Sara Sharif

How often do we see it going back to a SS failure? We'll again see the same excuse blaming lack of funding when really it falls down to lack of competence or interest.

How effective do you expect someone to be if they're doing the work of 2 or 3 people?
Or the turnover of staff is so high that they never actually get a chance to catch up on the background of their cases, let alone do anything proactive?

My parents were foster carers for ~30 years from the 60's on, even back then they knew social workers who were burning out and getting overwhelmed because of case loads, and could see how that affected how well those social workers were doing.

I can't imagine it's got any better with things like the known cutbacks that affected other cases, where newly qualified staff were doing jobs that required experienced staff, some staff were dealing with the cases for 2 or 3 other people who'd left and not been replaced, and some were trying to do the job they were hired for and the job of their superiors who had left.

Oddly enough funding does actually have a major effect on how well things work.
I can't remember if you've ever mentioned what you work in, but could you continue to do your work and that of any 2 of your colleagues to a high standard for weeks or months or years without making any mistakes or missing anything? How about when one of your remaining colleagues goes on holiday or is ill and you're now dealing with a workload that is time critical and meant to be done by 4-6 people.
Most people can't even in "easy" jobs, let alone jobs that are as stressful as child safety.
There are exceptionally good reasons for minimum staffing levels.
 
Last edited:
How do you know that any failures of a SS department within a bankrupt council is simply down to incompetence rather than a lack of funding?

Hang on, this is Surrey we're talking about not Birmingham - they're not bankrupt AFAIK.

No doubt they also have budgeting constraints/issues with funding as per many councils but I don't think that is necessarily a blanket excuse for failings of this severity.
 
Hang on, this is Surrey we're talking about not Birmingham - they're not bankrupt AFAIK.

No doubt they also have budgeting constraints/issues with funding as per many councils but I don't think that is necessarily a blanket excuse for failings of this severity.

Did you see the reply to your earlier post I made?

Woking BC are boned.
 
Did you see the reply to your earlier post I made?

Woking BC are boned.

But they're not responsible for the children's services or are they? I thought it was Surrey County Council:


For example - this mentions Surrey County Council social services as being responsible here:
Surrey County Council social services closed an investigation into injuries on Sara Sharif six days after getting a referral from the 10-year-old’s school, an Old Bailey jury has been told.
The court heard that a report was entered into the school’s child protection monitoring system on 10 March last year about a staff member spotting bruises on Sara’s chin and eye, The Times reported.
 
Last edited:
But they're not responsible for the children's services or are they? I thought it was Surrey County Council:


For example - this mentions Surrey County Council social services as being responsible here:

Surrey aren't in great shape either:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-surrey-67288077

That quote seems to align with my initial thoughts though, great they raised a report that was subsequently closed surely that should have been followed up if someone thought it was important enough to raise.
 
Surrey aren't in great shape either:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-surrey-67288077

That quote seems to align with my initial thoughts though, great they raised a report that was subsequently closed surely that should have been followed up if someone thought it was important enough to raise.

Well I'm not sure (m)any local authorities are and that's potentially a factor no doubt but I don't think it's a good enough excuse here, they had specific reports of injuries and... closed the case. I guess we'll have to see what the safeguarding review has to say.
 
Social services need to be held accountable for incidents like this.

According to news the girl's case was put to the family courts by social services on a few occasions and the courts returned her to the family on these occasions.

If social services are getting the case in front of courts and the courts are returning to family, not only social services fault here.

It's a shame we now have to keep these scum fed and watered in prison for the next 40 years.
 
Capital punishment for this would be too light a sentence.

Unbelievable how so many mistakes/bad procedure all in a row had to happen to get to this point.

Glaringly obvious ones too.

The worst part is that it's not like this sort of failure hasn't happened before. Baby P for example.
 
Surrey aren't in great shape either:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-surrey-67288077

That quote seems to align with my initial thoughts though, great they raised a report that was subsequently closed surely that should have been followed up if someone thought it was important enough to raise.

Which is my point. Someone intentionally closed it. That's not lack of funds.
 
Which is my point. Someone intentionally closed it. That's not lack of funds.

That very much depends. When you have no money and are overwhelmed, what do you do? You can either pretend to have capacity for everything and its a complete mess or you can put procedures in place to basically bin cases that you can't handle and don't deem high risk.

Lets say you can handle 100 cases per month and you have 150. You might work out which 100 are the most serious and try to close ones that aren't as bad.

They are on a hiding to nothing in these cases. Constant agro from the families, constant pressure from all sides and then when something goes awfully wrong like it has here you're on the hook. Its like being in the police these days I imagine. **** pay, **** job, no time to do it properly. Pushed to do things you think are stupid and wrong and then when anything goes wrong you are hung out to dry.
 
That very much depends. When you have no money and are overwhelmed, what do you do? You can either pretend to have capacity for everything and its a complete mess or you can put procedures in place to basically bin cases that you can't handle and don't deem high risk.

Lets say you can handle 100 cases per month and you have 150. You might work out which 100 are the most serious and try to close ones that aren't as bad.

They are on a hiding to nothing in these cases. Constant agro from the families, constant pressure from all sides and then when something goes awfully wrong like it has here you're on the hook. Its like being in the police these days I imagine. **** pay, **** job, no time to do it properly. Pushed to do things you think are stupid and wrong and then when anything goes wrong you are hung out to dry.

Given what had been recorded and witnessed this was not a case to close, even if you are busy. By any measure that girl was high risk.
 
Given what had been recorded and witnessed this was not a case to close, even if you are busy. By any measure that girl was high risk.

I would suggest that a lot of cases they deal with are high risk in the grand scheme of things and very very few on them end in a childs death. I reckon there are a lot of cases out there right now that reasonably closely mirror this one that are not getting the attention they deserve from the authorities. Very sad but they need more funding and we need seem to have no money. Everything is getting worse and costs more money as it does so.

Its a feedback loop as well. The more ****** people you have in your country the more you need to intervene in their lives and their childrens lives. You don't have the funds so more and more slip through the net and the problem just grows and grows.
 
How often do we see it going back to a SS failure? We'll again see the same excuse blaming lack of funding when really it falls down to lack of competence or interest.
We have a friend who has taken custody of her grandchild because the mum is literally in a mental institute and the dad got her pregnant to get residency from what they could see, alcoholic and all round bad person. Their view on social services was extreme arrogance and you can’t really complain about them, they are accountable to nobody. The case workers are living on a different planet. When they raised the father’s alcohol consumption she was told it was a cultural thing because they are Eastern European and xenophobia was raised. Absolutely NUTS.
 
That very much depends. When you have no money and are overwhelmed, what do you do? You can either pretend to have capacity for everything and its a complete mess or you can put procedures in place to basically bin cases that you can't handle and don't deem high risk.

Lets say you can handle 100 cases per month and you have 150. You might work out which 100 are the most serious and try to close ones that aren't as bad.

They are on a hiding to nothing in these cases. Constant agro from the families, constant pressure from all sides and then when something goes awfully wrong like it has here you're on the hook. Its like being in the police these days I imagine. **** pay, **** job, no time to do it properly. Pushed to do things you think are stupid and wrong and then when anything goes wrong you are hung out to dry.

The bit in bold is key.

When anyone does this, they bake in the budget cuts. All of the cases should be investigated, and not closed unless thoroughly investigated (anything else is complicit in any suffering inflicted and you shouldn't be doing that job). If they are left open, leave them on the books, just like the NHS waiting list and scream for more money - if it doesn't come then the blame lies on who controls the budget when it inevitably leads to the death of a child.
 
How effective do you expect someone to be if they're doing the work of 2 or 3 people?
Or the turnover of staff is so high that they never actually get a chance to catch up on the background of their cases, let alone do anything proactive?

My eldest sister became a socialworker not long out of university. Think she did about 6 months before jacking it in. It was too much work, too distressing and too little support for someone fresh into the field. That was 25+ years ago
 
Back
Top Bottom