Explosive report Ed Balls refused to make public!

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/baby-p-the-official-files-1023092.html


By Mark Hughes and Cahal Milmo
Tuesday, 18 November 2008

Detailed documents chronicling every tragic moment in the short and horrific life of Baby P can be revealed for the first time today.

The comprehensive file gives a hitherto-unseen insight into the transformation of the 17-month-old toddler from a healthy infant into the victim of systematic and horrific abuse which was repeatedly missed by social workers. They chart every significant day in the youngster's life from birth to death.

Beginning at his birth on 1 March 2006, the document tells of his first innocent trips to the doctor to be weighed and treated for nappy rash. But within seven months the reasons for the visits had become more sinister.

His first non-routine trip to a doctor came on 13 October 2006 when he visited his GP, Dr Jerome Ikwueke, with bruises to his head and chest after what the document calls an accidental fall downstairs.

Two months later, on 11 December, he visits Dr Ikwueke, this time with bruising to his forehead, nose, sternum and right shoulder. On the same day he is seen by specialists at the Whittington Hospital, north London.

The following day he is examined again and referred to a child abuse investigation team. The police investigation began on 15 December. On 19 December, the boy's 27-year-old mother, who was last week convicted of causing or allowing her son to die, is arrested for the first time. She is freed on bail.

When the boy is discharged from hospital he is released into the care of Angela Godfrey, a family friend. Heartbreakingly, Baby P's only Christmas was spent with Ms Godfrey and not at home with his mother and siblings.

Also revealed in the early part of the documents are two separate trips Baby P's mother made to a doctor. On 9 June 2006 – three months after her son was born – she visits a doctor for depression. A month later she sees the same doctor to discuss relationship problems she had with the child's natural father. The man, who cannot be named for legal reasons, left Baby P's mother when he discovered her infidelity, but stayed in contact with his son.

In January 2007, the child returns to the hospital for X-rays on his legs and nappy rash. Meanwhile, his mother is examined by a mental health worker.

On 2 February, a Haringey Council social worker, Maria Ward, is appointed to the family. She visited Baby P at home for the first time on 22 February. She made 10 visits to his home in the six months she was their social worker, eight scheduled, two unannounced.

Meanwhile, another social worker said yesterday that she and police officers had raised concerns about Baby P being returned to his mother early in 2007. Sylvia Henry, a team manager at the Tottenham social work office, arranged a foster care place for the toddler but claimed she was overruled by a manager, who insisted that he be placed with Angela Godfrey.

However, Haringey Council has denied this. A statement released yesterday said: "That meeting agreed a plan for his return home and this was agreed with the police."

In April the child was taken to North Middlesex Hospital's A&E unit with bruising to his face and swelling to his head. The document notes that the mother claims the injuries were caused by another child who pushed Baby P into a fireplace four days earlier. It says that Baby P was unsteady on his feet and holding his head to one side.

The following day, on 10 April 2007, the child is referred to a child development centre after his mother and social worker apparently became concerned that he likes to bang his head against things. On 11 April he is discharged from hospital and sent home.

A month later the child's mother is interviewed by police under caution, relating to her arrest for assault on Baby P on 19 December. Three days later the police visit the family home, in Tottenham, north London, and take photographs of the child and the furniture and seize one of Baby P's toys.

Between 12 and 26 June, Baby P is looked after by Anne Walker, a childminder. Earlier this week she claimed she warned social services about the child's injuries, but says her warnings went unheeded. She said: "He was dying. I told them about his state. I said things were not right. But nothing was done. If someone had taken action we would not be mourning the loss of a baby's life. The warning signs were all there."

In July 2007, the month before Baby P's death, his mother takes him to the hospital twice to have him checked for an ear infection and an allergic reaction caused by red Leicester cheese.

Three days before he died, Baby P's mother sees her GP to complain she is stressed by accusations she has hurt her child. A day later she was told that she would not be charged over allegations she had assaulted her son. It was on or around these days that Baby P sustained his fatal injuries.

On 1 August 2007, Dr Sabah Al Zayyat examined Baby P at St Ann's Hospital in Tottenham. It was the last time that any medical professional had a chance to save the child. However Dr Zayyat failed to notice that the child had broken ribs and a broken back. Instead she notes that he is "quite miserable" and crying. She adds that it was not possible to make a full examination.

The document ends with 14 entries detailing Baby P's death. A 999 call was made at 11.36am on 3 August. Four minutes later, the ambulance arrived at the house. Half an hour later the child was declared dead at hospital and police were called. At 1.45pm Baby P's mother was arrested.

'Hit squad' to be sent to Haringey

*An emergency "hit squad" is about to be ordered into Haringey Council to take over the running of its troubled social services department, Nigel Morris writes.

Ed Balls, the Children's Secretary, is preparing to act within a fortnight. Ministers hope the move will force the council to suspend senior staff, including its director of children's services, Sharon Shoesmith. Mr Balls told MPs he would "not hesitate" to act on the findings of an inquiry into the mistakes made in the case of Baby P.

The Government also plans to give extra powers to "children's trusts", which aim to protect youngsters. And Mr Balls announced details of a review by Lord Laming into child protection procedures.

Who's who in the documents

Dr Jerome Ikwueke

The GP who saw Baby P in the first untroubled months of his life and later spotted the injuries which raised suspicions that he was being abused in December 2006. He referred Baby P to specialists at the Whittington Hospital in north London.

Dr Heather Mackinnon

The consultant paediatrician at the Whittington who examined Baby P and was so concerned at his injuries that she contacted Haringey social services. She expressed concern at the suggestion he should be returned to his mother.

Angela Godfrey

The family friend who was given care of Baby P in December 2006 after he was released from hospital. She pressed for the infant to be returned to his mother.

Maria Ward

The social worker appointed to Baby P's case in February 2007. She made 10 visits to the family home, the last occurring four days before his death. She declared herself content with the protection plan for the toddler.

Paulette Thomas

A health visitor who first visited Baby P's home in March 2007. She saw him only four times before his death after his mother cancelled appointments. Thomas reported no problems at his one-year development check.

Dr Sabah al Zayyat

The paediatrician who was the last doctor to see Baby P alive. She failed to spot his broken back or ribs and claimed he was moving his legs when she examined him two days before his death. She is the only individual who has faced censure for her conduct by being banned from working with children unsupervised.

His first non-routine trip to a doctor came on 13 October 2006 when he visited his GP, Dr Jerome Ikwueke, with bruises to his head and chest after what the document calls an accidental fall downstairs.

Two months later, on 11 December, he visits Dr Ikwueke, this time with bruising to his forehead, nose, sternum and right shoulder. On the same day he is seen by specialists at the Whittington Hospital, north London.


This was already at 7 months old!!

By Simon Walters and Daniel Boffey
Last updated at 2:34 AM on 15th March 2009

* Vital legal meeting delayed for six weeks
* Interim care order agreed but not issued
* Baby P returned to his home though dogs were still there
* Social workers did not believe mother had live-in lover
* And now disgraced council boss could win £1m in claim for 'sex discrimination'

An attempt to cover up the full horror of the death of Baby P was exposed last night after a secret report on the blunders that caused the tragedy was leaked to The Mail on Sunday.

The report shows how the true scale of incompetence by the authorities - and the appalling injuries suffered by the little boy - were censored by the disgraced social services chief blamed for the tragedy, with the full backing of the Government.

Schools Secretary Ed Balls has refused pleas to publish full details of the Serious Case Review of Baby P's death in August 2007. But The Mail on Sunday has learned that it shows:

* A vital legal meeting that failed to decide to take the child out of his home days before he died had been delayed for six weeks because of 'workload pressures' - and was a shambles when it took place.
* It was agreed there were legal grounds for issuing an 'interim care order' to withdraw the child six months before he died - but nothing was done.
* Instructions not to let the child return home until dogs had been removed from the house were ignored.
* Police were accused of letting their investigation into child abuse claims 'drift'.
* Social workers did not believe the mother had a live-in lover - even though she announced she was pregnant in a parenting class that they told her to attend.
* A doctor who failed to notice Baby P had a broken back believed the boy had been sent for treatment because of his 'behaviour' - not child abuse.
* When the police officer in charge of the case changed, the new officer was not told of Baby P's background.
* Health, welfare and legal experts missed vital meetings to discuss the child's welfare.

The Serious Case Review was supervised by sacked Haringey social services chief Sharon Shoesmith - who, it can be revealed, is accusing the council of sex discrimination over her dismissal and could win as much as £1million if successful.

The review was completed last November after Baby P's mother, boyfriend and a male lodger were convicted of causing or allowing the baby's death.

However, it has never been made public. Instead, an 'executive summary' - in effect a censored version - was published.

The decision not to publish the full report was supported by Mr Balls, who said it could deter people from co-operating with investigations into similar cases. However, critics say it is a cover-up.

The Serious Case Review shows how the summary played down the catalogue of blunders by the authorities - and watered down the scale of brutality inflicted on the child as a result of their failures.

One key aspect of the full report concerns a legal review held on July 25, 2007, a week before Baby P died. It was called to decide whether to apply for a care order to remove the child from the mother's home and whether to launch a police investigation.

The summary suggests it was conducted properly. Yet the Serious Case Review shows the legal advisers who had been dealing with the case were not present and a 'locum' lawyer who knew none of the background details dealt with it.

She merely 'noted the medical report and details of the police investigation - no proper minutes were taken', says the report. It says the scandalous six-week delay in organising the meeting was caused by 'workload pressures'.

Furthermore, those present appeared unaware that as early as December 29, 2006 - weeks after abuse of Baby P was first suspected - police had agreed that the threshold for issuing an interim care order had already been met. 'Meeting decided threshold had been met but it was not worth pursuing,' it states.

The summary suggests the authorities could not be blamed because the toddler's mother had 'co-operated with child protection plans'. This is contradicted by the uncensored version.

It reveals that after the child was briefly withdrawn from the house, social services were advised that he should not be allowed back with his mother until dogs had been removed from her home. The advice was ignored.

At last year's trial, it emerged that there were a number of dogs in the house and that the mother's lover treated Baby P like a dog.

The full report states: 'Jan 21. Police objected to presence of dogs in the child's home. A meeting was convened to discuss the child's return home but no paediatrician was present.

'Jan 26. Child went back to live with his mother.'

In addition, the mother 'disappeared' for a week in July, weeks before Baby P died, without telling the authorities.

The failure to realise that the mother's boyfriend lived with Baby P is also laid bare. The full report says Baby P's father told the authorities 'he was convinced the child's mother had a boyfriend. The mother denied the allegation the next day. The father's claim was not properly checked'.

The mother announced she was pregnant when she was sent to parenting lessons by the council. Yet social services were still unaware she had a lover.

The report says police allowed the investigation into Baby P to 'drift' and when one officer was replaced by another, case notes were not passed on.

'No photographs were taken of child's injuries when police visited. Investigation drifted for two months. Specialist doctor emailed police re calling an independent review but received no reply.'

It was decided in March that there should be an urgent 'paediatric assessment' but it did not happen until two days before Baby P died.

When it did occur, the doctor failed to spot that Baby P had a broken back and believed the child had been brought in for treatment because of his 'behaviour' - not suspected child abuse.

The summary says there was 'extensive involvement' of professionals in the months up to Baby P's death. But the full report says they were missing from vital meetings and did not speak to each other.

'June 4. Meeting held to discuss child. Police and child protection people there but no doctors or medical experts.

'June 8. Case review meeting. Agreed case was urgent but no health professionals present. Legal review did not happen until six weeks later.'

Most harrowing of all, the full report contains more details of Baby P's injuries including 'haematoma [internal bleeding], scabs, blood marks, an infected finger, hives [a skin rash] and blueish bruises'.

Last night Fergus Smith, the independent child welfare expert who wrote the Serious Case Review, called for all such reports to be published in full.

He did not comment on the Baby P report, but said: 'These reports should be in the public domain, suitably anonymised to protect those involved and frontline staff.'

A source close to the inquiry said: 'Getting information from Haringey was like getting blood from a stone. The inquiry team contemplated walking out.'

A Haringey Council spokesman said: 'Publication of Serious Case Reviews is governed by statutory guidance. Any change is a matter for the Government.'

Details of the full report were revealed as it emerged that Mrs Shoesmith, the head of children's services who was sacked over Baby P's death, is claiming that she was the victim of sexual discrimination by Haringey.

In combining a claim for unlawful dismissal with an allegation that she was treated differently because of her gender, Mrs Shoesmith, 55, stands to maximise her potential level of compensation over the loss of her £133,000-a-year job as Haringey's Director of Children and Young People (DCYP).

There is a £63,000 cap on unfair dismissal payouts but there are no limits on compensation for discrimination claims.

Should Mrs Shoesmith be successful, she would be eligible for a year's loss of earnings leading up to the tribunal date, loss of future earnings and further compensation for her alleged 'injury to feelings and for personal injury'.

She has put no figure on her claim but the total payout could potentially surpass £1million, according to experts in employment law.

John Quigley, of William Sturges Solicitors, said: 'If she won hands down it could be a huge payout on the basis that she is only 55 and she would otherwise have had ten more years of employment and salary.'

Mrs Shoesmith was dismissed without notice last year after the review of the case ordered by Mr Balls.

The review blamed Mrs Shoesmith, who had 1,000 staff and oversaw an annual budget of £100million, for 'insufficient' management oversight. She subsequently lost an internal council disciplinary hearing in January over her sacking.

In her claim, lodged at Watford Employment Tribunal and seen by this newspaper, Mrs Shoesmith says she has 'suffered and continues to suffer from clinically recognised psychiatric illness and has had suicidal thoughts following the severe stress and trauma caused by the termination of her employment'. It alleges that there was no lawful reason for her dismissal.

She claims the disciplinary procedures she went through were unfair and that her fate was predetermined by the intervention of Mr Balls in a televised Press conference in which she was described as 'not fit for purpose'.

Mrs Shoesmith further claims she was 'unlawfully discriminated against on the ground of her gender' in that she was replaced by men as both Chairperson of the Local Safeguarding Children Board (LSCB) and as DCYP.

The submission adds: 'The claimant will say that she was treated less favourably by the Council than a man would have been treated in similar circumstances in that she was summarily dismissed from her job without compensation whereas a man would not have been so dismissed.'

She claims that she was made the 'scapegoat' for Baby P's death.

Mrs Shoesmith is also claiming breach of contract in the High Court, where she could win a year's salary for the council's failure to pay her in lieu of notice.

Mrs Shoesmith declined to comment. A spokesman for Haringey Council said: 'We will contest all her claims vigorously.'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1162061/Baby-P-boss-1m-sex-bias-claim-reveal-explosive-report-Ed-Balls-refused-make-public.html

This is disgusting!!!! I have no words to describe the utter shitiness of this crap system and how it failed a tiny defenceless little boy.

Something needs to be done.