Shoesmith

[Phil D. Rolls]

What's this woman all about?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-11311290

I think she had a valid point about why was Social Work the only one singled out. Health and police always seem to slope off in these situations. However, given the way she has behaved, she made them an easy target.

Is she simply someone with a personality disorder that has bullied her way to the top through sheer egotism. Or, is she a well meaning person who has been misrepresented?

Personally, I think Social Work has pushed itself into too many spheres that don't concern it and are reaping the rewards of that policy. I think they have overstretched themselves.

[Borders Hibby]

What's this woman all about?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-11311290

I think she had a valid point about why was Social Work the only one singled out. Health and police always seem to slope off in these situations. However, given the way she has behaved, she made them an easy target.

Is she simply someone with a personality disorder that has bullied her way to the top through sheer egotism. Or, is she a well meaning person who has been misrepresented?

Personally, I think Social Work has pushed itself into too many spheres that don't concern it and are reaping the rewards of that policy. I think they have overstretched themselves.

She seemed very defensive,interested in her own reputation rather than improving the services for kids.

[EH6 Hibby]

I think the way she has behaved is a disgrace. She was the director and therefore the buck stopped with her.

There was a similar case in Edinburgh a few years ago where the NHS and Social Work were involved in a case where a child was murdered, The Director of Social Work had the decency to resign after Social Work were found have failed the child, I think Sharon Shoesmith should have done the same.

[lyonhibs]

I think the way she has behaved is a disgrace. She was the director and therefore the buck stopped with her.

There was a similar case in Edinburgh a few years ago where the NHS and Social Work were involved in a case where a child was murdered, The Director of Social Work had the decency to resign after Social Work were found have failed the child, I think Sharon Shoesmith should have done the same..

I was going to post on this. She's doing herself no favours with the way she's come across in the enquiry.

When asked "What would you have done differently" so responded "well that's one heck of a question, considering all I've been through"

Unreal - what about the child who your department was meant to be monitoring. What about what HE went through - doesn't really seem to register on her radar.

Some people will go to any lengths to save their own skin, regardless of how long ago the horse bolted from the stable. She should have taken responsibility for the integral failings of her department.

[Mibbes Aye]

What's this woman all about?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-11311290

I think she had a valid point about why was Social Work the only one singled out. Health and police always seem to slope off in these situations. However, given the way she has behaved, she made them an easy target.

Is she simply someone with a personality disorder that has bullied her way to the top through sheer egotism. Or, is she a well meaning person who has been misrepresented?

Personally, I think Social Work has pushed itself into too many spheres that don't concern it and are reaping the rewards of that policy. I think they have overstretched themselves.

For what it's worth, Sharon Shoesmith doesn't come from a social work background. She was a teacher and school inspector who rose through the ranks on the Education and schools side of local authorities, not social work.

Many local authorities, probably more so in England and Wales originally, but certainly in Scotland nowadays, no longer have stand-alone social work or social services departments. The children and families element of social services is combined with the local authority's education department.

The intention, I suppose, is to ensure that professionals working with children are much more 'joined-up', and in part that can be the case. I suppose the goal would be that the sum is greater than its parts. That's laudable. Many of the recurrent failures in child protection have been down to communication barriers between agencies and integrated working should in principle address that.

It's not difficult to imagine how two very different professions don't necessarily fit well together. It's a very uneven relationship in that education will have a lot more employees, a lot more senior managers and thus the culture will almost certainly be weighted in one direction.

Shoesmith wasn't a social worker. Even if she had come from that background I can quite believe her recent statement that she would have had no knowledge of this particular case, in her position. Nevertheless she was head of the children's service and as such, had ultimate responsibility.

[Phil D. Rolls]

For what it's worth, Sharon Shoesmith doesn't come from a social work background. She was a teacher and school inspector who rose through the ranks on the Education and schools side of local authorities, not social work.

Many local authorities, probably more so in England and Wales originally, but certainly in Scotland nowadays, no longer have stand-alone social work or social services departments. The children and families element of social services is combined with the local authority's education department.

The intention, I suppose, is to ensure that professionals working with children are much more 'joined-up', and in part that can be the case. I suppose the goal would be that the sum is greater than its parts. That's laudable. Many of the recurrent failures in child protection have been down to communication barriers between agencies and integrated working should in principle address that.

It's not difficult to imagine how two very different professions don't necessarily fit well together. It's a very uneven relationship in that education will have a lot more employees, a lot more senior managers and thus the culture will almost certainly be weighted in one direction.

Shoesmith wasn't a social worker. Even if she had come from that background I can quite believe her recent statement that she would have had no knowledge of this particular case, in her position. Nevertheless she was head of the children's service and as such, had ultimate responsibility.

From my experience, social workers do an amazingly good job. I have to say, I agree with Shoesmith in asking the question why aren't health services or the police on the mat in the same way that she is.

That said, the fact that the question is being asked kind of illustrates the silohs that seem to have developed in the caring professions. I think there is still a lot of self interest and a lot of witholding of information between agencies.

What will also be interesting is who takes responsibility for what, once cuts are imposed on public spending. My experience in health is that there is a lot of crossover between the NHS, Social Work, and Voluntary Agencies at the moment. At the end of the day it is the "service user" who will suffer as the buck gets passed.

Sharon Shoesmith seems like a very egocentric woman, but by acting selfishly she is at least drawing attention to a disjointed approach to care and well being.

[wpj]

For what it's worth, Sharon Shoesmith doesn't come from a social work background. She was a teacher and school inspector who rose through the ranks on the Education and schools side of local authorities, not social work.

Many local authorities, probably more so in England and Wales originally, but certainly in Scotland nowadays, no longer have stand-alone social work or social services departments. The children and families element of social services is combined with the local authority's education department.

The intention, I suppose, is to ensure that professionals working with children are much more 'joined-up', and in part that can be the case. I suppose the goal would be that the sum is greater than its parts. That's laudable. Many of the recurrent failures in child protection have been down to communication barriers between agencies and integrated working should in principle address that.

It's not difficult to imagine how two very different professions don't necessarily fit well together. It's a very uneven relationship in that education will have a lot more employees, a lot more senior managers and thus the culture will almost certainly be weighted in one direction.

Shoesmith wasn't a social worker. Even if she had come from that background I can quite believe her recent statement that she would have had no knowledge of this particular case, in her position. Nevertheless she was head of the children's service and as such, had ultimate responsibility.

In my neck of the woods we have a "children's Trust" which consists of health, social work and education, there is co location and a developing culture of information sharing across three seperate IT systems, obviously one would be better but that just won't happen. Staff are trained on all three so all information is available for all teams. Child Protection training is mandatory for all staff and the tagic cases of Victoria Climbie and Peter Connelly are focused on and staff encouraged to see how they may have been able to help.
All these and other measures will make a difference but safeguarding children is everyones responsibility, more so now when there is a national shortage of midwives and health visitors who traditionally guided families through the first few months. This added to a growing population with no growth to services providing care then cracks are bound to appear.
Shoesmith had not conducted herself well at all but one quote i read today rings true

"Many heads of children's services must look at Sharon Shoesmith and think "there but for the grace of God ..." because what the ex service head at Haringey told an inquiry into safeguarding will echo uncomfortably throughout the country – there are countless children dying at the hands of parents or relatives and nothing that was put in place after the 'Baby P' case has helped to change this fact. Indeed, it could be argued that the main impact has been to overburden an already stretched service with more procedures and paperwork, making child protection more difficult."

[Mibbes Aye]

From my experience, social workers do an amazingly good job. I have to say, I agree with Shoesmith in asking the question why aren't health services or the police on the mat in the same way that she is.

That said, the fact that the question is being asked kind of illustrates the silohs that seem to have developed in the caring professions. I think there is still a lot of self interest and a lot of witholding of information between agencies.

What will also be interesting is who takes responsibility for what, once cuts are imposed on public spending. My experience in health is that there is a lot of crossover between the NHS, Social Work, and Voluntary Agencies at the moment. At the end of the day it is the "service user" who will suffer as the buck gets passed.

Sharon Shoesmith seems like a very egocentric woman, but by acting selfishly she is at least drawing attention to a disjointed approach to care and well being.

Agree completely that there's a narrative pretty much set on blame that focuses more on social work than it does on health or police.

To some extent that's to be expected - there's more subjectivity in the decision-making processes that SW employs, so criticism is easier and more understandable.

Would also agree about the relationships - there's a rich seam for sociological or behavioural study in how the various public agencies interact with each other and with the other sectors.

Funnily enough, the one area where I think that crossover between statutory and voluntary organisations often works at its best is in mental health. I think you have professional experience of that so would welcome your thoughts.

As for Ms Shoesmith, again I agree. She has been vilified and it's right to draw attention to the implications of that. At the same time there's an inherent issue here about responsibility, which she seems to have set aside. Not entirely convinced that she is as ignorant of that as she has been portrayed, but she has had a lot of opportunities to express a greater sense of ownership and she hasn't really acted upon them.

[Mibbes Aye]

In my neck of the woods we have a "children's Trust" which consists of health, social work and education, there is co location and a developing culture of information sharing across three seperate IT systems, obviously one would be better but that just won't happen. Staff are trained on all three so all information is available for all teams. Child Protection training is mandatory for all staff and the tagic cases of Victoria Climbie and Peter Connelly are focused on and staff encouraged to see how they may have been able to help.
All these and other measures will make a difference but safeguarding children is everyones responsibility, more so now when there is a national shortage of midwives and health visitors who traditionally guided families through the first few months. This added to a growing population with no growth to services providing care then cracks are bound to appear.
Shoesmith had not conducted herself well at all but one quote i read today rings true

"Many heads of children's services must look at Sharon Shoesmith and think "there but for the grace of God ..." because what the ex service head at Haringey told an inquiry into safeguarding will echo uncomfortably throughout the country – there are countless children dying at the hands of parents or relatives and nothing that was put in place after the 'Baby P' case has helped to change this fact. Indeed, it could be argued that the main impact has been to overburden an already stretched service with more procedures and paperwork, making child protection more difficult."

Would agree with you too - the safety and wellbeing of children is and should be everyone's responsibility, as it goes beyond what can be delivered by professionals alone.

Think your quote is very accurate - many people around the country will know fine well that a case like Baby P could happen on their watch. I'm never sure about the way that these cases are reacted to however - fundamentally and consistently they boil down to breakdowns in process, breakdowns in communication, but these breakdowns are as a consequence of human behaviour, of people not following a guideline, or following-up on a report etc etc. If this happens a couple of times within the overall chain it's often enough to shift the collective understanding of the case and that shift can be the difference between a situation being unsatisfactory but managed; and a situation leading to the death of a child. The remedy to that is partly about culture change which comes from training and workforce development, but also about having robust processes with proper checks, balances and sign-offs. It does mean bureaucracy but it lessens the risk, or at least I think it does??

[Phil D. Rolls]

Agree completely that there's a narrative pretty much set on blame that focuses more on social work than it does on health or police.

To some extent that's to be expected - there's more subjectivity in the decision-making processes that SW employs, so criticism is easier and more understandable.

Would also agree about the relationships - there's a rich seam for sociological or behavioural study in how the various public agencies interact with each other and with the other sectors.

Funnily enough, the one area where I think that crossover between statutory and voluntary organisations often works at its best is in mental health. I think you have professional experience of that so would welcome your thoughts.

As for Ms Shoesmith, again I agree. She has been vilified and it's right to draw attention to the implications of that. At the same time there's an inherent issue here about responsibility, which she seems to have set aside. Not entirely convinced that she is as ignorant of that as she has been portrayed, but she has had a lot of opportunities to express a greater sense of ownership and she hasn't really acted upon them.

In my experience, there is pretty good co-operation between health, social work, and to a lesser extent the police in mental health. That said, I don't know how good or bad things are elsewhere.

Personally, I get frustrated at processes within the NHS and how stuff can get lost simply by moving from one team to another - let alone from one catchment area to another!

An example I can give is that a nursery school was aware that one of our clients 3 year old children was taking herself to nursery in the morning.

They alerted the appropriate agency, yet we weren't allowed to be in the loop on what was happening on that score. We were entirely at the mercy of what the client disclosed.