http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/lawandorder/6001357/A-request-to-snoop-on-public-every-60-seconds.html
A request to snoop on public every 60 secs
Councils, police and other public bodies are seeking access to people’s private telephone and email records almost 1,400 times a day, new figures have disclosed.
By Tom Whitehead and James KirkupPublished: 10:00PM BST 09 Aug 2009
Councils have been accused of using the powers, which were originally intended to tackle terrorism and organised crime, for trivial matters such as littering and dog fouling Photo: AP
The authorities made more than 500,000 requests for confidential communications data last year, equivalent to spying on one in every 78 adults, leading to claims that Britain had “sleepwalked into a surveillance society”.
An official report also disclosed that hundreds of errors had been made in these “interception” operations, with the wrong phone numbers or emails being monitored.
Related Articles
· Councils launched 10,000 snooping operations last year
· MPs to investigate council email spies
· Government wants powers to open your private email account
· Local authorities launched 10,000 snooping operations last year
· Council spy cases hit 1,000 a month
The figures will fuel concerns over the use of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act by public bodies.
The Act gives authorities – including councils, the police and intelligence agencies – the power to request access to confidential communications data, including lists of telephone numbers dialled and email addresses to which messages have been sent.
Councils have been accused of using the powers, which were originally intended to tackle terrorism and organised crime, for trivial matters such as littering and dog fouling. Only last month, it emerged that councils and other official bodies had used hidden tracking devices to spy on members of the public.
The latest figures were compiled by Sir Paul Kennedy, the interception of communications commissioner, who reviews requests made under the Act. They relate to monitoring communication “traffic” – such as who is contacting whom, when and where and which websites are visited, but not the content of conversations or messages themselves.
Sir Paul found that last year a total of 504,073 such requests were made. The vast majority were made by the police and security services but 123 local councils made a total of 1,553 requests for communications data. Some councils sought lists of the telephone numbers that people had dialled.
Amid growing unease about surveillance powers, ministers issued new guidelines last year about their use. Despite the promised crackdown, the 2008 figure is only slightly lower than 2007’s 519,260 requests.
In April, the Home Office said it would go ahead with plans to track every phone call, email, text message and website visit made by the public, in order to combat terrorists and other criminals.
Chris Huhne, Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman, said: “It cannot be a justified response to the problems we face in this country that the state is spying on half a million people a year.
“We have sleepwalked into a surveillance state but without adequate safeguards.”
Sir Paul found 595 errors in interception requests last year, including mistakes by MI5 and MI6, the intelligence agencies.
However, he defended councils over their use of the Act, concluding: “It is evident that good use is being made of communications data to investigate the types of offences that cause harm to the public.”
His report even encourages councils to acquire more communications data, saying that “local authorities could often make more use of this powerful tool to investigate crimes”.
A Home Office spokesman said: “It’s vital that we strike the right balance between individual privacy and collective security and that is why the Home Office is clear these powers should only be used when they are proportionate.”
Monday, August 10, 2009
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
Charter for Grandchildren considered for Wales & England
Dear Frank,
Thanks for your 23rd April e-mail.
Please accept my apologies for the delay in my response - I am backlogged with work.
You conclude by stating "I was approached on the 29th January this year by a researcher from the Assembly’s Research Department a Sarah Hatherley requesting my views on a “Charter for Children”.
See Sarah's response below and attached.
Does Janet have everything in hand at Local Authority level?
I will now pursue the Deputy Minister for Social Services and get back to you.
Best wishes
Mark
From: Hatherley, Sarah (APS MRS) [mailto:Sarah.Hatherley@Wales.GSI.Gov.UK] Sent: 13 February 2009 15:46To: Isherwood, Mark (Assembly Member); Jones, Toby (AM Support Staff, Mark Isherwood)Subject: FW: MRS090228 Charter for Grandchildren
Dear Mark/ Toby,
Following on from my response below to your enquiry on a Charter for Grandchildren, I have received the following response from the office of the Deputy Minister for Social Services:
Although our Minister has not had any specific discussions on a Charter for Grandchildren /Grandparents, we recognise that Grandparents play a significant role in the lives of children and young people. As well as being recognised in the Parenting Action Plan this is also highlighted within the Assembly Government’s Strategy for Older People.
The Parenting Action Plan which was issued under the policy portfolio of the Minister for Children, Education and Lifelong Learning and skills in December 2005, highlighted the role of Grandparents under Chapter 4 – Promoting Positive Parenting (see paragraphs 4.9 - 4.12).The action to develop from this was ‘Action 3’ as stated below:
“We will set up a Working Group in the Autumn 2005 to consider the Beth Johnson Foundation report on grandparents in Wales and propose an outline Programme of Action for the Assembly Government, statutory authorities and the voluntary sector, including the sharing of good practice and approaches. Subsequent actions will be built into the third year of the Parenting Action Plan (2007-08), linked with Phase Two of the Strategy for Older People”.
There are still some issues that are ongoing from the work on Grandparenting and the recommendations of the Working Group on Grandparenting. A summary of the actions are as follows:
Recommendation for a survey to be undertaken of the use made by local authorities of family and friends care, and of the arrangements in place to provide financial support. This is being pursued through the Children and Young Person Act 2008 that proposes to provide a framework for family and friend’s care.
Guidance to local authorities clarifying the use of family and friends care, to ensure compliance with the statutory requirements and to ensure parity of treatment, will link into the work pursued by the Children and Young Persons Act 2008.
Recommendation that the use of the Toolkit produced by the Family Rights Group be used. The Assembly government has funded production of a Welsh language version of the Family Rights Book and toolkit that is due to be published in March 2009.
Recognition of the role of grandparents in supporting parents is included in guidance on the role of intergenerational approaches in strengthening the family being developed and planned to issue in December 2009".
I have attached a copy of the Parenting Action Plan and Strategy for Older Strategy for your information.
<> <>
You might also be interested in the evidence to the Children and Young People's Committee of the National Assembly of Wales in relation to the Parenting Action Plan: http://www.assemblywales.org/bus-home/bus-committees/bus-committees-third1/bus-committees-third-cyp-home/bus-committees-third-cyp-inquiry/cyp-pap.htm
Best wishes
Sarah
______________________________________________ From: Hatherley, Sarah (APS MRS) Sent: 30 January 2009 09:46 To: 'Mark.Isherwood@wales.gov.uk'; 'jones.toby@wales.gov.uk' Subject: MRS090228 Charter for Grandchildren
Dear Mark/ Toby You asked whether Wales (or Wales and England) has an equivalent of the Scottish Government’s ‘Charter for Grandchildren’ – or what consideration has been given to one?
It is my understanding that the ‘Charter for Grandchildren’, which was published in 2006, applies to Scotland only. There is currently no equivalent document for Wales (or Wales and England). It was created in Scotland to accompany the Family Law Bill (Scotland) 2006 as advisory only and is not legally binding. The Charter was designed to remind parents, professionals, children and grandparents of the important role that grandparents and the wider family can play in a child's life, and how the wider family can be a source of support and stability in difficult times. You can view the document using the link below: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2006/04/21143655/2
I have contacted Grandparents Apart Self Help Group, (who have been actively involved in promoting the Charter for Grandchildren in Scotland and at a UK level) to ask them whether they have been involved in discussions with the Welsh Assembly Government regarding an equivalent document for Wales. I can confirm that they have not.
You might be interested to know that Grandparents Apart Self Help Group have called on the Scottish Parliament to make the Charter for Grandchildren legally binding. The following briefing provides background information on the Petition and the Scottish Executive's response and can be accessed using the link below: http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/business/research/petitionBriefings/pb-07/PB07-1051.pdf
The group has recently presented a new proposal to the Scottish Executive to make the Charter mandatory for professionals dealing with children. Further information can be found on the Grandparent's Apart website using following link: http://www.grandparentsapart.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&p10
The following article, 'Grandparents' rights and grandparents' campaigns', published in the Child and Family Law Quarterly might also be of interest to you. I have attached a copy of this article for your information below.
<> I have contacted the Welsh Assembly Government to find out more about any consideration they might have given to the Charter for Grandchildren. I should receive a response from the Assembly Government by Wednesday 4 February and I will forward it on to you then.
Best wishes, Sarah Sarah Hatherley Members' Research Service /Gwasanaeth Ymchwil yr Aelodau National Assembly for Wales/Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru 029 2089 8447 The Members' Research Service is independent of the Welsh Assembly Government and provides confidential and impartial research support to the Assembly's committees and to individual Assembly Members.
Mae Gwasanaeth Ymchwil yr Aelodau yn cefnogi Pwyllgorau'r Cynulliad ac Aelodau'r Cynulliad wrth ddarparu gwasanaeth ymchwil cyfrinachol a di-duedd, sy'n annibynnol o Lywodraeth Cynulliad Cymru.
Visit the Members’ Research Service internet page Cliciwch yma i weld tudalen rhyngrwyd Gwasanaeth Ymchwil yr Aelodau
Visit the Assembly Business Notice Cliciwch yma i weld Hysbysiad Busnes y Cynulliad
Thanks for your 23rd April e-mail.
Please accept my apologies for the delay in my response - I am backlogged with work.
You conclude by stating "I was approached on the 29th January this year by a researcher from the Assembly’s Research Department a Sarah Hatherley requesting my views on a “Charter for Children”.
See Sarah's response below and attached.
Does Janet have everything in hand at Local Authority level?
I will now pursue the Deputy Minister for Social Services and get back to you.
Best wishes
Mark
From: Hatherley, Sarah (APS MRS) [mailto:Sarah.Hatherley@Wales.GSI.Gov.UK] Sent: 13 February 2009 15:46To: Isherwood, Mark (Assembly Member); Jones, Toby (AM Support Staff, Mark Isherwood)Subject: FW: MRS090228 Charter for Grandchildren
Dear Mark/ Toby,
Following on from my response below to your enquiry on a Charter for Grandchildren, I have received the following response from the office of the Deputy Minister for Social Services:
Although our Minister has not had any specific discussions on a Charter for Grandchildren /Grandparents, we recognise that Grandparents play a significant role in the lives of children and young people. As well as being recognised in the Parenting Action Plan this is also highlighted within the Assembly Government’s Strategy for Older People.
The Parenting Action Plan which was issued under the policy portfolio of the Minister for Children, Education and Lifelong Learning and skills in December 2005, highlighted the role of Grandparents under Chapter 4 – Promoting Positive Parenting (see paragraphs 4.9 - 4.12).The action to develop from this was ‘Action 3’ as stated below:
“We will set up a Working Group in the Autumn 2005 to consider the Beth Johnson Foundation report on grandparents in Wales and propose an outline Programme of Action for the Assembly Government, statutory authorities and the voluntary sector, including the sharing of good practice and approaches. Subsequent actions will be built into the third year of the Parenting Action Plan (2007-08), linked with Phase Two of the Strategy for Older People”.
There are still some issues that are ongoing from the work on Grandparenting and the recommendations of the Working Group on Grandparenting. A summary of the actions are as follows:
Recommendation for a survey to be undertaken of the use made by local authorities of family and friends care, and of the arrangements in place to provide financial support. This is being pursued through the Children and Young Person Act 2008 that proposes to provide a framework for family and friend’s care.
Guidance to local authorities clarifying the use of family and friends care, to ensure compliance with the statutory requirements and to ensure parity of treatment, will link into the work pursued by the Children and Young Persons Act 2008.
Recommendation that the use of the Toolkit produced by the Family Rights Group be used. The Assembly government has funded production of a Welsh language version of the Family Rights Book and toolkit that is due to be published in March 2009.
Recognition of the role of grandparents in supporting parents is included in guidance on the role of intergenerational approaches in strengthening the family being developed and planned to issue in December 2009".
I have attached a copy of the Parenting Action Plan and Strategy for Older Strategy for your information.
<
You might also be interested in the evidence to the Children and Young People's Committee of the National Assembly of Wales in relation to the Parenting Action Plan: http://www.assemblywales.org/bus-home/bus-committees/bus-committees-third1/bus-committees-third-cyp-home/bus-committees-third-cyp-inquiry/cyp-pap.htm
Best wishes
Sarah
______________________________________________ From: Hatherley, Sarah (APS MRS) Sent: 30 January 2009 09:46 To: 'Mark.Isherwood@wales.gov.uk'; 'jones.toby@wales.gov.uk' Subject: MRS090228 Charter for Grandchildren
Dear Mark/ Toby You asked whether Wales (or Wales and England) has an equivalent of the Scottish Government’s ‘Charter for Grandchildren’ – or what consideration has been given to one?
It is my understanding that the ‘Charter for Grandchildren’, which was published in 2006, applies to Scotland only. There is currently no equivalent document for Wales (or Wales and England). It was created in Scotland to accompany the Family Law Bill (Scotland) 2006 as advisory only and is not legally binding. The Charter was designed to remind parents, professionals, children and grandparents of the important role that grandparents and the wider family can play in a child's life, and how the wider family can be a source of support and stability in difficult times. You can view the document using the link below: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2006/04/21143655/2
I have contacted Grandparents Apart Self Help Group, (who have been actively involved in promoting the Charter for Grandchildren in Scotland and at a UK level) to ask them whether they have been involved in discussions with the Welsh Assembly Government regarding an equivalent document for Wales. I can confirm that they have not.
You might be interested to know that Grandparents Apart Self Help Group have called on the Scottish Parliament to make the Charter for Grandchildren legally binding. The following briefing provides background information on the Petition and the Scottish Executive's response and can be accessed using the link below: http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/business/research/petitionBriefings/pb-07/PB07-1051.pdf
The group has recently presented a new proposal to the Scottish Executive to make the Charter mandatory for professionals dealing with children. Further information can be found on the Grandparent's Apart website using following link: http://www.grandparentsapart.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&p10
The following article, 'Grandparents' rights and grandparents' campaigns', published in the Child and Family Law Quarterly might also be of interest to you. I have attached a copy of this article for your information below.
<
Best wishes, Sarah Sarah Hatherley Members' Research Service /Gwasanaeth Ymchwil yr Aelodau National Assembly for Wales/Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru 029 2089 8447 The Members' Research Service is independent of the Welsh Assembly Government and provides confidential and impartial research support to the Assembly's committees and to individual Assembly Members.
Mae Gwasanaeth Ymchwil yr Aelodau yn cefnogi Pwyllgorau'r Cynulliad ac Aelodau'r Cynulliad wrth ddarparu gwasanaeth ymchwil cyfrinachol a di-duedd, sy'n annibynnol o Lywodraeth Cynulliad Cymru.
Visit the Members’ Research Service internet page Cliciwch yma i weld tudalen rhyngrwyd Gwasanaeth Ymchwil yr Aelodau
Visit the Assembly Business Notice Cliciwch yma i weld Hysbysiad Busnes y Cynulliad
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
Journalist looking for a story.
Hello Jimmy,
Hope you're both well. You might remember I spoke to you a while back for an article for Best magazine. I'm not sure if it's been published yet as they contacted me just last week and asked me to send it through again, so it might be that it's due to come out in the next few weeks. Sorry for the delay! As soon as I find out when it will be going into the mag, I'll let you know.
I'm actually contacting you about another article I've approached to write, this time for Yours magazine. They're interested in the whole issue of grandparents separated from their grandchildren, but they're looking for quite a specific case study. I'll give you their wish list and we'll see if it draws any comparisons with any stories you may have come across.
They're looking to speak to a grandmother who became separated from her grandchildren because of a marriage break-up, but was then reunited with them at a later date and now has a loving relationship with them. They would like the grandchild to be over 18, to avoid any issues with identification.
I did think of your own story, but I'm not sure if the fact that you'll soon be in Best will cause a problem for them. If you can't think of anyone else in your organisation, I will suggest Margaret to them as a possible candidate and see what they think.
Hope this is okay with you. Please drop me a line when you've had a chance to think if you know of anyone suitable, either by return email or by giving me a call on the numbers below.
Many thanks and I'll look forward to hearing from you soon.
Kind regards,
Elaine.
Elaine McLaren
Tel: 01453 828 584
Mobile: 07799 830 672
Hope you're both well. You might remember I spoke to you a while back for an article for Best magazine. I'm not sure if it's been published yet as they contacted me just last week and asked me to send it through again, so it might be that it's due to come out in the next few weeks. Sorry for the delay! As soon as I find out when it will be going into the mag, I'll let you know.
I'm actually contacting you about another article I've approached to write, this time for Yours magazine. They're interested in the whole issue of grandparents separated from their grandchildren, but they're looking for quite a specific case study. I'll give you their wish list and we'll see if it draws any comparisons with any stories you may have come across.
They're looking to speak to a grandmother who became separated from her grandchildren because of a marriage break-up, but was then reunited with them at a later date and now has a loving relationship with them. They would like the grandchild to be over 18, to avoid any issues with identification.
I did think of your own story, but I'm not sure if the fact that you'll soon be in Best will cause a problem for them. If you can't think of anyone else in your organisation, I will suggest Margaret to them as a possible candidate and see what they think.
Hope this is okay with you. Please drop me a line when you've had a chance to think if you know of anyone suitable, either by return email or by giving me a call on the numbers below.
Many thanks and I'll look forward to hearing from you soon.
Kind regards,
Elaine.
Elaine McLaren
Tel: 01453 828 584
Mobile: 07799 830 672
Thursday, April 2, 2009
BBC 30 minute Interview with Shareen Nanjinani
GRANDPARENTS APART INTERVIEW IN PARTS
1http://www.youtube.com/v/o7YBPu3QurYGRANDPARENTS APART INTERVIEW PART
2http://www.youtube.com/v/UFkj5LJX8CEGRANDPARENTS APART INTERVIEW PART
3http://www.youtube.com/v/QqvpRdl6Q4s
1http://www.youtube.com/v/o7YBPu3QurYGRANDPARENTS APART INTERVIEW PART
2http://www.youtube.com/v/UFkj5LJX8CEGRANDPARENTS APART INTERVIEW PART
3http://www.youtube.com/v/QqvpRdl6Q4s
Friday, March 27, 2009
Thursday, March 26, 2009
The Dundee Demo report.
Further info:- http://gapukinfo.blogspot.com/
http://www.youtube.com/swf/l.swf?swf=http%3A//s.ytimg.com/yt/swf/cps-vfl87070.swf&video_id=CE9Ih2169y0&rel=1&eurl=&iurl=http%3A//i4.ytimg.com/vi/CE9Ih2169y0/hqdefault.jpg&sk=Aba9SxvYfXrKBJCLn7NtepKKAW-42qmmC&fs=1%22%3E%3C/param%3E%3Cparam&hl=en&cr=US&avg_rating=0.0&length_seconds=40&allow_ratings=1&title=GRANDPARENTS%20DEMO%20AT%20DUNDEE%20SOCIAL%20WORK%20CONFERENCE
Dear All,
Our campaign in Dundee went very well. We were right outside the room where the attendees were having registration and their morning coffee breaks and they could not help but see us as we waved to them. Someone heard them debating us being there so we have achieved what we came for.
Alan Baird the boss man in question has refused to resign over the Branden Muir case in Dundee and would not answer our phone calls to his office. His secretary refused to give us any information as to his whereabouts and even refused to speak to the media.
The media coverage was Brilliant, GMTV, STV, Radio Times, The Telegraph, The Courier and a few radio and newspaper reporters which i can't remember them all but will be posted on the blog above as they become available. We can't thank them all enough for their coverage and kindness.
The Apex City Quay Hotel Dundee.
It cost £95+vat for social services to charge social services for the conference. £65+£13.50 for breakfast at this Hotel which lots of them stayed overnight. What a Bill!According to the locals there is huge social services building with lots of rooms and another one just yards from the Apex (luxury) Hotel which could easily have housed this conference.
Why was so much of your money spent on a big fancy hotel when an alternative was available? "Simply the best" for our social services that has an obvious policy on cost saving and treating our children as commodities to save money and they throw it away on luxury for themselves.
We should all demonstrate outside the social service headquarters in our particular areas and demand to be heard. Then report our findings to a central point of information for UK distribution.
Will you join us to bring justice for our children?
Jimmy
If I did not have personal experience of the behaviour of Social Services I would think your response over-the-top. But I do, and my experience is that Grandparents are non-persons as far as Social Services are concerned.
Regards
Edinburgh Business man.
Jimmy Deuchars
Grandparents Apart UK
22 Alness crescent
Glasgow G52 1PJ
0141 882 5658
http://www.grandparentsapart.co.uk/
March 26, 2009 9:06 AM
Changes that must come about for our children's best interests.
Grandparents Apart UK
Essential points that need to change for our children’s best interest?
1…Our motto is “Bringing Families Together” so we think the best interests of a child startsoff with Equal parenting when there is no valid reason not to. We know two parents should be first and formost in a childs life for a balanced upbringing with grandparents as a strong backer upper and first when parents are not avaiable.
2...The ‘Charter for Grandchildren’ to be Mandatory for professionals working in Children’s welfare to ensure children do not lose out on the benifits grandparents can offer.
3…The social services must stop treating children as commodities like a business deal
4.....If adopted a child must maintain contact with birth family.
5 ...Kinship care before strangers. Grandparents should not be by-passed for strangers.
6. ..All below accountable to law. The law turns a blind eye to the following. For courts not to
pursue these in condoning the use of them.
(a).....False accusations.
(b)....Erroneous reporting by social workers.
(c).....Flouting of court orders.
7…Proper recording of all social work meetings and discussions E.g. Dual tape recording similarto police proceedings for the protection of both the client and social workers.
8….More “transparency” and especially “accountability” of Social work and their managers
9….Specialised training for social workers in the best interests of our children.
10…Orchestrating “cover up’s”, when children are failed.
11…Accusations removed from record, when proven innocent.
There is a huge rise in drug and alcohol abuse and there is reckoned to be a million children in Britain today living in a home with one or both parents addicted to drugs or alcohol. Amid fear of the ever increasing cases of child abuse. Grandparents Apart UK have considered a new proposal in the best interests of children.
Our new proposal is considering the child in as much as not to have the protection of their grandparents in child abuse cases is devastating to them and not at all in their best interests.
We therefore propose that The Charter for Grandchildren in Scotland should be adopted for use in England and Wales, ‘ The role grandparent can play in their grandchildren’s lives’ must be mandatory for professionals dealing with children thereby ensuring in the absence of one or both parents that the love and protective role grandparents can play is not wasted as is the case at present because grandparents are regarded as irrelevant persons and therefore rarely considered in practice.…Being mandatory for professionals would not be an imposition on the parents or family in general…If the governments were to adopt this as an example it would send a message of encouragement to families that grandparents can be a huge asset in the family and it could be worthwhile attending mediation focussing on the best interests of the children.
It is generally agreed by governments and most organisations dealing with children that grandparents are important in the family.. It is also agreed that they can be vital in the early detection of child abuse and in the care and stability of children when they are in a crisis situation especially in the middle of the night. That is if they are informed about it at all, being irrelevant persons, this is not always the case. If the crisis has been violent and very upsetting it would be in the best interests of the children to be settled as quickly as possible with someone who cares for them.
Grandparents Apart UK is a non-profit staffed by volunteers Scottish Charity.
0141 882 5658
www.grandparentsapart.co.uk
Essential points that need to change for our children’s best interest?
1…Our motto is “Bringing Families Together” so we think the best interests of a child startsoff with Equal parenting when there is no valid reason not to. We know two parents should be first and formost in a childs life for a balanced upbringing with grandparents as a strong backer upper and first when parents are not avaiable.
2...The ‘Charter for Grandchildren’ to be Mandatory for professionals working in Children’s welfare to ensure children do not lose out on the benifits grandparents can offer.
3…The social services must stop treating children as commodities like a business deal
4.....If adopted a child must maintain contact with birth family.
5 ...Kinship care before strangers. Grandparents should not be by-passed for strangers.
6. ..All below accountable to law. The law turns a blind eye to the following. For courts not to
pursue these in condoning the use of them.
(a).....False accusations.
(b)....Erroneous reporting by social workers.
(c).....Flouting of court orders.
7…Proper recording of all social work meetings and discussions E.g. Dual tape recording similarto police proceedings for the protection of both the client and social workers.
8….More “transparency” and especially “accountability” of Social work and their managers
9….Specialised training for social workers in the best interests of our children.
10…Orchestrating “cover up’s”, when children are failed.
11…Accusations removed from record, when proven innocent.
There is a huge rise in drug and alcohol abuse and there is reckoned to be a million children in Britain today living in a home with one or both parents addicted to drugs or alcohol. Amid fear of the ever increasing cases of child abuse. Grandparents Apart UK have considered a new proposal in the best interests of children.
Our new proposal is considering the child in as much as not to have the protection of their grandparents in child abuse cases is devastating to them and not at all in their best interests.
We therefore propose that The Charter for Grandchildren in Scotland should be adopted for use in England and Wales, ‘ The role grandparent can play in their grandchildren’s lives’ must be mandatory for professionals dealing with children thereby ensuring in the absence of one or both parents that the love and protective role grandparents can play is not wasted as is the case at present because grandparents are regarded as irrelevant persons and therefore rarely considered in practice.…Being mandatory for professionals would not be an imposition on the parents or family in general…If the governments were to adopt this as an example it would send a message of encouragement to families that grandparents can be a huge asset in the family and it could be worthwhile attending mediation focussing on the best interests of the children.
It is generally agreed by governments and most organisations dealing with children that grandparents are important in the family.. It is also agreed that they can be vital in the early detection of child abuse and in the care and stability of children when they are in a crisis situation especially in the middle of the night. That is if they are informed about it at all, being irrelevant persons, this is not always the case. If the crisis has been violent and very upsetting it would be in the best interests of the children to be settled as quickly as possible with someone who cares for them.
Grandparents Apart UK is a non-profit staffed by volunteers Scottish Charity.
0141 882 5658
www.grandparentsapart.co.uk
Dundee Demo over rights for Grandparents.
http://www.eveningtelegraph.co.uk/output/2009/03/25/story12828010t0.shtm
Grandparents from across Scotland gathered outside the Apex Hotel in Dundee today to demand better rights, and urged social workers to listen to their concerns (writes Kirsten Johnson).
The protest took place as delegates from the Association of Directors of Social Work met in the hotel for a one-day conference to discuss developing a workforce fit for purpose.
The current president of ADSW is Dundee City Council’s social work director, Alan Baird, who recently fended off a resignation call over his department’s handling of the Brandon Muir case.
Jimmy Deuchars, from pressure group Grand-parent Apart UK, led the demonstration.
He told the Tele he hoped the lobby would make those at the meeting listen to the group’s plea.
“Grandparents are at the bottom of the list when it comes to rights, but we are the ones who can notice the first warning signs. We deserve to see our grand-children, and they deserve to see us.
At the moment the Charter For Grandparents is only advisory. We want it to be mandatory — it will save children’s lives.”
Brian McNair, chairman of the Equal Parenting Alliance, also attended the demonstration. He said, “I hope the social workers, especially Alan Baird, take note. You have to be seen to be heard nowadays. We hope this brings our message into the public eye.
“We are questioning the integrity of some social workers across the country. They often do not record meetings they have with grandparents. This is not right. “If grandparents are in contact with their grandchildren they can see the signs of abuse, but the social services class them as irrelevant.”
CHALLENGES
During the conference the delegates, representing each local authority area in Scotland, considered the challenges within workforce development. BT’s group human resources director
Alex Wilson gave a keynote speech outlining how the company addressed workforce issues and shared knowledge and experience of developing good practice.
There were also presentations given on the place of the Continuous Learning Framework in organisational develop-ment and the use of Social Services Knowledge Scotland, an online knowledge service for social services staff and their managers.
Grandparents from across Scotland gathered outside the Apex Hotel in Dundee today to demand better rights, and urged social workers to listen to their concerns (writes Kirsten Johnson).
The protest took place as delegates from the Association of Directors of Social Work met in the hotel for a one-day conference to discuss developing a workforce fit for purpose.
The current president of ADSW is Dundee City Council’s social work director, Alan Baird, who recently fended off a resignation call over his department’s handling of the Brandon Muir case.
Jimmy Deuchars, from pressure group Grand-parent Apart UK, led the demonstration.
He told the Tele he hoped the lobby would make those at the meeting listen to the group’s plea.
“Grandparents are at the bottom of the list when it comes to rights, but we are the ones who can notice the first warning signs. We deserve to see our grand-children, and they deserve to see us.
At the moment the Charter For Grandparents is only advisory. We want it to be mandatory — it will save children’s lives.”
Brian McNair, chairman of the Equal Parenting Alliance, also attended the demonstration. He said, “I hope the social workers, especially Alan Baird, take note. You have to be seen to be heard nowadays. We hope this brings our message into the public eye.
“We are questioning the integrity of some social workers across the country. They often do not record meetings they have with grandparents. This is not right. “If grandparents are in contact with their grandchildren they can see the signs of abuse, but the social services class them as irrelevant.”
CHALLENGES
During the conference the delegates, representing each local authority area in Scotland, considered the challenges within workforce development. BT’s group human resources director
Alex Wilson gave a keynote speech outlining how the company addressed workforce issues and shared knowledge and experience of developing good practice.
There were also presentations given on the place of the Continuous Learning Framework in organisational develop-ment and the use of Social Services Knowledge Scotland, an online knowledge service for social services staff and their managers.
Monday, March 23, 2009
Reaction to our demo from Dundee police.
I filled in the form on Tayside Police website and on Thursday or Friday a lady contacted me. Asked her questions and wished us well. So on that stregnth we confirmed our booking at the hotel adding one more.
On Sunday afternoon a policeman came on from the Dundee Police sounding quite miffed as he thought we had not contacted them, he said "what is this." I explained I had spoken to a lady from the police station and he mellowed somewhat. He went on to say we would be on private Port Authority land and we would need to get permission. Then I said we would go to the nearest point out of the Port land and he said there were no pavements for us and the Harbour Gate would be the only place.
We have emailed the Dundee Port Manager which the policeman said did not exist. Mr Matt North of the Dundee Port Authority phoned us first thing and explained, that land does not belong to them and that the Dundee council have adopted it. And emailed confirmation to that effect.
In Glasgow we contacted the Glasgow Police, they spoke to us asked all the questions how many etc then wished us well just like the police lady from Dundee did on the first instance. The demo in Glasgow went off with no problem and gave us tremendous media coverage.
Today the demo in Dundee went off well. The police did have a presence of 2 plain clothes and a van recording us all the time. The Community Inspector had a word with me and we assured him we were on a peaceful demonmstration and he was very courteous and accepted us. The demo went off very well with coverage from GMTV, STV, Radio Taymouth i think it was, and other local newspapers and radios which i forgot in the confusion of it all. We have to thank them all for their kindness and coverage.
On Sunday afternoon a policeman came on from the Dundee Police sounding quite miffed as he thought we had not contacted them, he said "what is this." I explained I had spoken to a lady from the police station and he mellowed somewhat. He went on to say we would be on private Port Authority land and we would need to get permission. Then I said we would go to the nearest point out of the Port land and he said there were no pavements for us and the Harbour Gate would be the only place.
We have emailed the Dundee Port Manager which the policeman said did not exist. Mr Matt North of the Dundee Port Authority phoned us first thing and explained, that land does not belong to them and that the Dundee council have adopted it. And emailed confirmation to that effect.
In Glasgow we contacted the Glasgow Police, they spoke to us asked all the questions how many etc then wished us well just like the police lady from Dundee did on the first instance. The demo in Glasgow went off with no problem and gave us tremendous media coverage.
Today the demo in Dundee went off well. The police did have a presence of 2 plain clothes and a van recording us all the time. The Community Inspector had a word with me and we assured him we were on a peaceful demonmstration and he was very courteous and accepted us. The demo went off very well with coverage from GMTV, STV, Radio Taymouth i think it was, and other local newspapers and radios which i forgot in the confusion of it all. We have to thank them all for their kindness and coverage.
Sunday, March 22, 2009
Success of our last demo.
Grandparents Apart UK
Just as we successfully with pride and dignity protested in Glasgow on 4th March 2009.We will again make our presence known at this event by means of another demonstration. We can not let this opportunity go ahead without our input being taken into consideration.
ALL of our Directors of Social Services will be present for this one meeting at a very exclusive venue.
Will your voices be heard?
Will your concerns be listened to?
Join us at Grandparents Apart UK who stand against wrongful decision making by these Directors who are paid for by the public for the decision making with the public's children.
The Association of Directors of Social Work (ADSW)will be holding a one-day seminar onWednesday, 25th March 2009 at the Apex City Quay Hotel in Dundee.
The purpose of this event is to:
• Consider and debate the inherent challenges in workforce development
• Share knowledge and experience of developing good practice
• Promote the roles of strategic and operational managers in driving forward the workforcedevelopment agenda
As workforce development is a vital function at all organisational levels, the seminar will be of particularrelevance to frontline, middle and senior managers. Staffing and HR Professionals.
For more information and contact details please download the
Just as we successfully with pride and dignity protested in Glasgow on 4th March 2009.We will again make our presence known at this event by means of another demonstration. We can not let this opportunity go ahead without our input being taken into consideration.
ALL of our Directors of Social Services will be present for this one meeting at a very exclusive venue.
Will your voices be heard?
Will your concerns be listened to?
Join us at Grandparents Apart UK who stand against wrongful decision making by these Directors who are paid for by the public for the decision making with the public's children.
The Association of Directors of Social Work (ADSW)will be holding a one-day seminar onWednesday, 25th March 2009 at the Apex City Quay Hotel in Dundee.
The purpose of this event is to:
• Consider and debate the inherent challenges in workforce development
• Share knowledge and experience of developing good practice
• Promote the roles of strategic and operational managers in driving forward the workforcedevelopment agenda
As workforce development is a vital function at all organisational levels, the seminar will be of particularrelevance to frontline, middle and senior managers. Staffing and HR Professionals.
For more information and contact details please download the
Dundee rally. What we want to happen.
What must be for our children’s best interest?
1.... ‘Charter for Grandchildren’ to be Mandatory for professionals working in
Children’s welfare.
2.... Equal parenting when there is no valid reason not to.
3.... Stop treating children as commodities like a business deal
4.... If adopted, child contact maintained with birth family.
5 ....Kinship care before strangers.
6. ...All below accountable to law.
a)-- False accusations.
b)--Erroneous reporting by social workers
c)--Flouting of court orders.
d)-Orchestrating “cover up’s”, when children are failed.
7. ..Proper recording of all social work meetings and discussions E.g. Dual tape
recording similar to police proceedings
8… More “transparency” and especially “accountability” for Social work and
their managers
9. ..Specialised training for social workers in the best interests of children.
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
SSCUP for grandparents.
Grandparents Apart and the Scottish Senior Citizens Unity Party
At the Grandparents Apart Uk Rally held in George Square, Glasgow, on 24th March 2009 I John Swinburne leader of the SSCUP pledged 100% support from the SSCUP and I stated that the aims of Grandparents Apart UK would be vigorously pursued by all SSCUP -MSP who were returned after the 2011 elections
The importance of grandparents having full access to be able to enjoy stable relationships with their own grandchildren must be recognised and written into law.
The 2011 manifesto of the Scottish Senior Citizens Unity Party will fully endorse this issue.
John Swinburne
Founder and Leader of the SSCUP
At the Grandparents Apart Uk Rally held in George Square, Glasgow, on 24th March 2009 I John Swinburne leader of the SSCUP pledged 100% support from the SSCUP and I stated that the aims of Grandparents Apart UK would be vigorously pursued by all SSCUP -MSP who were returned after the 2011 elections
The importance of grandparents having full access to be able to enjoy stable relationships with their own grandchildren must be recognised and written into law.
The 2011 manifesto of the Scottish Senior Citizens Unity Party will fully endorse this issue.
John Swinburne
Founder and Leader of the SSCUP
Monday, March 16, 2009
Demo in Dundee
Grandparents Apart UK
will be there to protest like we did in Glasgow on 4th March 2009.We cannot let this go unchallenged when we have all the directors of social services at one venue.
will be there to protest like we did in Glasgow on 4th March 2009.We cannot let this go unchallenged when we have all the directors of social services at one venue.
Will you join us?
The Association of Directors of Social Work (ADSW)will be holding a one-day seminar onWednesday, 25th March 2009 at the Apex City Quay Hotel in Dundee.Only the best will do. Luxury is no problem.
The purpose of this event is to:
• Consider and debate the inherent challenges in workforce development
• Share knowledge and experience of developing good practice
• Promote the roles of strategic and operational managers in driving forward the workforcedevelopment agenda
As workforce development is a vital function at all organisational levels, the seminar will be of particularrelevance to frontline, middle and senior managers. Staffing and HR Professionals.
For more information and contact details please download the
The Key elements of the Lamming report
At least 200,000 children live in households with a high risk of abuse.
1. Firstly we need a family law that is fair and just.
2. Equal Parenting needs to be the norm where dads as well as mums, even if they live apart
have a say in bringing up children.
3. Parental alienation needs to be frowned upon by everyone and incur heavy penalties.
4. The Charter for Grandchildren needs to be mandatory for professionals working in
children’s welfare to ensure children do not lose out on the benefits grandparents can offer.
5. Mediation should be promoted more to prevent molehills becoming mountain.
6. Social services need to be more open and truthful and answerable to the law if not.
7. Accusations not proven should be removed from records.
8. False accusations should be punishable by law.
9. All meeting to be recorded to eliminate inaccuracies.
10. Using children for revenge or blackmail should be punishable by law.
Social workers trying to protect them (children) feel demoralised and unsupported.
1. Social workers have too big a case load and are making too many mistakes to reach their targets.
2. Better education and better liasion with senior management who appear to be naïve of what happens on the shop floor.
3. The welfare of children is run like a business ‘cost befor care’ and this very cold attitude is not in the best interests of childre.
In many areas they spend too much time on inadequate IT systems and too little time seeing children.
1. On the job experiences cannot be beaten.
2. Seeing the trauma of young children indistressshould be enough to soften even the hardest hear. but when it is the case of rush in with twenty armed policemen to snatch 8 children nobody care about the didtress of the child.
New recruits deal with complex cases without adequate training and supervision.
1. I know someone who had a friend that trained as a social worker but died within 6 months and is was claimed lack of training and stress was a big part of his death.
Police child protection teams are under-resourced and have low status.
What this really means, we do not know. The last paragraph explains how they go about it. I have it from a granny that had full PRRs over her grandson but the police waded in and bodily dragged the 14 year old back to his mother on her say so. Methinks the police are well qualified.
It can take 45 weeks to bring a child protection case to court.
An absolute scandal! That amount of time destroys a childs stability, identity and the will to be a human being . Having to suffer being told your family does not want you any more just to prepare them for adoption.
The government should provide child protection training for council leaders and senior managers.
Of coarse, that is the main problem, the higher staff havn’t a clue what goes on with their social workers. I have a nice letter from Edinburgh Council; explaining their policy. It is nothing like what happens in practice.
Social workers' employers should face disciplinary action over child protection failures.
Aggreed. Social workers should face the law for falcifaction of records but so should the directors for neglect of duty.
A national agency should be set up to oversee the swift and effective implementation of these recommendations.
More money being thrown in the wrong place. The governmennt is admitting here it cannot cope with it’s own organisations. Order them to do the job right or face the consequences of losing their job or prosecution. That will make them sit up and take notice. Listen to the people when they are crying out to you for justice or is that dropping your standards too far.
1. Firstly we need a family law that is fair and just.
2. Equal Parenting needs to be the norm where dads as well as mums, even if they live apart
have a say in bringing up children.
3. Parental alienation needs to be frowned upon by everyone and incur heavy penalties.
4. The Charter for Grandchildren needs to be mandatory for professionals working in
children’s welfare to ensure children do not lose out on the benefits grandparents can offer.
5. Mediation should be promoted more to prevent molehills becoming mountain.
6. Social services need to be more open and truthful and answerable to the law if not.
7. Accusations not proven should be removed from records.
8. False accusations should be punishable by law.
9. All meeting to be recorded to eliminate inaccuracies.
10. Using children for revenge or blackmail should be punishable by law.
Social workers trying to protect them (children) feel demoralised and unsupported.
1. Social workers have too big a case load and are making too many mistakes to reach their targets.
2. Better education and better liasion with senior management who appear to be naïve of what happens on the shop floor.
3. The welfare of children is run like a business ‘cost befor care’ and this very cold attitude is not in the best interests of childre.
In many areas they spend too much time on inadequate IT systems and too little time seeing children.
1. On the job experiences cannot be beaten.
2. Seeing the trauma of young children indistressshould be enough to soften even the hardest hear. but when it is the case of rush in with twenty armed policemen to snatch 8 children nobody care about the didtress of the child.
New recruits deal with complex cases without adequate training and supervision.
1. I know someone who had a friend that trained as a social worker but died within 6 months and is was claimed lack of training and stress was a big part of his death.
Police child protection teams are under-resourced and have low status.
What this really means, we do not know. The last paragraph explains how they go about it. I have it from a granny that had full PRRs over her grandson but the police waded in and bodily dragged the 14 year old back to his mother on her say so. Methinks the police are well qualified.
It can take 45 weeks to bring a child protection case to court.
An absolute scandal! That amount of time destroys a childs stability, identity and the will to be a human being . Having to suffer being told your family does not want you any more just to prepare them for adoption.
The government should provide child protection training for council leaders and senior managers.
Of coarse, that is the main problem, the higher staff havn’t a clue what goes on with their social workers. I have a nice letter from Edinburgh Council; explaining their policy. It is nothing like what happens in practice.
Social workers' employers should face disciplinary action over child protection failures.
Aggreed. Social workers should face the law for falcifaction of records but so should the directors for neglect of duty.
A national agency should be set up to oversee the swift and effective implementation of these recommendations.
More money being thrown in the wrong place. The governmennt is admitting here it cannot cope with it’s own organisations. Order them to do the job right or face the consequences of losing their job or prosecution. That will make them sit up and take notice. Listen to the people when they are crying out to you for justice or is that dropping your standards too far.
Explosive report Ed Balls refused to make public
Baby P boss in £1m sex bias claim as we reveal explosive report Ed Balls refused to make public
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1162061/Baby-P-boss-1m-sex-bias-claim-reveal-explosive-report-Ed-Balls-refused-make-public.html
By Simon Walters and Daniel BoffeyLast updated at 5:41 PM 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.
Victim of abuse: Baby P died in August 2007 aged 17 months
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.
Schools Secretary Ed Balls refused pleas to publish full details of the review of Baby P's death
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.'
'Scapegoat': Lawyers say Sharon Shoesmith is in line for a huge payout if she wins her tribunal claim
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
By Simon Walters and Daniel BoffeyLast updated at 5:41 PM 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.
Victim of abuse: Baby P died in August 2007 aged 17 months
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.
Schools Secretary Ed Balls refused pleas to publish full details of the review of Baby P's death
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.'
'Scapegoat': Lawyers say Sharon Shoesmith is in line for a huge payout if she wins her tribunal claim
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.'
Care children 'failed' by system
Children in care are still failing to flourish in the classroom
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7934884.stm
Ministers have been urged to do more to improve the education of children in care, as figures revealed they still lag behind other groups.
Students in care achieved, on average, two Standard Grade passes in 2008, fewer than pupils from even the poorest social backgrounds.
Former First Minister Jack McConnell said their poor results meant they were consigned to the "margins of society".
The Scottish Government said it was already working to improve attainment.
A spokesman said: "All children deserve the chance to fulfill their potential and there should be no difference between the chances of young people in care and their peers.
"That's why we recently moved to clearly set out what is expected of everyone responsible for our looked after children and to launch measures to improve the educational attainment and achievement of young people in care."
The results for children in care - in foster homes or children's homes - were broadly in line with the level last year, although large numbers of children were missing from the survey.
In the overall results for all pupils, which included the outcome of appeals, girls did better at Higher grade with 25.2% passing three or more Highers compared to 19.6% for boys.
The number of pupils passing three Highers was up 0.3% to 22.4%. At Standard Grade the pass rate for five Highers was up 0.6% to 76.2%.
European experience
Mr McConnell, a former math’s teacher and Labour education minister, said education authorities and ministers could learn from the experience of other European countries in raising the attainment levels of children in care.
He said: "The youngsters that are in care technically have the state as their parent. They should expect the same support, the same direction, the same assistance that we would expect any other parent to give.
"It is absolutely tragic that so many of these youngsters leave school, some without any qualifications at all, most with very few qualifications and are therefore far more likely to become involved in crime, to become unemployed, be at the margins of society for the rest of their lives." In September, the Scottish Government published the "These Are Our Bairns" document, setting out the roles and responsibilities of those who look after children.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7934884.stm
Ministers have been urged to do more to improve the education of children in care, as figures revealed they still lag behind other groups.
Students in care achieved, on average, two Standard Grade passes in 2008, fewer than pupils from even the poorest social backgrounds.
Former First Minister Jack McConnell said their poor results meant they were consigned to the "margins of society".
The Scottish Government said it was already working to improve attainment.
A spokesman said: "All children deserve the chance to fulfill their potential and there should be no difference between the chances of young people in care and their peers.
"That's why we recently moved to clearly set out what is expected of everyone responsible for our looked after children and to launch measures to improve the educational attainment and achievement of young people in care."
The results for children in care - in foster homes or children's homes - were broadly in line with the level last year, although large numbers of children were missing from the survey.
In the overall results for all pupils, which included the outcome of appeals, girls did better at Higher grade with 25.2% passing three or more Highers compared to 19.6% for boys.
The number of pupils passing three Highers was up 0.3% to 22.4%. At Standard Grade the pass rate for five Highers was up 0.6% to 76.2%.
European experience
Mr McConnell, a former math’s teacher and Labour education minister, said education authorities and ministers could learn from the experience of other European countries in raising the attainment levels of children in care.
He said: "The youngsters that are in care technically have the state as their parent. They should expect the same support, the same direction, the same assistance that we would expect any other parent to give.
"It is absolutely tragic that so many of these youngsters leave school, some without any qualifications at all, most with very few qualifications and are therefore far more likely to become involved in crime, to become unemployed, be at the margins of society for the rest of their lives." In September, the Scottish Government published the "These Are Our Bairns" document, setting out the roles and responsibilities of those who look after children.
Friday, March 13, 2009
Thanks To Robert Whiston
Not to self - - at some future date /project perhaps ? I don't think I
agree with the direction this article is taking. [The Survival of
Grandparent Visitation Statutes] I don't quite see grandparents as
'non-parents'. RW
A child custody dispute may arise between a parent and a nonparent in a variety of contexts. One type of case that has received considerable comment involves the same-gender partner of the child's parent.
Other situations involve a stepparent, probably the most common case of a nonparent seeking custody; a relative, including a grandparent; or a third party with whom a parent has placed the child during an extended period. In all of these cases, the child may have lived with the nonparent for most of the child's life, and the non-parent may have been the primary caretaker of the child, forming a very close psychological parent-child bond.
In these types of custodial disputes, the non-parent seeking custody is faced with the traditional rule that the parent is entitled to custody unless that parent is found to be unfit (Buser 1991; Clark 1988). The effect of giving primacy to the interests of the biological parent when the other choice is a nonparent means that the best interests of the child may be disregarded.
Legal scholars have puzzled over the persistence of a rule that seems to place the child's best interests after those of the parent. Some scholars speculate that these cases reflect a concern about the importance of blood ties and a belief that the child's biological parent will in the long run be the most successful caretaker for the child. In addition, courts often show sympathy for a biological parent who has, perhaps after a period of years, now realized how important the child is (Chambers 1990). Finally, in the case of the same-gender partner, the court may express some of the societal ambivalence toward that family form.
agree with the direction this article is taking. [The Survival of
Grandparent Visitation Statutes] I don't quite see grandparents as
'non-parents'. RW
A child custody dispute may arise between a parent and a nonparent in a variety of contexts. One type of case that has received considerable comment involves the same-gender partner of the child's parent.
Other situations involve a stepparent, probably the most common case of a nonparent seeking custody; a relative, including a grandparent; or a third party with whom a parent has placed the child during an extended period. In all of these cases, the child may have lived with the nonparent for most of the child's life, and the non-parent may have been the primary caretaker of the child, forming a very close psychological parent-child bond.
In these types of custodial disputes, the non-parent seeking custody is faced with the traditional rule that the parent is entitled to custody unless that parent is found to be unfit (Buser 1991; Clark 1988). The effect of giving primacy to the interests of the biological parent when the other choice is a nonparent means that the best interests of the child may be disregarded.
Legal scholars have puzzled over the persistence of a rule that seems to place the child's best interests after those of the parent. Some scholars speculate that these cases reflect a concern about the importance of blood ties and a belief that the child's biological parent will in the long run be the most successful caretaker for the child. In addition, courts often show sympathy for a biological parent who has, perhaps after a period of years, now realized how important the child is (Chambers 1990). Finally, in the case of the same-gender partner, the court may express some of the societal ambivalence toward that family form.
Sunday, March 8, 2009
Letter from Scottish Government. And reply.
Children, Young People and Social Care DirectorateCare and Justice (CYPSC) Division The-ScottishGovernment
T: 0131-244 3663 F: 0131-244 3547E: paul.wilson@scotland.gsi.gov.uk
Mr Jimmy DeucharsGrandparents Apart UK, 22 AIness Crescent, GlasgowG521PJ
Your ref: Our ref: 2009/0003231 ORMarch 2009
Dear Mr Deuchars
Thank you for your emailing, on 30 January, notification of the demonstration you areorganising for 4 March to Mr Ed Balls MP, Secretary of State for Education concerning the recently publicised adoption case in Edinburgh. As adoption is a devolved matter, and therefore is the remit of the Scottish Government, I have been asked to reply.
I understand that The City of Edinburgh Council have received a complaint from thegrandparents and are investigating the specific issues raised. As you will appreciate, Icannot comment on individual cases which involve highly personal and confidentialinformation regarding all the parties involved in the case and it would be inappropriate for me to discuss any allegations made in the Daily Mail concerning bullying by social workers. However, I hope I can address some of your concerns.
All children deserve a secure and stable home to grow up in and the removal of any child from their natural parents is always a difficult decision and one that is never taken lightly. That is why councils have a duty to make recommendations based on the best interests of the child. The Scottish Government firmly believes that, if a child, cannot live with their birth parents, the first option should be to consider the ability and capacity of kinship carers in the wider family to provide the child with a safe and permanent home. In making recommendations about the placement of a child local authorities, as a matter of policy and good professional practice, consider the possibility of the child being cared for by his or her extended family. I understand that, in line with this policy, the City of Edinburgh Council operates a family first policy when placing children who need to Iive away from their birth parents and currently supports in the region of 240 'kinship carers' ( extended family looking afre children in this way) the majority of whom are grandparents. As you know as with all potential carers for Looked After Children, kinship carers undergo a rigorous assessment of their capacity to care for the children in a safe secure and stable through-out their childhood. This assessment considers a number of factors and will not rely on age alone in its determination of the person's ability to supply a safe, secure and stable home for a child.
Before a child is placed with adoptive parents, an adoption agency (either a local authority or a voluntary organisation) will have to assess the adopters as suitable, that the adoption is in the best interests of the child and that the child is placed with adopters who can best meet the child's needs.
In deciding whether an applicant is suitable as an adopter the local authority will take into account a range of factors. No one has a right to adopt a child and if the assessment indicates that they would not be able to provide a safe, secure, and stable home then they will not be considered as adopters. Any recommendation of a person as suitable to adopt a child must be considered by both an independent panel of experts (an adoption panel), which includes independent social workers, as well as legal and medical advisers, and then the local authority's decision maker, who is also independent of the case. If a child is considered by the local authority to be suitable for adoption, and this is confirmed by both the adoption panel and the agency decision maker, the local authority can apply for an order freeing the child for adoption. This order places the parental rights and responsibilities for the child with the council and cannot be granted unless the consents of the parent or guardians have been given, or that the court is satisfied that they can be dispensed with under specific grounds1. In granting this order the court will appoint a Curator ad Litem, an independent expert, whose role is to represent the best interests of the children and ensure that they are at the centre of the proceedings. A Curator will also assess permanent options for the children, including the extended family, and advise the court.
Any potential match between a child and a potential adopter is scrutinised by the adoption panel. When this panel recommends a match as suitable, and the agency decision maker, considers the match to be suitable, an application to the court for an adoption order can be made. Although the adoption agency can make a recommendation to the court that a match is suitable, it is ultimately the decision of the court to grant an adoption order.
Finally, the law in Scotland requires that the views of children over the age of 12 are taken into account when making arrangements for adoption. Younger children's views are also considered and their views will have been taken during the case, and the Curator appointed by the court will ensure that they are heard by the court.
As you can see, there are several levels of scrutiny involved in granting an adoption order and each of these will need to be satisfied that the match is in the best interests of the children before an order can be granted.
I hope that this helps.Yours sincerely
Paul WilsonCare and Justice Division
' The grounds are: the parent or guardian—
(a) cannot be found or is incapable of giving agreement;
(b) is withholding his agreement unreasonably;
(c) has persistently failed without reasonable cause to discharge the parental duties in relation to the child;
(d) has abandoned or neglected the child;
(e) has persistently ill-treated the child;
(f) has seriously ill-treated the child
Victoria Quay, Edinburgh EH6 6QQ, http://www.scotland.gov.uk/
Answer to the Scottish Governments Letter
The Governments state that their Children’s policies are working in the best interests of children. Is the overwhelming amount of people complaining all wrong?
So where does the problem lie?
I have stated before. It is the administration of these policies that are to blame, a monster that has gotten out of control of its master. The Governments are so wrapped up in their self righteousness that they no longer listen to the people, but only to the administration that advises them on an unfeeling cost and personal financial basis,
With all the bad publicity Social Services, Courts, Professionals are receiving from the media and John Hemming MP http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YNQFaBcwFlU surely even the Scottish Government must be able to make a connection here. It is sticking out like a sore thumb all over the UK.
Our demo on the 4th March in Glasgow, not a big one by any means, but the amount of media that was there is awakening the public, an even bigger force called people power to the incompetence of our Government. We did not just have grandparents protesting. There were mothers, fathers, grandparents and extended members of families that have suffered under the Government’s monster.
Jimmy Deuchars
Grandparents Apart UK
22 Alness crescent
Glasgow G52 1PJ
0141 882 5658
http://www.grandparentsapart.co.uk/
T: 0131-244 3663 F: 0131-244 3547E: paul.wilson@scotland.gsi.gov.uk
Mr Jimmy DeucharsGrandparents Apart UK, 22 AIness Crescent, GlasgowG521PJ
Your ref: Our ref: 2009/0003231 ORMarch 2009
Dear Mr Deuchars
Thank you for your emailing, on 30 January, notification of the demonstration you areorganising for 4 March to Mr Ed Balls MP, Secretary of State for Education concerning the recently publicised adoption case in Edinburgh. As adoption is a devolved matter, and therefore is the remit of the Scottish Government, I have been asked to reply.
I understand that The City of Edinburgh Council have received a complaint from thegrandparents and are investigating the specific issues raised. As you will appreciate, Icannot comment on individual cases which involve highly personal and confidentialinformation regarding all the parties involved in the case and it would be inappropriate for me to discuss any allegations made in the Daily Mail concerning bullying by social workers. However, I hope I can address some of your concerns.
All children deserve a secure and stable home to grow up in and the removal of any child from their natural parents is always a difficult decision and one that is never taken lightly. That is why councils have a duty to make recommendations based on the best interests of the child. The Scottish Government firmly believes that, if a child, cannot live with their birth parents, the first option should be to consider the ability and capacity of kinship carers in the wider family to provide the child with a safe and permanent home. In making recommendations about the placement of a child local authorities, as a matter of policy and good professional practice, consider the possibility of the child being cared for by his or her extended family. I understand that, in line with this policy, the City of Edinburgh Council operates a family first policy when placing children who need to Iive away from their birth parents and currently supports in the region of 240 'kinship carers' ( extended family looking afre children in this way) the majority of whom are grandparents. As you know as with all potential carers for Looked After Children, kinship carers undergo a rigorous assessment of their capacity to care for the children in a safe secure and stable through-out their childhood. This assessment considers a number of factors and will not rely on age alone in its determination of the person's ability to supply a safe, secure and stable home for a child.
Before a child is placed with adoptive parents, an adoption agency (either a local authority or a voluntary organisation) will have to assess the adopters as suitable, that the adoption is in the best interests of the child and that the child is placed with adopters who can best meet the child's needs.
In deciding whether an applicant is suitable as an adopter the local authority will take into account a range of factors. No one has a right to adopt a child and if the assessment indicates that they would not be able to provide a safe, secure, and stable home then they will not be considered as adopters. Any recommendation of a person as suitable to adopt a child must be considered by both an independent panel of experts (an adoption panel), which includes independent social workers, as well as legal and medical advisers, and then the local authority's decision maker, who is also independent of the case. If a child is considered by the local authority to be suitable for adoption, and this is confirmed by both the adoption panel and the agency decision maker, the local authority can apply for an order freeing the child for adoption. This order places the parental rights and responsibilities for the child with the council and cannot be granted unless the consents of the parent or guardians have been given, or that the court is satisfied that they can be dispensed with under specific grounds1. In granting this order the court will appoint a Curator ad Litem, an independent expert, whose role is to represent the best interests of the children and ensure that they are at the centre of the proceedings. A Curator will also assess permanent options for the children, including the extended family, and advise the court.
Any potential match between a child and a potential adopter is scrutinised by the adoption panel. When this panel recommends a match as suitable, and the agency decision maker, considers the match to be suitable, an application to the court for an adoption order can be made. Although the adoption agency can make a recommendation to the court that a match is suitable, it is ultimately the decision of the court to grant an adoption order.
Finally, the law in Scotland requires that the views of children over the age of 12 are taken into account when making arrangements for adoption. Younger children's views are also considered and their views will have been taken during the case, and the Curator appointed by the court will ensure that they are heard by the court.
As you can see, there are several levels of scrutiny involved in granting an adoption order and each of these will need to be satisfied that the match is in the best interests of the children before an order can be granted.
I hope that this helps.Yours sincerely
Paul WilsonCare and Justice Division
' The grounds are: the parent or guardian—
(a) cannot be found or is incapable of giving agreement;
(b) is withholding his agreement unreasonably;
(c) has persistently failed without reasonable cause to discharge the parental duties in relation to the child;
(d) has abandoned or neglected the child;
(e) has persistently ill-treated the child;
(f) has seriously ill-treated the child
Victoria Quay, Edinburgh EH6 6QQ, http://www.scotland.gov.uk/
Answer to the Scottish Governments Letter
The Governments state that their Children’s policies are working in the best interests of children. Is the overwhelming amount of people complaining all wrong?
So where does the problem lie?
I have stated before. It is the administration of these policies that are to blame, a monster that has gotten out of control of its master. The Governments are so wrapped up in their self righteousness that they no longer listen to the people, but only to the administration that advises them on an unfeeling cost and personal financial basis,
With all the bad publicity Social Services, Courts, Professionals are receiving from the media and John Hemming MP http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YNQFaBcwFlU surely even the Scottish Government must be able to make a connection here. It is sticking out like a sore thumb all over the UK.
Our demo on the 4th March in Glasgow, not a big one by any means, but the amount of media that was there is awakening the public, an even bigger force called people power to the incompetence of our Government. We did not just have grandparents protesting. There were mothers, fathers, grandparents and extended members of families that have suffered under the Government’s monster.
Jimmy Deuchars
Grandparents Apart UK
22 Alness crescent
Glasgow G52 1PJ
0141 882 5658
http://www.grandparentsapart.co.uk/
Saturday, March 7, 2009
The Charter for Grandchildren
It is important that parents, grandparents and other family members, speak to, and treat each other, with respect. You may not get on, but you can still be civil, for the sake of the children. Try to avoid arguing with or criticising family members in front of the children. It can be very upsetting for them.
On occasions professional organizations such as social work departments or the courts can become involved and may have to make decisions that will have a lasting impact throughout a child’s entire life. In these circumstances it is vital that the loving and supportive role that the wider family, in particular grandparents can play is respected and protected for the child…
FAMILIES ARE IMPORTANT TO CHILDREN
Grandchildren can expect:
To be involved with and helped to understand decisions made about their lives.
To be treated fairly
To know and maintain contact with their family (except in very exceptional circumstances) and other people who are important to them.
To know that their grandparents still love them, even if they are not able to see them at the present time.
To know their family history.
The adults in their lives to put their needs first and to protect them from disputes between adults - not to use them as weapons in quarrels between adults.
Social workers , when making assessments about their lives, to take into account the loving and supporting role grandparents can play in their lives.
The Courts, when making decisions about their lives, to take into account the loving and supporting role grandparents can play in their lives.
Lawyers and other advisers to encourage relationship counseling or mediation when adults seek advice on matters affecting them and their children.
Along with others, Grandparents Apart put a lot of hard work into “The Charter for Grandchildren” demanding to be heard about the gaps in the family law concerning their grandchildren. Why? Because we really do have the best interests of our grandchildren at heart, if it was not for love of them why would we bother?
We are happy to promote the Charter for Grandchildren and the Parenting Agreement because they are useful documents.
Grandparents Apart Self Help Group Scotland. 22 Alness Crescent, Glasgow G52 1PJ
http://www.grandparentsapart.co.uk A Scottish Registered Volunteer Charity No. SC 031558
Grandparents Apart Uk Revised proposal for the ‘best interests of children’
Our revised proposal is considering the child in as much as not to have the protection of their grandparents in child neglect and abuse cases is devastating to them and not at all in their best interests. In this revised proposal we have listened to the government and strive to work towards their wishes as much as possible.
The governments of the UK have refused point blank to give grandparents legal rights of contact with their grandchildren. Their wishes are that grandparents should not have individual legal rights because the say it would cause more problems than it resolves solves and it is not the answer for every child. (Neither are their proposals) Further wishes of the government are that families get together without legislation and The Charter for Grandchildren was produced for that purpose but there has been no encouragement from the government and the situation is not improving and grandparents are being by-passed for strangers or like the wee girl given to two men when the she was afraid of men... This is not in the best interests of children.
We therefore propose that ‘The Charter for Grandchildren’ in Scotland should be adopted UK wide and ‘and be mandatory for professionals dealing with children thereby ensuring in the absence of one or both parents that the love and protective role grandparents can play is not wasted as is the case at present because grandparents are regarded as irrelevant (not important) persons and therefore rarely considered in practice.…Being mandatory for professionals would not be an imposition on the parents or family in general…If the governments were to adopt this as an example it would send a message of encouragement to families that grandparents can be a huge asset in the family and inspire mediation focusing on the best interests of the children when there is a huge rise in drug and alcohol abuse and amid the fear of the ever increasing cases of child abuse. What more does the government want? Is this the best interests of children or is it polotics?
It is generally agreed by governments and most organisations dealing with children that grandparents are very important in the family.. It is also agreed that they can be vital in the early detection of child abuse and in the care and stability of children when they are in a crisis situation especially in the middle of the night. That is if they are informed about it at all, being irrelevant persons, this is not always the case. If the crisis has been violent and very upsetting it would be in the best interests of the children to be settled as quickly as possible with someone who they know cares for them.
In any event, the following statements are proof enough that there is common ground to build on for the benefit of our children and the governments should act without delay.
Responses from concerned parties.
Children 1st. Response to PE 1156
Grandparents should be given the right of information about their grandchildren’s welfare.
Grandchildren’s Charter which is not about grandparents’ right to contact with their grandchildren, but about their grandchildren’s interests – these documents are available at: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Justice/Civil/17867/10388
CHILDREN 1ST is a strong supporter of this approach. The Committee may want to ask the Government about how widely these documents are used, and whether any further non-legislative measures are needed to help embed their use. Children 1st. Response to PE 1120
I totally agree that grandparents are often best placed to detect any kind of abuse or addiction that harms children and are often left picking up the pieces with no support when things fall apart. I think resolving that bit should be a priority (i.e. offering financial and emotional support) and then perhaps there’s scope to move on to greater recognition of the role grandparents play and how this could be established in law.
H. C. Woman’s Aids recent communication. Not necessarily the final word of W. A.
You are totally right: grandparents are among the most skilled professionals when it comes to looking after children. Grandparents can play an essential role in not only boosting their grandchildren's well- being. But also - as you rightly say - in detecting child abuse. MS Miller has kindly agreed to this quote in firm belief that grandparents have a crucial role to play in a child’s life in the over whelming majority of circumstances.
Maria Miller MP
Thank you for your email. I have much sympathy with your case and have
noted that my fellow Hampshire MP and frontbench colleague, Maria
Miller, has made a point which I fully endorse.
Gerald Howarth MP
Member of Parliament for Aldershot & Shadow Defence Minister
Making the Grandparents' Charter mandatory for professionals effectively means that you create legal duties - in other words individuals cannot enforce rights directly but can expect state institutions to follow the principles of the Charter. It might be worth you exploring the implications of this with the government.
Robert Brown Euro MSP
Former Justice Minister Cathy Jamieson MSP, also a former social worker, said
“Grandparents play a hugely significant role in children's lives. They are often the people who step in to care for children when parents can't cope due to drug or alcohol misuse and many find themselves struggling financially as a result. I would expect every social work department to look at what they can do to help in these situations, to ensure that the best interests of the child are promoted at all times. Supporting grandparents is often the best way to support the children."
Cathy Jamieson MSP Shadow Justice Minister
During my four year term as an MSP (2003-2007) I encountered many problems relative to grandparents and their grandchildren. I regularly raised the issue of 'Kinship Carers' in Parliament and complained about the lack of funding for grandparents who had their grandchildren given into their care by social workers.
The new proposals by the 'Grandparents Apart UK organisation' would act as yet another safeguard in the welfare and wellbeing of vulnerable youngsters. It is imperative that the Government acts now to help to reduce the chance of any more children becoming the focus of media attention due to abuse which has gone unnoticed by social workers and allow the Charter for Grandchildren to be mandatory by professionals.
This is a cost free simple way to help to bring to an end this new trend in society whereby vulnerable children become helpless victims. All too often there is drugs at the root of the problem. Social workers need all the help they can get therefore should welcome this new proposal NOW!
John Swinburne. Leader of the Scottish Senior Citizens Unity Party.
Jimmy Deuchars, June Loudoun.
Grandparents Apart UK
22 Alness crescent
Glasgow G52 1PJ
0141 882 5658
http://www.grandparentsapart.co.uk
On occasions professional organizations such as social work departments or the courts can become involved and may have to make decisions that will have a lasting impact throughout a child’s entire life. In these circumstances it is vital that the loving and supportive role that the wider family, in particular grandparents can play is respected and protected for the child…
FAMILIES ARE IMPORTANT TO CHILDREN
Grandchildren can expect:
To be involved with and helped to understand decisions made about their lives.
To be treated fairly
To know and maintain contact with their family (except in very exceptional circumstances) and other people who are important to them.
To know that their grandparents still love them, even if they are not able to see them at the present time.
To know their family history.
The adults in their lives to put their needs first and to protect them from disputes between adults - not to use them as weapons in quarrels between adults.
Social workers , when making assessments about their lives, to take into account the loving and supporting role grandparents can play in their lives.
The Courts, when making decisions about their lives, to take into account the loving and supporting role grandparents can play in their lives.
Lawyers and other advisers to encourage relationship counseling or mediation when adults seek advice on matters affecting them and their children.
Along with others, Grandparents Apart put a lot of hard work into “The Charter for Grandchildren” demanding to be heard about the gaps in the family law concerning their grandchildren. Why? Because we really do have the best interests of our grandchildren at heart, if it was not for love of them why would we bother?
We are happy to promote the Charter for Grandchildren and the Parenting Agreement because they are useful documents.
Grandparents Apart Self Help Group Scotland. 22 Alness Crescent, Glasgow G52 1PJ
http://www.grandparentsapart.co.uk A Scottish Registered Volunteer Charity No. SC 031558
Grandparents Apart Uk Revised proposal for the ‘best interests of children’
Our revised proposal is considering the child in as much as not to have the protection of their grandparents in child neglect and abuse cases is devastating to them and not at all in their best interests. In this revised proposal we have listened to the government and strive to work towards their wishes as much as possible.
The governments of the UK have refused point blank to give grandparents legal rights of contact with their grandchildren. Their wishes are that grandparents should not have individual legal rights because the say it would cause more problems than it resolves solves and it is not the answer for every child. (Neither are their proposals) Further wishes of the government are that families get together without legislation and The Charter for Grandchildren was produced for that purpose but there has been no encouragement from the government and the situation is not improving and grandparents are being by-passed for strangers or like the wee girl given to two men when the she was afraid of men... This is not in the best interests of children.
We therefore propose that ‘The Charter for Grandchildren’ in Scotland should be adopted UK wide and ‘and be mandatory for professionals dealing with children thereby ensuring in the absence of one or both parents that the love and protective role grandparents can play is not wasted as is the case at present because grandparents are regarded as irrelevant (not important) persons and therefore rarely considered in practice.…Being mandatory for professionals would not be an imposition on the parents or family in general…If the governments were to adopt this as an example it would send a message of encouragement to families that grandparents can be a huge asset in the family and inspire mediation focusing on the best interests of the children when there is a huge rise in drug and alcohol abuse and amid the fear of the ever increasing cases of child abuse. What more does the government want? Is this the best interests of children or is it polotics?
It is generally agreed by governments and most organisations dealing with children that grandparents are very important in the family.. It is also agreed that they can be vital in the early detection of child abuse and in the care and stability of children when they are in a crisis situation especially in the middle of the night. That is if they are informed about it at all, being irrelevant persons, this is not always the case. If the crisis has been violent and very upsetting it would be in the best interests of the children to be settled as quickly as possible with someone who they know cares for them.
In any event, the following statements are proof enough that there is common ground to build on for the benefit of our children and the governments should act without delay.
Responses from concerned parties.
Children 1st. Response to PE 1156
Grandparents should be given the right of information about their grandchildren’s welfare.
Grandchildren’s Charter which is not about grandparents’ right to contact with their grandchildren, but about their grandchildren’s interests – these documents are available at: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Justice/Civil/17867/10388
CHILDREN 1ST is a strong supporter of this approach. The Committee may want to ask the Government about how widely these documents are used, and whether any further non-legislative measures are needed to help embed their use. Children 1st. Response to PE 1120
I totally agree that grandparents are often best placed to detect any kind of abuse or addiction that harms children and are often left picking up the pieces with no support when things fall apart. I think resolving that bit should be a priority (i.e. offering financial and emotional support) and then perhaps there’s scope to move on to greater recognition of the role grandparents play and how this could be established in law.
H. C. Woman’s Aids recent communication. Not necessarily the final word of W. A.
You are totally right: grandparents are among the most skilled professionals when it comes to looking after children. Grandparents can play an essential role in not only boosting their grandchildren's well- being. But also - as you rightly say - in detecting child abuse. MS Miller has kindly agreed to this quote in firm belief that grandparents have a crucial role to play in a child’s life in the over whelming majority of circumstances.
Maria Miller MP
Thank you for your email. I have much sympathy with your case and have
noted that my fellow Hampshire MP and frontbench colleague, Maria
Miller, has made a point which I fully endorse.
Gerald Howarth MP
Member of Parliament for Aldershot & Shadow Defence Minister
Making the Grandparents' Charter mandatory for professionals effectively means that you create legal duties - in other words individuals cannot enforce rights directly but can expect state institutions to follow the principles of the Charter. It might be worth you exploring the implications of this with the government.
Robert Brown Euro MSP
Former Justice Minister Cathy Jamieson MSP, also a former social worker, said
“Grandparents play a hugely significant role in children's lives. They are often the people who step in to care for children when parents can't cope due to drug or alcohol misuse and many find themselves struggling financially as a result. I would expect every social work department to look at what they can do to help in these situations, to ensure that the best interests of the child are promoted at all times. Supporting grandparents is often the best way to support the children."
Cathy Jamieson MSP Shadow Justice Minister
During my four year term as an MSP (2003-2007) I encountered many problems relative to grandparents and their grandchildren. I regularly raised the issue of 'Kinship Carers' in Parliament and complained about the lack of funding for grandparents who had their grandchildren given into their care by social workers.
The new proposals by the 'Grandparents Apart UK organisation' would act as yet another safeguard in the welfare and wellbeing of vulnerable youngsters. It is imperative that the Government acts now to help to reduce the chance of any more children becoming the focus of media attention due to abuse which has gone unnoticed by social workers and allow the Charter for Grandchildren to be mandatory by professionals.
This is a cost free simple way to help to bring to an end this new trend in society whereby vulnerable children become helpless victims. All too often there is drugs at the root of the problem. Social workers need all the help they can get therefore should welcome this new proposal NOW!
John Swinburne. Leader of the Scottish Senior Citizens Unity Party.
Jimmy Deuchars, June Loudoun.
Grandparents Apart UK
22 Alness crescent
Glasgow G52 1PJ
0141 882 5658
http://www.grandparentsapart.co.uk
A granny story.
Grandma's boyfriendA 5-year-old boy went to visit his grandmother one day. Playing with histoys in her bedroom while grandma was dusting, he looked up and said, 'Grandma, how come you don't have a boyfriend now that Grandpa went to heaven?'Grandma replied, 'Honey, my TV is my boyfriend. I can sit in my bedroom and watch it all day long. The religious programs make me feel good and the comedies make me laugh. I'm happy with my TV as my boyfriend.'Grandma turned on the TV, and the reception was terrible. She started adjusting the knobs, trying to get the picture in focus. Frustrated, she started hitting the back of the TV hoping to fix the problem.The little boy heard the doorbell ring, so he hurried to open the door and there stood Grandma's minister. The minister said, 'Hello son, is your Grandma home?'The little boy replied, 'Yeah, she's in the bedroom bangin' herboyfriend.'The minister fainted. Now, that's funny... I don't care WHO you are.
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Eight Children taken into care.
*
http://www.thisissouthdevon.co.uk/news/children-taken-care/article-714504-detail/article.htm
Friday, February 20, 2009, 09:47
EIGHT children and a woman were taken into the care of social workers by police wearing riot gear because of growing concern for their welfare. Twenty police officers in body armour and carrying Taser guns were called out to the house in Torquay shortly before lunchtime yesterday.They were joined by 10 social services officers from
Torbay Council who took the children, aged 15 and under into care, along with a woman.One man was also taken to Torquay police station where he is understood to be helping officers with their inquiries.Sgt Jacqui Rees, who led the joint social service and police operation, said: "The eight children and the woman are now under the care of the social services.
"The man is helping us with our inquiry."We had this joint operation with the social services because of concerns for the welfare of the children and the woman."It is understood some of the children may not have been attending school.
Sgt Rees said the officers attended the address while wearing body armour and carrying Tasers because of fears friends of the man in the neighbourhood may oppose the removal of the children and cause trouble. She added: "There were concerns for the safety of our officers."Police officers later took off their riot gear at the request of the social services because 'it might scare the children'. A police spokesman confirmed the operation was at the request of Torbay Council's social services. Sgt Steve Blair, head of the child protection team with Torbay police, added it was a sensitive operation and police were only there 'to add the weight of the law and make it happen'. He added: "We were asked to assist the social services in obtaining their objectives which was to ensure that these children were removed to a safe place, which is where they remain."
Torbay Council's people commissioner Carol Tozer or is it (Taser) said: "Torbay Council considers the safety of children as our paramount concern."We continue to work very hard to protect vulnerable children in the area and liaise closely with the police and other partners to ensure their safety."
http://www.thisissouthdevon.co.uk/news/children-taken-care/article-714504-detail/article.htm
Friday, February 20, 2009, 09:47
EIGHT children and a woman were taken into the care of social workers by police wearing riot gear because of growing concern for their welfare. Twenty police officers in body armour and carrying Taser guns were called out to the house in Torquay shortly before lunchtime yesterday.They were joined by 10 social services officers from
Torbay Council who took the children, aged 15 and under into care, along with a woman.One man was also taken to Torquay police station where he is understood to be helping officers with their inquiries.Sgt Jacqui Rees, who led the joint social service and police operation, said: "The eight children and the woman are now under the care of the social services.
"The man is helping us with our inquiry."We had this joint operation with the social services because of concerns for the welfare of the children and the woman."It is understood some of the children may not have been attending school.
Sgt Rees said the officers attended the address while wearing body armour and carrying Tasers because of fears friends of the man in the neighbourhood may oppose the removal of the children and cause trouble. She added: "There were concerns for the safety of our officers."Police officers later took off their riot gear at the request of the social services because 'it might scare the children'. A police spokesman confirmed the operation was at the request of Torbay Council's social services. Sgt Steve Blair, head of the child protection team with Torbay police, added it was a sensitive operation and police were only there 'to add the weight of the law and make it happen'. He added: "We were asked to assist the social services in obtaining their objectives which was to ensure that these children were removed to a safe place, which is where they remain."
Torbay Council's people commissioner Carol Tozer or is it (Taser) said: "Torbay Council considers the safety of children as our paramount concern."We continue to work very hard to protect vulnerable children in the area and liaise closely with the police and other partners to ensure their safety."
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
4th March Demo Info.
*
Grandparents Apart UK
A peaceful Demonstration against Social Services
Child Adoption and Family policies
Child Adoption and Family policies
*
Wednesday 4th March 11.am
At
George Square Glasgow.
Wednesday 4th March 11.am
At
George Square Glasgow.
*
Who is invited?
Grandparents, Mothers, Fathers, Step-parents, Uncles, Aunts.In fact everyone who cares about children is welcome.
Grandparents, Mothers, Fathers, Step-parents, Uncles, Aunts.In fact everyone who cares about children is welcome.
*
Reason:- To protest against the adoption, parenting, andgrandparent policies of our "out of touch Social Servicesdepartments" who now appear to be wholly incompetent andacting as a law unto themselves, with complete disregard forthe children's "Best Interests" (article 8 of the Human rights actand the UN convention for the rights of the Child)?
These policies are causing untold distress to children andfamilies. The proof being the recent outrage, regardinggrandparents who were by-passed for the adoption of theirgrandchildren We demand policies to be more in line withchildren's welfare and not to be treated as commodities to bedisposed of as in a business plan.
We call on everyone who cares for children's welfare todemonstrate your disapproval of these policies and also towrite to your MSPs, MPs in protest stating that you support ourprotest.
For full details follow this link for further information.
Grandparents Apart UK is a Scottish Registered Charity. No SC 031558 Staffed by volunteers. Registered at 22 AIness Crescent Glasgow G52 1 PJ
For full details follow this link for further information.
Grandparents Apart UK is a Scottish Registered Charity. No SC 031558 Staffed by volunteers. Registered at 22 AIness Crescent Glasgow G52 1 PJ
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Thanks to Lisa Cohen from Jump
Birmingham and Black Country CAFCASS rated as inadequate by Ofsted
http://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed32727
Ofsted report into Birmingham and Black Country CAFCASS services published
Oftsed has published it s latest area report on CAFCASS services for Birmingham and the Black Country.
Overall the service has been given a Grade 4 inadequate rating with inconsistencies found in assessment, case planning and recording and some unacceptable delays. In particular the report noted that in the Black Country area there is a problem with allocation of private law cases with waiting times of up to 20 weeks.
CAFCASS Chief Executive, Anthony Douglas responded by concentrating on the report’s acknowledgements of the progress being made at a national level
“I am pleased that the intensive improvements we are making to our services in Birmingham and the Black Country have been acknowledged. It will take eighteen months more to improve consistently across the country as we are changing fundamental working practices and that takes time."
The full text of the Ofsted report is available on their website, (http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/Ofsted-home/Publications-and-research/Browse-all-by/Documents-by-type/Cafcass/Cafcass-Birmingham-and-the-Black-Country-service-area/(language)/eng-GB)
MPs, agony aunts and journalists to meet over family justice system
http://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed32732
Campaigining MPs to highlight continued concerns over family justice system
A group of MPs, led by John Hemming, has organised a meeting at the House of Commons with a group of journalists and media agony aunts to discuss the care system and family courts. Those involved include Camilla Cavendish of The Times, Sue Reid of the Daily Mail, Kate Hilpern who works for the Guardian and Independent and Denise Roberston, Agony Aunt on This Morning. They will be discussing a series of proposals including
Allowing social workers more time to see children and families and less time in front of computers
Continue progress towards transparency in the family courts
Allowing parents to have a second opinion
Providing public support for appeals and contesting care orders
Providing some public support for Mackenzie Friends
Expert evidence should only come from regulated professionals
All hearings should have anonymous judgments
Clayton v Clayton should not be reversed
Serious Case Review chairs should be independent and appointed independently
National guidance is needed to define what "risk of significant harm" means
The meeting will take place on 25 February 2009.
LSC announces training help for mediation suppliers
http://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed32721
£100,000 in grants for mediation training announced by LSC
The Legal Services Commission has announced that 14 mediation providers have been awarded grants to assist them train more mediators. The grants total £100,000, funds which the LSC hopes will
"support a trainee mediator and the organisation through both the Family Mediation Foundation Training Programme and the Competence Assessment Portfolio, in order for them to qualify to undertake publicly funded family mediation."
The recipients of the awards are:
Oxfordshire Family Mediation
Family Mediation Worcestershire
Mediation Herefordshire
Surrey Family Mediation Service
Focus Family Mediation Ltd
West Yorkshire Family Mediation Service
South Essex Family Mediation Service
Coventry and Warwickshire Family Mediation
Laceys Mediation
Family Mediation Cardiff
Fosters Mediation
Birmingham District Family Mediation
North East London Family Mediation Service
West Wales Mediation Service
More on this and the scheme in general can be found on the LSC website.
Moj / LSC formal response on graduated fees to be published this week
http://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed32722
Full details of the changes to graduated fees to be published
It has been announced that the formal response to the consultation on Reforming the Legal Aid Family Barrister Fee Scheme will be published later this week by the MoJ and LSC.
The announcement follows a written ministerial by Lord Bach on 12 February outlining the main thrust of the likely changes. The formal response “reiterates and details” that statement. The LSC has also stated that
"Guidance and details on the specific remuneration changes will be provided in an ‘easy-to-read’ format on our website just prior to their implementation in June.”
http://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed32727
Ofsted report into Birmingham and Black Country CAFCASS services published
Oftsed has published it s latest area report on CAFCASS services for Birmingham and the Black Country.
Overall the service has been given a Grade 4 inadequate rating with inconsistencies found in assessment, case planning and recording and some unacceptable delays. In particular the report noted that in the Black Country area there is a problem with allocation of private law cases with waiting times of up to 20 weeks.
CAFCASS Chief Executive, Anthony Douglas responded by concentrating on the report’s acknowledgements of the progress being made at a national level
“I am pleased that the intensive improvements we are making to our services in Birmingham and the Black Country have been acknowledged. It will take eighteen months more to improve consistently across the country as we are changing fundamental working practices and that takes time."
The full text of the Ofsted report is available on their website, (http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/Ofsted-home/Publications-and-research/Browse-all-by/Documents-by-type/Cafcass/Cafcass-Birmingham-and-the-Black-Country-service-area/(language)/eng-GB)
MPs, agony aunts and journalists to meet over family justice system
http://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed32732
Campaigining MPs to highlight continued concerns over family justice system
A group of MPs, led by John Hemming, has organised a meeting at the House of Commons with a group of journalists and media agony aunts to discuss the care system and family courts. Those involved include Camilla Cavendish of The Times, Sue Reid of the Daily Mail, Kate Hilpern who works for the Guardian and Independent and Denise Roberston, Agony Aunt on This Morning. They will be discussing a series of proposals including
Allowing social workers more time to see children and families and less time in front of computers
Continue progress towards transparency in the family courts
Allowing parents to have a second opinion
Providing public support for appeals and contesting care orders
Providing some public support for Mackenzie Friends
Expert evidence should only come from regulated professionals
All hearings should have anonymous judgments
Clayton v Clayton should not be reversed
Serious Case Review chairs should be independent and appointed independently
National guidance is needed to define what "risk of significant harm" means
The meeting will take place on 25 February 2009.
LSC announces training help for mediation suppliers
http://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed32721
£100,000 in grants for mediation training announced by LSC
The Legal Services Commission has announced that 14 mediation providers have been awarded grants to assist them train more mediators. The grants total £100,000, funds which the LSC hopes will
"support a trainee mediator and the organisation through both the Family Mediation Foundation Training Programme and the Competence Assessment Portfolio, in order for them to qualify to undertake publicly funded family mediation."
The recipients of the awards are:
Oxfordshire Family Mediation
Family Mediation Worcestershire
Mediation Herefordshire
Surrey Family Mediation Service
Focus Family Mediation Ltd
West Yorkshire Family Mediation Service
South Essex Family Mediation Service
Coventry and Warwickshire Family Mediation
Laceys Mediation
Family Mediation Cardiff
Fosters Mediation
Birmingham District Family Mediation
North East London Family Mediation Service
West Wales Mediation Service
More on this and the scheme in general can be found on the LSC website.
Moj / LSC formal response on graduated fees to be published this week
http://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed32722
Full details of the changes to graduated fees to be published
It has been announced that the formal response to the consultation on Reforming the Legal Aid Family Barrister Fee Scheme will be published later this week by the MoJ and LSC.
The announcement follows a written ministerial by Lord Bach on 12 February outlining the main thrust of the likely changes. The formal response “reiterates and details” that statement. The LSC has also stated that
"Guidance and details on the specific remuneration changes will be provided in an ‘easy-to-read’ format on our website just prior to their implementation in June.”
Radio Scotland joins the demo.
Dear All
A great opperchancity for you to get your oar in and vent your anger about your situation. Come on guys go for it.
Jimmy
Hi there Jimmy,
It was indeed a pleasure to speak with you on the phone yesterday and as promised, here is a little more information about our programme.
Give Me A Voice is a 30 minute pre recorded programme that gives ordinary people living in the communities of Scotland the opportunity to give voice to an issue or campaign that they feel strongly about. We would be very interested in making a programme with you and other members of your group to help raise the awareness of grand parents rights.
It would be our intentions to join you in George Square on the 4th March and to interview yourself after the demonstration as well as some other grandparents.
I would be most appreciative if you were able to put me in touch with other grandparents who have either had the experience of being by passed by social services, resulting in their grandchildren being passed onto either other family members or complete strangers and also perhaps some grandparents who still have unresolved issues in gaining access to their grandchildren.
I fully understand that this can be a very sensitive area for some grandparents but for the purposes of the programme, we can change their names and not reveal any identifying features about where they live or where their grandchildren are.
I am working to a tight deadline for this programme so it would be great if we were able to establish contact with other grandparents within the next couple of days.
Kind regards
Phil
A great opperchancity for you to get your oar in and vent your anger about your situation. Come on guys go for it.
Jimmy
Hi there Jimmy,
It was indeed a pleasure to speak with you on the phone yesterday and as promised, here is a little more information about our programme.
Give Me A Voice is a 30 minute pre recorded programme that gives ordinary people living in the communities of Scotland the opportunity to give voice to an issue or campaign that they feel strongly about. We would be very interested in making a programme with you and other members of your group to help raise the awareness of grand parents rights.
It would be our intentions to join you in George Square on the 4th March and to interview yourself after the demonstration as well as some other grandparents.
I would be most appreciative if you were able to put me in touch with other grandparents who have either had the experience of being by passed by social services, resulting in their grandchildren being passed onto either other family members or complete strangers and also perhaps some grandparents who still have unresolved issues in gaining access to their grandchildren.
I fully understand that this can be a very sensitive area for some grandparents but for the purposes of the programme, we can change their names and not reveal any identifying features about where they live or where their grandchildren are.
I am working to a tight deadline for this programme so it would be great if we were able to establish contact with other grandparents within the next couple of days.
Kind regards
Phil
Monday, February 23, 2009
Crossed wires
I think I know what has happened here.One of the forced adoption /secret family courts mums is organising another protest - nothing to do with your protest at all - and I think wires have crossed somehow. I am sure this mother would be mortified if she accidentally sabotaged your protest - I've spoken to her on the MFJ site, and she is a genuine campaigner, I'm sure. I am sure she is 100% behind what you grandparents are doing, as most of the other mothers are (I would say all, but we are having mole problems, I guess you have those as well) Anyway, I thought I'd better mail you about this. I can't come to Glasgow, I would love to come and support you people - but I will be fasting and praying for you, for sure. We are all fighting the same cause as far as I'm concerned - these corrupt child services are wrecking families and putting children into danger.
God bless,
Zoompad
God bless,
Zoompad
Letter to The President of the USA
Dear Mr President,
Grandparents are considered to be very important in their grandchildren’s lives but they have no legal standing in their lives through-out the world.
We have campaigned for eight years for legal rights of contact for grandparents but all governments refuse to grant individual legal rights to grandparents. As our children are losing out on the benefits and protection grandparents can offer because of their irrelevant status in the eyes of governments we have revised our policy.
Our group Grandparents Apart UK has worked with the Scottish Government to produce ‘The Charter for Grandchildren’.. It is an excellent document for children but it was only deemed advisory and is proving very difficult for professionals to abide by it. To do right by the children it would need to be mandatory for professionals that deal with children’s welfare.
Grandparents have a unique insight into their own families good and bad points and can detect signs of change like child abuse a mile off, but as the law stands grandparents are so easily banned from families in an effort to hide their shortcomings that children are being neglected and abused and the law is protecting the abuser.
This does not arise in normal families the question of grandparents losing contact never comes up in normal families with nothing to hide. Even if they do fall out the children do not suffer or get used as weapons for blackmail etc. We are talking about the millions of children caught up in drug and alcohol homes with no-one to turn too. Their grandparents would be a blessing to these children if the were only allowed to know about their welfare and professionals were encouraged more to recognise them for caring and keeping them in a home environment..
As of lately the British Social Services have been devastatingly incompetent in dealing with children as been displayed all over the media. We need a strong family man to exert some influence to bring an end to this madness.
Please read The Charter for Grandparents and if you think it can save children from neglect or abuse help us to put sense into our UK governments.
Jimmy Deuchars
Grandparents Apart UK
http://www.grandparentsapart.co.uk/
Grandparents are considered to be very important in their grandchildren’s lives but they have no legal standing in their lives through-out the world.
We have campaigned for eight years for legal rights of contact for grandparents but all governments refuse to grant individual legal rights to grandparents. As our children are losing out on the benefits and protection grandparents can offer because of their irrelevant status in the eyes of governments we have revised our policy.
Our group Grandparents Apart UK has worked with the Scottish Government to produce ‘The Charter for Grandchildren’.. It is an excellent document for children but it was only deemed advisory and is proving very difficult for professionals to abide by it. To do right by the children it would need to be mandatory for professionals that deal with children’s welfare.
Grandparents have a unique insight into their own families good and bad points and can detect signs of change like child abuse a mile off, but as the law stands grandparents are so easily banned from families in an effort to hide their shortcomings that children are being neglected and abused and the law is protecting the abuser.
This does not arise in normal families the question of grandparents losing contact never comes up in normal families with nothing to hide. Even if they do fall out the children do not suffer or get used as weapons for blackmail etc. We are talking about the millions of children caught up in drug and alcohol homes with no-one to turn too. Their grandparents would be a blessing to these children if the were only allowed to know about their welfare and professionals were encouraged more to recognise them for caring and keeping them in a home environment..
As of lately the British Social Services have been devastatingly incompetent in dealing with children as been displayed all over the media. We need a strong family man to exert some influence to bring an end to this madness.
Please read The Charter for Grandparents and if you think it can save children from neglect or abuse help us to put sense into our UK governments.
Jimmy Deuchars
Grandparents Apart UK
http://www.grandparentsapart.co.uk/
Foster carers in danger of HIV from children
Foster carers not told if babies are HIV positive 'to protect the child's human rights'
By Emily AndrewsLast updated at 11:01 PM on 22nd February 2009
Tricia McDaid: Was told she would have to lie if the parents asked what the drugs were for
Foster carers have been put at risk by not being told that the babies they are looking after could be HIV positive.
Social workers decided that the human rights of a mother wanting to keep her child's status confidential were more important than protecting foster parents, it is claimed.
In one case a foster mother, with three young children of her own, was given a new-born baby to look after and not told that he could have HIV.
This exposed her, her husband and their children to risk of infection.
Baby J was born last November to a mother known to be HIV positive.
During his birth doctors and nurses wore masks, goggles, boots, protective clothing and double sets of gloves to cut the risk of infection.
His elder brother had already been taken into care, and social services did the same for Baby J when he was a few days old.
Midwife Tricia McDaid, who questioned social workers about the practice when she became aware of the case in Newham, East London, said: 'This is appalling. Both the babies, the foster carers and their families were put at risk as they were not told.
'The foster parents were asked to administer anti-viral drugs to combat the baby developing HIV but were not told what they were.'
Mrs McDaid, 47, says that when she raised the issue with social services she was then moved from her job as a midwife in the community.
Although it is highly likely that babies who are born to HIV positive mothers will also be infected, it is not possible to know for sure until they are 18 months old.
So as soon as he was born Baby J was given daily anti-viral drugs to boost his immunity.
But crucially the foster family with whom he was placed were not told they were at risk of catching HIV. One of the three children was just two years old.
Mrs McDaid said: 'Newham takes the view that the foster parents don't need to know.
'This happens all the time and it's putting foster carers and their children at terrible risk.
'I was also told by the head of child protection at Newham Hospital that if the foster parents asked me what the drugs were for I would have to lie.
'In my opinion that is breaking the law and breaking the midwife and nursing code of conduct. It also puts the baby at risk as anyone administering drugs to a young baby needs to know exactly what they are and what dosage it should be.
'When I raised difficult questions with the council they ostracised me and tried to freeze me out as they didn't want this getting out.'
Mrs McDaid believes that the council is using Article Eight of the European Convention on Human Rights - the right to respect for one's private and family life - to protect the mother and child.
She said: 'Putting the human right of the mother's confidentiality about her HIV status above the right of the foster carers to know is wrong.
'It's playing Russian roulette with people's lives.'
A Newham council spokesman said: 'Foster carers would normally be expected to be provided with full information, but we admit that this did not happen in this instance.
'The circumstances in this case are complex and we acknowledge
that it could have been handled differently.
'Our procedures and protocols are now subject to revision.
'We are launching an investigation and we do not know if any other cases have occurred.
'The pan-London child protection procedures, which we are signed up to, contain guidelines that are primarily aimed at protecting children and ensuring children and their parents who may be HIV positive are not discriminated against.'
By Emily AndrewsLast updated at 11:01 PM on 22nd February 2009
Tricia McDaid: Was told she would have to lie if the parents asked what the drugs were for
Foster carers have been put at risk by not being told that the babies they are looking after could be HIV positive.
Social workers decided that the human rights of a mother wanting to keep her child's status confidential were more important than protecting foster parents, it is claimed.
In one case a foster mother, with three young children of her own, was given a new-born baby to look after and not told that he could have HIV.
This exposed her, her husband and their children to risk of infection.
Baby J was born last November to a mother known to be HIV positive.
During his birth doctors and nurses wore masks, goggles, boots, protective clothing and double sets of gloves to cut the risk of infection.
His elder brother had already been taken into care, and social services did the same for Baby J when he was a few days old.
Midwife Tricia McDaid, who questioned social workers about the practice when she became aware of the case in Newham, East London, said: 'This is appalling. Both the babies, the foster carers and their families were put at risk as they were not told.
'The foster parents were asked to administer anti-viral drugs to combat the baby developing HIV but were not told what they were.'
Mrs McDaid, 47, says that when she raised the issue with social services she was then moved from her job as a midwife in the community.
Although it is highly likely that babies who are born to HIV positive mothers will also be infected, it is not possible to know for sure until they are 18 months old.
So as soon as he was born Baby J was given daily anti-viral drugs to boost his immunity.
But crucially the foster family with whom he was placed were not told they were at risk of catching HIV. One of the three children was just two years old.
Mrs McDaid said: 'Newham takes the view that the foster parents don't need to know.
'This happens all the time and it's putting foster carers and their children at terrible risk.
'I was also told by the head of child protection at Newham Hospital that if the foster parents asked me what the drugs were for I would have to lie.
'In my opinion that is breaking the law and breaking the midwife and nursing code of conduct. It also puts the baby at risk as anyone administering drugs to a young baby needs to know exactly what they are and what dosage it should be.
'When I raised difficult questions with the council they ostracised me and tried to freeze me out as they didn't want this getting out.'
Mrs McDaid believes that the council is using Article Eight of the European Convention on Human Rights - the right to respect for one's private and family life - to protect the mother and child.
She said: 'Putting the human right of the mother's confidentiality about her HIV status above the right of the foster carers to know is wrong.
'It's playing Russian roulette with people's lives.'
A Newham council spokesman said: 'Foster carers would normally be expected to be provided with full information, but we admit that this did not happen in this instance.
'The circumstances in this case are complex and we acknowledge
that it could have been handled differently.
'Our procedures and protocols are now subject to revision.
'We are launching an investigation and we do not know if any other cases have occurred.
'The pan-London child protection procedures, which we are signed up to, contain guidelines that are primarily aimed at protecting children and ensuring children and their parents who may be HIV positive are not discriminated against.'
Letter from a very frustrated guy
Whats happening in this world?.. When will people wake up ? We have Bankers stealing money all over the world, we have Politicians thats supposed to serve the people, We have peace officers thats become enforcement officers to collect more money for bankers, using stun guns on people CCTV cameras everywhere, listening and tracking devices in our computors , phones, and soon to be televisions or digital boxes,and cars, We have Corporations patenting our DNA and every plant, fruit and vegetables plus minerals, We have people in the middle east being killed by bombs, we have Moslims blaming jews, In the uk council officials tell us take down crosses and crucifixes, inferring it might offend moslims, Christains falling for this tactical manouvre, Once the middle east is bombed into submission or seriously depopulated, Christains and Jews will probably be next, So that these New agers, or world bank government, New World order shills thats patented everything on this planet is going to force us to eat Genetically modified crops that they own and have patents on, as well as banning people from growing herbs, or vegatables, and declaring minerals and vitamins and co2 toxins. Poltically correct groups shouting safe the earth, dont teach your children about morality, and Non Scientists telling us we are in danger due to global warming, and tax threats on animal farts,, This situation seriously needs fixed before the whole worlds in hock to these banksters. Martin
Sunday, February 22, 2009
Good work Maggie Tuttle.
Maggie Tuttle
6 Poynings Avenue
Southend on Sea
Essex SS 2 4RT
21/02/2009
Tele 07767710756
To
David Cameron
Leader of the Opposition
House of Commons
London SW 1A OAA
Dear Mr Cameron.
Re Grandparents Rights.
Whilst I thank you for your letter of the 12 December 2008, grandparent’s rights as far as I can see, will never get any recognition via the law or the courts, it is all down to money, and our grandkids in many cases, as you may have seen in the press as of late, continue to be set apart from family and grandparents, I know you as an MP are fighting a losing battle on our behalf, and although there seems to be some press coverage for grandparents, it is still a no go, and always will be. I sympathise with you and thank you for any help you have tried for grandparents in the commons, but as I say, even you will not get a change in the Law.
In the UK Mothers/Fathers day, and many other days are set aside every year to remember the occasions for what ever,
Can I please ask you to help one more time, in the fact of asking in the Commons on behalf of the grandparents that a law could be passed to have?
A grandparent’s day every year? I am sure you could do this; if nothing else it would generate finances as other days of remembrance does.
Mr Cameron you know you’re self, how important most grandparents are, we help with our grandkids/finance/free child care/clothing/schooling/accommodation/tuition and much more, most of all we give love/support and care, all free.
We deserve one day of recognition, not that grandparents are asking for this, it is me asking you, on behalf of millions of grandparents, please just help us to get a day, every year acknowledged; it just may help one day to give us some rights.
And please do not send the norm of, thank you for your letter, do some thing.
Please see enclosed leaflet re Grandparents Apart UK protest 4th March Glasgow 2009 being held at George Square Glasgow.11.am. Their proposal http://grandparentsapartuk.blogspot.com/ for the role grandparents can play will not override ay rights for parents and will ensure the children can get the best grandparents can give.
Yours Sincerely
6 Poynings Avenue
Southend on Sea
Essex SS 2 4RT
21/02/2009
Tele 07767710756
To
David Cameron
Leader of the Opposition
House of Commons
London SW 1A OAA
Dear Mr Cameron.
Re Grandparents Rights.
Whilst I thank you for your letter of the 12 December 2008, grandparent’s rights as far as I can see, will never get any recognition via the law or the courts, it is all down to money, and our grandkids in many cases, as you may have seen in the press as of late, continue to be set apart from family and grandparents, I know you as an MP are fighting a losing battle on our behalf, and although there seems to be some press coverage for grandparents, it is still a no go, and always will be. I sympathise with you and thank you for any help you have tried for grandparents in the commons, but as I say, even you will not get a change in the Law.
In the UK Mothers/Fathers day, and many other days are set aside every year to remember the occasions for what ever,
Can I please ask you to help one more time, in the fact of asking in the Commons on behalf of the grandparents that a law could be passed to have?
A grandparent’s day every year? I am sure you could do this; if nothing else it would generate finances as other days of remembrance does.
Mr Cameron you know you’re self, how important most grandparents are, we help with our grandkids/finance/free child care/clothing/schooling/accommodation/tuition and much more, most of all we give love/support and care, all free.
We deserve one day of recognition, not that grandparents are asking for this, it is me asking you, on behalf of millions of grandparents, please just help us to get a day, every year acknowledged; it just may help one day to give us some rights.
And please do not send the norm of, thank you for your letter, do some thing.
Please see enclosed leaflet re Grandparents Apart UK protest 4th March Glasgow 2009 being held at George Square Glasgow.11.am. Their proposal http://grandparentsapartuk.blogspot.com/ for the role grandparents can play will not override ay rights for parents and will ensure the children can get the best grandparents can give.
Yours Sincerely
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Update:
My oldest boy has just phoned me from his mothers house.
Last communication was mid Dec.
They want to see me and come at weekends again.
I chose not to go down the court route.
Court action would have taken a lot longer than 8 weeks to advance, it would have also upped the anti and lead to more frustration and loss of earnings.
I say to you all, if court action was a guarantee of success then it would have been a first option. Unfortunately we are at the mercy of a system that is broken.
I applaude anyone that has actually achieved the goal of continuing to be the same parent for their children with no conditions attached post separation.
Kornelius
My oldest boy has just phoned me from his mothers house.
Last communication was mid Dec.
They want to see me and come at weekends again.
I chose not to go down the court route.
Court action would have taken a lot longer than 8 weeks to advance, it would have also upped the anti and lead to more frustration and loss of earnings.
I say to you all, if court action was a guarantee of success then it would have been a first option. Unfortunately we are at the mercy of a system that is broken.
I applaude anyone that has actually achieved the goal of continuing to be the same parent for their children with no conditions attached post separation.
Kornelius
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Children who died when SS was involved
The death of Baby P appalled the nation. But after a six-month investigation, Live reveals an even greater tragedy: the devastating hidden toll of young children who died in the care of their families despite social services being alerted.
To complete this, the first-ever study of all 150 child-protection authorities in England, we used Freedom of Information rights to demand files in the face of cover-up tactics by agencies all the way up to Children's Secretary Ed Balls.
On the eve of yet another review into child protection, Live publishes the full damning portrait of a nation incapable of protecting its most vulnerable members
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/article-1142243/The-228-child-deaths-didnt-want-tell-about.html#
By DAVID ROSE Research by GEORGE ARBUTHNOTT
To complete this, the first-ever study of all 150 child-protection authorities in England, we used Freedom of Information rights to demand files in the face of cover-up tactics by agencies all the way up to Children's Secretary Ed Balls.
On the eve of yet another review into child protection, Live publishes the full damning portrait of a nation incapable of protecting its most vulnerable members
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/article-1142243/The-228-child-deaths-didnt-want-tell-about.html#
By DAVID ROSE Research by GEORGE ARBUTHNOTT
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Pregnant Mother Driven To Suicide By Social Services
Pregnant Mother Driven To Suicide By Social Services
By Teresa | 17th Feb 2009 | in Forced Adoption Stories
The tragic story of a desperate mother who’s two children were put up for adoption by social services in East London brought about a tragic end to her young life as pregnant mother Angela Franklin 30 was found dead by police. Angela in need of support after the forced removal of her two children was instead bullied by the system leaving her in despair in what Angela described in writing “ i lost all my children due to lies being told in court by social services” just before her suicide
In Angela’s own written words just over a week before she takes her life and that of her unborn child we see the desperation of a mother who is lost and despite friends she made on the social networking site facebook who done thier best to support her she couldn’t bare to let social services take another one of her beloved children.
03 February 2009 at 05:05
“i felt suicidal after a bad relationship but after a while i got over him and i was able to move on. i now have someone who i love but still my life is not happy. i lost all my children due to lies being told in court by social services. i cant see or speak to my children.
this is one thing that i would not get over. my children meant the world to me and still do.
i have somehow detached myself from the man i love. the children look like him and they are everything like him. everytime i am with hime i get upset.
i dont know where to turn or who to turn to now.
i feel lost.
i am pregnant again and i dont want to live.
some may think i am being selfish because i should be thinking about he baby inside of me. but social services want to take this baby too and i would rather die.
i just dont know what to do. i want out
the sooner the better”
The sad truth is Angela Franklin took her own life as she couldn’t live her life without her children and she knew she was never going to see them again and she also knew that if she continued with the baby she desperatly wanted growing inside, her only hope to cling onto life would disapear as Social Workers would rip the baby she loved from her at birth. A social worker tipped her over the edge when Angela was informed by a social worker of their intentions shortly before her suicide.
Seeing no way out Angela gave up her fight with Social Services and the Court who let her, her unborn child and two young children down.
Angela done the only thing she felt she could to stay with her baby and that was to take her baby with her.
Mothers, Fathers, Grand-Parents, Aunts and Uncles face long lengthy battles with social workers who target them and remove their children based on false accusations and problems that do not render childen at risk but in need of family support so why do these families not get the support they need? The system has failed thousands of families as organisations and self help groups struggle to cope with the growing numbers of parents facing the systems failures.
Social Workers may well take the attitude of “oh well she must of been depressed so we done the right thing removing her children” but it is in fact the system that drives mothers and families to this despair in the first place.
Families are pushed to the extremes as they battle it out with Social Services in a desperate fight for their children as social workers misuse every thing in their power to leave parents mentally and phisically exausted and poweless as they say their last goodbyes to their children.
Parents are slowly worn down over the coming months and years as social workers get more and more funding and the more the parents fight for their children the more resources the social workers get with the never ending pot of tax payers money they misuse to pay for those resources. The resources on Social Services side do well out of it because they make millions.
Whilst all this is going on the children in danger and at serious risk are being slowly pushed aside and end up dead whilst Social Workers continue their onslaught to innocent families who not only don’t have the resources of which to fight the social workers on the same level but also don’t have the same support at hand to fight their corner. Whilst the families are being dragged through the onslaught of social workers they are being effected emotionally, phisically and mentally by the negativity, the lies social workers tell, the inaccuracies by professionals, having to fill out endless forms themselves, learn the law as they go along and the constant rejection by Judges who dont always bother reading the parents side or find it easier and quicker to go along with social workers. Are courts now so over loaded with cases that they just want to rush them through so they can get on with the next one and then get home in time for tea?
When Social Workers get it wrong there is nowhere to complain and there are no professionals that can give decent second opinions because the families are not only denied a second medical or psychaitric opinion by the courts but many of those professionals are financially thriving by acting on the sides of the social services. There are no resources for the families dragged through the system nor the support they need.
Social workers demand psychiatric evaluations of parents who have been fighting for months for their children and the psychiatrists brand mothers with BPD or mental health problems if they dare as to fight for their children or show signs of distress. How can any parent be fairly evaluated after social workers have staged a mass onslaught to these families using the most horredous and bullying tactics possible in order to break the parents before they are even evaluated?
After years of fighting for the rights of children in care to be given a voice if they are suffering abuse and to expose it, and just as families have fought to speak openly about the injustices they have faced, the public got excited when the anouncement arrived that the Family courts are to opened in April and with it came the false sense of security.
And just as no2abuse suspected as stated in a previous article, whats the catch?
Well that catch or should I say blow came when Jack Straw announced that as from April at the same time the courts are supposed to be opened in order to allow the media to report on the injustices to families and children he is not only reversing a previous decision but also ensures that families facing injustices and children in care will not be allowed to openly expose their abuse anywhere if they identify themselves. They are not allowed to be named and they are not allowed to tell anyone who they are publicly.
Jack Straw has done this to protect soclal workers and professionals who fail families like Angela Franklin and he has not done it to protect any child or family. His decision will see more and more families ruined by injustices and we will see more children abused in care and more children will die. Its inevitable because that’s what secrecy does. It ruins lives. Many survivors of abuse lived in fear of their abusers and now they are finally speaking up about the abuse they suffered Jack Straw has decided to gag them as well so the abusers can carry on with the security of secrecy.
Thankyou to those who provided information to make this story possible and to give Angela the voice that was taken away from her by the system failures
By Teresa | 17th Feb 2009 | in Forced Adoption Stories
The tragic story of a desperate mother who’s two children were put up for adoption by social services in East London brought about a tragic end to her young life as pregnant mother Angela Franklin 30 was found dead by police. Angela in need of support after the forced removal of her two children was instead bullied by the system leaving her in despair in what Angela described in writing “ i lost all my children due to lies being told in court by social services” just before her suicide
In Angela’s own written words just over a week before she takes her life and that of her unborn child we see the desperation of a mother who is lost and despite friends she made on the social networking site facebook who done thier best to support her she couldn’t bare to let social services take another one of her beloved children.
03 February 2009 at 05:05
“i felt suicidal after a bad relationship but after a while i got over him and i was able to move on. i now have someone who i love but still my life is not happy. i lost all my children due to lies being told in court by social services. i cant see or speak to my children.
this is one thing that i would not get over. my children meant the world to me and still do.
i have somehow detached myself from the man i love. the children look like him and they are everything like him. everytime i am with hime i get upset.
i dont know where to turn or who to turn to now.
i feel lost.
i am pregnant again and i dont want to live.
some may think i am being selfish because i should be thinking about he baby inside of me. but social services want to take this baby too and i would rather die.
i just dont know what to do. i want out
the sooner the better”
The sad truth is Angela Franklin took her own life as she couldn’t live her life without her children and she knew she was never going to see them again and she also knew that if she continued with the baby she desperatly wanted growing inside, her only hope to cling onto life would disapear as Social Workers would rip the baby she loved from her at birth. A social worker tipped her over the edge when Angela was informed by a social worker of their intentions shortly before her suicide.
Seeing no way out Angela gave up her fight with Social Services and the Court who let her, her unborn child and two young children down.
Angela done the only thing she felt she could to stay with her baby and that was to take her baby with her.
Mothers, Fathers, Grand-Parents, Aunts and Uncles face long lengthy battles with social workers who target them and remove their children based on false accusations and problems that do not render childen at risk but in need of family support so why do these families not get the support they need? The system has failed thousands of families as organisations and self help groups struggle to cope with the growing numbers of parents facing the systems failures.
Social Workers may well take the attitude of “oh well she must of been depressed so we done the right thing removing her children” but it is in fact the system that drives mothers and families to this despair in the first place.
Families are pushed to the extremes as they battle it out with Social Services in a desperate fight for their children as social workers misuse every thing in their power to leave parents mentally and phisically exausted and poweless as they say their last goodbyes to their children.
Parents are slowly worn down over the coming months and years as social workers get more and more funding and the more the parents fight for their children the more resources the social workers get with the never ending pot of tax payers money they misuse to pay for those resources. The resources on Social Services side do well out of it because they make millions.
Whilst all this is going on the children in danger and at serious risk are being slowly pushed aside and end up dead whilst Social Workers continue their onslaught to innocent families who not only don’t have the resources of which to fight the social workers on the same level but also don’t have the same support at hand to fight their corner. Whilst the families are being dragged through the onslaught of social workers they are being effected emotionally, phisically and mentally by the negativity, the lies social workers tell, the inaccuracies by professionals, having to fill out endless forms themselves, learn the law as they go along and the constant rejection by Judges who dont always bother reading the parents side or find it easier and quicker to go along with social workers. Are courts now so over loaded with cases that they just want to rush them through so they can get on with the next one and then get home in time for tea?
When Social Workers get it wrong there is nowhere to complain and there are no professionals that can give decent second opinions because the families are not only denied a second medical or psychaitric opinion by the courts but many of those professionals are financially thriving by acting on the sides of the social services. There are no resources for the families dragged through the system nor the support they need.
Social workers demand psychiatric evaluations of parents who have been fighting for months for their children and the psychiatrists brand mothers with BPD or mental health problems if they dare as to fight for their children or show signs of distress. How can any parent be fairly evaluated after social workers have staged a mass onslaught to these families using the most horredous and bullying tactics possible in order to break the parents before they are even evaluated?
After years of fighting for the rights of children in care to be given a voice if they are suffering abuse and to expose it, and just as families have fought to speak openly about the injustices they have faced, the public got excited when the anouncement arrived that the Family courts are to opened in April and with it came the false sense of security.
And just as no2abuse suspected as stated in a previous article, whats the catch?
Well that catch or should I say blow came when Jack Straw announced that as from April at the same time the courts are supposed to be opened in order to allow the media to report on the injustices to families and children he is not only reversing a previous decision but also ensures that families facing injustices and children in care will not be allowed to openly expose their abuse anywhere if they identify themselves. They are not allowed to be named and they are not allowed to tell anyone who they are publicly.
Jack Straw has done this to protect soclal workers and professionals who fail families like Angela Franklin and he has not done it to protect any child or family. His decision will see more and more families ruined by injustices and we will see more children abused in care and more children will die. Its inevitable because that’s what secrecy does. It ruins lives. Many survivors of abuse lived in fear of their abusers and now they are finally speaking up about the abuse they suffered Jack Straw has decided to gag them as well so the abusers can carry on with the security of secrecy.
Thankyou to those who provided information to make this story possible and to give Angela the voice that was taken away from her by the system failures
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)