forward by a kinship carer

INDEX
PART I
Children and young people survey – about help and support for
children and young people Distributed on behalf of the Scottish Government
by Children 1st
PART II
Children & Young People Act 2014
Part 13 – Support for Kinship Carers
Informal Consultation Paper July 2014
Response from: Dalkeith Midlothian Kinship Carers Group
PART III
Supplementary foreward paper by a kinship carer to accompany
questionnaire in respect of Second Legislation survey distributed by Children
1st and the Scottish Government
PART IV
Handwritten evidence by a child with ADHD
Supporting paperwork to substantiate
Dalkeith Midlothian Kinship Care Group’s
responses to Second Legislation Survey
1
Scotland's Children ~ The Children (Scotland) Act 1995 ~ Regulations and Guidance
Volume 1 Support and Protection for ~ Children and Their Families
2
Education and Culture Committee – 2nd Meeting 2012 – 17 January 2012
Round Table discussion
3
Concordat 2007
4
MSPs ~ Chamber ~ Jackie Baillie
Debate ~ Kinship Carers ~ 26 January 2012
5
Education and Culture Committee Minutes of Meeting
18 September 2012 ~ Evidence Session – Aileen Campbell, MSP, Minister
6
Education and Culture Committee Minutes of Meeting –
5 August 2014 ~ Who Carers? – Scotland ~ Looked After Children –
Evidence from children placed in foster care
7
Scottish Government – Charitable Funding ~ Kinship Children & Kinship Carers
Paper requesting information on why the Scottish Government allocates phenomenal
sums of funding to children’s charities throughout Scotland to assist kinship carers –
(spreadsheet attached – Expenditure in excess of £25K)
Part I
Children and young people survey – about help and support for children
and young people
This is a survey for all children and young people who live with their grandparent, auntie,
uncle, cousin, brother or sister.We are asking you questions to find out what extrasupport
could help you and your family.
You do not need to put your name on the survey and no one will know that you took part.
All the answers we receive will be put together in a report and shared with the Scottish
Government to help them make better policies for children like you who live away from their
parents.
Once you have finished this survey, you can post it for free to this address before 30
September 2014:
FREEPOST RSGE-ZGBB-EKCJ
CHILDREN 1ST POLICY TEAM
83 Whitehouse Loan
Edinburgh
EH9 1AT
The survey will only take about 10 minutes to fill in. Thanks for taking part!
1. How old are you? Circle the answer:
5–8
9 – 11
12 – 14
2. I am:
Male
Female
15 – 16
17 – 18
3. I am looked after by my:
Grandad
Granny
Aunty
Uncle
Grown up sister or brother
Friend
Neighbour
Cousin
other person …………………………
4. How long have you been living with them? Tick your answer:
Less than 6 months
6 months - 1 year
3 - 5 years
Over 5 years
1 - 3 years
5. Do you have a social worker? Tick your answer:
Yes
No
I don’t know
5. What do you do after school or at the weekends? Tick all that you do:
Meet up with friends
Go to a youth club
Watch TV
Cook dinner
Go to a sports club
Look after family members
Do homework
Go to the shops
Anything else, please tell us ………………………………………………………………….
6. If you could choose new things to do after school, or at the weekends – what
would they be? Tick your answers:
Go to leisure centre
Meet up with friends
Go to the park
Play new sports
Go to the cinema
Do art activities
Go to a youth club
Go to an after school club
Anything else? ……………………………………………………………………………………….
7. Sometimes children and families need a bit of help and support to feel safe and
happy. What extra support would you like to have? Tick your answers:
Talking and spending time with a new fun grown-up (sometimes called befriending)
Support to help me with my feelings about living away from my parents
Support to help me with my school work
Support to help me when I visit my mum or dad
Support to help me with caring for my family members
I don’t need any extra help and support thanks
I don’t know
IS there any other support that would help you? Or is there anything else you would
like to tell us about?
Thanks for taking part!
PART II
Children and Young People Act 2014 (CYPA 2014)
Part 13 (Support for Kinship Care)
Informal Consultation Paper July 2014
Responses on behalf of
Dalkeith Midlothian Kinship Carer Support Group
9th October 2014
Children and Young People Act 2014 (CYPA 2014)
Part 13 (Support for Kinship Care)
Informal Consultation Paper July 2014
Responses on behalf of
Dalkeith Midlothian Kinship Carer Support Group
If a child/ren is not living with their birth/adoptive parent/s then the child/ren is either in (i)
(ii)
(iii)
Foster Care
Residential Care, or
Kinship Care
Accordingly, all children taken into care regardless of their “status”, or how they are
categorised within Social Work Departments/Local Authorities or Government Offices are “at
risk”, (they would not be in the Local Authority/State’s care if they were considered not to be “at
risk”) - they would be happily living at home in a family situation with their parents!
In our opinion the Act (CYPA 2014) actually forces and pressurises kinship carers into applying
for a KCO. Under duress from this Act, non-applicants could possibly lose their maintenance
and allowance payments for not adhering to the local authority’s terms, conditions and rules for
being a kinship carer.
Kinship carers, in the first instance, did not apply for the post to be a child’s carer, they were
deviously coerced, through emotional blackmail, by the local authority, into caring for a
relative/friend’s child/ren. Initially this was for a short period of time, then the timescale was
gradually extended to ensure that a carer had successfully bonded with the child. We would
suggest that the Government is fully aware of how local authorities subtly use their power of
manipulation to ensure that relatives fulfil the role of caring for an “at risk” child to remove their
obligation towards that child and pass the responsibility onto an unsuspecting kinship carer.
Through intimidation and pressure cleverly orchestrated by Social Workers, citing that the child
might be placed on the Adoption Register, or placed in long term foster care out with their
geographical region ensures that a kinship carer complies with the local authority’s wishes and
applies to the Court for a Section 11(1) Agreement of the Children Scotland Act 1995. The
intensity of the local authority’s bidding in this regard is overwhelming and the meagre amount
of legal advice offered to an ill-equipped kinship carer is dire. The local authority’s willingness
to fund this route is proof in itself that this is more advantageous for them to pass on the
responsibility for an “at risk” child/ren to a kinship carer than for them to be involved with that
child indefinitely. Once a Section 11 Agreement has been achieved the local authority ceases
their involvement with the case, closes their file, passes the job on to a kinship carer, the case
has been successfully completed, JOB DONE! (The local authority then disappears like a puff
of smoke, along with the “looked after” status of the “at risk” child).
Is this fair? Why should a kinship carer be penalised by the State for showing compassion,
empathy and love towards a relative’s child, (however distantly the child is related)? This child
has been abandoned by its natural/birth/adoptive parent/s, denied equivalent holistic support
as foster children and automatically written off for being more needy because of their adverse
reaction to the traumatic events affecting their life prior to entering into the care system.
401.1.7.CYPA-RESP.01.09.14
1
Regardless therefore of who is “eligible” and who is “not eligible” it should follow that all
children in Scotland who are not living with their natural/birth or adoptive parents but living with
carers are “eligible” and should be entitled to exactly the same comparable funding, nurturing,
life experience and holistic support as all children in care.
Getting it right for every child (GIRFEC), the Government’s Mission Statement, is falling far
short on delivery because of the discrimination between foster children and kinship children.
Kinship caring was once considered a duty within a family but it is now proving to be a huge
financial burden for a relative. If, as is described in Section a) of the paper “Description of
kinship care assistance (section 71(2) of CYPA”, that carers are forced to apply for a KCO and
are subsequently means tested to qualify for any maintenance, allowance or entitlement then
there is little doubt that there will be a sharp decline in relatives willing to care for a distant or
near relative’s child. This hitherto places a larger burden on local authorities and the State.
Local authorities are creaking under the strain of delivering fair treatment for “looked after”
children or children that are categorised as “at risk”. The local authorities appear to jog along
in a disorganised shambles trying to placate Scotland’s huge, ever increasing army of
abandoned, abused and neglected children. To substantiate this judgment, just listen or read
the Minutes of the Education and Culture Committee Meeting of 5 August 2014 when children
who have survived the care system (foster care children) speak out and give evidence of their
experience and treatment at the hands of foster carers. Unfortunately these children describe,
often heart wrenchingly, the despair they suffered living within the confines of the foster care
system.
Children develop and mature at different speeds and it is debatable whether or not children,
similar to those mentioned above, who are in care, are self sufficient and ready to look after
themselves and leave the security of their home at aged 16 years. The age should be flexible
but in reality should be increased until they have attained the age of 21 years. In all
seriousness were you ready to be self sufficient, leave the security of your home and find your
way in the world at aged 16 years?
Kinship care is the best solution for “looked after” children, or children “at risk”, but by
implementing the terms of the KCO, there is little doubt that in the future there will be stark
decline in relatives willing to make all the sacrifices attached to caring for someone else’s child
without the backing of the State and local authority.
Kinship carers are responsible for the guidance and future of abused, neglected and damaged
child/ren. It is their duty, as kinship carers, to give a child/ren encouragement, direction, family
values, respect, kindness, honesty, friendliness, hospitality and generosity all expressed
constantly with a huge dose of unconditional and overwhelming love. Therefore, is it fair for
kinship carers to have to fight for everything including the kind of support that they so rightly
deserve?
Attached to this paper are Dalkeith Midlothian Kinship Carers Group answers to your questions
regarding Part 13 (Support for Kinship Carers). We trust that these are explicit and honest in
their content and helpful with the compilation of your involvement in the secondary legislation.
401.1.7.CYPA-RESP.01.09.14
2
Description of kinship care assistance (Section 71(2) of CYPA
(1)
Your Question
Our Answer
Do you agree with these suggested Absolutely not. Kinship caring should be on a
types of assistance
level par with foster caring as indicated by the
2007 Concordant. Implementation was
suppose to be in place by 2011, it is now
2014 and although it was discussed at a
meeting on 12 September 2012 it still has not
been implemented.
(2)
What would you add/take away under Our accompanying paper is quite explicit in
each heading.
this regard.
(3)
What kind of things should fall under Child-centred planning/kinship carer planning.
information advice and counselling Joint counselling sessions with training
support?
facilities for kinship carers and kinship
children. Isolation of carers is damaging to a
kinship child’s wellbeing. Only experienced
kinship carers can offer this kind of holistic
counselling.
Hired professionals are not
experienced frontline kinship carers.
(4)
Do you agree that some support should Who exactly determines what qualifies as
be needs based? If not, why not?
“needs based”? Surely this is determined by
a situation which has evolved and the fact
that carers have to commit 100% to caring for
a relative’s child. Support financially and
holistically for that child should be openended without having to be assessed by a
team of so called “professionals”.
(5)
Do you think that the free school meals Yes, it is appropriate. This should
criteria are appropriate for this purpose? automatically kick in when a child is first
placed with a kinship carer.
(6)
Can you think of any others which might None that are more appropriate, but certainly
be more appropriate?
on a parallel is: subsidised bus and train
travel,
allowances
for
extra-curricular
activities and sport, joining fees for clubs and
associations; theatre/cinema passes; school
outings, projects and trips, shoes, leisure
clothes, sport kit, musical instruments/lessons
the list is endless..
(7)
How do you think we could most easily
identify those who would not be eligible
for free school meals (or any other
criteria used) but would still experience
hardship if they did not receive some
support?
401.1.7.CYPA-RESP.01.09.14
Kinship caring is not a life style choice like
foster caring and it is therefore assumed that
all kinship carers are either retired (OAPs) or
have had to sacrifice their jobs and income to
accommodate and facilitate caring for a
kinship child. All kinship children, regardless
of their carer’s status or financial position,
should be entitled and eligible for the
assistance mentioned in Item 6 above,
including free school meals.
3
(8)
What kind of things should be included Is it in the best interest of the child and carer
in
assistance
with
legal
costs to receive a KCO, or the best interest of the
Government/Local Government to force this
associated with a KCO petition?
Petition upon carers? It appears to be a
“dripping roast” and a steady income for the
legal fraternity. This could lead to a greater
revolt and decline in relatives willing to care
for a relative’s child. More problems could
evolve from this Order than it was suppose to
solve. Local authorities and the Government
are already in default of their obligations of
the 2007 Concordant whereby parity was
promised by 2011!
(9)
Do you think the start up support should The start-up support should be equal to foster
be the same for all eligible KCO carers support not just for “eligible” KCO’s. It
holders?
should be irrelevant whether or not a KCO is
in place. If a child is placed with a carer, the
support should automatically be given.
(10)
Do you think that £500 is a reasonable
amount for a start-up support? If you
think it should be more, what do you
see as the main start-up expenses?
(11)
Do you think that 18 months is a Far too long. A kinship child generally arrives
reasonable timeframe for the receipt of during the night, usually in their night attire.
such support?
Outlays for a kinship child start immediately.
Recompensing for outlays and overheads
should be remunerated to the kinship carer
within one calendar month of the child
arriving.
(12)
What do you think essential transport Kinship children and kinship carers should be
would look like?
entitled to free bus and rail travel, a monthly
petrol allowance and if a kinship child has a
disability then immediate access to a “blue
badge”.
(13)
Do you think 3 years will be sufficient Transitional support should be open-ended.
for transitional support? If not, why not? Kinship carers are already penalised by
sacrificing their lifestyle to raise someone
else’s child, albeit the child is known to them.
Why should they also be burdened with a
timescale such as transitional support?
Hypothetically, if a carer did not dedicate their
life to raising a relative’s child how exactly
would the local authority deal with that
situation. Would a foster carer be burdened
too with “transitional support”?
401.1.7.CYPA-RESP.01.09.14
Considering the upheaval to one’s family,
lifestyle and home; the requisition of fittings,
furnishings and equipment; clothes, toys,
heating, lighting and fuel; petrol, travel and
involvement of attending initial reviews, etc.,
we consider that a start-up grant of at least
£1,000 to be a far more realistic figure.
4
Part 2 : When or how kinship care assistance is to be provided (section 73(3)(a) of CYPA
Questions for discussion
Your Questions
Our Answers
(1)
Is a parenting capacity assessment Absolutely ridiculous! Why should kinship
sufficient for the purposes here?
carers be assessed to receive any kind of
support or assistance? The carer is providing
a very worthwhile service and should not be
assessed on their eligibility, ability, financial
status or otherwise. This is totally demeaning
and
could
obstruct
some
relatives
volunteering to care for an “at risk” child.
(2)
If not, what might
assessment look like?
(3)
Do we need to specify what an
assessment should consist of and how
it should be used in secondary
legislation, to ensure uniformity across
the country, or should we use guidance
instead to allow for flexibility and take
account of local and individual
circumstances?
(4)
What kind of plans (statutory or non- Statutory kinship placements occur when a
statutory) might currently be in place?
Child Protection intervention has occurred
and a decision has been made to place a
child with relatives or a significant friend. It
may also involve an order made by the Court.
Non-statutory kinship care is a term used to
describe an arrangement whereby child/ren
are cared for by relatives without any Child
Protection intervention. There should be a
National Register listing all kinship carers in
Scotland; both statutory and non-statutory,
kinship carers should be registered so the
Government knows exactly how many kinship
carers there are in Scotland. They haven’t a
clue how many carers there are in Scotland
at the moment.
(5)
Should there be a specific timescale for For the statutory placements possibly within
assessment to take place? If so, what two months. For non-statutory kinship carers
would be realistic? If not, why not?
it depends how many there are in Scotland.
401.1.7.CYPA-RESP.01.09.14
an
alternative There is far too much bureaucracy and heavy
handiness attached to kinship caring. Kinship
carers should be recognised as “relative
foster carers”, awarded the same recognition,
treatment and assistance as foster carers and
the imbalance would soon disappear
alleviating the need for continuous research
into what supports a kinship carer wants or
should receive.
As quoted in answer (2) there are far too
many individuals, officials, professionals,
organisations and levels associated with
kinship caring throughout Scotland; these
individuals and organisations have absolutely
no knowledge or experience of front line
kinship caring and should thus be removed
from any kind of assessment criteria
regarding kinship carers.
5
(6)
Should there be a requirement for the
local authority to notify the qualifying
person about their decision as to
whether to provide kinship care
assistance and the reason for it?
Of course they should advise the kinship
carer of their decision. Why shouldn’t they?
Carers are entitled to know this, it’s all about
transparency.
Part 3 : When or how a local authority is to consider whether a child is at risk of
becoming looked after (section 73(3)(b) of CYPA)
Questions for discussion:
Your Questions
Our Answers
(1)
Do you think these criteria will capture Absolutely not. The only way to capture
those who need support the most?
those in most need of support is to have a
register and monitor all carers and children.
(2)
Do you think we need to add any
criteria specifically relating to the
circumstances of the kinship carer and
the effect that these have on the child,
rather than just focussing on the child?
(3)
What additional criteria would you add? Since there appears to be a greater influx of
Why?
children being taken into care and placed
with kinship carers the suggestion would be
that there should be a central “somebody” coordinating how kinship caring should be dealt
with throughout Scotland. At present kinship
caring appears to be a complete mess with
the 32 local authorities all doing whatever
they please and causing absolute mayhem.
(4)
What criteria would you remove? Why?
401.1.7.CYPA-RESP.01.09.14
Maybe. A kinship carer does feel isolated,
abandoned and left to their own devices by
their local authority. There is no support
mechanism like the “Foster Carers’ Network”.
This does cause animosity and should be
looked into because if a kinship carer suffers
health problems then the kinship child is
affected and there is no support mechanism
to assist until the carer recovers.
Take the administration, organisation and
registration of kinship carers away from the
local authorities and get a qualified team of
professionals in to co-ordinate the carers into
well organised teams within each Council. It
just appears to be messy and no central
office has control over what is happening
across Scotland.
6
Part 4 : When or how a local authority is to review whether a child continues to be at risk of
becoming looked after and other matters about the provision of kinship care assistance
(sections 73(3)(c) and (d) of the CYPA)
Your Questions
Our Answers
(1)
Do you agree that reviews should take
place on a regular basis?
What
timescale do you think would be
appropriate (e.g. every year, every 2
years, etc.)
An annual review is probably appropriate
although each kinship care case should be
dealt with on an individual basis. There
should be no hard and fast rule but in
accordance with the CYPA there is to be an
appointed “guardian” with responsibility for
every child in Scotland.
Any concerns
flagged up by the “guardian” could initiate the
review process to kick in.
(2)
Do you think that local authorities or
people in receipt of assistance should
be able to request a review outside of
this timescale? Do you think that ‘a
significant change of circumstance’
would be an appropriate reason for
this? What other reasons might be
appropriate?
Teachers, health workers, play leaders,
nurseries, neighbours, acquaintances, etc.,
all have the wisdom, (if they are concerned
about a child’s welfare), to contact the
necessary authorities to instigate the review
process to kick in. (This question is far more
inclined probably towards foster carers).
(3)
What might a “significant change of
circumstance” be? Should we provide a
list of such circumstances in secondary
legislation or should this be covered in
guidance?
Kinship carer might have health or financial
issues and can no longer give adequate care
and protection to a kinship child.
Parental access / court hearings / there are a
multitude of eventualities which could affect
the stability of a fragile kinship child.
(4)
How can we ensure that this does not Franchise the workload out, or centralise the
place an unmanageable burden on local management of kinship care under the
authorities?
auspices of the NHS. At present no local
authority has been able to administer
successfully the workload pertaining to
kinship care. If the 32 local authorities can
successfully administer the workload for
foster carers then surely they should adopt a
similar method for administration for kinship
carers. A very simple but agreeable solution
to all concerned.
(5)
Do you think that we need to specify
what an assessment should consist of
and how it should be used in secondary
legislation, to ensure uniformity across
the country, or should we use guidance
instead to allow for flexibility and take
account of local and individual
circumstances?
401.1.7.CYPA-RESP.01.09.14
There is very little chance that local
authorities would accept, take notice and
implement as best practice an “assessment
template or instruction manual” with regard to
uniformity. Local authorities are not keen on
change and prefer to work to their own
agenda; therefore there is very little chance of
local authorities adapting and successfully
implementing a new approach to kinship
caring which could be rolled out across
Scotland.
7
Part III
FORWARD BY A KINSHIP CARER
Much has been attributed to Kinship Carers by charities and organisations that do not reflect the true
nature of the carer. This has been done by either poor or nonexistent investigative methodology or
to justify the manipulation or redirecting of funding.
Education and Culture Committee Meeting Minutes, 18 September 2012, [Col 1397] Quote Neil Findlay, “Councils get X if it does Y”,
the issue raised is;
not only is Y not happening; but blame is being apportioned to Kinship Carers.
It is to their shame that COSLA and Children 1st have misrepresented the facts around Kinship
Carers considering both organisations have been handed large amounts of monies to support
Carers.
1.
The Scottish Government and COSLA agreed to and signed up to the Concordat which
underpins the spending 2008-09 to 2010-11, (page 5 bullet point 6) “Kinship care –
providing allowances for Kinship Carers of “looked after children” to treat them on an
equivalent basis to Foster Carers”.
2.
Education and Culture Committee Meeting Minutes, 18 September 2012, [Col 1385]
Quote Neil Bibby, “20 local authorities obviously means 12 are not included. The table
shows that of the 20 authorities that were surveyed, five pay the same allowance rate for
kinship care and for foster care.
3.
Education and Culture Committee Meeting Minutes, 18 September 2012, [Col 1397]
Quote Neil Findlay, “I will pick up on that issue. The point that is being made is that the
block grant is provided, but it is subject to the Concordat. The Concordat means that there
is an agreement that a Council will get X if it does Y; the issue is that Y is not happening”
The evidence provided by Councillor Douglas Chapman, the COSLA spokesperson—I
know that you are not responsible for his submission, (minister) — states:
“This confusion has led to perverse incentives with children becoming and remaining
looked after with Kinship Carers for financial rather than welfare reasons.”
The inference is that a bit of a scam is going on. Is there any evidence of that?
No evidence is provided in the submission. Does the Government agree with that
assertion?
4.
Education and Culture Committee Meeting Minutes, 18 September 2012, [Col 1397]
Quote Aileen Campbell: One reason for bringing forward the kinship care order is to ensure
that the system does not create a perverse situation in which, as you say, more children
end up being looked after than we would ideally want.
5.
Education and Culture Committee Meeting Minutes, 18 September 2012, [Col 1398]
Quote Neil Findlay: Do you regard COSLA’s statement as being true? Is there any
evidence that what it suggests is taking place?
6.
Education and Culture Committee Meeting Minutes, 18 September 2012, [Col 1398]
Quote Aileen Campbell: There is anecdotal evidence through Children 1st.
-1-
With reference to the COSLA spokesperson in 3: on page 1 Councillor Douglas Chapman infers that
Kinship Carers do it for the perverse financial reasons.
On the contrary it is in fact COSLA members that do it for perverse financial reasons. Let’s examine
the facts. When a child is at risk it is the bodies represented by COSLA that have a duty to
intervene. These bodies have a number of tools at their disposal.
1.
2.
3.
Care Homes.
Foster Care
Kinship Care.
In the Care Home : they have a duty to look after the child’s needs and indeed any disabilities a
child may have and ensure that staff are adequately trained and resourced to meet that need,
anything less would be negligent.
Foster Care : they have the same duty of care and indeed they resource this through at least two
payments to the Carer one for the child’s maintenance and one for the carer. The carers payment
varies greatly depending on the child’s needs in other words it takes into account any disabilities a
child may have.
Kinship Care : this is undoubtedly recognised and confirmed by Councillor Douglas Chapman, (plus
the cohort of COSLA), as the best possible place for a “looked after” child. Why then are kinship
carers treated so badly and undervalued by the State/Government/Local Authority ?
1. Firstly they get the Kinship Carer to take out a section 11 if they can.
2. They misrepresent section 11 to the Carer, because in most cases they fail to point out that
COSLA members can retain parental rights. Why is this important to a child at risk? That
answer is quite simple; it takes the Kinship Carer out of conflict with the birth parents and
surely this is in the best interests of the child?
3. Consequentially, it allows COSLA to walk away from the situation. Yes, it’s a money saving
scam! They do not need to help provide the services a child may receive when in a Care
Home or in Foster Care. Pure and simple discrimination of the worst possible type,
perpetrated against that child.
This behaviour is prejudicial, biased, unfair and disgraceful, as well as being highly
discriminatory.
4. PPI was recognised as something that was miss-sold by banks it would appear that section
11 falls into this category.
5. Worst of all are the cases where COSLA members provide paltry amounts of support. They
have a “claw back” system which even Iain Duncan Smith might “retch at”! Family Allowance
becomes liable for tax at circa.£50,000. COSLA members, in their wisdom, deduct Family
Allowance (at source) from any payment/allowance which they make to kinship carers. The
rational is that Foster Carers do not get Family Allowance. Really! So they are now making
a direct link between the funding of Kinship Carers and Foster Carers.
A Kinship Carer is not funded, at all, (i.e. they do the job for absolutely nothing) they are
not paid a salary/fee/discretionary allowance or emolument, in any shape or form, to care
unconditionally for a child who is either a near/distant relative, family friend, or just a child
known to them. The kinship carer sacrifices everything to care unreservedly for a sometimes
very difficult, needy, neglected, damaged or disabled child.
-2-
COSLA members have intervened initially in the removal of a child from their natural/birth
parents; then shirk any responsibility, financially or otherwise, to assist and aid a kinship carer
in dealing with the whole scenario.
6. In conclusion therefore, regarding the aforesaid and justifiably highlighting the modus
operandi in relation to COSLA and its Members; it is apparent they are avoiding their
responsibilities, deceitfully hijacking Kinship Carers’ lives and discriminating against children
in kinship care
(i) they do not provide adequate funding for the carer to effectively and efficiently care for a
kinship child;
(ii) they do not provide training to the Kinship Carer; and
(iii) they do not provide additional funding for a kinship child with any kind of disability.
Undeniably kinship children suffer from a massive degree of inequality and discrimination
(Reference : Section 6 on Page 1) Education and Culture Committee Meeting Minutes, 18 September 2012, [Col 1398]
Quote Aileen Campbell: There is anecdotal evidence through Children 1st.
Children 1st hosted an event at the Scottish Parliament on 18 March 2014. The programme for the
evening included a section whereby a Kinship Carer was requested to tell her story. I sent a request
through to Jill Cook by email enquiring why that particular Carer was chosen to speak and what
particular factors or considerations Children 1st used in selecting a particular person to address the
attendees at the event to represent all kinship carers. I was advised that this information was
effectively the business of Children’s 1st and I was not privy to know! Since Children 1st receive
large amounts of cash supposedly for Kinship Carers I have every right to know to ensure that
kinship carers are not being misrepresented.
I, plus a large number of my kinship care colleagues, would be more than happy to meet with any
parliamentary committee to discuss my concerns on this specific topic and also to seek clarification
from the elusive Children 1st about their total and absolute involvement with kinship carers. Since
Children 1st receive substantial charitable funding from the public purse, I, as a kinship carer, have
every right to know how the funding given to charities on kinship carers’ behalf is used and spent.
============================================================================
[Email to Terry Harkins Kinship Carer from Jill Cook, (Children 1st) - 24th April 2014]
Dear Terry
Thank you for your email. I am the Service Manager of the National Kinship Care Service and I can
assure you that Children 1st “do not hold the view that people take children into kinship care for financial gain, and we did not say
this during any meetings we have had with COSLA”.
============================================================================
-3-
It is clear that an attempt to smear Kinship Carers has been perpetrated by organisations to justify
their own failings and indeed Parliament has been misled by either COSLA, Children 1st, or the
Minister.
What tangible help has Children 1st provided me with, or for that matter, any other Carer? I have
shown that they have been in contact with me via email yet they have never sent me any
documentation with regards to ‘a consultation’ or ‘a survey’; (I have received all via third parties)!
Can Children 1st demonstrate, make public and vouch by visually reporting their accountability of
their charitable income from the Scottish Government to be used explicitly for the benefit and welfare
of kinship carers.
For the avoidance of doubt, the following is what I should like to know:1.
Annual income received from the Scottish Government from the Third Sector
financial pot for the last financial year (i.e. Apr13 – Mar14) to be used
exclusively for kinship carers and their children.
£
2.
Children 1st – employee’s salaries / expenses / outlays / AOIE (any other
incidental expenditure) attributed to kinship caring, i.e. travel, car leasing or
extraordinary expenditure (please itemise)
£
3.
Outlays in respect of overheads for meetings, trainings or events. Please
describe and substantiate with spreadsheets, and collaborative accounts.
£
4.
Funds held to account for this financial year i.e. Apr14 – Sep14 (particularly
designated and ring fenced for “the use of kinship caring”)
£
============================================================================
Citizens Advice Scotland
Our group was approached by a Kinship Carer whom we met during a fundraising “bag packing”
event in Morrison’s Supermarket, Dalkeith. We offered the carer support and advised her to seek the
help and advice of a local charity, (Kinship Advice and Advocacy Provision SCIO - www.kaapinfo.org/kinship-care). The principal, Bruce Ballentine, provides free advocacy services to Kinship
Carers.
The carer informed us, in handwriting, that on 23rd July 2014, she had a meeting with Gill Westwood
of Citizen Advice Scotland in her home. The carer told Gill Westwood that she would be approaching
our Group for support. The carer told us Gill Westwood stated that she should not get in touch with
our group DMKC (Dalkeith Midlothian Kinship Carers or Bruce Ballentine of KAAP; since “We, DMKC
and KAAP”, could do more harm than good. Also present at the meeting was Diane Littlejohn of
Midlothian Sure Start.
On the 6th August 2014 the carer received a telephone call from Diane Littlejohn, (Midlothian Sure
Start) to remind her of Gill Westwood’s advice regarding DMKC and KAAP.
We have been contacted by Sue Peart, Manager, Citizen Advice Scotland, Penicuik, demanding
sight of the aforementioned handwritten letter. I suggested to Sue Peart that she liaise with Gill
Westwood to formally ascertain if she did in fact make such derogatory and negative comments,
regarding our support group and that of KAAP. (We have in fact retained the handwritten letter on
file and have received the carer’s absolute permission to use the letter as written evidence). We are
reluctant to follow this course of action though since all the members of Dalkeith Midlothian Kinship
Carer Support Group, are Kinship Carers themselves, and value the confidentiality and discretion
offered by the peer members within the group of carers.
-4-
If Sue Peart does not co-operate with our emailed requests (proof available on request) we will be
forced to approach the Citizen Advice Scotland’s Human Resources Department to seek clarification
on their Rules and Regulations regarding this kind of advice and behaviour by their advisers. We
have, indeed, on numerous occasions, requested contact details of the Citizens Advice Scotland
Human Resources Department.
============================================================================
Accordingly, you, as our elected representatives, must contemplate and reflect on the true net worth
of organisations and charities such as the aforesaid who receive vast sums of funding, with little or
no accountability, to provide some type of “half baked” services for Kinship Carers.
It seems unbelievable that these same organisations and charities consider that some Kinship
Carers are involved in some sort of “scam” and are only involved with kinship caring for financial
reward. This is disgusting, hurtful and spiteful since kinship caring is renowned for being financially
unrewarding but compassionately rewarding!
If Kinship Carers had a choice then they too would become Foster Carers and receive all the relative
supports available, financially and holistically. Foster caring is a lifestyle choice, kinship caring is not.
Kinship Carers in the main have been cajoled and emotionally blackmailed, by the local authorities,
into caring for a ‘looked after’, ‘at risk’, ‘damaged’ child.
Kinship Carers opinions should be sought prior to funding being allocated to any organisations or
charities bidding to provide services for Kinship Carers. There should be strict guidelines,
regulations, rules, accountability and monitoring of any organisation or charities advocating their
services to work with Kinship Carers.
============================================================================
In conclusion, and on a very personal note:
Six years ago my wife and I removed our nephew from foster care. He had been accommodated in a
series of unsuccessful foster care placements because he suffered from “attention deficit
hyperactivity disorder” (ADHD).
The symptoms of (ADHD) can be categorised into two sets of behavioural problems,
(i) inattentiveness, and
(ii) hyperactivity and impulsiveness
Foster Carers receive disability living allowances and holistic support for a child with any kind of
disability or incapacity (physically or mentally) including ADHD. Kinship Carers receive no such
recognition or allowances for caring for a child with an equal type of disability/incapacity. Foster
Carers receive frequent and regular respite but this is also denied to Kinship Carers.
============================================================================
All children taken into any category or definition of care (foster/kinship/residential) are “damaged
children” and therefore all carers ought to be treated identically and should be entitled to the
equivalent financial and holistic support/assistance.
-5-
Part IV
The Child's View
-6-
Transcription of the Child’s View
My name is ---- ------- -------- I am 12 years old I have A.D.H.D and live with my
Aunt Mandy and Uncle Terry. I live with them because my mum is dead and my dad
is homeless and takes drugs. I got taken off my Mum and Dad at 10 months and went
into 6 strangers homes then into foster care for 1-2 year, until my Aunt and Uncle
came and took me into their home and settled me in and I’ve been here for 6 and a bit
years and decided to write about it P.S My Mum and Dad have both been in Jail My
Mum once or twice My dad 5-6 times and counting. He’s violent and abusive
alcoholic, takes drugs neglected me he’s not even bothered to send me a birthday or
Christmas card, he’s not even been a proper dad, My uncle has been more of a dad
than he has. I’m glad that, I have written it down. It’s been a sad beginning but I’m
going to make sure it’s a happy ending
----
This was written by a child that is having a difficult time adjusting to the new surroundings of the High School. I was attending a meeting at the school and this was
written during the time I was away.
No Scammers here COSLA just people trying to ease a difficult situation without the
proper training and tools. For the record we have had no respite in 6 years, as well as
not being good for our health it probably makes us less effective carers but still we try
and try again, every day is a new day so to speak.
The three tier scam that is operated by COSLA members needs to stop as it quite
simply discriminates against children in Kinship Care.
Means testing School Dinner Test, if you have a jointed income of say £16,000, in
Midlothian you do not qualify for free meals. Means testing sheet takes no account of
things like Mortgage payments. (£400) per month.

Download Report