Police are called an average of 425 times a month to children’s homes in Lancashire because youngsters have gone missing.Ah, yes. You can read all about the sort of homes we are talking about at Winston Smith’s excellent blog.
It is estimated that the financial strain of dealing with the issue is costing police and taxpayers around £5million per year.
The figures have been included in a report entiled ‘Who Cares?’ that has been drafted by a task group of the county council’s scrutiny committee.Perish the thought!
It has already sparked controversy, with county councillor Susie Charles, the executive member for children’s services, being accused of ‘complacency’ and attempting to ‘bury’ the report.
But Coun Charles has denied the claims and insisted several recommendations, including establishing a multi-agency hub for looked-after children, were being taken forward.And will that ‘multi-agency hub’ go out at midnight to drag back little Aleeesha or Shevan from wherever they are hiding, or will they just be the ones to call the police, rather than whoever does it now?
But maybe it’s not something that we should worry about?
In the report, into placements by other north-west authorities into dozens of Lancashire homes, both council-run and independently-managed, county councillors have been told how:Ouch! That’s a lot of disruption. And a lot of money:
One boy at a Rossendale care home went missing 11 times in a short period - but his social worker had not visited him for three months.
Five homes in Bacup were responsible for 80 missing from home reports.
One youngster was reported to have gone missing 40 times.
Children at a Wyre home were found taking drugs, drinking in the street and engaging in under-age sex.
One ‘prolific’ young offender, who was placed in a unnamed private care home in East Lancashire without notifying police or social services, created 'havoc' before he could be moved.
Det Supt Ian Critchley, head of the county’s public protection unit, who was interviewed by the watchdog group, estimated that each case cost the force around £1,000 to deal with, in terms of officers resources, as well as the disruption to other services.Bill the council direct!
County councillor Peter Steen, who represents Whitworth and chaired the task group, said the looked-after children, especially those with personal difficulties, should not be ‘demonised’.And the sort of people they should offer ‘support’ to? The sort of people who don’t need to be ‘demonised’?
“The vast majority of children who are looked after is because there are problems in their background,” said Coun Steen.
“They are not bad, it is not their fault but they need support. But also the police need to be aware if there is someone who is vulnerable who is coming on to their patch. They need to be able to offer support.”
Just two years ago Lancashire Police was forced to step in and apply for the closure of Brighton House in Waterfoot, after teenagers went on the rampage across the Rossendale valley./facepalm
And in 2008, 13-year-old Jamie Smith, who absconded from the Higher Cockham Farm home in Haslingden, was jailed for 13 years after he pushed a man into a bonfire in Birkenhead.
10 comments:
"And in 2008, 13-year-old Jamie Smith, who absconded from the Higher Cockham Farm home in Haslingden, was jailed for 13 years after he pushed a man into a bonfire in Birkenhead.
This happened not a million miles away from me...and there's a bit more to it than that...the little bastard robbed and murdered a grown man.
More info if interested:
"http://www.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/liverpool-news/regional-news/2008/02/26/13-year-old-pleads-guilty-to-bonfire-murder-92534-20526734/
Bitter irony was that "Youth worker Mrs Croft, of Birkenhead, was celebrating her 53rd birthday when police arrived at her office to say her son was dead.
Forgot to add that we don't need to demonise the little bastards...they do that just fine all by themselves.
Well this what you get when you reward that sort of behaviour isn't it. What do I mean? I wonder what the response to disruptive behaviour, assault and absconding is. Is it depriving them of something? Is it any form of punishment? No, they'll be given a new Ipod or trainers, taken out to events, given free holidays - because the poor dears need more attention FFS
I am friends with a foster carer for a seriously aggressive and disruptive young lad. He has a family history that beggars belief, but he knows what he is doing and 'plays' the system. He has more spent on him in one week than I can afford to spend on myself, working full time (new clothes whenever he wants, taxi's to and from school, trips out every week, trips away every month,...). What incentive does he have to act normally? None.
His sister, homed coincidentally in a care home in Lancashire, absconds regularly to go socialising (sometimes twice a day, and don't the social workers look really clever calling the police 5 minutes after she was returned to the home by them?). The result, she's off for a holiday in Florida this year with all the trimmings.
The thing is, others have seen what he gets and, guess what? Yep, they've all started acting up. They may be young, but stupid they're not.
Gadget has often posted on this very subject, the sheer waste of police time and the associated costs in dealing with 'missing' feral fuckwits is indeed horrendous. Add to this the other similar problem, the number of sectioned mental health patients who walk out unhindered from their secure units on a daily basis across the UK! Just as bad! These other agencies fail to do their job then simply fill out a form and pick up the phone and it becomes the police's problem. Only in the UK.
Really? It's not like that on Tracey Beaker.
Dr Cromarty said:"Really? It's not like that on Tracey Beaker."
Aha! but that is the BBC fantasy public sector childrens home. Any connection with reality may be elastic.
“They are not bad, it is not their fault but they need support."
Yes they are, yes it is and they need punishing.
Oh, and by the way, am I sick to the guts of the word 'vulnerable' -at least in its utterly new meaning.
What Ranter said. I worked in a place that had three children's homes a mental health hospital and lots of 'care' in the community.
Result up to half a dozen vulnerable mispers a night.
Vulnerable in the sense that they were juveniles or had mental health issues - or both.
When a call comes out on the police radio with the words "childrens home" involved you can hear the tumbleweed across the borough.
"...and there's a bit more to it than that...the little bastard robbed and murdered a grown man."
I remember the case. Appalling that he only got 13 years, and will probably not serve half.
"Well this what you get when you reward that sort of behaviour isn't it. "
Spot on!
"The thing is, others have seen what he gets and, guess what? Yep, they've all started acting up. They may be young, but stupid they're not."
No, it's a mistake to assume they are stupid. They understand consequences.
"Oh, and by the way, am I sick to the guts of the word 'vulnerable' -at least in its utterly new meaning."
Ditto! You can usually preface it with the words 'preys upon the'....
"When a call comes out on the police radio with the words "childrens home" involved you can hear the tumbleweed across the borough."
They'll start calling them something else soon, you wait and see.
Post a Comment