There are plenty of cases where they need to be involved but they just dont seem to tackle those so why do they keep doing suchg daft things? Surely even if the SW cme up with the idea a superior should have read it and stopped it?
From the Judge:
"The social worker had been asked to 'identify her best example' of the mother failing to meet the boys emotional needs - to which she replied citing that she had not given him ice cream. "
"He added: 'A further criticism in this vein was that the mother had failed to arrange for (his) hair to be cut in the way that he liked. Again, this is obviously inconsequential.'"
And what was the family court judge thinking?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5840243/Judge-blasts-social-worker-said-boy-not-returned-mother.html