Tribunal member reported claimant to child protection

The doctor that sat on the tribunal made a report to child protection.

It's not clear whether this was meant as a helpful Section 17 referral due to the child having SEN and thus a child in need due to disability or, as the social worker stated, 'negligence'.

I would assume the social worker shouldn't have named the reporting party. But that aspect fits with their general lack of professionalism and tact.

So I'm curious -- does this happen often?

(Incidentally the tribunal was partially successful, going from no award to standard for both components, but there may have been an error in the number of points awarded with regard to being unable to leave the house without prompting and a companion due to over welling 'anxiety'.)

Yes, of that I am aware. Especially for a GP. And that I support.

And regardless of which it could have been a Section 17 referral. As an 'assessment of needs' was mentioned as needing to be done during the tribunal, but that things had got in the way. (A Section 17 referral secures help for a SEN child that the local authority has a statutory obligation to provide.)

Maybe it happens more that we hear though, as I suspect most social workers aren't arrogant enough to name the person that made the referral though, maybe.

An explanation of the referral was received yesterday, and the most charitable way to describe it is 'wrong'.

I'll draft a complaint to the President of the Tribunal.

If they were wrong, they were wrong. The first question is whether they did it by direction of the Tribunal. If not, then it's really for the President of the Tribunal to resolve.