In January 2011, Issy was taken to her local GP, about her periods.
We weren’t informed she was going.
She was kept waiting in the GP’s reception for over 30 minutes.
That evening, NAS rang us to inform us there had been an incident.
Issy had tried to leave the surgery, and ‘back up’ had been summoned, and Issy retrained.
Issy returned home three days later, with bruises, all over her body.
Horrified, we asked how she got them, but, received no explanation.
On a visit to her NAS home,my husband noticed a copy of the body map, completed the same day, as the incident.
He got a copy of it.
It was kept in a separate incident book.
Yet, an OFSTED report had recommended, it not be kept separately.
It recorded 48 bruises.
But, there had been no paediatric assessment, or, any medical examination.
A meeting was not held until 10 th May 2011.
This was between Isabel’s independent reviewing officer, safe guarding services Barnsley, social worker, head master and ourselves.
Notes from this meeting state;
‘They (parents) had enjoyed a really good Christmas holiday with her (Isabel). However on her return to Robert Ogden things had been very concerning. On 11 January Isabel had attempted to abscond from the GP surgery appointment and they strongly felt that the GP should have been asked to visit her at Clayton Croft in the light of her difficulties with strange environments. When she returned home for the following weekend a total of 48 bruises had been documented on a body map. There was no discussion of these bruises at the looked after review meeting held the same day. The Easter holiday had been spent in Ireland and Isabel had been fine within the apartment but had tried to abscond when in town. There had been two incidents when she had exhibited signs of distress but there had been no need to restrain her and she had no bruises during this period’.
When I asked what they meant by ‘restraint’, the NAS head teacher, said they took hold of her arms, either side, and walked her briskly.
Disturbed, by this horrific whitewash, of the infliction of 48 bruises on a vulnerable child, I pointed out, that blaming injuries on ‘self harm’, would hide, and therefore, encourage abuse.
I received silent, patronising nods.
Any bruises, received at home, would not have been regarded as ‘self-harm’.
On returning from our care.
Issy was always checked by NAS, for marks, despite no reported incidents.
If there had been any, Issy would have been made subject to a s47 Childrens Act paediatric assessment, paid for by the LA, so not independent.
Us prosecuted, our jobs lost, made social pariah’s as child abusers, and worse still, we would never again have been allowed alone with Issy.
Such was, and is, the terror of the State’s Damocles sword, that hangs over ours, and, every parent’s heads.
In stark contrast, what can, anyone, do about state abuse?
We could not go to the police.
Who could they prosecute, in the extremely unlikely event, they decided it was not ‘self harm’.
And the Care Quality Commission, and OFSTED, do not consider individual’s complaints.
No one, can or will, even acknowledge state abuse
Issy would remain in the abusers care, as she did and they could continue to claim £177,000 for 8 months residential ‘care’ tax free so £200,000, with impunity.
The notes, show the meeting recommended the following actions;
-Any use of restraint will be notified to Mr and Mrs Burns as well as to Social Care.
-Body Maps will be made available .
-Wherever possible medical appointments will be arranged at Clayton Croft
-The referral to CAMHS to be progressed
None of these actions were ever taken, or implemented.
A follow up strategy meeting was set for 28 th June 2011, as far as I am aware, it did not take place.
On Isabel’s return home in 2013, we complained about NAS’s abuse of Issy .
Her now different social worker, attended the follow up meeting, which should have been held in June 2011, in May 2013, we were not invited.
She fed back via telephone, that the meeting had concluded that all Issy’s 48 bruises, were self-harm.
And, this is now accepted, as the truth by the LA, and, documented.
And it was mentioned by her Adult Social Worker in her 2015 continuing healthcare funding assessment application that Issy had seriously self harm.
This assessment can and will, increase the amount of money her care provider, can claim and the drugs they can use.
And, exonerate them from future liability for her injuries, which can be blamed on self harm.
Ofsted’s report for Robert Ogden 2010-11, was ‘outstanding’.
After this incident, poor Issy was a changed girl.
As her restraint had been whitewashed.
Its likely effect on Issy, poo impaction, loss of trust , and, post traumatic stress disorder, could not be considered.
And, the ever present, corporate self- preservation, kicked in.
Her risk assessment level was, no doubt, raised.
She was rarely taken out, she still echos her care worker
‘Never goin out now because of f’in you’
And when Issy, was, reluctant to get out of the NAS van.
She now, totally, refused to go into her classroom.
And spent her time, mainly in her bedroom.
And above, is a page from that File, Science 2, Making Choices, dated 2/5/12.
It states, Isabel did a cooking activity where she observed the ingredients changing texture. When the buns had cooked, staff showed Isabel the buns and explained that the runny buns had set to create a solid bun.
Such is education, costing £200,000 per annum as tax free.
She went from 12 to 7 stones, her periods stopped, and, she became poo incontinent.
But, despite frequent requests, and the recommendations of the Strategic Meeting in 2011,no GP was ever, brought to her NAS home to examine her.
Instead, Issy was fed build up drinks, and, vitamin tablets, both, exacerbate impactions.
When we contacted her independent reviewing officer, she repeatedly claimed medical care was our responsibility, even though she was registered with the NAS home’s GP, 25 miles away.
We rang this GP, but only a locum was prepared to go out, and, she never did.
One of our recent agency workers, had worked shifts at that time in the NAS home.
She told us Issy’s meals were put into her room via the window.
And she had been the only person, who had got her to eat a filled nachos, by taking the filling out.
In October 2012, whilst driving home for the weekend, Isabel attacked me in the back of our car.
We were forced to stop at the side, of a very busy A road, 5 miles from her NAS home.
I got out with Eleanor, and stood on the grass verge, whilst Issy wrestled with Seamus in the drivers seat.
I rang for help from her NAS home, they sent their van out, and drove behind to our house with Issy.
Despite warning of such an incident for months, we could not secure transport, so, I had videoed the struggle on my mobile.
On Monday, our social worker emailed, that the NAS workers, had noticed bruising on Isabel’s arms, and, social services were considering a s47 paediatric assessment.
NAS knew of the incident, and, the bruising, as they had driven her home, but the incident was not mentioned.
We were beside ourselves, thinking we could be prosecuted, and, cut out of Issy life, for ever.
I showed him the video. Thank God I’d taken it.
Because of it, the social services were forced to admit,the bruises were indicative of defensive action, to prevent Issy getting of the car.
And we got a van, and a harness.
The wonders of irrefutable evidence.
In November CAMHS became involved.
We met up with their psychiatrist in Issy’s NAS home, she visited Isabel in her bedroom.
We were not allowed to.
The psychiatrist looked visibly shocked on her return.
And agreed, that it would be better for Issy, if she could live at home, but this was not possible.
She prescribed antidepressants.
We were not happy with this, but relieved, it was not risperidone.
My constant pleas, that she had all the signs of a second faecal impaction were ignored.
Issy still received no physical examination.
As ever, her physical problems were ignored.
The National Autistic Society were being paid, at this time, just under £6000 per week for Isabel’s care.
Factoring in her time with us, equal to, an unbelievable £9,000, as tax free.
For which they provided minimum wage care staff, and, agency carers, to sit outside her room, attempt to wash and dress her, but not apparently to feed her.
She did not go out, or, to school.
Issy’s behaviour worsened on the antidepressants.
She became more aggressive and agitated.
Over our two weeks Christmas holiday in Ireland, she would not go out, so we thought the only thing to do, was to see if her behaviour improved without the antidepressants.
Immediately, she became less aggressive, and, we were then able to take her out in our hire car on trips to the sea, for walks and café lunches.
Isabel at Christmas in Ireland.