Personally, I think the protection services do a reasonable job in difficult circumstances, but it's seems to be up to the dedicated individual worker on the ground to make a lashed up system work. In this case, the people on the ground don't appear to have been up to it . They and a solicitor involved have been reprimanded as a first step.
I don't think it's possible to have a 100% water tight protection system though. Some one will always be evil enough and devious enough to find a way around restrictions placed on their behaviour.
Even on this small forum, we have Berbs with one view and Nour with the opposite one. Too much 'interference' or not enough? An interesting conundrum.
It's just that they appear to interfere when it's not necessary, but close cases where they are too dumb to see bruises behind chocolate, or too blind to see a broken beaten 17 month old baby.
I mean this baby was tortured, fingernails taken off, and STILL they closed the case.
You can't get any more incompetent.
I think in child abuse cases there should be no softly softly approach.