I had made, so many email, and oral complaints, that the social services stated in our core assessment,
‘Isabel’ s parents to discuss concerns with the Social Services in an appropriate way and accept that some issues have previously been addressed.’
As, the LA’s education, and agency support packages, and, her residential school, had cost well over a million, and by their abuse had made Isabel much worse.
And, produced no education, or, respite,
a formal complaint , was long overdue.
I knew this process, would involve, even more timewasting, and, stress,
as an’ independent’, (paid by the Local Authority) investigator, went over, the already known, documented information.
But, as far as I could suss, this was a preliminary to a local ombudsmen claim.
Itself a preliminary to suing the LA, for breach of its statutory duties ?.
And, the complaints process, even if successful, would have little effect on Issy’s current, or, future service provision, at most producing limited compensation, at the expense of possibly bankrupting lawyers costs of the LA.
So much for the rule of law.
I didn’t know, all complaints, where automatically stalled by a court application under the MCA.
If we sued the LA, for breach of their duties, and, our human rights, this would be tricky as they had all the experts, it was on the balance of probabilities.
and likely doomed on public policy grounds.
We could not get legal aid, nor, find a solicitor, who could, or would, take on the state.
If I did it myself, I‘d be fighting court systems, and, expensive lawyers, and risk their costs.
The sad, inevitable truth was, the services, were inadequate, because they were unaccountable.
My complaint disappeared into the internet ether, and I received a reference number, and a promise of acknowledgement within 7 days.
And, just as I was beginning to think, the computer had said ‘no ‘, I received one.
It forced two meetings.
The first, with the social workers boss, and, another with the social worker, we never got to the ‘independent’, paid by the LA investigator.
The boss, arrived in our kitchen two weeks ago, timed not to coincide with the care workers, for fear of a crowd.
Her first, and only previous visit, had been three months earlier, with the care agency boss, after, I’d refused to allow, the targeting, spying, inadequate, ‘education’ package to continue.
Little had happened at that meeting.
A change of agency staff, and, her, reassuring me, Issy’s ‘best interests’, were decided by the court, not the social services.
Yeah, in our speedy, clogged up courts, whose wishes/evidence, are they going to rubber stamp, mine, and Issy’s, or, the social services ?
On her second visit to our kitchen, about our complaints, she entered with a big grin, jollily asking,
‘How are things going?‘
How do you answer that?
Surely she must, or, should know.
And wasn’t this about our complaints?
Questions, all too impolite, and, futile to ask.
She then explained, it was her, not our social workers, as the GP had stated in his letter, who had been concerned about my cough.
Not explaining, why this mattered, nor why the GP said it was her,
or, how she was able to report a cough, she’d never heard, and, conclude it was now affecting my general health.
She reminded me, though I didn’t recall telling her, ( had she seen GP note?), that my husband, had in fact taken me to the GP.
Inference being, I had been so ill, I was forced to go.
But, did not explain, how my cough, was relevant, to this last GP’s appointment a year ago, due to recurring post viral fatigue.
She informed us, our GP had asked her about Issy’s care plan.
And, she had told him, it was for her to remain at home, as we wanted.
No mention of Issy wanting it so badly she had refused to leave the house for five months..
Then, why hadn’t the GP told me that, as he said he would in his letter.
More crucially, why is our GP, meeting with our social workers, and their boss, without our knowledge, or consent,to discuss, our daughters future care, and, my health ?
She then informed us, as we already knew, no school would have Issy, but gave no reason ie introduction of ECHS.
That, SEN statements had been replaced, by rip off , ad hoc, skills for ‘independent’ living packages, at 16.
Issy would have loved to go to school every day, and, had loved her 3 visits, to the specialist day school, she should now be attending, and, would have attended in 2007, had the National Autistic Society, not been so greedy.
And, the LA had not colluded, by enforcing a 52 week education placement, on the excuse, of Issy’s behaviour, which was due to a faecal impaction.
I assumed, that was our complaints dealt with, although they, or, indeed the reason for her visit, were not mentioned, other than the ‘cough’.
She then asked, why I hadn’t gone to Wimbledon.
Forcing me to point out the obvious, again already made known to the SS.
The effect on Issy, of everyone disappearing, for the first time ever, for as long as three nights.
And some 10 different itinerant shifted workers, who didn’t know what needed to be done.
At a time, when she was ill, not eating, and, refusing to go out.
She made no comment.
I added, I was also worried, that Issy’s behaviour might escalate, with strangers, one she had never met, and, result in her removal, and medication.
She looked surprised, and remarked,
‘But Isabel’s behaviour isn’t that severe’.
( fishing ?)
As, why, was she paying two workers, at a cost of £50 per hour, to sit in our kitchen ?
This lead to Issy’s continuing illness.
And, although, I found it almost impossible, I was forced to go through her symptoms again, for the umpteenth time.
With as always no point.
Her reaction, was patronising, and,implied Munchausen/Fabricated Illness Disorder.
’If you think Issy has appendicitis, you are bound to be worried ‘.
She offered to approach the GP about it.
We’d already had 7 GP visits, without success.
And, I was also aware, a GP had already discussed Issy’s health with this lady, behind my back.
I asked what difference, this could possibly make.
She did not reply.
I had previously sought, and, eventually managed to get, social services to write to our GP, when I had found it impossible, to obtain a faecal impaction scan.
This had been spun, the core assessment to,
‘At times they can present as reluctant to access services via the GP or Dentists as they appear of the view that Social Care should take care of these matters’.
Therefore, worried that ‘yes’, supported this, but ‘no’ was evidence of neglect, I agreed to the lady’s help, should the symptoms reoccur.
The most important question, as to why Isabel had refused to leave the house since April, after an apparent push by her education package, to remove her to ’ independent’ living, was not discussed.
Yet, it was one of the complaints, she had come to discuss.
So I raised it.
The Boss said, she could get a ‘lady’, to try to find out why, and,get Issy out.
We all knew why but it was not being acknowledged.
When some 10 workers, a social worker, and, assistant teacher had failed.
And why, had this miracle worker, not been sent in months ago? .
We had already completed Issy’s adult social services assessment, but, I assumed, the court would also require a psychologist’s report, to assess her MCA ‘incapacity’, and, our mental disorders.
Maybe that was the lady’s real role?
How would I ever know?
Difficult, a refusal was failing to cooperate, and not trying to get Issy out, would not be, in her ‘best interests’, so after an initial refusal, I felt forced to agree to this lady’s visit.
But what did all this have to do with our complaints ??
On one of Issy’s several appearances in the kitchen to ask for juice.
The Boss cheerily exclaimed,
‘She likes being at home, having her Mummy do everything for her.’
A loaded, inflammatory, and inappropriate comment, in light of Issy’s autism.
The previous targeting of me, and her ‘skills’ training.
Finding it impossible to maintain civility, I retorted,
‘Please, don’t, start Mummy bashing’.
The Boss looked surprised,
And, in a concerned, counsellor tone, replied,
‘She hadn’t meant to upset me’.
Mother’s mental instability ?
Inexplicably, she spent her last 10 minutes, asking about our other daughter’s activities and future, and left.
Possible welfare issues?
As usual, we were none the wiser for her visit.