Save

Your current notes:

Email a copy to yourself

Thank you. The email has successfully been sent to your email address.

I'm sorry - there was an error in sending the email. Please try again below.

Cancel

Social workers

The following illustration may help:

In the case of D, a 9 year old boy was hit on the ear by his dad and a case conference was convened. My manager insisted that I recommend that D be subject to a Child Protection Plan and that his father should no longer reside at home. I was less convinced of this strategy. It was clear to me that the family was under severe stress; they had three other children, one of whom had significant learning disabilities and particularly challenging behaviour. The incident occurred during a moment when the father was trying to control the disabled child and, whilst restraining him, he accidentally hit D's ear. After the investigation, when the father was required to live elsewhere, I questioned the legality of making him do that and I could see that his absence was having a deleterious effect on D. I thought that D's human rights were being infringed (right to family life) by my manager's insistence on the dad leaving the house and I could see no legal justification for it. I tried to weigh up the merits of ensuring that the father was no longer a risk to the children with D's need to have his dad at home. I felt I had to be honest and express my view and I therefore challenged my manager in supervision. We were able to discuss the dilemma and reach a compromise which both D and his father accepted.

Back