Social Workers all seem to know what this is but deny hotly they practice it, well we shall see if thats the case, I would welcome feedback on this very matter.

A social worker wrote in a report that my child suffers "harsh, excessive and cruel punishments" and that entailed "being sent to bed, put in the naughty corner, denied watching cartoons on Sky and sent to bed with no tea...", this was in context of my child admitting these things happend when she was admittedly "naughty".

Now to most parent's the above would be viewed as rather "lenient" punishments and perhaps too soft but we all have our own methods of parenting and I felt that my child had suffered much in her life and I made sure she was a part of breaking the cycle of violence she had seen.

Now the first passage I would feel proud of that I can and will use non-corporal punishment's yet in the social workers report it was seen as an indication of evil abuse and she poured scorn over my parenting skills.

Why is this? Well it's simple, social workers use the "good enough" principle to move the goalposts to their favour.

Another casepoint, this applies to myself and a friend in similar dilemma, we both have small flats, laminated floors, decent home cinema, well you get the picture, sometimes a bit untidy due to respective children yet clean and genreally well kept.

Is that good enough you think?

Not on your life it isn't for social services have a way and means of making the fresh milk sour, the paint peeling, the floors dirty, washing up filling the sink etc, all they have to do is say this is the case. By the time you read about it in the reports they calmly say, "well, he painted the walls and of course he has done the washing up becase he knows we are checking". We both have suffered this to a great extent.

The "good enough" principle is always seen as the situation where your criteria is never "good enough", a toy on the floor equates to a tip of a property, a cup on the sides equates to stacks of washing up and it is a underhand and hard to prove practice indeed.

It is of no wonder that people feel frustrated when they find they cannot fulfil goals set for them, or they attain the goals to find the goalposts have moved yet again.

Of course there's "good enough" parenting as seen above, it would not have mattered one bit if I had not even punished the child and done nothing, or that I had used my legal right to physically chastise her, either way it is never good enough because they will always move that minimum level one notch further than your level of attainment.

One arguement given by a Cornwall social worker in answer to a parent smacking his child was that he didn't do it "hard enough" and then realised the mistake and blamed it onto using physical punishment.

It is such tools of the trade that lead to their highly erroneous assessments and reports, in depicting your property, the social worker could be an anal retentive personalilty who would be highly critical of an operating theatres level of cleanliness, let alone your neat and tidy place. There is no allowance for children making a mess is there either, it's all grist to the mill as far as they are concerned, "Toys over the floor, not good enough, child out of control, no boundaries, poor parenting"

The govt must publish safety guidelines on these issues, define just what is acceptable and what is not, this would have a good effect on the parents as they can see that as a good general guideline in upbringing children and maybe give them ideas but the major point is to prevent social workers creating false elements in reports by "hyping" up perfectly innocent everyday things.

Also a man's perspective of whats tidy and whats not is totally diferrent to a womans who sees the corners and under the sofa that us men tend to forget, society ingrains housework into our women and I would admit they are better at it than I but I try my best.

A point in my own case to be noticed about my property which has had myself and the legal team in stitches of laughter at the varying level of advice, last year when I moved into the property, it was in poor condition and being disabled it takes me a while to get going, the social wroker of that time reported to the conference that it was kept clean and tidy and she thought it a nice flat. This was in plain view of the previous tenants body shaped blood stain and faecal voiding on the floor where he had died previsouly and I was battling the DSS for floorcoverings.

When the new one came in he was looking for ammunition and could not find anything so he bided his time....

The Guardian visited and becasue I had new-born kittens I had to remove the flea collar from the mother as it was slowly poinsoning the babies and of course her being flat bound meant she had to use the litter tray provided. The guardian sat there and my cat went and used the litter tray and my god did it pong! add to that the fact a flea bit her didn't help anything and it was reflected in her statement that there was a minor hygiene problem being rectified.

Advantage social services! The social worker came back and ranted on about the state of the place, for many many weeks inquired if I had a vacuum cleaner, demanded to be shown the whole flat and got nasty when I stopped him looking in my personal bedroom. I took photographs right after he left of the floor, the front room, kitchen bathroom etc and still he raved on the state of the place, all because he took his opening from the guardian.

I now have a social work assistant, who thinks the place is spotless, wonders how i keep it so clean and nice, likes the decor and the flooring etc.

And that is the good enough principle

RPSSUK