People often ask us a host of questions about what we do, how we do it and most importantly why we do it, so we thought we would conduct an interview with ourselves, and our most frequently asked questions.
Well, it is Christmas, time for a little festive fun.
- Researching Reform – how did that all happen, then?
Well, I went though the family courts during my own divorce, with a small child and was constantly surprised by the way the process dealt with families. It made such an impression on me that I decided to blog about it, and then by accident found myself working on projects designed to help make the system more user-friendly.
2. Are you angry about your experience – is this project a vendetta of sorts?
No, not at all. I genuinely love working on law and policy reform; it stretches my mind and makes me feel like I’m tweaking for change, and not just for the sake of it.
3. So, you’re not trying to bring down the system single-handedly, then – because that’s a rumour going round, you know…
If I wanted to bring down the system I wouldn’t champion personal heroes who work inside it. I may be critical of poor practice, whether in law, social work or psychiatry, but I try to differentiate between practice and people. There’s a fine line between people inside the system who genuinely don’t care and those who have grown despondent because they don’t feel they can make a difference. I’m always on the look out for both – the former to ensure they don’t abuse their positions and the latter to try to cheer them on. And I am a lawyer by trade – I stand by my profession, despite its awful public image, often deserved, and the oath we take to do right, which I had to make when I got called to the Bar.
4. What kind of stuff do you find yourself doing, other than blogging?
I get to work on all sorts of amazing things, with all sorts of amazing people. My priority is the Pro Bono work; since LASPO, more and more families are being denied their basic right to representation and they’re very scared and upset by the whole process. I’ve also organised debates in the Commons and events in the Lords for family law organisations, worked as a Consultant for the All Party Parliamentary Group on Family Law and the Court of Protection and advised politicians and peers on family law and policy. At the moment, I write articles on family law for various organisations, advise charities and enterprises on areas of family law, do lots of legal research and work on my beloved Encyclopaedia on Family and The Law.
5. That sounds like a heavy workload. Is being meticulous important to you?
Yes, very. However, when things get hectic at work, I may not always have the time to make sure that every post on my blog is pitch perfect and I take the view that if anyone wants clarification on anything I’ve written, all they have to do is ask. That’s the beauty of the internet – it’s not static, everything can be explained or made clearer. And, of course, I’m human; I get tired too.
6. There’s another rumour going round that your project is the work of the devil – care to comment?
If by that you mean that it seeks to put the system out of business, then no, it is designed to do the exact opposite. The Encyclopaedia I’ve created for example, is designed to help parents get the information they need, in language they can digest easily, and to help practitioners find what they need too. It essentially aims to make the whole process smoother and faster, with one critical advantage – it will help to regain public trust, so much of which has been lost, in the system. Families want to believe in professionals who are dedicated and who care. People who collaborate with us, have those qualities in spades. It’s a win-win situation.
7. Phew, well, we’re relieved. But you must have some bug bears about the system?
Yes, I have lots. It’s a little outdated, it doesn’t ‘look after’ families and my biggest gripe is the system’s current failure to listen, truly listen, to the Voice of the Child. Listening is an art in itself, which most people lose when they get big. We’ve got so many voices going on inside our own heads that it’s hard to hear the voices of others. And little people’s voices are that much softer.
8. How do you feel about the time limits on care proceedings?
I think the government is looking at the system’s problems back to front – we shouldn’t be setting deadlines for tasks to be done: that’s a superficial solution to the problem of delay which will not address the root causes of the system’s lethargy. We should be focusing on quality of support, streamlining processes and using our common sense. There’s very little of the latter around inside the system, but it would make a huge difference if people were allowed to use it.
9. What’s up with the Children and Families Bill?
The Bill, to my mind, is awkward. There’s a dollop of good stuff, a dose of bad, and a whole chunk missing, which makes it incomplete and wobbly. I’d like to see less legislation and more of a focus on actual on the ground support, looking at each family’s needs and treating them like the unique units they are – with the dignity they deserve.
10. Can we end with a fun question – you’re very intense, and it’s Christmas, we need a laugh: What’s the funniest thing that’s ever happened to you at work?
If only there were just a few – I’m a walking catalogue of embarrassments, but I’ll embarrass someone high profile, on this occasion. I was organising a family law debate in the House of Commons and sent an email to a Minister who was, at the time, head of a large department, specialising in the area in which the debate was about. Within moments of sending the email, I received an email from the Minister, which was intended for their PA. The email explained to the PA that the debate’s topic was an area they knew nothing about and to make up an excuse to the effect that they had to be with their constituents on that evening. Realising their mistake, the PA wrote back with speed, citing the very reason I had been privy to, not moments before, and not a mention of the runaway email….. And that, weird virtual interviewer, is politics.
Thanks, Researching Reform, you’re one crazy gal, but we love ya. More tea anyone?
Researching Reform 
Hi Natasha:
After a long afternoon on the phone with frustrating calls, what a pleasure to read this post! Love the Picture too! And, yes, I will have more tea…. 😉
Tom
LikeLike
Hi Tom, thank you, I’m so glad 🙂 More tea for you!
LikeLike
And the ultimate question: Do you think you are making any impression on this grossly dysfunctional system,?. Or is it just like peeing your pants in dark clothing, you get a lovely warm feeling but nobody notices.
LikeLike
Hi R, I think that’s probably not for me to judge. As with any effort to bring about change of any kind, it’s never down to one person.
I do remember almost ten years ago now, no one was talking about family law. I would broach the subject with politicians and judges and everyone said the same thing: you will get nowhere trying to reform this system, because the politics surrounding this area are taboo, and no MP will touch it. That didn’t stop me writing and campaigning, though.
Since then, a debate on these issues has started. I’ve noticed the government start to tackle various issues and lawyers and people inside the system engage in the conversation on change. I make no judgement either on the quality of that exchange, just that it’s happening, for the first time, in a way we haven’t seen before. There’s more talk, more traction.
I still don’t think you can attribute that momentum to just one person. Anyone who tries to claim they’ve single handedly rocked a process is being dishonest. It takes a lot of people, all working together, to bring about change. And my project involves a lot of people.
On a personal note, although a lot of the time I can’t reverse the damage the system does to families I assist with their cases, I’m often told just being able to talk to someone who will listen, is appreciated. It’s not going to make an impact on the universe, but that’s not what this project is about. If I help just one person find what that they need, or keep their children where injustice has been done (and I have on occasion been able to do that), or even just offer someone the opportunity to connect with politicians or heads of organisations to get the help they need (which I also have been able to do), then I take the view that what I’m doing is worthwhile.
Change inside the process, real change, is going to take some time. I may have stopped working on this project long before then, or I may still be going at it, I don’t know. But I hope that more people engage in the discussion and help to create a really useful place for families to come to with their troubles.
LikeLike
Read all the way through. I look forward daily to R&R and then JBs posts. If only I were 55 years younger. I would ask your permission to Dunk a biccie while as your guest. Old Phil..
LikeLike
Thank you, Phil. Your support is so appreciated.
LikeLike
Hi Natasha,
How very nice to hear a little about you for a change. A very enjoyable and informative read, but is RR more than just you? You mention ‘we’ – is that the Royal one?!
The only point I would disagree on is that ‘no-one discussed Family Law ten years ago’. Fathers 4 Justice was formed in 2002, and in fact the Childrens Act of 1989 was as a result of a long debate over Family Law. I believe this act was passed with the best of intentions but it failed in many respects and led to gross inequality and suffering. So we learn, adapt and change until we get it right, always aware that what seems right today may not be regarded as right tomorrow. It’s a slow process, but it is people like yourself who encourage and stimulate debate that help drive the process on, particularly as you are a professional who has been at the sharp end of the system yourself, as I believe.
I very much hope we can meet up for a working lunch in the New Year. Meanwhile I hope you and yours have a great time over the Christmas period.
Roger
LikeLike
Hi Roger,
Thank you for your comment. The “We” in not intended to be a royal one by any means – it stems from the fact that I view the project and myself as two separate entities – it allows me to focus on being impartial, as much as I can.
By debate about the system, I mean the volume of it. We have had several ‘major’ overhaul periods since the 20th century, but none quite like this one, I don’t think.
Happy new year sir, and look forward to meeting you on the other side (of the year). 🙂
LikeLike
In my humble opinion the greatest invention for change has been the internet. The beauty of this is that it cannot be shut down. People are now voicing their experiences, fears, annoyance and disgust of a system that has been wrong for many decades over the internet and has now become a global phenomenon.
Many others are realising that so many people cannot be wrong and that something is very wrong with a system that purports to be for the family and the children within. As more people demand that a good hard look of the system as a whole is taken and rectified, more people will demand those people working within the system are held accountable for their actions that lead to children being removed from their families. They will demand a better deal for families.
There will be change and it will be forced on them because they will not make changes of their own accord. Global forces will come into play as one country will follow another. As examples, Russia stopping adoption to USA because their children are being killed. Australia do not want another lost generation so are looking at how to prevent it. Adoption will be stopped there too. A decade ago, no one spoke much of trafficking now it is realised millions of people are involved, of all sexes and ages, for all different purposes and that children too are trafficked. Speaking out will bring about change. Everyone now knows of the abuse perpetrated and hidden in childrens care homes & schools under the cloak of child protection and/or the church or other religious groups. Public opinion is very powerful!! It needs to be harnessed to bring about positive change. Most people are totally unaware of the reality of the system until they get caught up in it and by then it is too late for them. Most people have a misguided view of what role social services play and feel they are there to help the family and feel that all they need to do is tell the truth but this is not the case as what is said is distorted and used against you in the family court. Those involved will agree.
It is people like yourself Natasha who have given Researching Reform, a forum, so people can voice what they are feeling. Websites like Children screaming to be heard, Forced Adoption, PAIN, Fathers for Justice, Justice for Families, Victims Unite, Kids for Cash UK and many, many others where people can go for advice. Alternative media like UK Column, and alternative radio sites are becoming more popular and the mainstream media are picking up on what is happening and voicing their concerns too. The more people who know what has befallen others can help prevent the same happening to them. I am reminded of the quote, “For every action, there’s is a reaction” and it cannot come quickly enough!
LikeLike
Mr. E. Timpson MP is giving a further £250,000 to promote Fostering Agencies. I repeat. Because of the easy taking of children and placing them through the adoption system cases of sexual abuse of these children will occur within 15 years. I pray that I am wrong.
LikeLike
Phil, It’s true, millions of £s island set aside for the removal of children from their homes and on support services for both fosterers or adopters. Many of those people have never even had experience of children but with cash incentives people are willing to foster. Children are a commodity that frankly pay them well. As one fosterer commented they wouldn’t be doing it unless they were paid to do so. If the child proves incompatible then the child is just moved on to another and another until such time as the child ages out. We have yet to see how the option to stay in foster care until 21 years old panns out. It may only be taken up by those who go on to further education but many will be in the situation of leaving earlier and will no longer know their family members as social workers break the family bonds in the belief that if the child sees family members it will be disruptive to the child. That is a nonsense, never mind that recent research in Australia has shown that when contact is cut it is the child who is extremely distressed. Cutting contact serves another purpose however, it breaks down the child to accept the situation they find themselves.
Many will adopt & it’s on the cards many adoptions will breakdown, some may even be considered successful by the authorities, but since there are no checks after adoption I don’t see how they can know. Success in any case is subjective. Reports are filtering through on the internet to tell of unhappy childhoods living with abusive adoptive parents. To adopt a child from the care system is nothing less than the local authority offloading responsibility and the upkeep costs for that child. That responsibility was taken on when the child was taken from their parents and the local authority became Corporate Parents. Russia at least has stopped adoptions to the USA after it came to their attention children were abused and murdered by adoptive parents. Personally I do not think it is morally or ethically right to adopt a child taken from its family. Social services “safeguard a child” but that child will grow into an adult and should know its own family and their place within it. It’s been stated that parents don’t “own” their children but who gave that right to Governments? I would have thought the family had a greater stake.
It’s a crying shame that the money earmarked for strangers doesn’t go to support the family, keeping it intact. When a child goes into care that child is damaged by the experience of removal. Children are resiliant but there are limits.
LikeLike
Good Morning N. Thank you Dana. While reading your post I noted it was not for the love or want of a child or even nurturing a child out of pity. THE MONEY is the governing factor.
I have often thought that the only way we could win a fight with CHILDRENS social service is to show the general public what the Fostering and Adoption system is costing the Taxpayer. If only I had the ability to make public the money which is paid out within in the System from the BEGINNING to the end of a single case of a child taken into “care”. I mean the whole mob of them. SS. doctors, PSYCHOS, CAFCASS,
lawyers, and all the others in their everflowing trough. If only one tenth of this money was spent on helping a troubled family.
(Note my Website, DELETE if it is not suitable in R&R).
LikeLike
Good morning, Phil.
LikeLike
Yes Phil, I do believe it is all about the money generated from all different sources and the golden goose is the child. Once caught in the net, the process begins and doesn’t stop until the child ends up in care. It matters not how many appeals as they rarely succeed but generate more money. A never ending cycle that social workers always win and Judges rubberstamp without question. The whole family court system is merely a conveyor belt to legally remove children from their homes. The child is the ultimate loser and will suffer long after leaving the care system. Families are unnecessarily destroyed and families lives are on hold until they are reunited. If the government was really concerned about the welfare of the children ever effort would be made to keep the child with the family but sadly this is not the case. Social workers constantly ignore what is in the Children & Families Act because they can, under the guise of ” it’s in the child’s best interests”. If it were, they wouldn’t be in care.
LikeLike
It is long overdue that the term “”In the best interests of the child” was removed from all legislation and consigned to the history books. It is at best an obscure concept with no universally accepted definition and is therefore highly subjective and dependent on the beliefs, values, and attitudes of the adult making such decisions. A different adult at a different time and in a different place would probably make an entirely different decision based on the same set of facts. The social class and status of the adult viz-a-viz the child and parent will also have an immense bearing on such decisions.
It should be replaced by questions such as: Is this decision demonstrably and measurably to the benefit of the child?. How well does it meet this individual child’s emotional, physical, intellectual, psychological, and social needs?. Has the child’s wishes been given full consideration and weighting in the decision making process and if such decision does not conform with the child’s wishes, why not?. Will the child’s human rights as specified in international conventions and domestic law be upheld?.
I would suggest that very few, if any, current decisions regarding children would satisfy such criteria but will usually be masked in a cloud of prevarication and procrastination and obfuscation.
LikeLike
R, you describe very concisely how easy it is to make flawed decisions. It applies especially to social workers and judges.
Neglect covers a wide spectrum but at what point does it tip the balance enough to remove a child permanently from its parents and extended family? What seems to be forgotten is the trauma children go through when parted from their parents. Which is worse? I would say removing the child as it damages them as a child and the reprecussions exist long after. I wonder if Judges become so jaded that it doesn’t register with them anymore the effect of their decisions.
After watching “Psychopaths” on TV I fear many professionals involved in the System could well be psychopaths! That would explain a lot!
As it coming up to Christmas I hope the Ghosts of Christmas pay a visit to each and every professional involved in the System! May they learn their lessons and return the stolen children to their families!
LikeLike
While Ruminating again. I have two propositions to make on what people may make as a Christmas WISH. Journalists use this method.
(i) Social Worker. Great Diety(LUCIFER ?), PLEASE grant me the right to have the ability to tell more LIES so as to get children into the care systems clutches.
(ii) ABUSED FAMILY. GOD. At this Yuletide may the CONSCIENCE of the Government and all those involved in the taking of children be AWAKENED to the GRIEF of what has been done to us by a SUPPOSED social service.
LikeLike
I STATE again categorically that PMs past and present, their Deputies. Ministers, past and present, the Cabinet and High Court Judges have KNOWLEDGE of what has and is happening within the Social Service System, NAMELY the taking of children by CORRUPTION. I HAVE knowledge of all the FAMILIES who have STATED that Social Services in their Case have LIED. To emphasise my point(if this is allowed by R&R) Google:– Walsall ss-forced adoption
WHY does that Council STILL remain SILENT.
LikeLike