A Family being Torn Apart


A Family being Torn Apart If only Social Services had spent £300 in providing a Brain Scan? A Wakefield family being torn apart - In July 2004, The social services knocked on our door to say someone had reported that our son, S, 13, was locked in his room all the time and was not allowed to eat with the family. Thus began two years of lies but eventually we emerged victorious. S was perfectly normal until, at the age of 5 he fell and hit his head hard on the floor. After this his behaviour began to change. At age 8 he was diagnosed with ADD and prescribed Ritalin. My wife and I were not convinced that he did have ADD as he was doing things that were just not normal e.g. urinating anywhere EXCEPT the toilet. We believed that he has suffered some form of brain injury from his fall but our pleas for a brain scan fell on deaf ears. S behaviour became worse as he became older. Eating food out of bins, even though he had just had his breakfast, throwing food around the table, filling his waste bin with urine instead of using the toilet and stealing. Eventually, aged 11 he was caught shoplifting. With nowhere left to go, santionwise, we said that he would end up in prison, and to see what that would be like we said that as punishment, whenever he misbehaved, he would be locked in his room for an hour (simply sending him to his room and closing the door was useless as he would just come out again). This course of action had no effect on S’s behaviour whatsoever so, after six months, we stopped this practice. S eating habits were so disgusting that he would have to eat in the kitchen alone as his younger brother, Z, 4, was beginning to copy him. S was taken into foster care on the day the social workers arrived and Z stayed with us. The lies and truth distortion then began. Z was suffering from constipation (a common childhood complaint) at the time of social services interference so they insisted that Z saw a paediatrician the very next day. He merely confirmed that Z DID have constipation and that the medicine we were giving him WAS fine and he clearly stated in his report “Z was very chatty, emotionally happy and happy with his parents” Needless to say, this report was virtually ignored. According to social services however, S looked ill and pale and was in clear need of medical attention, yet he was not seen by a doctor for a further five days and his report stated: “I could not find any signs of physical abuse and because of his bright, clean appearance; it is difficult to confirm neglect.” A very remarkable recovery! On the second day of being in foster care, S dropped a bottle of pop and his foster father said he had low muscle tone, which managed to be accredited to the paediatrician. This blatant lie was perpetuated for months until I demanded to see the report that stated this. Suddenly they admitted a mistake had been made. We obtained a report from Dr C.A Hawley at Warwick University who has conducted extensive research into behavioural changes in children after head injury. Her report describes behaviour almost exactly as S was showing but again this was ignored. Social services sent all their papers to another doctor to ask if he could have a brain injury. -Without even seeing S he said no it was not possible but he definitely is been abused by us. With only one-sided negative leaning social services papers to go on, what other conclusion could he reach? However, no one I have spoke to would accept a doctors diagnosis without even been seen by that doctor and hearing the other side of the story. Very un-professional. Official line from Social Services was that S was thriving in foster care and was showing none of the extreme behaviour we reported. Four days after social workers reported that everything with S was ‘fine’, his foster father submitted a report to court that clearly said everything wasn’t. He was still having temper tantrums over insignificant events and, more worryingly, his behaviour towards girls AND boys were becoming inappropriately sexual. When it was realised that something was seriously wrong with S that could not be attributed to us, they started looking for reasons to remove Z. Social Services said that they would arrange contact between Z and S (which we had reservations about as S had tried to harm Z). However, no arrangements were made. At the next court appearance, they said that we were not co-operating and that they wanted to make Z part of the proceedings. Up until that point, Z was doing fine at his school. Suddenly, school started report that Z was defiant and misbehaving, and most disturbingly, that Z was also eating out of bins, and had been doing so for months. This was all news to us. Things progressed and after many ‘assessments’ (each contradicting the previous one and ALL at odds with the social workers ‘core assessment’), the social workers ordered a psychological assessment of all the family and decide, when she had read that report, whether she would apply for a full care order for Z. ‘That report concluded that we would probably benefit from a parenting class and made no recommendation for Z’ removal.’ This report was totally ignored and a full care order was recommended. The planning meeting was totally against that, including the guardian and the local authorities own solicitor. Eventually the social workers reported difficulties in palming S off onto his father (an unemployed man, prone to depression), so they applied to the court for a six month delay. This proved decisive for us. In that time, S set fire to his father’s house, resulting in his father never wanting anything to do with him again, and also his aunt no longer wants to see him. It is clear to everyone involved that S has serious mental problems that social services are totally ignoring. What benefit is that to S? Z has continued to thrive and with every report saying that Z is happy and happy with his parents, social workers have had a massive climb-down and suggested that a supervision order is probably best. We agreed to this, as we have nothing to hide. If social services had spent maybe £300 in providing a brain scan for S, he could well be on medication and be making something of his life. Instead they have wasted countless thousands to try and brand us as ‘abusers’ and steal our other son too. Yours S and T Published by Fassit UK© Back