Social workers suspended for ignoring warnings about father who attacked baby
Three social workers have been suspended after ignoring warnings about a father who later attacked his baby daughter, leaving her permanently brain damaged.
Zak Whitlock, 21, was allowed to return to the family home in Wigston despite having a history of mental illness, domestic violence and drug abuse.
-
Gareth Williams, Director Children and Young people's Service, Leicestershire County Council, Mary Robertson, Chair Local Safeguarding Children Board
He was left alone with the child, known as Baby B, despite warnings he could harm her.
Whitlock smashed the seven-week-old's skull, causing irreparable damage and fracturing a rib. She was left permanently brain damaged, has a severely misshapen head and will not recover.
A serious case review published yesterday unearthed a series of blunders.
Gareth Williams, Leicestershire County Council children's services director, said: "At the heart of this case was a serious error of professional judgement made by social care professionals." The review found:
A warning from a trainee probation officer that Whitlock was a risk four months before Baby B was born was not acted on.
Documents detailing the risk Whitlock posed were lost.
Social workers were "too trusting" with Whitlock and did not question his account of events.
A crucial case conference to discuss measures to care for Baby B was not called until the child was two weeks old – and suspicious injuries had already begun to appear.
Social workers were too ready to listen to Whitlock and the girl's mother Leigh Challands' problems, ignoring the baby's needs.
For three years before Baby B's birth, social services had concerns about Whitlock's and Challands' ability to look after children.
The social workers, including one manager, are now suspended on full pay.
Mr Williams said: "I would like to say straight away how sorry I am that this child suffered such tragic injuries.
"This is a very serious case and in the light of that we have suspended three members of staff and rigorous disciplinary procedures are ongoing.
"There has been a total restructure of the children's social care service and we now have a stronger senior management team under a new assistant director."
He said the department, which has 86 social workers dealing with 350 children, had been restructured to "cut out bureaucracy".
The inquiry, by Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland Local Safeguarding Children Board, was told that by the time the baby was seven weeks old she had been admitted to hospital four times.
On one visit she had unexplained marks on her legs, while on another her ear and cheek were bruised.
The other two times were for routine health reasons.
But despite a discussion at a high-level of the risks of allowing Whitlock home, three social workers let him return.
He was jailed in February after being convicted of grievous bodily harm with intent.
A judge ordered him to serve a minimum of four-and-a-half-years before he can apply for parole.
Challands, 19, was sentenced to two years' detention after admitting cruelty by negligently leaving the baby alone with Whitlock.
Read the Mercury Opinion - Baby case sounds all too familiar
21 Comments
View all
by Barry, leicester
Friday, July 23 2010, 9:57AM
“I am totally losing the plot here since what action will be taken since the social workers involved seemed to be suspended on full pay and yet the mother seems to be charged with neglect.
My maths maybe poor but 86 social workers for 350 children does not sound a lot to me and with evidence of the parents having problems suggests that they would be acting irrationally and better observation should take place.
Still one rule for the so called professional etc.”
by Eileen, Kibworth
Thursday, July 22 2010, 11:59PM
“The crying shame of this is that this little child's life is changed forever, The most frustrating thing (seems to me admittedly from the outside) is that there were many Officrrs and members of the public who flagshipped concerns without success. There doesn't seem to be any way of highlighting (in some cases screaming) concerns without being labelled a 'having an agenda' or 'being political' - it's so easy to label people negatively and therefore dismiss their concerns. Most of us are only tryig to 'do the right thing' albeit without sticking to political party lines - as I said before - what a crying shame when tiny children suffer as a consequence.!”
by Darnthesaffetynet, London W11 1NR
Thursday, July 22 2010, 6:47PM
“betty, what would you have the public do?
Members of the public, just like me, are doing all we can.
When we are shocked into awareness that children, who we know well, are being abused we DO report it to the relevant authorities.
We don't have a choice and we can't shop around for 'reporting places'
Reporting the abuse is the start of a living, ongoing nightmare.
We are treated as if we have some sort of other agenda rather than trying to get some sort of protection for the children.
We are told that 'no one else shares our concerns' even though the evidence is everywhere and there are others who 'have seen' a few things in regard to the abuse of the children.
'The seen a few things people' who are in the main not interrviewed more less asked what they have seen.
Then when we see that the children are left in situ to sustain further violations we are told that these injuries are of 'the self-inflicted kind!
By now most of the child abuse 'reportees' will be experiencing hostility and often down right threatening behaviour, at the hands of the child protection people.
Kick up a fuss about the lack of any effective protection for the children and you will be deemed 'hostile' and interfering.
Your long term attachment to the children will count for nothing, nor will the children's attachment to you be respected or recognised.
You will be told by the SS that 'The Parents' want nothing to do with you.
(of course they don't you have 'seen' the abuse and know the extent of it)
Well betide you if you say that to the social worker though.
They will write you off as hostile and vindictive rather than you having to live the nightmare of watching the children being further mind a body twisted!
The children will be isolated into the hands of their identified abusers and by the time the brown stuff hits the fan and 'the abuse' is too obvious and can't be masked or hidden any longer the 'abusers' will have ISOLATED the children from all who know them well enough to notice the signs that the children are still being violated and who indeed the children might tell.
The now further mind and body twisted children will have learned not to trust anyone and will be rendered to suffer in silence. They will have had their bona fide attachments to 'the others' who they love and trust pro-actively deleted by the abusers and by the social services! ETC, ETC.
The now ISOLATED children, who can no longer be left to live with their abusers will then be ISOLATED into 'care' to be looked after by strangers.
There is something seriously amiss in a child protection in practice procedure which ISOLATES the children into the hands of their IDENTIFIED abusers and which is unable to protect the children more less reach outcomes for the children which are in the children's best interest.
The public can be forgiven for their perception that 'the supporting the family ethos' within child protection in practice, On A National Level, has evolved into an ethos of supporting and aiding the children's identified abusers!”
by karin, Oadby
Thursday, July 22 2010, 4:02PM
“May i just say my comments reference his appearance had NOTHING to do with his 'fashion sense', tattoos or hair style but everything to do with that 'where did I leave my brain' expression.”
by Alison Stevens, East Goscote
Thursday, July 22 2010, 2:40PM
“I made a comment yesterday about PAIN concerns about the large statistics involving forced adoption in Leicestershire,
And now we have the Social Services failings into the horrendous injuries caused too baby B,and the inquiry, which the contents of, should be made public.
In this case,safety concerns and other guidelines were not followed correctly, thus a vulnerable child is let down,and becomes another statistic, the Social Workers involved have been suspended for shoddy practice.
A warning for other profeshionals in the child protection area, follow the correct guidelines or face the consequences.
With reference to the six other case reviews, Leicestershire Social Services will soon be getting the same caption as our neighbors the West Midlands and Birmingham, NOT FIT FOR PURPOSE.”