This is "jackboot justice" in its rawest, dirtiest form and its all done in the interest of the children.

What a cop out, is persecuting a childs parent in their interest? We think NOT!

Much of this I have experienced personally so is not a flight of the imagination... other's too could tell of similar circumstances but who is listening?

We are...

I expect some serious "feedback" on this as its pretty brutal in its delivery but to cite many authorities in the UK, whats sauce for the goose....

I hope to show here, what really goes on, as said above, this isn't propoganda fuelled by bitterness against a SSD but real, harsh truth of the worst kind of behaviour meted out on our fellow citizens.

It seems to be rationalised and made OK because its in the interest of the child in question but if something is flawed in the first place then isnt the rationalisation flawed too, it isn't correct in any shape that a system has developed which may protect the children but from what? Imagined causes because some social workers are so used to seeing abuse everywhere they cannot think independantly anymore?

These practices and these workers are a menace and a danger to children and society, perhaps the RPSSUK should set up a child protection register of their own with the category of Risk from Social Services.

Well, here's what some of them do....

Lying: A good one to start with, social worker's lie habitually in many department's, it is wondered if they can determine the truth anymore in the amount of lies that spout forth, we are not talking about a white lie in being late for an appointment but active and serious activity designed to mislead and deceive the recipients of the lie.

Yes social workers LIE, they claim the ends justify the means, if it means they can get away with trickery to get you to 'fess up or if their case is looking a bit dodgy and needs a bit of reinforcement then they will unhesitantly tell the most disgraceful lies

Failure to acknowledge your views: Possible the most common theme in all the dealings with Social Services, if your view is at variance with theirs, how many social workers take this on board, not many from my experiences becasue they are taught that "anyone who refuses a social worker is to be considered and treated as a deviant person" so say no and watch them change, they see themselves as higher beings that cannot be refused which is ridiculous, social workers are no higher than anyone else and deviancy is not a label to be used if you are exercising free will.

So the question is what happens if your view differ's, absolutely nothing in most cases, their view is the one that counts, all those years you have looked after the children, well don't worry because social services know better even though they have met you twice maybe, they always know better and will make sure that this is rammed down your's and other's throats until you accept this.

Blackmail: Well, apperently it isn't blackmail as we know it as its unpunishable due to the nature of a local authority, Blackmail as I was told by a policeman is only prosecuteable if the person doing so gains a conceivable reward using menaces, a local authority cannot be seen to gain any material award as its a LA! Yet everyday departments use this ploy to gain their goals and at the expense of terrorising its victims

Last year I was forced to sign an "agreement" under duress, if I didn't sign it then they would start care proceedings, their words were "sign or we will take your child", now my mind of blackmail is that if someone who appears capable of ably carrying out a threat in menaces uses that threat to force you to do something which normally you would not agree with or is against your will in principles, then that is blackmail, other events that come under the same banner is the good old Emergency Powers Warrant trick, a social worker who wants you to do something that you may have refused will have either a EPW application or someone elses EPW on a clipboard stating to you that if you do not comply then off they go with your child.

Other incidents include: "Do this or we will make it hard in court...","I'm telling you now that we will force you...","If you don't co-operate then I will be forced to tell the court of your refusal in this...", "Don't do that or you will never get your child off the register.."

Deception: Different to the lies thing but its subtle and quite a scary thing to happen to oneself, social services use the system of "deception by ommission" as a good starter, they feed other agencies what they feel they should see, not everything that is there, social services will claim they are tyring to save time but they are offering a preformatted opinion to people who would not be able to make an informed choice outside of this information. Coupled with a few embellishments and locked in the professionals meetings, who knows what else is said, one bloke who had access to his files found that a social worker had told the meetings that this man had "tried it on with her", "put his hand up her skirt" but felt impelled to report this off the record as she felt sorry for him....! Immediate sympathy vote, immediate damnation of the man in question, psychological warfare in reality. And of course the assumption straight away that any man capable of assaulting sexually a social worker is capable of assaulting his child QED.

They will portray a picture of their choosing, whether its to your advantage or not and whether its truthful or not, social services are past masters in the game of lies and deception and it still is in the interest of the child. On the front page is a reference to a Christine Purcell, this is a stark reminder of what they are capable of and she got caught, how many undetected....?

Amateur Diagnosis: A very serious criminal offence that goes undetected and unpunished, a worker can and will label you as mentally ill when only a GP, Psychiatrist or other Mental Health specialist can do so, Psychiatric Nurses are not able to diagnose so why can a social worker do so? It is a ploy to discredit you and make you unreliable, it explains your behaviour of complaints and resistance and in some cases can lead to hospitalisation and worse

First signs of this are usually "We have concerns for XXXX's mental health" or in some cases "We believe XXXX to be mentally ill", a double whammy that preconcieves virtually anyone that reads this but social workers and even approved ones are not licensed to diagnose nor are they medically qualified to do so either, it is an imprisonable offence for someone to attempt to diagnose a medical or mental condition whilst not being registered as a Doctor of medicine

Criminalisation: Yes, they can criminalise you too, people on benefits are at serious risk mostly through this and its a dirty and sdisgusting trick too, our standards of living have improved quite considerably over the last twenty years and benefit recipients have better quality homes than yesteryear, lets say for instance a £100 a week income family has a nice TV, a PS2 and a good car, all bought on credit and they are just meeting the payments, well its time for a call to the benefit agency, XXXX is plainly working and claiming because they have so much expensive stuff, who are the DWP going to believe? At the start of this year I swapped a £100 Renault 19 for a Jaguar XJ40, this was done through eBay and recorded as such, no money passed hands and the car was taxed and Mot'd and cost £200 a year to insure, yes it was juicy but I didn't travel too much and i loved the car to bits. One phone call to the DWP (I am on long term sickness) and I was hauled in, it took a lot of convincing to prove that I was not earning money elsewhere and it was slipped out that a social services person had made the call, it was touch and go whether I would have faced charges on having a car like my Jag and obvisouly a social worker felt it was a car above my station.

Anyone who claims any money of any kind from social services should always sign a receipt, if its a regular amount then watch out as sooner or later if you are at war with your department then this will be used against you, suddenly you have been labeled a thief (yes the word used) as the social worker will claim you are defrauding the costs, dirty dirty trick which is hard to escape

Other areas of criminalisation are involved when a SSD utilises the police forces help, on the front page there is a link to a site in Dorset where the police have been used as a weapon against families, there are always police officers sympathetic to social services cause and sometimes they get roped in to do the dirty work for a social worker, there have also been incidents where social workers have asked the police to cover up for them and it only comes out later on there has been any connivance.

Interrogations of a Minor: The iron fist inside a velvet glove... Your child is at risk from a goldmining social worker, you are at risk equally. Too many cases later on are seen to contain some very shady practice and most times a social workers case hinges on a childs transgression, so how do they make a child talk? Simple, in a vein seen in war films portraying the Gestapo, your child is given the softly softly approach at first, there is no preformatted questions or theme, closed or leading questions are not "allowed" but who is there to witness this because you are denied the right to ne there, children tell their parents of being "pestered", "confused", "shouted at", "talked to by two different people at the same time", most times the child is apprehensive, ill at ease and still eager to please the adults around them, they are not equipped to deal with such attacks and invariably agree to what is being asked.

If that fails and it rarely does, the social worker will claim you have coerced the child, that you have silenced them or have evoked their loyalty against the social worker, this sort of rubbish is used quite a lot and again is purely designed to preconceive any agencies and courts to their point of view

Then there's the "we can help" ploy, this is used to try and trick a child into agreeing what the social worker wants, if a social portrays a picture of you the parent being "mentally ill" and in need of help, how can the child refuse to agree? If a social worker uses the statement "Its alright, we know what goes on, we know that XXXX does this to you, do you love XXXX? Do you want to help?" How is a child able to respond to that series of hidden questions, then later on the social worker will refer to this and say "well you know when you said XXXX does tis to you....", it doesn't take a genius to work out the next step.

False Memory Implantation: The hardest of all of this to escape and it is a fledgling school of thought that is being investigated in the US, in a study of a section of children, many kids were told of a time when they broke a leg but obvisouly forgotten the incident, within a couple of weeks and in some cases sooner, these children had very real and vivid memories of breaking their legs even though they had not. This is false memory and is inherent in children reliant on adults telling them what has happened to them, it becomes an unshakeable belief and is also a tactic used by single parents who wish to keep the ansent parent away.

Now a social worker using the closed and leading series of statements is actively reinforcing a fantasy into memory so in time a child will believe they have been abused and invent subconsciously full and vivid memories of this incident happening, if a social worker implants this into a child that their parent has been abusing them, then in time there will be an unshakeable belief and the social worker has a real case to deal with.

There are more that is being done but I think the above will serve as a pointer to what goes on, if any team manager, line manager or senior manager of a wroker knows these practices goes on then they are equally guilty of some very serious crimes against a person, too many iffy cases go through and its wholly on this sort of stuff that its made up from, this is why we are fighting for evidence based social work with clear rules not guidelines and independance of monitoring, the first port of call would be to make LA's use JI procedure in all social work assessments, how many would try some of the dirty tricks with the cameras and a copper beside them?

RPSSUK