Online Forum Online Booking Contct Us
Share Us  

Call us on: 01293 978700

Newsletter

Subscribe to our newsletter for the latest deals and information



Joomla Extensions powered by Joobi

To enquire about

advertising with us

please click here

new_phone_htc_01_033

Your Shopping Cart

 x 

Cart empty

Online ForumOnline BookingContact Us

Welcome, Guest
Username: Password: Remember me
Welcome to the DNB Health and Social Care ltd Forum!

Tell us and our members who you are, what you like and why you became a member of this site.
We welcome all new members and hope to see you around a lot!

TOPIC: Why Social Worker put our children at risk.

Why Social Worker put our children at risk. 6 years 2 months ago #1132

  • Denisb
  • Denisb's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Posts: 109
  • Thank you received: 1


Attachment is a deep and enduring emotional bond that connects one person to another across time and space (Ainsworth, 1973; Bowlby, 1969).


Why Social Services continue to make fundamental mistake in segregating fathers from their children?
It is all to do with the misunderstood and misinterpretation of the Attachment Theory by John Bowlby (1958) wish according to Social Services is evidence based practice”.

They discovered that baby's attachments develop in the following sequence:
o Up to 3 months of age - Indiscriminate attachments. The newborn is predisposed to attach to any human. Most babies respond equally to any caregiver.
o After 4 months - Preference for certain people. Infants they learn to distinguish primary and secondary caregivers but accept care from anyone;
o After 7 months - Special preference for a single attachment figure. The baby looks to particular people for security, comfort and protection. It shows fear of strangers (stranger fear) and unhappiness when separated from a special person (separation anxiety). Some babies show stranger fear and separation anxiety much more frequently and intensely than others, but nevertheless they are seen as evidence that the baby has formed an attachment. This has usually developed by one year of age.

o After 9 months - Multiple attachments. The baby becomes increasingly independent and forms several attachments.
The results of the study indicated that attachments were most likely to form with those who responded accurately to the baby's signals, not the person they spent most time with. Schaffer and Emerson called this sensitive responsiveness.

Many of the babies had several attachments by 10 months old, including attachments to mothers, fathers, grandparents, siblings and neighbors. The mother was the main attachment figure for about half of the children at 18 months old and the father for most of the others. The most important fact in forming attachments is not who feeds and changes the child but who plays and communicates with him or her.

The attachment of a child to his or her father is not hard to observe as long as the personal observing is not fresh out of a dipper; flexing his or her degree. Children are made to suffer when separated from their father. So long the father has been responding accurately to the child there is attachment. From birth to five years old there are no substantive evidence that the baby has a stronger attachment to the mother than the father and being the main feeder dose not automatically qualified neither as the attaché, but the emphasis should be placed on how responsive parents are to their children when being observed.

The confusion for Social Worker is when theory suggest that the mother was the main attachment figure for about half of the children at 18 months old and the father for most of the others. About half! Not half and the father for most of the others. Would 48% for the mother and 48% for the father be expressed in this statement above? This is one of the fundamental mistakes that continue to this day.

Secondly the culture of the time, men being the main bread winner dads had far less exposure to his child. But this is not the case today as most parents work and have equal input into the children’s upbringing.

Bowlby suggested that a child would initially form only one primary attachment (monotropy) and that the attachment figure acted as a secure base for exploring the world. The attachment relationship acts as a prototype for all future social relationships so disrupting it can have severe consequences. This theory also suggests that there is a critical period for developing at attachment (about 0 -5 years). If an attachment has not developed during this period then the child will suffer from irreversible developmental consequences, such as reduced intelligence and increased aggression.

SO what happen if “monotropy” happened between father and child and father are taken away from this equation? “Severe Consequences” including “irreversible developmental consequences such as reduced intelligence and increased aggression”. Social services soon wash their hands and walk away and put the blame on the parents’ differences, when their approach should not encourage the Alienation of fathers. Social Services automatically assumed that the “monotropy” happened with mother only. This is not the case. So countless children are damaged because Social Worker are knowingly discriminate and prejudice against fathers because of a misunderstood and out of date theory.

We have experienced this “the Riot” increase juvenile crime rates from child with absent fathers, we are observing it daily but who is doing what to change it? Does anyone give a hoot? So when someone come and tell a father "what is in thee best interest of his children and assumed to know more than him; The thought of how this sounds It simply infuriate fathers and drives them mad. Because it is simply ignorant for someone to suggest they know your children better than you, especially when father knows that their "evidence based practice" is based on ambiguous conclusion. These are the people Government give absolute power to screw your children up. Social Worker's will always put children at risk unless they reconsider Bowlby's theory and know what they are suppose to observe.

We have created a gender bias system which even when father care and fight for his children, he is at a very high risk of falling due to such bias system. For example Child benefit is paid to the mother, working tax credit, father can’t claim from CSA unless he was receiving these benefits. Father usually is not entitled for legal aid so his entire life saving is squandered often have to give up because he run out of money. Legal-aid Solicitor represent parent not “Children” according to Venters Solicitors. So who really concerns about the best interest of your children? Social Services encouraging the breaching of court order to exasperate the father usually.

Who are more like to response to the need of a child better? A trained parent whose job is to response to people’s needs or an uneducated parent? Is it the mother and father or vice versa?

Last Edit: 6 years 4 weeks ago by Denisb.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Why Social Worker put our children at risk. 6 years 1 month ago #1135

  • Denisb
  • Denisb's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Posts: 109
  • Thank you received: 1
It is sad that another poor child has to die. We live in a country that treated dogs better than they treat men. The societal imbalance and partial approach in solving family problems is and will continue to be a pebble in our nation’s bladder. How many people in this country will tolerate seeing a dog eating out of the bin? If we see this happening it is obvious to us that the dog has been abandon.

When we observe this behaviour in a defenceless child, the cry for help should be obvious as the child desperately urge to survive. For whatever reasons ignorance, immoral, out-ethic or sheer selfishness, the child is deduced to a behaviour problem.

Sadly through my own personal experience I found both the police and Social Service inept when dealing with protecting children from abuse and together with the court and the family law they create a perfect shield to entertain such abuses. We will see more and more children being abused by their mother and both Social Services and the Police will continue to water-down the problems when it is committed by mothers.

Children are put under great pressure by social service and teachers as they alert the perpetrator of the noticeable sign of abused. So the perpetrator, get better and cleverer in the way she conduct her abuse. The child become scares and succumbs to his or her abuser and his urge to survive is lost.

This is the point when it should be abundantly obvious to the trained observer, but sadly any idiot can become a Social Worker today and as long as they have the commend of good written English and have to ability to make a report sound impressive irrespective of the integrity or validity of its content.

Emotional abuse is the most widespread abuse that children endured in this country and it is disregarded by Social Services unless it was in the best interest of Social Service. Both Social Services and the Police have created the perfect environment to encourage such abuses and they quite literally condone them. As the child losses interest, his drive and urge to survive all the sign stopped.

Survival in the context used here means survival in the wider context of live not merely physical.

www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/article...want-tell-about.html
Last Edit: 6 years 1 month ago by Denisb.
The administrator has disabled public write access.
Time to create page: 0.179 seconds