Sorry help again!

[Suzie, FRG Adviser]

Dear Mummyof1x

This is Suzie, online adviser at Family Rights Group. Thank you for posting again with a further question and you do not need to apologize additional question can arise and it is best to seek an answer rather than worry about something. Also, the discussion forum is for parents to support each other with their own experiences of a particular situation.

It is unfortunate that the report you should receive prior to the scheduled initial child protection conference is delayed as explained by the social worker. It is helpful to have time to read the report, and I hope you will receive it shortly.

You ask if you can request an adjournment of the conference. Yes, you can request an adjournment, but I think it is unlikely one would be agreed, I say this because of the professionals who must be brought together on the date, and it may take a significant amount of time for them all to be available for rescheduled meeting.

I note what you say regarding your invitation letter and the timescale of 3 days given for you to receive the report. The government’s statutory guidance does not provide a specific time so the 3 days must be the local authority’s own local policy. You can complain that they are not adhering to their own time limits.

In response to your post on 7th January, this was explained and I suggest that you look again at that post as there is useful information there about child protection and the conference. Here are links relating to child protection and to a FILM about to an initial child protection conference.

You will have an opportunity to speak with the person who will chair the conference either today or prior to the start of the meeting and you can point out your dissatisfaction in not receiving the report to the Chair. Explain to him/her that it means you did not have the opportunity to properly read, digest and comment on the report. I suggest that once you receive the report you make a note of anything that concerns you, especially factual errors which you can ask to be changed.

It is important you attend the conference and I hope you will have someone attending with you for support. The conference can go ahead in your absence so it is best to attend if your request for an adjournment is not granted and decisions made without you participating in the meeting.

I hope the information you have been given in the post of 7th January, and this post will be useful to you in preparing for the conference. This will give you the opportunity to raise your concerns in the meeting and anything which you need to complain about regarding the procedures can be dealt with in a complaint later if necessary.

Please telephone the advice line to speak with one of our experienced advisers if you need more advice. For ease of reference the advice line is on 0808 801 0366 and the line is open from 9.30am to 3.00pm Monday to Friday (excluding Bank Holidays).

Hope this helps.

Best wishes

Suzie

[Mummyof1x]

Hiya,
I finally received the report and I am not happy about it. There are two things that are factually incorrect. I have proof of one that is a blatant lie. Can I bring this up in the meeting and ask for it to be changed considering now they are not working until Monday and that’s when the conference is?

I’ve read the report and I’m very very confused. I thought to meet the threshold there has to be risk in MY household with my son. The report states nothing but positive from everyone even the social worker with how my son is in the house with my new partner and myself. There’s no negative at all. The only negatives are a past allegation of common assault which is going to court next month and substance misuse of cannabis which he is getting help for and is now down to 1 a day. Only at night when my child is asleep. They haven’t got any evidence the domestic abuse actually took place hence why it’s going to court for common assault. I told them I cannot say whether he did do this or not as I wasn’t there but I can say that in my house he doesn’t show this. They have now put down that I have dismissed this, minimilised it and told them it’s definitely not true and I don’t believe any of the allegations.. They are trying to say due to my partners ADHD it can affect his parenting ability. They mention my partners child being on a PLO a lot also, even though he hasn’t been allowed to see her for over a year due to mums wishes. He has to go to court for this after the PLO if they don’t take it to court themself. They have stated him having a little bit of cannabis at night time is going to affect his parenting to my child.

They have also stated he is doing a parenting assessment but they have significant concern of his parenting to my child and his daughter. I feel quite frustrated as they are literally saying there is no risk at my house but from past allegations this now makes it a risk for my child.. they are also stating if there was DV in my house I wouldn’t tell them. To assume this is crazy. They are also using the fact I didn’t sign the form at the start against me as apparently that’s not looking out for my son and putting him at risk.

It’s going to be a big fight on Monday as I strongly feel like past allegations should not affect my son when nothing has been proven and it’s not in my household.. I feel like I’ve got no hope. All my words have been twisted and they have over exaggerated everything to do with anything I have said. They have even said my partner recognises when he’s angry and he goes for a walk to calm down but this is apparently a negative because he shouldn’t get angry.. I really am frustrated with the system right now. Please correct me if I am incorrect about any of this!!
Thanks for reading again.

[Winter25]

I’m really sorry, I can hear just how upsetting and frustrating this is, and what you’re describing is sadly very common at CPC stage. I’ll go through this clearly and answer your questions, because you’re not wrong to feel confused.

First and most important: yes, you absolutely can and should raise factual inaccuracies at the conference.
A Child Protection Conference is not a trial and the report is not fixed. The chair’s job is to hear corrections and challenges. Take your proof with you, refer to it calmly, and say clearly:

“That statement is factually incorrect. I have written evidence to show this and I would like it noted and corrected in the record.”

Even if they don’t physically amend the report on the day, the chair must record your disagreement and the evidence. That matters hugely going forward.

Now, about the threshold, you are right in principle!

To place a child on a Child Protection Plan, there must be current evidence of a risk of significant harm to your child, not hypothetical or speculative risk.

What you are seeing in the report is something social workers often rely on when there is no clear evidence of harm in the child’s actual home environment. They construct what is known as a “risk by association” and “future prediction” narrative instead.

It’s important to know that this approach has been criticised and ruled unlawful by the High Court and Supreme Court when used as a substitute for evidence of current harm. The courts have been clear that professionals cannot justify intervention based purely on what might happen, past allegations alone, or risk linked to another person or household without demonstrating how that translates into present risk to the child in question.

However, social services frequently gloss over these rulings because they are not a court and operate on professional opinion and internal thresholds. That does not mean their approach is legally sound, it simply means it often goes unchallenged unless a parent pushes back.

You are absolutely entitled to challenge this in the conference and ask them to explain, clearly and specifically, what current risk exists to your son today, not what they fear could happen in the future.

That’s why the report feels contradictory here, lots of positives about your home, your child, and observations… followed by “however” paragraphs based on:

*historic allegations
*another household
*assumptions about what might happen

interpretations of your responses

That doesn’t mean you’re imagining the inconsistency, it’s genuinely there.

A few specific points you raised:

• Historic, unproven allegations
Allegations that are going to court and not proven are not facts. They can be considered, but they cannot be treated as established harm. You are entitled to say:

“These are allegations, not findings, and there has been no incident or risk in my household.”

• Cannabis use
Using cannabis once at night when the child is asleep does not automatically equal risk. If they believe it does, they should be able to explain how it impacts your child specifically, not just state it as a concern.

• ADHD affecting parenting
Having ADHD is not a safeguarding risk in itself. If they are relying on this, they must show actual impact, not assumptions. Many parents with ADHD parent safely. I have ADHD I parent fine

• Your words being reframed as ‘minimising’
This is a very common tactic. Saying “I wasn’t there and can’t confirm what happened” is not the same as minimising or dismissing. You are allowed to be factual and honest. You can correct this in the meeting.

• Using your refusal to sign the form against you
You were legally entitled not to sign it. Exercising a legal right is not evidence of being unprotective. You can say that calmly and clearly.

• “If DV happened you wouldn’t tell us”
This is assumption-based reasoning, not evidence. It’s appropriate to challenge that and ask what it’s based on.

• Anger management being reframed as negative
Recognising anger and taking space is normally seen as a protective strategy. You’re right to question how that’s suddenly being presented as a concern.

Finally, about Monday.

You’re allowed to do the follwing

*challenge inaccuracies
*ask for your objections to be minuted
*say you disagree with the recommendation
*ask what specific harm they believe exists to your son, now

You do not have to accept the narrative they’ve written.

Go in calm, factual, and child-focused. You’re correcting the record nothing more

---
For transparency: I’m not an adviser here, just a parent with lived experience sharing what I’ve learned along the way.

[Mummyof1x]

Thank you so much! I am definitely going to be confronting them Monday about a lot of this report as I feel it is very unfair. Health have come back no concerns, and same with childminder, dad, and myself. But social and police (I think) have said yes. I’d be more understanding if they said there’s negative in my house and my son wasn’t looked after but all it was is positive after positive after positive.
I will keep you updated Monday on how it goes! Praying all my fingers and toes right now!!