I wouldn’t want to be a social worker. They are expected to predict the future – will this parent harm this child at some future time? They are also expected to analyse the politics of every situation – if I take the albino child from this family of Nigerian witchdoctors, is that racist?
Sometimes they get it wrong and sometimes they make such a total bollocks of things that you’d think someone higher up the management chain would say ‘hang on a minute…’
They don’t though. The judge in this case was perfectly correct to say –
Sir James said he had ‘quite deliberately’ not identified either of the two social workers or a team manager. But he said he had deliberately identified Darlington Borough Council.
‘It is Darlington Borough Council and its senior management that are to blame, not only social workers and a team manager, ‘ said Sir James.
The father in question was alleged to have ‘numerous criminal convictions’ by the council when in fact he had two police cautions. He had been involved with the EDL briefly. He slept with an underage girl when he was 17 – a four year age difference, and he was only just legal himself at that time. No mention of any history of violence nor of any history of serious criminal activity.
The social worker wrote this –
One social worker recorded: ‘The distorted thinking of those within the EDL is barbaric and their actions inappropriate. Therefore the mentality of those involved has to be brought into question.’
The social worker also pointed out ‘the immoral nature of the values and beliefs’ of EDL members and the violence of their protests.
These champions of diversity don’t like people who are different, do they?
On one point, the judge is simultaneously wrong and right.
‘We must guard against the risk of social engineering, and that, in my judgment is what, in truth, I would be doing if I was to remove [the toddler] permanently from his father’s care.’
Which is exactly what the council expected him to do.
Oh yes, he is right about guarding against that risk, but wrong about the council’s thoughts on the matter. The council is guarding against the risk of being seen to be socially engineering.
That social worker is not entirely to blame (though should still be horsewhipped, tied upside down over a barrel of burning tobacco and then given a jolly good ticking off. It’s the English way). She/he was employed in that role precisely because of the ‘moral guardian’ attitude displayed. Her wild reasoning that a brief involvement with the EDL meant he would likely send the child to school in a KKK outfit and her Outrage! at his not having the same moral standards as her were the reason she got the job.
It’s her bosses who control the social engineering aspect. Put the right bosses in place and you’ll get the right social workers employed.
Won’t happen if you vote for Labour or Lib Dems. Some chance if you vote Tory, but no guarantee.
At council level, it’s best to vote for individuals rather than parties. A ‘No overall control’ result seems the best outcome. Preferably with none of Common Purpose’s inflated-ego idiots in there at all.
And the names of the idiots in charge should always be published.