Chances of living together?
Notifications OFF
Kids are on CIN, my partner and I will start specialist risk assessment by SW over the coming weeks, aiming to have reccomendatiobs by end of May. Initially we were only asking for unsupervised contact and no overnight stays. However as a result of media fallout my OH has found himself homeless and it looks as though he'll lose his job in the next fortnight.
My question is, could I now ask the SW if my OH could live with us? It's a massive leap from what we had originally requested - but equally the situation has taken a very bad unexpected turn - it seems insane that I can't get him off the streets and give him the support he desperately needs.
The focus obviously being keeping my boys safe, and my OH, but what would that look like. How do people manage and keep a sense of normality for their kids - I guess it's impossible!? Does anyone have any practical advice? X
My question is, could I now ask the SW if my OH could live with us? It's a massive leap from what we had originally requested - but equally the situation has taken a very bad unexpected turn - it seems insane that I can't get him off the streets and give him the support he desperately needs.
The focus obviously being keeping my boys safe, and my OH, but what would that look like. How do people manage and keep a sense of normality for their kids - I guess it's impossible!? Does anyone have any practical advice? X
I don't have any advice but I'm in a similar situation. Daughter is on a CPP and OH has not been allowed to live at the house since August 2023. It's a very long story with SS, I have had to get a solicitor involved as they have done nothing for 8 months. We were supposed to be having an assessment with Lucy Faithfull but they won't fund it so we are arguing why is the CPP remaining in place. The only thing I can say is that your partner moving back home may increase their concerns and they could look at moving it to CPP but get the thoughts of the SW first xx
Hi,
I've posted about this before on another thread but I can't remember what it was called so I'll have to go over it again apologies.
I wouldn't push for overnight stays with ss because they need to know that whatever happens you will prioritise your children over your partners needs. Unfortunately him being homeless is likely to be an added perceived risk factor for your children. If you look at cases of the failings of ss resulting in child deaths at the hands of step parents a lot of them are moved in with the child before most people would agree is a healthy amount of time. The moms will largely state that their partner had nowhere to go etc.
I know that it isn't what you want to hear and I understand the logic of wanting to get him off the streets but men who are looking for children to abuse are good at grooming the people around the child. This is from research and courses I've done. I would advise that you don't use this reason to ask for overnights right now. Take things slowly with ss and signpost your partner to probation, visor, local authorities and citizens advice for help with his housing issues xxx
I've posted about this before on another thread but I can't remember what it was called so I'll have to go over it again apologies.
I wouldn't push for overnight stays with ss because they need to know that whatever happens you will prioritise your children over your partners needs. Unfortunately him being homeless is likely to be an added perceived risk factor for your children. If you look at cases of the failings of ss resulting in child deaths at the hands of step parents a lot of them are moved in with the child before most people would agree is a healthy amount of time. The moms will largely state that their partner had nowhere to go etc.
I know that it isn't what you want to hear and I understand the logic of wanting to get him off the streets but men who are looking for children to abuse are good at grooming the people around the child. This is from research and courses I've done. I would advise that you don't use this reason to ask for overnights right now. Take things slowly with ss and signpost your partner to probation, visor, local authorities and citizens advice for help with his housing issues xxx
I agree about him being homeless actually increasing the risk, they will see it as you won't throw him out/feel pressured to let him stay if there's a protection issue because he has nowhere else to go. When they approve overnights they usually want the other person to have an alternative place to reside so that you won't feel trapped into them having to stay with you even if there's a potential protection issue or even if you just have a gut feeling.
I know none of us would ever put the men over our children and I'm not saying you would but that's how SS minds will tick if you mention it.
I know none of us would ever put the men over our children and I'm not saying you would but that's how SS minds will tick if you mention it.
I agree with the ladies above, and through experience, I would not recommend you ask for overnight stays. Especially not when you don't even know if unsupervised visits are ok through assessments yet. I'm sorry that it's not the advise you'd like to have, but it's the best one in the long term for all. I hope those assesments are positive first, and then you could come up with a family safety plan and overnight sleeps basing it on those assesments.
I am sorry but I also agree with the ladies on here.
My partner I to kick out when I was 8 months pregnant to try show I was protecting my daughter. This made him homeless and at one point council told him he could live on the street social were convinced I couldn't live without him. So I proved them by not letting him back despite this he lived in hotels for the first few weeks (paid for by us and family) before securing his own place. We have lived separately for over 2 years. Social took my daughter when she was born and had her in foster till 18 months..
Finally convinced them I would put her first by sticking to keeping him out of the home despite him constantly saying he wanted to move home etc.
He's now slowly moving back home and once we have a 2 bed (1 bed is to small) he will be allowed to move back fully.
If you push for it now because he's homeless they could just use it and say that you wouldn't protect the boys because you wouldn't be able to get rid of him etc as he's got nowhere else to go.
Sorry xx
My partner I to kick out when I was 8 months pregnant to try show I was protecting my daughter. This made him homeless and at one point council told him he could live on the street social were convinced I couldn't live without him. So I proved them by not letting him back despite this he lived in hotels for the first few weeks (paid for by us and family) before securing his own place. We have lived separately for over 2 years. Social took my daughter when she was born and had her in foster till 18 months..
Finally convinced them I would put her first by sticking to keeping him out of the home despite him constantly saying he wanted to move home etc.
He's now slowly moving back home and once we have a 2 bed (1 bed is to small) he will be allowed to move back fully.
If you push for it now because he's homeless they could just use it and say that you wouldn't protect the boys because you wouldn't be able to get rid of him etc as he's got nowhere else to go.
Sorry xx
I can absolutely see the point everyone is making about the risk that SS will perceive, however this seems like a complete catch 22 situation as its well-researched and documented that a stable and secure home environment significantly reduces the risks of recidivism in all types of offending, homelessness does the complete opposite. So by removing people from the home environment to reduce the chances of them reoffending your conversely increasing their likelyhood of reoffending.
I get where your coming from from a reoffending point of view and your right, but SS don't care at all about the offender and whether this highers their risk of reoffending they only care about providing the most protection for the child and quite often they see this as removing the offending parent as much as possible from the child and putting safeguards or blocks in to prevent there ever even being an opportunity for the child to be abused, e.g. supervised contact, not residing with the child, unable to be alone in a room with the child, safety plans. SS will probably see it as If the OP's other half is homeless this will mean there is a competing demand against the child's safety so she may feel unable/unwilling to ask him to leave as he has nowhere to go, so she will be less likely to remove the risk if needed.
I'm of course not saying that's true but I've read 100s of posts on here that confirm this is how they've been treated by SS. And in my own contact with them they are not willing for ex OH to have any contact with the children and have said they will move to remove them i pursue this.
The probation officer would probably see it differently as their main focus is preventing reoffending. But SS hold all the power when it comes to children, and it sounds like a grueling and risky battle to go against them...
I'm of course not saying that's true but I've read 100s of posts on here that confirm this is how they've been treated by SS. And in my own contact with them they are not willing for ex OH to have any contact with the children and have said they will move to remove them i pursue this.
The probation officer would probably see it differently as their main focus is preventing reoffending. But SS hold all the power when it comes to children, and it sounds like a grueling and risky battle to go against them...
As I said I completely understand what SS are doing and why.
I suppose I was just playing devils advocate and the point I was trying to make (probably badly) was that by attempting to protect the children at home social services are indirectly increasing the risk of another child coming to harm by creating a situation where reoffending is more likely, essentially robbing Peter to pay Paul, as I said catch 22 all around.
I suppose I was just playing devils advocate and the point I was trying to make (probably badly) was that by attempting to protect the children at home social services are indirectly increasing the risk of another child coming to harm by creating a situation where reoffending is more likely, essentially robbing Peter to pay Paul, as I said catch 22 all around.
I get what you're saying completely and as someone who has been signed off for partner to come home it absolutely feels like a juggling act in my own head to balance contradicting thoughts.
The aim of my response was to educate around perceived risks because showcasing this knowledge can help hugely with ss long term. I know that it can be difficult to read and relate the risk to our partners but ultimately you have to be able to while assessments are being conducted to ascertain the risk posed to your children xxx
The aim of my response was to educate around perceived risks because showcasing this knowledge can help hugely with ss long term. I know that it can be difficult to read and relate the risk to our partners but ultimately you have to be able to while assessments are being conducted to ascertain the risk posed to your children xxx