Press one of the expand buttons to see the full text of an article. Later press collapse to revert to the original form. The buttons below expand or collapse all articles.
October 13, 2013 permalink
A woman who raised her own grandson was subject to silly and onerous conditions by a power-tripping social worker. The boy's jaw was broken while in foster care, but that cannot be discussed. The boy cannot visit places he loves, but is restricted to places he hates, including the beach where his injury occurred. Christopher Booker follows up his earlier story.
'We decide where you eat’ – social workers love a petty power trip
Why is a social worker spoiling the contact between a woman and her grandson?
By Christopher Booker, 4:19PM BST 12 Oct 2013
A year ago, under the heading “Don’t ask your grandson how his jaw got broken, say social workers”, I reported the bizarre story of an Essex grandmother who was allowed a brief “contact” session with her beloved 11-year-old grandson, shortly after he had been beaten up on a beach by a gang of teenagers while he was unhappily in foster care. She was told she would only be allowed to meet the boy she had brought up, who loves his “Nan” and whom she has never harmed in any way, on strict condition that no reference could be made to his injuries and how his jaw had been broken.
Now the grandmother, who formerly made something of a name for herself in showbusiness, is having an equally bizarre argument with the boy’s social worker over how the two of them should spend three hours of the 25 hours of “contact” they are allowed each year. Granny wants to take the boy to his favourite restaurant for lunch, as he wishes. But this has been forbidden by the social worker, quoting a judge’s instruction that their contact sessions must be “activity related”. He therefore suggests that the boy should be taken to a McDonald’s, which he hates, or that the foster carer should provide him with a packed lunch. As for the rest of the contact, the social worker suggests that the boy should be taken to a bowling arcade, which costs £8.50 for a single game, and which he also hates, or for a walk on the same “beech” (sic) where his jaw was broken last year in the incident they are forbidden to mention.
How on earth could we have created a system which allows a little jobsworth social worker to throw his weight around in this absurdly dehumanised way, which makes a complete mockery of the claim that the system’s only concern is to put “the interests of the child” first? And if reporting this brings any vengeful comeback from that social worker, I warn him under the new “Munby rules” that, next time, he will be named.
Source: Telegraph (UK)