shocking facts from childline

[michxx]

everyday 2000 calls go unanswered by childline due to lack of funding...
please follow this link and tell as many people as possible -lets bombard gordon brown with ecards!

http://campaigning.nspcc.org.uk/stopabuse

Take action now!
Helping stop child abuse is everyone's responsibility. As an NSPCC campaigner, you can effect real change for children simply by sending an email to those in power.

Join thousands of NSPCC supporters urging Government action. Send an e-card to Gordon Brown now asking him to ensure all children and young people have access to help when they need it most.

Take action - email Gordon Brown now! -

[/url]

[AussieAdam]

Well said Mich - I do a lot for the hampton trust in the UK and know only too well how much we need child line - Not every kid has the strength to come out direct face to face with an adult.

Its a sad fact that on every street in England at least one child is suffering some kind of abuse. The escalation of drug use and the breakdown in family realtionships have added to and increased the mental and physical violence inflicted on kids by people they are meant to trust and depend on

[swee]

*bump*

[Curvey_Brunette]

everyday 2000 calls go unanswered by childline due to lack of funding...

I wonder how many of these calls are from children who aren't actually abused, but are spoilt children who have been stopped from doing what they want to do or have been told "No" when they've asked for something?

Child abuse isn't a government problem, it's not a question of money, it's not a question of counselling, it's not a question of anger management for 'bad parents'

It is a question of lack of awareness.

I firmly believe in smacking, I firmly believe in discipline and I firmly believe in setting limits for children and sticking to those limits rigidly.

So many times I have seen parents say "no" when a child asks for sweets at the supermarket check-out, and yet when the child kicks and screams they get what they want.

What sort of example is this to set to a child? It says to them if they ask for something and don't get it then throwing a temper tantrum will get them what they want and this is carried through into adult life.

There are many parents who simply haven't got a clue how to handle children, they don't know what to do or how to discipline children.

It is very rare my husband and I have to resort to smacking our children, we do all that we can to avoid a smack but if they get that out of hand then they get a smack.

But they are walked through why they have been smacked, it's rationalised with them as to why they have been smacked, they're lead through the events that lead up to the smack, they're told why they have been smacked.

Just saying "Because you've been naughty" isn't enough, it's not a reason, it doesn't explain to them why their behaviour is so unacceptable to behave as they have.

This is why so many parents go wrong with their children, it is this basic and fundamental process that is missing from parenting.

All children misbehave from time to time, even my own kids. This is a fact of having children and this is why sometimes we as parents feel like tearing our hair out. The most annoying answer from a child is "I don't know" and to some that is so infuriating they 'lash out' because they're at the end of their tether with their child/children.

That sort of behaviour towards a child isn't pleasant, it's not acceptable and it doesn't do anyone any good, not the parent or the child. But is is understandable with some children.

On a few occasions I have been told that my children are exceptionally well behaved when they're in a shop. Many times I have heard the person serving me tell me of how some parents allow their children to run around the shop and basically do as they please.

Some of my professional friends have commented on how 'socially switched on' my children are, how they are able to relate to adults on an articulate conversational level way above what they should be able to for their age.

I'm nothing special, nor is my husband. We're just an ordinary couple leading an ordinary life so if we can do it then anyway can.

But leaving the 'guidance on parenting' to the government is a lazy attitude to take, it may seem easier to rely on someone else but at the same time it sends a signal to the children that if they fail then someone else will pick up the pieces.

[Jelly-Belly]

I can't quite believe that somebody would say that children phone childline because they don't like being disciplined.

Child abuse is very real.

What has r**** and i***** got to do with discipline anyway?

What has a parent's problem with drug or alcohol addiction got to do with parenting skills?

Surely a child who is left to do what they like is being neglected which is another form of abuse.

Who's gonna help the child if the government doesn't get involved? Or maybe the child should just accept what happens to them and stop complaining.

[Curvey_Brunette]

I can't quite believe that somebody would say that children phone childline because they don't like being disciplined.

That sort of thing does happen. Children do call such numbers and complain of being abused just because they've been denied the latest trainers or the latest computer, games console or the latest mobile phone.

Child abuse is very real.

It is when there is abuse going on.

What has r**** and i***** got to do with discipline anyway?

Nothing at all

What has a parent's problem with drug or alcohol addiction got to do with parenting skills?

If you're drunk out of your skull or stoned out of your box how can you manage a child's life when your own is such a mess?

Surely a child who is left to do what they like is being neglected which is another form of abuse.

In what way?

The law says that a child of 8+ can stay at home alone for reasonable periods of time.

So long as they aren't coming to any harm and a parent isn't out socialising but has left their child at home because it's inappropriate to take them, then what's the problem?

Who's gonna help the child if the government doesn't get involved? Or maybe the child should just accept what happens to them and stop complaining.

Why is it the governments responsibility in the first place?

It's the 'nanny state' that's wrong. If you have children then it's up to you to look after them and raise them not the governments job.

The fact is that child abuse is more frequent among the 'child based agencies' such as children's homes and foster homes so the problem is within the system.

But the system is so inadequate it has to try and displace what's going on within itself and has to try to blame natural parents for being abusive towards their child.

[monosodium]

I know this may sound really cold initially - but childline should not exist and neither should the NSPCC or any other childrens charity.

ChildLine is the kind of counselling service which actually should be funded from our taxes and not charity.

Maybe the "social services" child protection duties should be outsourced to the NSPCC so they can be paid for it. It's only because people want to help and are giving charities the money that allows the government to skimp on this kind of service.

[monosodium]

Why is it the governments responsibility in the first place?

It's the 'nanny state' that's wrong. If you have children then it's up to you to look after them and raise them not the governments job.

It isn't governments place - it is the place of the laws which are created by the government. Any remotely intelligent person will agree with the need for laws to give additional protection to those who are most vulnerable such as children.

It is parents responsibility to look after children, but just because it is their responsibility doesn't mean they actually do it. Many people have many responsibilities which they do not perform. They should be held to account if they don't but you have to find out about it before you can do anything, which is where (at the moment) the likes of NSPCC and ChildLine come in.

Government should fund the agencies which enact, enforce and support the laws which it creates. Therefore protecting children from abuses is absolutely a government responsibility and picking up the pieces and trying to support the affected children is a necessary part of that.

[Curvey_Brunette]

I personally wouldn't mind if the NSPCC, Childline and social services actually did any good.

Since the ruling that family courts are to be open courts, there have been stories of miscarriages of justice coming out of the closet. Stories of parents wrongly accused of abusing their children when in fact the child had a medical complaint.

I read of a story in the US where a mother was accused of child abuse and killing her children by feeding them anti-freeze. When someone bothered to look into the case properly, it was found that the child had a medical condition and to have given her child anti-freeze when she was accused of doing so would have meant she would have of had to have given her child over 60 gallons of the stuff.

And what about when the agencies get it wrong?

How many children have been systematically abused to death by parents or step-parents when the family was known to social services and was supposed to have been monitoring the situation?

Child protection issues are arse over tit, good parents are being accused of abuse because some doctor says so, and because of that the medical facts are never investigated properly.

Professionals are "hand picked" to give the opinion the authority wants rather than a true and unbiased opinion. And yet the children who are being abused and are at a real risk at left to their own devices to be later carried out of the family home in a body bag.

[Jelly-Belly]

I personally wouldn't mind if the NSPCC, Childline and social services actually did any good.

I think the children who have been helped by them might disagree with you there.

And what about when the agencies get it wrong?

Maybe if there was proper funding then the agencies wouldn't make mistakes.

If you have children then it's up to you to look after them and raise them not the governments job.

So you wouldn't claim child benefit then??

[Curvey_Brunette]

I think the children who have been helped by them might disagree with you there.

And what about the children who have been wrongly removed from their parents because of spurious accusations of abuse?

For example Proff. Meadows who gave invalid professional opinions?

Or Suthell who told the police to investigate the father in a case of cot death based on a television interview?

Or Proff. Greene who examined the wrong pathology slides and gave a professional opinion that a child's death was due to abuse?

Or the children involved with Marietta Higgs who accused many parents of child abuse Teeside about 15 years ago?

Or the Orkney Island kids removed because some nasty piece of work said their parents were "devil worshiping"?

Case after case after case of gross incompetence where children have been removed from natural parents with little or no foundation.

The 1989 Children act clearly states that because something has happened once it doesn't mean it will happen again. Today it only has to happen once and you'll get a knock in the door from social services.

And while they waste their time chasing up frivolous accusations, they're leaving the kids who do need help to die at the hands of an adult who can't control themselves.

What about the children placed in children's homes and foster car who have been abused?

And what about when the agencies get it wrong?

The agencies seem to continually get it wrong.

My personal experience of this shows it. My gran lives in a warden controlled bungalow, because she's not quite with it and we don't have the time to check on her more often than a couple of times a week, (she lives 100 miles away), she's been allocated a social worker.

My husband and I now pay for a home help to go in every day, tidy up for her, light a fire when it's cold and make sure she's eaten properly. We've gone to those lengths because we drop in on her, she never knows when we're going to turn up.

When we have been she's had no fire, she's had no food in and she's sat at home wrapped up in jumpers and coats because the whole house was so cold. But when he social worker visited her by appointment, there was food in the house, there was a fire lit, everything seemed fine and we were just making it up.

Last Christmas we thought we were going to lose her, she became very ill. This year she's fighting fit, she's put on a bit of weight, the house is warm and she's eating regularly and properly.

Maybe if there was proper funding then the agencies wouldn't make mistakes.

What's money got to do with it?

As I've illustrated above, people can put in a show, they can appear to be one thing when they're something else. They can make everything seem fine when it isn't. It's the dozy social worker who's more happy to write in their report "Visited Family X, no problems" rather that seeing past the front that's out on.

If it's not within the guidelines they don't do it, if it's not blatantly obvious to them they can't see it.

On a home visit, seeing the child is essential, but how many times have we read that social workers call and call on a family but never get a reply. Why doesn't that ring alarm bells with them?

Why doesn't that suggest to them all isn't what it seems?

I personally would sooner sit outside their house waiting for them to either come out or return home, or even call the police, have the door kicked in to make sure that child is safe and well rather than hope I might catch them at home another time or write a letter saying I'll be calling at such and such a time.

It's that sort of common sense that's missing. It's that lack of awareness that is rife within the child protection community rather than a lack of money.

So you wouldn't claim child benefit then??

No we don't.

Everything we have we've worked for. We don't have any outstanding loans or credit agreements. If we go to a shop we pay cash or by bank draft.

We don't want and we don't expect financial handouts for having children.

[colleen smith]

I have just witnessed a mother slapping her teenage son, hard, around the face while queuing at Disney, Paris. I was shocked and have written all about it on my blog. (see link below)

[Fluffystuff]

I used Childline myself and had it not been for them would not have been able to get a grip on the particular situation that was happening at that time to me.....they are needed desperately by so many children and I fully support what you are doing....

Have clicked on your link and filled in the relevant information.

[DemonLover]

There are a few different issues here. Childline and the like do good work, but I do agree that sometimes they get things wrong, but doesn't everyone?

On the subject of discipline, I firmly believe that kids need to know where the boundaries are. I was smacked as a child a few times, when I'd done something seriously wrong. I knew I'd done wrong and I tell you what - I didn't do it again! I am now a 23 year old member of society, working and contributing. I think my generation were the last to get proper discipline, and plenty my age didn't. And those I envied as a child, that were allowed to do what they want, are now useless wastes of space, no job, living on benefits coz they couldn't be arsed at school, didn't listen to their parents, got crap marks and couldn't get a job. All due to no discipline as small children.

I totally agree that having a child is your responsibility. I knew girls at school desperate for a baby because they knew they would get a house and handouts! What sort of thing is that for a young person to aspire to, 'I want to be a state scrounger'. This is only because we allow it to be so. If you didn't get benefits and had had no option but to get off your arse and get a job, I reckon the unemployment problem would sort itself out soon enough.