It isn’t a case of simply ‘getting over things’.

I still sometimes wake up quite affected by my past. The things that people did to me I can’t just get over. It will never be as simple as that. Those things won’t stay in the past when it comes to how they impact on my everyday life. I have not been out for a long time socially because I don’t want to do that nowadays. I don’t like even being around people some days (that would be today). The cruelty I experienced was so wrong. I was autistic not a bad person. I was basically psychologically tortured over a number of years to get rid of my autistic traits. I feel the effects of that. I can’t pretend that whole parts of me haven’t been destroyed in the process. I did end up traumatised but never realised I was until years later. I couldn’t remember chunks of things that happened when I got stressed because of what others were doing to me. It wouldn’t matter if I actually met a decent person tomorrow. I would always be suspicious of them … like everyone I’ve ever met since I went through the stuff that happened to me. Anyway, traumatised labelled people don’t seem to meet decent people. That energy seems to attract users and narcissists trying to prop up their own egos. Or I meet other damaged people who bring chaos to my life. I don’t get decent people wanting to know me at all. I’m by no means saying that damaged people aren’t decent, I’m meaning the users and narcissists with that comment. I have found this to be the case ever since I became out in the open with being autistic. That is why I’m considering being the opposite now. That label has given society an excuse to abuse me. The clause that I’m under which I’m trying to get off gives the system an excuse to freely walk into my life using historical information to interfere and potentially ruin my life again. I’m worried about that process because I haven’t heard of anyone getting off of the 117 section aftercare clause with a lifelong diagnosis. I will be the first to even challenge the system on this issue. I can’t find any other cases so I must be the first to go ahead with this process. They discharged me from mental health services over 6 years ago now (when an autism diagnosis was no longer classed as mental illness). They just never discharged the aftercare clause but I’ve had no services provided either. I was left on social cares list under the rehab team based miles away from where I live. I’ve seen them twice in the last 6 years, once when I came out of prison after I managed to get out early on appeal (only in there a month and it was changed to a community sentence on being released). They basically told me there was nothing that they could offer me. The second time was when I got that meeting to discuss the 117 thing. So there was basically nothing offered to me in recent years in regard to services that the clause would be needed to fund. Then during the social worker meeting it was suggested that if I stay on there the funding from the clause I’m currently on could be used to fund my care when I get elderly. I’m not planning to live that long and I’m not being left on a clause due to a what if scenario. That is basically how my son got adopted. Assumptions and what if scenarios presented to a judge to justify the cruelty they inflicted upon me in that situation. The way that modern social work is done should be reformed. I think I’ve mentioned this previously but my aunt on dad’s side used to be a social worker back before they had to go to university. The graduates started joining the system and it changed for the worse. There’s too many academic people working in it who can draw up a risk assessment based on information presented to them but these same people have no common sense and lack life experience. They simply have no idea because most of them have never had a disability or been through much in life (many qualify very young). It is very important to relate to clients in that kind of job. There is simply no way that the right decision can be made unless they do that. Children’s services need to look at the whole picture rather than just the child. They need to make an effort to keep families together rather than deciding to focus more on the adoption route trying to make our they’re parallel planning but they’ve already chosen the out of family option for the child. They have far too many cases to properly assess the families that get referred to them. That means they’re always playing it safe if they see anything in a birth family that is a potential risk. I would train to go into the system to change it from the inside but I’m doubtful that I will be allowed due to my history. I’m definitely not going to even attempt to do social work as a career until I’ve fought my way off of that clause. Anyway, todays topic kind of went off in a tangent. Sorry about that.

%d bloggers like this: