Saturday, 31 December 2011
Wednesday, 21 December 2011
Justice
Justice
Locked away
Looking for better
Listening to untruths about you and me
Learning that what is in, is more important
that what is out
Loving the fact that YOU are here and
nothing can change that
Loosed to fly, and bars, and prisons cannot
hold, I’m away
Living in the space of your freedom
Adrian Hawkes
W. 60
Monday, 21 November 2011
Cuts,Care and Development (Children in the Looked after system)
Cuts, Care and Development
(Children in the Looked after system)
In what direction is the care area in the UK heading? The current
government promised that it would not cut front line services particularly for
those most in need I am sure
you will agree that those who are on the ‘at risk register’ or
those actually in the Looked after system of the UK are very vulnerable and in
need. One London borough actually said it was going to
cut foster care rates by
half. That seems to me to be moving in the
opposite direction of what has been announced.
When I contacted
central government on this issue I was told, very sorry but this is a local
decision, nothing to do with us!
There is
a vast burden of regulations imposed on those who care enough to
foster or to adopt. Many of the regulations are very good but like all things
human, they
work at the whim of the humans applying the regulations. There are excellent social workers out there who I would say have the ability to apply
the CS factor, that is, common sense, (which often seem to be very uncommon).
However, in my
experience, there
seems to be many social workers for whom the ‘power’ of being a
social worker has gone to their head and they treat all others as lesser
mortals. I overheard a conversation
recently between
a key worker for vulnerable adults and a social worker. The key worker has good university degrees and is a
good worker, with experience and expertise.
I noted that the key worker was being very polite and patient. When the social worker had finished and
left, I said “are you all right?”
“Yes I am I suppose,” was the response, “but why is it that
social workers think that I am stupid, when I am not, and think that it is ok
to treat me in that way
and talk to me like dirt beneath their feet.”
It isn’t acceptable, but many social workers seem to display that
attitude. Why
is it? Is
it the training, or is it the pressure of the job, is it perhaps that they are
insecure? I
don’t know why it is but I wish it would stop.
I do not
believe the code of practice
is the problem, below are
some extracts:
The General Social
Care Council (GSCC) codes of practice
Social care workers must:
• Protect the rights and promote
the interests of service users and carers;
• Strive to establish and
maintain the trust and confidence of service users and carers;
• Promote the independence of
service users while protecting them as far as possible from danger or harm;
• Respect the rights of service
users whilst seeking to ensure that their behaviour does not harm themselves or
other people;
• Uphold public trust and confidence in social care services; and (i.e.
in their dealings with other professionals and working collaboratively)
• Be accountable for the quality
of their work and take responsibility for maintaining and improving their
knowledge and skills.
But talk is cheap or rather the words on the page are not worth a jot if they are not
observed.
Then there is the element of need; the number of looked
after children is around 64,400 on 31st March 2010 according to
government statistics. That does
not include those on the at risk register, which is probably
about the same number, this
brings us to an approximate total of 128,000 children in need of care.
Can we afford to cut our service
delivery in
such areas? Or should we be improving
the delivery and the training of those who are willing to foster or want to
adopt. Alongside the compelling argument to avoid cuts
perhaps we should also be looking at the reasons why we have so many children in
such need.
I wonder also if smaller agencies might actually deliver a better service
for less cost, particularly if the
checking procedures were
strengthened that are currently delivered by OFSTEAD
Since the
‘60s the whole adoption scene has changed dramatically, at that time single parenting was much
less common and abortion and birth control where only just commencing. There were 27,000 adoptions in 1968; large numbers of children were released to
adopters, many almost straight from birth.
That whole scene has now changed, now the children who require adoption are more
likely to come from parents that have been neglectful or abusive, either
physically, sexually, or by the use of substances that damage the children as
well as themselves. Adoptive parents can often face the choice of
waiting for years for a young single child or months for older sibling groups.
The reality being that as those children get older their experiences of neglect and abuse
are likely to be significantly higher due to the length of time they have remained with
neglecting parents. The
knock on effect is that adoptive parents are often left to clean
up the emotional fallout of their adopted children plus the support is minimal
and not a statutory requirement. The training
for adopters’ remains negligible, often has not changed much since the 60’s; and I would reiterate that the
kind of children coming into
the adoption system has changed dramatically.
Should this be more of a priority in designing the way we help these
vulnerable children and how we guide those adopters? The number of children available for adoption
has, of course,
dropped as single parent families have become more culturally acceptable. There are now around 3,500
children each year who go from care to adoption To make matters worse,
those in the know tell me that of current adopters, something like 1 in 4
situations break down, in other words the child goes back into foster care, or back
into a children’s home. The high emotional and public cost
of this surely needs investigating.
And where are we going with the large and unwieldy social service
department. Sometimes, just because of
their size, they seem to
treat the children, the foster carers and the adopters more like a commodity
than like people. I wonder if smaller agencies might actually deliver better
service for less cost, particularly if the checking procedures that are
currently delivered by OFSTEAD were
strengthened.
These big departments are being hit by cuts whatever central government is
saying to the contrary; departments have been slimmed down, in some instances this may be the right decision,
but in light of the cuts
can they still deal effectively
with those 64,000 children in a manner
that does not increase the damage that
all agree should be avoided.
The fact remains that
those in the looked after system are less likely to leave school with good
qualifications,
are often more likely to end up in the prison system, with all the ensuing
expense, or, as Big Issue
founder John Bird likes to say, they could become “….a great ‘big
issue’ seller!”
It is also still true that if you are part of the black and ethnic minority,
your chances of being in care are greater and your chance of finding an
adoptive parent is less likely.
26% of children within the English child care system were
from a black or ethnic minority origin in 2010 as compared to 11% within the
general population (Department for Education, 2010; Office of National
Statistics, 2010). Frazer and Selwyn (2005) noted that in 2003 only 10% of
approved adoptive families were of Black, Asian or mixed parentage and in the
same time period only 13% of all the children adopted were from a black or
ethnic minority origin.
Maybe smaller units of foster care, and a better training programme
for adopters would be a step in the right directions.
I know that a lot of work has been done in this area in the past, and of
course tragic events
like baby P make us all want to see change, however after the press fever has
died down we go back to doing what we did and sort of forget. These young people can be a great resource to the nation; we should
not short change them. And the current round of cuts should make us take a fresh look at how we can improve
their life situations. (25,000 children leave care each year)
Further reference:
Frazer, L. and Selwyn, J. (2005) ’Why are We Waiting? The
Demography of Adoption for Children of Black, Asian and Black Mixed Parentage
in England’, Child and Family Social Work, Vol 10, pp135 – 147.
Great Britain. Department of Health (2010) DfE: Children
Looked After by Local Authorities in England (including adoption and care
leavers) - year ending 31 March 2010 [Online]. Available at:
http://www.education.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/SFR/s000960/index.shtml (Accessed:
23rd April 2011).
Office of National Statistics (2010) Adoptions. Available
at: http://www.statistics.gov.uk/CCI/nugget.asp?ID=592
(Accessed: 12th April 2011).
Figures quoted are usually for England and Wales, Scotland and
Northern Ireland have separate statistics.
Adrian Hawkes
With Help from Al Coats
31st May
2011
For Blog and Wider
distribution
Edit - Technicolour
Text
W. 1512
Thursday, 13 October 2011
Morals and Conscience - Do we have them? Where do they come from?
Morals and Conscience – Do we have them? Where do they come from?
This is the third time I have written about this subject from which you will gather that I think it’s important, especially in the light of some the recent events in the UK, such as the riots. However I believe they are only a symptom of something deeper.
Politicians, of all shades, including the prime ministers are discussing this subject and it is playing central stage on many TV and Radio Programmes. Perhaps, then, it really is important. There is also deep concern about our schools and our young people – how, the politicians and TV pundits ask, can we install morals into young people so that they do not smash up our streets and destroy our society?
Many responses to my blogs can be summed up as follows, ‘Morals don’t need to come from the Bible, The Koran, or from a god, they surely can come from within ourselves?’ to which I answer, ‘yes of course they can but what sort of moral guide would that be?’
We need to go one step back and ask, why we need to have morals at all, and what is it that propels us to even ask these questions? My answer encompasses the whole issue of conscience.
What is conscience? What is our conscience? My argument would be that conscience is a part of us that we are all born with. Some people disagree with this concept and say that we don’t have a conscience, but I strongly believe that we do. We each have our own individual conscience, unique to us personally. That means that it only works for us, it doesn’t work for anyone else. What it instils in us is the general sense of right and wrong. In a nutshell, right and wrong for you might be different to the right and wrong for me, but there will, most definitely, be a personal right and wrong. This concept is far beyond the idea that we do things because they are convenient or inconvenient or because we know we can ‘get away with it’.
How does conscience work, well for the individual, and I do stress the individual in any given situation it will say to the person, ‘yes that is right do it,’ or, ‘No, that is wrong! You should not do it.’ You conscience does not impel you, it does not force you in any direction, it will only hint at the decision you should make, the final decision that decides the action is the result of your decision making process, which I would call the will. When you have carried out an act, you know if it is wrong without anyone telling you, you will feel uncomfortable and disturbed; the pendulum of your conscience has swung into the negative zone. For many people when they obey their consciences and do what they feel is right they often say they feel good, when they disobey their conscience they feel bad, or despondent, but the feeling does not prevent them from disobeying.
Interestingly the Bible does have some comments on this. John 1:9 is obviously talking about Jesus the Christ, but also the implication is that there is a ‘light’, or the word I use, conscience that is there in every person, and Romans 2:14 says this, “for when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do the things in the law, these, although not having the law, are a law to themselves.” In other words we all have it, and we use it, our conscience, personally.
This means that we will have different views of right or wrong according first of all to us, and then as we grow and develop, according to what we learn from our family and surrounding culture and education. The problem is that we all break our own rules, and go against our own conscience.
Conscience can of course be educated and that is where the moral discussion enters the stage. Who will define that moral code, will it be just me, will it be my culture, or will it be God? It is possible for our conscience to be developed and refined by all sorts of external things, including education.
But who should define the moral code, which one will we adopt? We need to understand that the moral code that Jesus defines is quite amazing in that it is contrary to all other moral codes that I know anything about, but please tell me if you know something different. Think about some of those moral imperatives and how counter-culture they are; ‘love your enemies, do good to those who do bad to you,’ for starters. What sort of Moral code do you want young people to follow? What moral code is required for our culture to follow and for you personally?
Adrian Hawkes
W. 821
Edited: Technicolour text
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)