Sir, I fully share the concern expressed in your leading article (July 7) and by Camilla Cavendish in times2 that the removal of a child from its parents is the most draconian intervention of the State in a family’s life and that the decision-making process leading to such removal needs to be extremely carefully scrutinised by the family court. Nor do I on a personal level, as someone who has specialised in the field of child protection for more than 20 years, object to more media reporting of the cases that I am involved in.

Where I disagree, however, is in the suggestion that parents and children involved in these cases wish to be identified so that the so-called conspiracy of silence between the family courts and social services is broken. In my experience, the vast majority of parents in these cases, for cogent reasons, do not want their identity made public. These cases involve extremely personal information. Clients of mine last year, parents of a child who had been severely injured in their care, made their position perfectly clear. They preferred to tell all those who lived near them that their child was ill in hospital with a rare disease, rather than admit that he was in foster care, for fear that their flat would be “torched” by their neighbours if the truth was known.

In addition, all the research so far shows that children wish to retain their anonymity in these cases, wish for the details of their cases to remain confidential and for obvious reasons, do not wish their classmates to know that they are in care nor the reasons for that. The position is not as simple as your leader suggests.

Alex Verdan, QC
London EC4

Sir, As a social worker for 35 years, ten as a director of social services, I can see no reason to justify our failure publicly to share the difficult decisions we make together with the courts and other professionals. There are ways of protecting in any media reports the identities and interests of children and potentially vulnerable parents.

It is the mantra of the rogue politician to “never apologise, never explain”. The mature professional is fully aware of the uncertainties we face in protecting children, while recognising the extraordinary damage we can cause in severing families. The difficult decisions made on behalf of the State and the whole of society need to be explained and explored openly. While we make these decisions unexplained and in secret we fail parents and, even more importantly, their children.

Bill McKitterick
Bristol

Explore Letters

• Feedback