Sunday, 18 March 2018

Accusations of fabricated illness and child abuse used to bully innocent families

Fabricated or induced illness (formerly Munchausens By Proxy) is a rare form of child abuse. NHS choices website reckons that the incident of FII is 89 cases in every 100,000, however it does not quote its source. The government document "Safeguarding children in whom illness is fabricated or induced" put the figure at 0.5 out if every 100,000 over 5 and 2.8 in every 100,000 preschoolers, or 1 child in a million, per year.
FII takes many forms but usually includes;
- poisoning to induce symptoms
- physically inducing symptoms
-over or under medicating
- claiming false symptoms that are not easily verified
- exaggerating symptoms
- obtaining specialist treatment when not needed
- falsely alleging psychological illness in a child

However, despite the extreme and very rare nature of FII, accusations of FII are very commonplace. There is a worrying trend of using FII accusations routinely in child protection against any family that complains about services, is seen as "difficult", does not comply blindly or in any other way annoys professionals involved.

Current training for HCPs on FII gives a list of symptoms which is very worrying. These include, use of complaints procedures, seeking out advocates and support, advocating on behalf of the child and seeking multiple diagnosis. These behaviours are blatantly the normal behaviours of parents fighting for a seriously ill child or a child with additional needs who is being let down by the system.

What we end up with is a system that attacks families that are trying to care for children with rare, complex, invisible, or multiple illnesses, conditions and needs.

I compiled a survey to look at the extent of this problem as I am personally aware of a number of families who have been bullied in this way. What I found did not shock me, but I hope it can highlight this very real problem in our society.

I received 168 responses to my survey, of those 61% had been accused of FII. This worrying trend if FII is very ableist, targeting those families who have multiple members with extra needs, illness, or disability. 57% of parents accused of FII had an an additional need, chronic illness or disability themselves.

One surprise was that the accusations of FII seemed to be thrown at parents from a variety of socioeconomic backgrounds:
38 % were single parents in benefits
16% were a couple on benefits
38% were a couple with one or more person working
9% were single working parents
So it would seem that these accusations are not targeted at one class alone, however, families whose children have additional needs, chronic illness or disability are more likely to experience poverty (Kuper et Al 2012). Poverty  of course, not being measured by whether or not your parents work. It is estimated by Scope that disability costs an extra £570 on top of average living costs, so there is a massive financial burden to be taken into account when talking about families with children with additional needs.
However, according to the Office of National Statistics, single parent households make up 25% of families in the UK, so it would seem single parent households are overrepresentated in accusations if FII, making up 47% of those families accussed of FII.

Bullying by social services is of course, not limited to FII accusations. There does seem to be many similar trends through other malicious practice.
Of those surveyed who had experienced child protection proceedings, 59% had found themselves facing child protection proceedings following a complaint they had made. Worryingly, 18% faced child protection procedures after complaining about a professional abusing their child. If complaints of abuse by professionals like social workers and health care professionals are silenced with malicious proceedings, how can we trust those professionals with our children?

Within those parents who had experienced child protection proceedings, 54% have an extra need, chronic illness or disability themselves. Although it may be argued that parents with SEND or chronic illness may need additional support, this is not what is happening here. This is a high incident of these parents facing accusations of child abuse or neglect. A massive over representation of those with additional needs, illness or disability and shows the blatant ableism within health and social care.

This is reflected within the children of the families experiencing child protection proceedings, 87% of the families who faced child protection proceedings had a child with additional needs, illness or disability.
Remember again, that this isn't families being supported by social service, but those accused of abuse and neglect.

"Invisible" Illness and disabilities seem to be a particular target for these proceedings, namely;
- Autistic Spectrum Disorder
- Ehlers Danlos Syndrome
- Myalgic Encephalomyelitis
- Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
- Mental health difficulties
The ableist nature of society against those with Invisible illness and disability is well documented and there are current campaigns seeking to highlight Invisable illness and disability.
However this does not seem to have penetrated the health and social care community. Instead of offering support and understanding to those with these conditions, there seems to be a culture of disbelief.
This leads to mistrust and therefore a reduced likelihood of compliance and engagement with health and social care, which only increases their disbelief and suspicion.

Out if those that had been taken through child protection proceedings, 18% declared they home educated and the vast majority of them, 83%, had home education used as a concern against them. It has been highlighted in the media recently that education is often failing to meet childrens additional needs and forcing parents into home education, to then use this as a concern against the parents ignores the lack of provision for children with additional needs, disability and chronic illness.

One major point I feel need to be made is that while there are major cuts to health and social care, combined with higher rates of referral to social services, means resources are overstretched. Focusing resources on bullying these innocent families leaves victims of actual abuse vulnerable and perpetrators free to abuse these children without consequence. The results are far reaching for all of society and require a response from the government to tackle this problem and provide all families with the support they require.

If you have experienced bullying and/or accusations of fii then Fiightback may be able to help. They are on Facebook, have an open page, closed page and a specialist EDS page.

Please, if you have children who have SEND or chronic illness and have had positive or negative social services involvement, take my new survey

And sign my petition against this cruel practice


  1. as a family this has been and is a reality x

  2. this is a reality for my family ,one child with complex health needs and another with ADHD .

  3. I'm sorry to hear that Susan, it's awful how commonplace it has become and no one is talking about it, because everyone is so scared

  4. although not accused of FII, we were accused of emotional abuse and neglect, denial of domestic abuse (which never happened), failing to protect children, putting our own needs above the children, and “blaming” the child for issues at home when we were trying to explain what we were coping with to get her the help she desperately needed. We were dragged through courts and accused of not compling with SW’s or recognising the problems because we disagreed with “professionals”. Two social workers blatently lied in our reports which I complained about, but nothing was done and their reports still stand today. Two years on and my relationship was destroyed, my eldest child went off the rails ended up excluded from school and missed 2 years education, my (now ex) partner tried to commit suicide, and has been severely mentally damaged by what has happened, and I have been left as a single parent with a finally diagnosed extremely complex SEN child, and a younger undiagnosed SEN child. Both whom I now home educate because the system has completely failed them. I’m more than happy to tell my story to anyone who wants to hear it.

    1. Thankyou for sharing your story and I'm so sorry all that happened to you and your family.

    2. You can get the reports corrected by writing to social services correcting everything that is a mistake (send copies of any evidence that backs this up) according to the Data Protection Act 1998 (which you should state). According to the Act, all opinions must be clearly stated to be such and not presented as fact, or they breach the law.

      As they permanently attach it to the associated report(s) and correct anything that you can prove is wrong.

      If they don't respond or refuse, contact the Information Commissioner to complaint.

      Before you write to SS though, do a Subject Access Request for copies of the files as you will probably find a lot more lies, so best to address it now. Otherwise if they ever target you again, they will simply reuse the old lies as "evidence".

      If you have evidence of lies, you can report the social workers (and any other professional who wrote lies in reports because in law they are as guilty) to the police as this is perjury. If it went in documents to court it's perjury and if it was in reports that weren't associated with court then it's non-oath sworn perjury. They can get up to 7 years in jail for perjury and up to 2 years in jail for non-oath sworn perjury. All the reports arise out of Acts of Parliament e.g. the Children Act 1989, and therefore CiN reports and CP reports apply to the law. You need to quote the Perjury Act 1911 when you report them to the police. All professionals who sent lies in reports are clearly stated in the law to be equally guilty.

      You can also report the SWs to the HCPC and quote all the social work codes of conduct and ethics they have breached, which you can Google for.

    3. (*Ask that* they permanently...)

  5. Not hugely relevant to your article but just FYI - the article by Kuper et al (2012) is about families in low-income countries who are participating in the Plan International sponsorship scheme, so it's not commenting on the UK situation. Kuper is a lecturer on my current course. There may well be research on links between having a disabled child and being on a low income in the UK elsewhere, though.

  6. been here,despite all medical paper work,was awful.......mud sticks now school wont believe anything

    1. It's really awful and can affect you for tears to come, I don't think they grasp how devastating it all is!

  7. Tiny little typo: "This worrying trend if FII is very ableist" (should say "of")

    Saying everything I have been saying for a long time now, therefore I agree with everything you state.

    "False accusations of fabricated and induced illness against parents"

    And I have an ongoing survey for UK Autism Parents on Social Care Experiences (only 10 questions with multiple choice answer options and notes field for people to say more if they choose):