Social worker ‘exaggerated’ threats from father

children in care

A “complacent” county council’s failure to support a newly qualified social worker contributed to his invention of threats by a parent, a family court judge has concluded.

The inexperienced social worker, ‘LM’, had been involved in the preparation of paperwork relating to the children of a man called ‘CW’, who have since been taken into the care system.

A few weeks before the hearing was scheduled to take place, the “agitated” social worker called the Police, following rumours that the father had been trying to find his address online. He claimed that his own partner had unwittingly exchanged emails with CW’s partner regarding the possibility of her buying baby clothes from them and that she had gone to say that the father would be coming to their home to collect the clothes.

It later emerged that this call was “factually inaccurate” and “at other times exaggerated in its account of the incident to which it refers”.

Despite his exaggerations, the precise nature of which was not specified in the judgement, the truth-stretching social worker received a largely sympathetic response from District Judge Howell at a family court hearing in Bristol. Noting that LM had confided in his manager not long before the call to that he felt intimidated by the father, the Judge took issue with the council’s response to this admission, declaring:

“I am gravely concerned about how this young and inexperienced social worker was left in the position of potentially misleading the court in this way. I have had no evidence as to the supervision he received.”

He accepted that LM had been panicking and not thinking clearly and may have believed there was a a genuine threat to his family, continued Judge Howell.

“[Social workers] like LM must live in constant fear of retaliation from disgruntled and angry parents into whose lives they have intervened and that fear must have been magnified by potential involvement of his young family.”

But some of the blame for the social worker’s “unprofessional” behaviour lay with the council, the Judge insisted.

It was“surprising that  a procedure had not  been put  in place when first  he reported his concerns to anticipate the state he might be in if he perceived a threat  in  his own home, and which would  have offered  him support  and guidance.”

Read the recently published ruling here.

Photo by TMAB2003 via Flickr under a Creative Commons licence

Stowe Family Law Web Team

View more from this author

5 comments

Brian - April 20, 2017 at 9:47pm

Fire him and prosecute, take him out a job where he deals with vulnerable people who need professionals with integrity and never let him work in social work again.. No moral compass. Get Rid and review case management supervision and probation period training/supervision.

drmanhattan62 - April 21, 2017 at 7:29pm

yes, i believe any S/worker caught telling lies or falsifying case files should be barred for life from ever working in any area of child protection again.
these people are Scum and need to be treated as such.

drmanhattan62 - April 20, 2017 at 10:00pm

sounds more like a cover up of another social worker breaking rules and deliberately trying to damage the parents. its widespread throughout the UK.

John Smith - April 20, 2017 at 10:40pm

Its time we had a computersised check list and the computer needs evidence. Actual factual evidence so that no-one can just point fingers and make things up about parents. We also need indpendent social workers and expert witnesses – not allowed ever have worked for or to work for the state –

It should be mandatory for someone like Karen Woodall who understands alienation/domestic abuse/stalking/psychopaths/sociopaths etc to go through files before it is allowed to go to court.

drmanhattan62 - April 21, 2017 at 7:34pm

This is how LAs have been so successful at winning in the family courts.
no watchdog, no accountability, just free to play God with human lives and their entire futures.

Leave a comment