Two Birmingham men are banned from 'approaching' girls

[Lurdan]

That's a tricky question, and not one with a straightforward answer. But you yourself provide a clue as to how that balance is skewed by council cuts, incompetence and ulterior motives.

We also live in a patriarchal society and girls also suffer from the way that plays out in Court (or more commonly doesn't play out in Court).

These are some of the most difficult kinds of protection cases. But sexual exploitation of children and youths in the care system is a significant problem. Made no easier by the fact that many of the victims don't recognise or accept that they are being exploited and abused.

In my opinion in this area there are no options which don't involve some bad outcomes, and it's a matter of minimising them, not of hoping to eliminate them.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

In my opinion in this area there are no options which don't involve some bad outcomes, and it's a matter of minimising them, not of hoping to eliminate them.

I agree. I don't pretend to have easy answers. Wish I did. But Birmingham council is badly failing those in their care and due to cuts that failure is likely to get far worse. This girl went awol over 100 times, I believe. Things had been going wrong for her long before she met these men. That's the story underneath this story.

 

[bluescreen]

Actually, we don't know when she met these men. They said they hadn't met her before but one of them already had her number on his mobile. That's the trouble with proceedings like these: no legal aid for proper representation. I haven't seen a transcript so don't know what other evidence was brought. But the judge decided on the balance of probabilities that these men were up to no good and likely to get up to no good again; as well as girls under 18 in general, part of the order related specifically to this girl.

 

[Nancy_Winks]

I agree. I don't pretend to have easy answers. Wish I did. But Birmingham council is badly failing those in their care and due to cuts that failure is likely to get far worse. This girl went awol over 100 times, I believe. Things had been going wrong for her long before she met these men. That's the story underneath this story.

That story is always present tho.

Everyone knows how this one goes don't they. I think this is the perfect response. Stand up and say these men hang out with a 17 year old girl from care with her drinking vodka in their car and hotel room. Maybe not a crime but we all know, everyone KNOWS what the crack is here. Fuck em they need to bear the reprecussions.

Mohammed Anjam (31), Omar Ahmed (27), Mohammed Javed (34), Alam Shah (37), Sajid Hussain (40) and Naseem Khan (29) shame on you.

 

[Sprocket.]

Birmingham Council is reacting to a situation brought about by bad management decisions at local level and appalling decisions from Whitehall. As in every other nook and cranny in this country the only skill that is required is the ability to point fingers and retreat into a blame storm. We, ultimately are responsible because we let this slipshod shower in Rotherham, Rochdale, Birmingham and everywhere else allow the abuse of children to flourish.
Is this latest action by Birmingham Council tantamount to releasing the vigilantes. Pitchforks and flaming torches available in reception.

 

[toggle]

That story is always present tho.

Everyone knows how this one goes don't they. I think this is the perfect response. Stand up and say these men hang out with a 17 year old girl from care with her drinking vodka in their car and hotel room. Maybe not a crime but we all know, everyone KNOWS what the crack is here. Fuck em they need to bear the reprecussions.

Mohammed Anjam (31), Omar Ahmed (27), Mohammed Javed (34), Alam Shah (37), Sajid Hussain (40) and Naseem Khan (29) shame on you.

IMO, it's only the perfect response if you accept that you can't do better.and maybee that is a practical issue, considering the shitstorm and poor conviction rates that surround sex crimes, but i want us to be living in a place where this is the minimum response, not the best one


the whole thing screams scapegoats, stable doors and a triumph of appearing to do something before the shitstorm hits their doorstep

 

[Nancy_Winks]

True all that toggle

But if that's all they currently have on them then it should still be said loud and clear.

 

[bluescreen]

Some of this reminds me of 'Winston Smith' and his 2009 blog entry about children in care, when he explains how easy it is for girls to abscond and how difficult it is to stop them. His attitude to his clients is unsympathetic and dismissive and one wonders why he ended up doing this job in the first place. He's straight out of the Daily Mail. Perhaps people on here with actual experience of the situation can provide an overdue corrective?

What really baffled me was the ease and regularity of their absconding. After all there are always three members of staff and sometimes four in the house twenty four seven, so I wondered why they didn’t put a stop to this. I asked Sarah, the senior support worker, how was it they could run away from the home with no one stopping them.

“Sarah, I’m just curious, do the staff fail to notice that these young girls are leaving the home?"

“Well, sometimes they just run off without telling us but often they tell us they are going out and don’t know when they will be back” answered Sarah.

“Why don’t you stop them? After all they are supposedly in care and they are only fourteen and very vulnerable. God knows what could happen to either of them and what they could get up to. It’s simply not right to allow them to wander around for days on end with no clue as to where they are.”

“Look I agree the whole system is mad but the simple fact is that we are not allowed to touch them so we cannot grab them and pull them into the house. That could be construed as assault and we could get in trouble. We do try to encourage them not to abscond.”

“Does that ever work” I ask?

“Sometimes, but rarely. If they want to go there’s nothing we can do to stop them.”
What kind of a care system is this that believes it is better to allow fourteen year old girls wander about for days on end without supervision rather than grab them by the scruff of the neck and command them back in their home where they are properly supervised?

“Do they usually stay away for long?” I asked.

“Sometimes just overnight but often for a couple of nights at a time sometimes longer though. Once they were away for four nights. What happens is that they get fed up and run out of money or places to stay and will telephone us and ask for a lift back to the home. This can often be at three or four in the morning and we have to get up out of bed and drive and collect them as we have a duty of care towards them.”

Is this care or rather a government funded taxi service for juvenile delinquents?

http://winstonsmith33.blogspot.co.uk/2009/02/children-in-care-well-ive-spent-weekend.html

 

[purenarcotic]

Staff in care homes cannot force young people to stay in the house; they can't stand in front of the door or anything as a parent might so young people are free to walk out the door. Quite obviously though, walking out of the door is not then an excuse for people to abuse these young people.

 

[bluescreen]

So what more should Birmingham Council be doing to protect its vulnerable children? Detectives?

 

[redsquirrel]

the whole thing screams scapegoats, stable doors and a triumph of appearing to do something before the shitstorm hits their doorstep

Precisely, this doesn't show that BCC care about this issue, but rather the opposite.

If they cared they'd be investing in social services rather than getting rid of 6000 workers. Taking out this legal action allows them to get some press headlines about how much they are doing to combat grooming while cutting jobs that will almost certainly mean that other young kids will be made more vulnerable.

 

[likesfish]

Tbf to winston he seemed to be in an impossible place.
" your responsible for these kids and you have a duty of care"
But you cant restrain or raise your voice or have sanction on their behaviour at all
Responsability without any power leads to burn out quickly.

 

[andysays]

Staff in care homes cannot force young people to stay in the house; they can't stand in front of the door or anything as a parent might so young people are free to walk out the door. Quite obviously though, walking out of the door is not then an excuse for people to abuse these young people.

So what can or should staff in care homes do to protect vulnerable young people for whom they have a duty of care?

Or rather, how should the structure of care homes be changed to enable them to do this, other than by proper funding which is clearly desirable, but appears not to be sufficient in itself? I'm not seeking to put the responsibility on individual care workers, because there's far more to it than that.

If the young person in this case has "gone missing" more than 100 times (can no longer find the original ref to this) then they, and presumably others, will continue to be vulnerable to exploitation, and it's clearly impossible to put banning orders on all who might take advantage of them (even if we accept that banning orders on an individual for whom there's insufficient evidence to bring a criminal prosecution are a good thing).

 

[8ball]

Responsability without any power leads to burn out quickly.

True, the only way to deal with this would be to properly professionalise the care service and give staff proper powers of discretionary measures when it comes to protecting children. That would be really expensive.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Staff in care homes cannot force young people to stay in the house; they can't stand in front of the door or anything as a parent might so young people are free to walk out the door. Quite obviously though, walking out of the door is not then an excuse for people to abuse these young people.

Good luck to a parent trying to stop a determined 17-year-old walking out the door.

 

[likesfish]

The danish system appears to work but its small homes staffed by degree level phd possbile carers who are well paid professionilsed and expected to make a real committment to the children in there charge who are placed there in long term set ups.
But thats very very expensive.

 

[8ball]

Good luck to a parent trying to stop a determined 17-year-old walking out the door.

I think you're quite aware that the dynamics are somewhat different.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I think you're quite aware that the dynamics are somewhat different.

Yes and no. Wherever they are living, 17-year-olds are at the latter end of their transition from childhood to adulthood.

 

[nino_savatte]

The danish system appears to work but its small homes staffed by degree level phd possbile carers

" Degree level phd"? Qu'est-ce que ça?

 

[likesfish]

" Degree level phd"? Qu'est-ce que ça?

Professional with ongoing professional qualifications and paid accordingly i.e expensive

 

[8ball]

Yes and no. Wherever they are living, 17-year-olds are at the latter end of their transition from childhood to adulthood.

Parents have a lot more tools in their armoury for all sorts of reasons. Plus, in any half-way healthy family if the kid walks out after a barney the parents will generally know where they've probably gone and whether they are safe.

 

[nino_savatte]

Professional with ongoing professional qualifications and paid accordingly i.e expensive

That still doesn't make sense. There are three degrees; a PhD is one of them.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Parents have a lot more tools in their armoury for all sorts of reasons. Plus, in any half-way healthy family if the kid walks out after a barney the parents will generally know where they've probably gone and whether they are safe.

My sister ran away aged 16. We didn't hear from her for 6 months. From the outside, our family probably looked 'half-way healthy'.

 

[likesfish]

That still doesn't make sense. There are three degrees; a PhD is one of them.

Sorry just meant they were expeected to have degrees to start with and were encourged to go on and get further qualifiactions and treated as highly skilled and paid professionals

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Sorry just meant they were expeected to have degrees to start with and were encourged to go on and get further qualifiactions and treated as highly skilled and paid professionals

This is key to all good systems. And you're right, it's expensive for a society. However, not doing it is more expensive.

 

[Pickman's model]

That still doesn't make sense. There are three degrees; a PhD is one of them.

ba / bsc; ma / msc; mres; mphil; phd - there's at least 5

and that's before you even start on foundation degrees...

 

[8ball]

That still doesn't make sense. There are three degrees; a PhD is one of them.

I'd say Diana Ross might be one of the others but then I always get them mixed up with The Supremes.

 

[8ball]

My sister ran away aged 16. We didn't hear from her for 6 months. From the outside, our family probably looked 'half-way healthy'.

Didn't hear as in no idea where she was? Where was she?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Didn't hear as in no idea where she was? Where was she?

In Italy. Living with an older man.

And no, no idea where she was.

 

[8ball]

In Italy. Living with an older man.

And no, no idea where she was.