feel they were punished when they were separated from their families. It is never wise to draw conclusions based on a small sample of the population as this report does but if we accept the findings at face value it does suggest that either way children are not being listened to, and social workers are getting things seriously wrong.

There is, in fact, a lot of evidence to support this in the report. It was explained by some witnesses that social workers cannot always distinguish those situations where parents can meet their children`s needs with additional help, and those where children require alternative care. They can be overly optimistic about a family`s ability to change on the one hand and lack confidence on the other. There were problems in communication especially with young people, and an inability to provide assessments backed by compelling evidence particularly for cases involving emotional neglect. Time was a factor because social workers did not always have time to properly assess families. There was difficulty in retaining experienced staff and questions about the Social Work degree. All of these inadequacies are particularly worrying given the following:

Universal services, alongside social workers, are increasingly helping to identify issues of concern that may require early intervention in families. This is particularly true in relation to neglect, where staff may be able to detect that relatively small issues are developing into more serious concerns. The further implementation of Getting it right for every child (GIRFEC) and the introduction of a statutory named person service‘ through the Bill is likely to increase this role further.

In other words GIRFEC is likely to mean that more young children are going to be taken into care which happens to be one of the aims of the Children`s Minister. But are social workers really going to be able to supply the compelling evidence that small issues are developing into more serious concerns when so far that has not been the case?  

Will joint training help?  It is easy to see what the answer to that is. Just get the various agencies to work collaboratively and do some joint training, share data and agree to a shared vision (collude) and there is the compelling evidence to present in front of the sheriff with confidence. The Minister`s target to double adoptions should be no problem at all. This is a system being stitched up to enable more children to be removed from their birth parents - but often they will be the wrong children. With the focus shifted in this way, what is to happen to the children all ready suffering significant harm?

Social Services and joined up working.

Here is an example of joined up working between the police and social services.

From Occupy News Network

Evidence authorities are threatening to take children from anti fracking protesters.

Protest against Fracking and we will take your kids

The [above] video shows how a protester in an anti-fracking protest is being questioned and followed by a member of Multi-Agency Unit, the connotations is that the social service worker is threatening the parent`s right to have a family.

Beyond the video link, ONN has no other information about this case, although the footage shows that the social worker

a) does not know the children.

b) does not have any direct concerns about their well being.

The only point the social worker seems to be concerned about is that their parent/ guardian is protesting.

Protest in Britain is still a human right under the European Convention, whether you have children or not. In terms of responsible parenting, it could easily be argued that an anti-fracking camp is one of the most responsible places to take kids. To stop fracking ruining their future.

  Greenwash 

Another extraordinary case is reported in the Telegraph 30 November 2013: It exposes joined up working between the police, social services, mental health and the judiciary.

A mother was given a caesarean section while unconscious - then social services put her baby into care

By Christopher Booker

6:06PM GMT 30 Nov 2013

"Last summer a pregnant Italian mother flew to England for a two-week Ryanair training course at Stansted. Staying at an airport hotel, she had something of a panic attack when she couldn’t find the passports for her two daughters, who were with her mother back in Italy. She called the police, who arrived at her room when she was on the phone to her mother. The police asked to speak to the grandmother, who explained that her daughter was probably over-excited because she suffered from a “bipolar” condition and hadn’t been taking her medication to calm her down."
 

"The police told the mother that they were taking her to hospital to “make sure that the baby was OK”. On arrival, she was startled to see that it was a psychiatric hospital, and said she wanted to go back to her hotel. She was restrained by orderlies, sectioned under the Mental Health Act and told that she must stay in the hospital. "
 

"By now Essex social services were involved, and five weeks later she was told she could not have breakfast that day. When no explanation was forthcoming, she volubly protested. She was strapped down and forcibly sedated, and when she woke up hours later, found she was in a different hospital and that her baby had been removed by caesarean section while she was unconscious and taken into care by social workers. She was not allowed to see her baby daughter, and later learnt that a High Court judge, Mr Justice Mostyn, had given the social workers permission to arrange for the child to be delivered."  Read More

Joined up working, or working in partnership, is always presented by Government as a desirable system. But isn`t it likely to lead to collusive relationships without checks and balances? What is obvious is that joined up working is very useful if you want to control a system from the top down or you need to ensure a result or cover up mistakes.  Because joined-up working means having the various agencies agreeing on an action that they must inevitably hold together and defend regardless of any opposition.

As Douglas Carswell MP for Clacton says: "As an Essex MP I have serious concerns about Essex Children`s Services. They are unaccountable and out of control. These people are dictators who abuse their powers. They are arrogant bullies and people are frightened of them.

UK Column have a lot to say about this:

See HERE