By James Simons
There were missed opportunities to properly investigate a torn lip suffered by a baby, according to a report by Somerset Safeguarding Children Board.
A report by Sommerset Safeguarding children found there were missed The girl, who was taken to hospital with the injury in 2014, and her younger half-sister, had suffered fractured ribs and a fractured tibia 10 months later, eventually endin up in care.
The report criticised professionals for failing to share more information with one another, in light of the “significant issues” in their lives including domestic abuse and drug misuse. Social services should also have been more sceptical of the dodgy explanations given for the injuries given by the parents,the report concluded.
After the injuries to the older girl, known as child L, Police and children’s social care decided not to carry out further investigation, opting for a child and family assessment to be undertaken instead The parents had undermined the seriousness of the injury, who claimed to have sought medical help and were concerned for the parent’s welfare.
The review concluded that it was highly unlikely for a child of this age to have sustained an injury of that nature accidentally, and was critical of police and social services for not being more suspicious that there was more to it.
However, the report claimed insufficient and unclear advice was given to social care and police by medics
Social services also missed a necessary child assessment conference and when a child protection investigation was eventually carried out, the report said it was “superficial and of poor quality”. These adjectives are shameful and typical of the failings common in cases involving social work negligence.
Instead of allocating the case to an experienced and competent social worker, the case was allocated to an inexperienced social worker who lacked the appropriate training. The council also failed to offer him sufficient supervision and management oversight, the report found.
Social Services Cut Corners
The report also claimed that “corners were being cut in terms of practice and supervision” due to the “major change and upheaval” in the department. It adds that the cut corners probably led to partner agencies failing to challenge social care decision-making, and having lower expectations of the services due to a “tacit acceptance” of the difficulties staff were facing.
The failure of pasrtner agencies to challenge social services is an example of the extent to which so- called respectable institutions sometimes fail families. Acceptance of the difficulties families were facing is a ridiculous reason not to challenge an organisation whose remit is to safeuard the interest of children who ave been abused.
Weak recommendations” that were unlikely to be acted upon” were also made by the inadequate investigation and the case was closed by social services two months after the incident. Unsurptisingly, fresh concerns were made eight months later over injuries to te younger sibling, known as child J , with social services “more thorough and competent” in their investigation for obvious reasons. They could smell a rat!
The review also found that liaison between agencies was much improved, and are proceedings were launched not long after.