Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDon
It's not enough though, not by any stretch of the imagination.
|
It's more than enough!
Quote:
|
These centres aren't used for normal parents, they're used for parents with disibilities that can effect how they look after their children, especially those with severe learning difficulties. You cannot tell from a young childs demeanor how good their parents are at looking after them. If you could then Baby P would never have happened.
|
I know what an "assessment centre" is. Baby P was a whole different thing. His mother did not have learning difficulties and they were not in an assessment centre. And a social worker ought to be able to tell enough about a child's parents' parenting skills by observing that child's demeanor and how he or she interacts with his or her parents
openly.
Quote:
|
You also have to be aware that these centres actually give the parents a chance to keep their children. In many cases if they couldn't be assessed like this then their child would be taken away from them and taken into care at birth.
|
If parents really do need the kind of help that is offered by these centres, I'd question whether they are ever going to be fit parents. But if this is not just a hopeless gimmick, we'll see the assessment centres' success rates. I wsh them every success.
Quote:
|
It wasn't THEIR bedroom, it was a bedroom at the assessment centre. One that in many cases is probably also used for young babies in cots in the same room as the parents. It wasn't a case of "we'll put a camera in here to see how well they sleep" it was a case of them being put in a room that happened to have a camera in there, due to what the room is used for.
|
It was THEIR bedroom for the duration of their stay, and and their child slept separately in a nursery. The intention might well be good, but what are social workers? Voyeurs? The cameras should never have been switched on.