This Should Not of Happened to Peter Connelly

This should not of happened to Peter Connelly – By Jonathan Pinder Born 1st March, 2006, Peter Connelly “Baby P” was only three months old when his natural father walked out after the mother; Tracey Connelly began an affair with Steven Barker, a racist thug obsessed with Nazi memorabilia and pornography. This was the start of the end for such a beautiful little innocent boy! In the world we live in today this should NEVER have happened!

So many things should never have slipped through the net and gone un-noticed. The professionals where the only people that could of saved this poor little boy’s life, they had the words! They had the means! And they had the power to stop this. But instead Fifteen month-old 'Baby P' was left to die at the hands of his mother and stepfather because of catastrophic blunders by doctors, police and the same Haringey Borough Council who so disastrously failed to help nine year-old Victoria Climbie ten years earlier.

Rather than resign in shame, doctors and social workers have fallen over each other to blame others and keep their jobs. And so it begins! In November 2006, Tracey Connelly’s new boyfriend, Steven Barker, moved in with her and shortly after the new lover moved into the family home in Finsbury Park, north London, Peter was seen with bruises and scratches on his skin on a visit to his GP Dr Jerome Ikwueke. This is when the excuses and lies began; Tracey Connelly’s excuse was that the boy's skin 'bruised easily. But no sooner had Peter visited the Doctors, Peter was taken to Whittington hospital with a head injury, bruising to the bridge of the nose, sternum, right shoulder and buttocks and when Tracey was asked about finger-marks on Peters body, the mother said they were from 'holding him and throwing him up in the air. '(Excuse and lie number 2) She also claimed that Peter, now only 9 months old, liked 'rough and tumble play’ (Excuse and lie number 3) when she was under police questioning on suspicion of assault.

Order custom essay This Should Not of Happened to Peter Connelly with free plagiarism report

450+ experts on 30 subjects Starting from 3 hours delivery

Get Essay Help

This is where Haringey social services placed Peter on the 'at risk' register and visited the family home to find it filthy and smelling of urine. Is this acceptable for a baby?? Was this question asked?? Yes it was and they came to the conclusion to let Peter stay with Angela Godfrey, a church going therapist and Tracey Connelly's best friend, instead of a foster carer. Why a friend of the mother who has just been questioned on suspicion of assaulting Peter and who’s house was so filthy? But within just a month, on January 26, 2007, with no decision made on any charge against the mother, Peter was allowed back home!

Mistake 1 and the first of many! On April 9TH, Peter was taken to hospital with a large swelling to his head and bruises to his eyes and cheek. Despite the injuries – which Tracey Connelly claimed were caused by another boy pushing him into a fireplace (Excuse and lie number 4) - doctors focused on treating the boy for possible symptoms of meningitis. While at hospital Tracey Connelly told staff 'I had been told in March that if there were any more accidental injuries they were going to take him away. ' Was this Tracey’s way of asking for help? If so why wasn’t this followed up?

Well it was and social services took no action other than to buy the family a fireguard. A fireguard??? Then on June 1st the social worker made an unannounced visit to the home and found Peter with bruises under the chin and a red line under his eye. Tracey Connelly claimed that another 18 month-old child had hit the boy during a squabble (Excuse and lie number 5). Tracey Connelly was ordered to take him to hospital. An examination by doctors revealed more bruising in 12 different areas of his body including a 'grip mark' on his leg. Tracey Connelly was interviewed by police four days later but again released on bail for the second time.

Disregarding the mounting evidence, it was decided jointly by police and social services to allow Peter home on condition his care was supervised by Angela Godfrey. The police officer investigating both assaults, DC Angela Slade, did at first object to returning the child but it was decided there was not enough evidence to start care proceedings. Peter's condition deteriorated even faster he lost weight and his scalp and ear infections became so bad that the child-minder refused to look after him anymore and his GP only prescribed anti-bacterial cream.

When Peter spent a night with his natural father; he had lost nails on his fingers and toes. On the next visit by social worker during a scheduled visit Tracey Connelly covered up Peter's bruises with chocolate (Excuse and lie number 6). Why was this happening and still no-one noticed anything and spoke up? Peters Last Chance The last chance to save Peter's life came on August 1st, when a doctor examined him at the Child Development Clinic in St Anne's Hospital, Tottenham. The doctor failed to spot his fractured ribs and ignored a series of bruises to his back and legs. Peter may even have already been paralysed y having his back snapped over a hard surface such as an adult knee or cot. When in court the doctor later said 'He didn't look any different from any child with a common cold. ' The next day, August 2nd, 2007, Tracey Connelly was told the assault investigation against her was being dropped and offered a free trip to the seaside as a treat! Peter spent that evening face down in his cot, wrapped tightly in a blanket 'like a cocoon' while his mother and stepfather celebrated. Peter was already dead when Tracey Connelly finally got out of bed at 11am. Good bye Peter. Why didn’t anyone fight for you?

Peter was seen by 28 different social workers, doctors and police officers before he was tortured to death! Whoever is to be blamed, and however the degrees of blame are to be portioned out, the bottom line is that Peter was killed after a horrific 18 month life, during all or most of which he was repeatedly beaten and physically injured by his mother, and her partner, and, perhaps, the lodger. What happened is beyond excusing or excuse-making. Those responsible should be called to account and removed from such work. Everyone from the case workers, to their supervisors, and the doctors and police.

Too many people and too many mistakes. Why did everyone make some many failings? The "devastating" catalogue of failings on the part of Haringey Council, health advisors and police meant that those who highlighted fears were ignored and the obvious signs of abuse went unheeded. It took seven inspectors from Ofsted, the Healthcare Commission and Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary just two weeks to produce the report comprising a long list of failings. (See list of failings) But the biggest blow came from the reaction of us, the public who rarely see these types of events and such brutality.

This cut us all to the core. To hear this brutality to such a young little boy was harrowing and devastating and then to hear of all the failings made by the people and authorities that where put in place to help prevent this was disgusting and we all wondered what exactly these people do for a living? For me as a support worker originally from a children’s background and now working with vulnerable adults this made me look more closely at my work and the procedures that where in place to see what changes I could possibly make and to be honest the changes aren’t at ground evel that need to be made, these changes need to come from way up the ladder, from managers up to the MP’s. So where do we go from here? What happened here was horrific but we must move forward. This should never have happened but unfortunately these things do happen and do slip through the net, the only positive thing that will come for this will be new rules and recommendations that are laid out for departments for Children, Schools, Residential children’s homes, other professional’s and families.

The joint area review has brought out a list of recommendations to enable all such parties to ensure that comprehensive and effective safeguarding arrangements for children and young people are established (see attached Recommendations of the joint area review) Also Ed Balls (Children's Secretary) told MPs that in the light of the Baby P case; “We have tabled three new clauses that will help us to go further towards implementing Lord Laming’s recommendations in this Bill, they will introduce new statutory targets for safeguarding and child protection and require local safeguarding children boards to appoint two members drawn from the local community and to publish an annual report on their effectiveness, But these measures could only go some way to protecting children”. And this is a sad and truthful fact that we will never be able to stop every single death of a child or vulnerable person, despite being known or unknown to social services.

It’s a sad point, but it is not realistic to say that every child murder can be prevented. Child protection is everyone’s business, but things that go on behind closed doors stay there- even when they shouldn’t.! LITTLE ANGEL (BABY P) Bye, bye little angel, So bright and so sweet, You had been here with us, With your heart of love and joy, Now you will rest in peace, No one now will treat you bad. We watch you grow and change, We will remember you always, With every smile on your tiny face. You are so special in every way And we will love you every day.

List of failings found by Ofsted, the Healthcare Commission and Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary Insufficient oversight of child protection services by Haringey's councillors and senior officers:

• A managerial failure to ensure all the requirements of the inquiry into Victoria Climbie's murder in 2000 is met;
• Social workers, health professionals and police do not communicate routinely and consistently;
• A failure to identify children who are at immediate risk of harm;
• Frontline procedures are of inconsistent quality; *Child protection plans are generally poor;
• Record-keeping for case files is inconsistent and often poor;
• An over-reliance on performance data which is not always accurate;
• A failure to speak directly to children at risk;
• Concerns that youngsters suspected of being abused may not have been able to speak up without fear;
• The Serious Case Review into Baby P's death is inadequate;
• The high turnover of social workers at Haringey Council has resulted in heavy reliance on agency staff, leading to a lack of continuity for children and their families;
• Heavy workloads for social workers, with the true number of children allocated to them not always accurately counted.

The inspectors' summary to their report may have been written in official jargon but its stark meaning is clear enough. They wrote: "The contribution of local services to improving outcomes for children and young people at risk or requiring safeguarding is inadequate and needs urgent and sustained attention. In other words, vulnerable children in Haringey cannot necessarily rely on the authorities to protect them and Baby P's death was not just tragic bad luck. Recommendations of the joint area review made the following recommendations that the Department for Children, Schools and Families should provide immediate appropriate support and challenge to the local authority to ensure that comprehensive and effective safeguarding arrangements for children and young people are established.

The Local Authority, working with its partners and in particular health and the police, should:

• improve governance of safeguarding arrangements establish more secure assessment and earlier intervention strategies which ensure that, in all cases where concerns about children are identified, agencies can intervene and assess risks of significant harm to children in a timely manner
• establish more systematic monitoring of the quality of practice ensure that managers and staff at all levels are accountable for casework decisions, and that they draw as necessary on the expertise of partner agencies to inform the decision making process
• take steps to integrate individual service processes and systems across all agencies more effectively
• assure the competence of leadership and management in all areas of children’s services and develop clear and effective accountability structures
• establish rigorous arrangements for management of performance across all agencies, which ensure that the quality of practice is evaluated and reported regularly and reliably, and that accountability for each action is defined and monitored
• make explicit to all staff and elected members the expectations and standards required of front line child protection practice
• establish rigorous procedures to audit and monitor the quality of case files across all partner agencies and ensure processes are in place to deliver improvement
• establish clear procedures and protocols for communication and collaboration between social care, health and police services to support safeguarding of children, and ensure that these are adhered to
• assure the competence of service and team managers in conducting rigorous and evaluative supervision and monitoring of safeguarding practice
• appoint an independent chairperson to the local safeguarding children board (LSCB).

Whilst not a mandatory requirement, it would be good practice for the Local Authority to:

• ensure that all elected members have CRB checks
• ensure that all elected members undertake safeguarding training.

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Run a free check or have your essay done for you

Check my essay Hire Writer