In a recent interview, Sandra Van Empel and Naomi Shann delved into the challenges faced by vulnerable women in the child welfare system and issues around lacking parental support. Naomi conducted this interview as part of a research project they’ve undertaken at Hull University, ‘Exploring the impact of loss in relation to children’s social work involvement and child removal.’
Their conversation sheds light on the complexities and pressures inherent in making decisions that will impact a child’s life and highlight the gaps in support for parents, particularly mothers, who have had children removed from their care. Here’s a snapshot of their insightful discussion.
The Pressure of Timely Decisions
Sandra Van Empel: “There’s that time pressure as well when it takes 26 weeks to make decisions for a baby that will last a lifetime.”
Sandra emphasises the immense pressure on professionals to make life-altering decisions within a tight timeframe, underscoring the need for thorough and thoughtful deliberation in such critical matters.
Insufficient Interventions
Naomi Shann: “Do you think there’s enough intervention during that gap between proceedings to make the necessary changes?”
Sandra Van Empel: “Not really, not really. Again, it comes down to… if they’re vulnerable or lonely, people will always attract like for like, really.”
Sandra acknowledges that the period between legal proceedings often lacks adequate support for women, many of whom face vulnerabilities that aren’t sufficiently addressed, perpetuating cycles of hardship.
Access to Post-Adoption Parental Support
Sandra Van Empel: “There should be something that [a woman who has had a child removed] can access. I know there’s the post-adoption option, which everybody offers. Oh, there’s the, you know, ring this number.”
Despite the availability of post-adoption services, Sandra points out that many women do not engage with these resources, leaving them without the necessary support to improve their circumstances and prevent future removals.
We wonder if this is due to a lack of tailored support. Regardless of the unique circumstances at play, the removal of a child is sure to cause a great deal of emotional distress for both the mother and the family. We can easily assume, then, that in the chaos following the removal, calling a number and knowing it’s a generalised service doesn’t feel very attractive and could possibly lead to a greater sense of overwhelm and cynicism towards the system.
The Need for Psychological Assessment
Sandra Van Empel: “It might be helpful because that would be the starting point for a parent… they’ll be angry. They’re raw, emotional, and probably can’t see what it is that they could have done more of or should have done more of.”
Sandra proposes that psychological assessments at the end of proceedings could provide a crucial starting point for parental support, facilitating personal growth and better outcomes in future parenting efforts.
It’s poignant to recognise the cycle that exists in this realm, where we could be looking at a mother who has experienced more than one removal of a child or at least been involved in proceedings more than once. Sandra commented earlier on the idea that vulnerable people attract vulnerable people, relating again to a cycle.
Understanding the proceedings at play is one thing, but truly understanding the possibly detrimental choices we’re making as people and having the opportunity to learn how to disrupt those patterns is crucial to interrupt the cycle.
Systemic Challenges and Empathy
Sandra Van Empel: “Services are very stretched… little attention to detail. Really… where’s the advocate for the mother?”
Sandra highlights systemic issues, including overstretched services and a lack of detailed attention to individual circumstances, advocating for better representation and support for mothers navigating these difficult situations.
The Importance of Empathy
Sandra Van Empel: “As professionals, as women and mothers and sisters and lovers, aunties… we have to think, well, yeah, we may have been fortunate. We’ve had people to lead us the right way, make a few right choices… that’s empathy for me.”
Sandra underscores the importance of empathy and understanding in professional practice, urging a compassionate approach that considers the personal histories and struggles of the women involved.
Collaborative Planning and Support
Sandra Van Empel: “If we put the plan together and you’re not able or willing or cannot sustain this for whatever reason, then there is a chance that your children won’t be staying with you.”
Sandra advocates for collaborative planning with parents, emphasising that sustained effort and cooperation are essential for keeping families together while being realistic about the potential outcomes if these efforts fall short.
Conclusion
Sandra Van Empel and Naomi Shann’s insights highlight the urgent need for more comprehensive and empathetic support systems for vulnerable parents. By addressing the gaps in intervention, improving access to psychological assessments, and fostering empathy and detailed attention in professional practices, we can better support these parents and ultimately improve outcomes for their children.
