It’s a humid start to the week and we’re sure the latest question we have for you is bound to make it hotter.
The Researchers collecting the data found that children were taken away from their parents by local authorities in over 90% of cases. It is the first time such data has been collated.
Court records show that 7,143 mothers were involved in repeat care cases – affecting 22,790 children, over a period of seven years. Many are taken due to child neglect and abuse concerns. Once the first child is taken, and as part of what is understood to be a grieving process, many mothers get pregnant again, only to find that their next child is taken from them, too.
Dr Broadhurst in the article, argues that this data shows that the family courts drastically need to change their approach to help women in these situations turn their lives around.
Our question to you, is this: what could be done to make the family courts better?
Researching Reform 
The first thing that would need to change is how child protection agencies are payed. The government ONLY gives an agency money when they take a child.
LikeLike
Thank you, Tammy. That’s a great point, and one which is liable to cause all sorts of conflicts of interest, and we know has done in the past.
LikeLike
The courts need more barristers conversant with “common law” which holds the courts accountable to the individuals and ensure legal documents are correctly processed… go check out https://www.youtube.com/user/ukcolumn/videos
LikeLike
Thank you, Jonathan 🙂 On another note, have you ever been to any of the debates in the House of Commons I organised? You look so familiar, and I don’t mean from Rotary 🙂
LikeLike
From the help line I can say hands on heart yes it it happening every time to women who have lost one child then the next is taken and it goes on and on mostly on allegations of alcohole and drugs and yes this is an issue but 9/10 including grandparents are all classed the same, Governments “In a child’s best interest” do not even consider the families when they take babies and children they are all taken for the multibillion pound children’s industry.
At the conference on the 25th July 2014 one of the guest speakers is Dr Dennhey a child Psychiatrist who has grave concerns that the families are ignored and the child sent to foster or adoptions will be speaking on this issue.
LikeLike
Thank you, Maggie. It’s heartbreaking. I think there are two main issues. One is the accuracy of the diagnosis in the first place and the other is helping those ladies who are genuinely unable to care for their kids to find ways of grieving which won’t cause them more distress. Those are my main concerns, at least.
LikeLike
SIMPLE !! The family courts should be run under the same guidelines as those of the uk criminal courts
This would entail the following improvements:-
1:- Innocent until PROVED guilty beyond reasonable doubt !Probabilities (51%) mean that family courts could now be taking children wrongly for nearly half the time.
2:-No gagging orders.
3:-The right to call for a second opinion in regard to medical or psychiatric evidence.
4:-The right to call any witnesses relevant to the case,including children deemed Gillick competent by an independent source.
5:-The public should be admitted and relatives be allowed to sit with or near parents
6:-Hearsay to be admitted only under special circumstances and to be awarded less weight than direct evidence should the two conflict.
7:-Previous offences or charges should not be revealed until after the verdict;
8:-Contact between children and parents should never be forbidden or censored unless the parent has been convicted of a serious crime against a child or children.Conversations between parents and children should never be censored.Murderers and Paedophiles in prison are of course allowed visitors and allowed to phone out about once a week in most prisons and can speak freely without censorship.
9:- The right of parents to a jury in the most important cases ie when permanent or long term separation between parent and child is envisaged.
10:-The right NOT to be punished by removal of children for mere “risk” of things that may never happen;Criminals are not jailed for risk !
THESE ARE THE NEW 10 COMMANDMENTS !
LikeLike
Reblogged this on Thinking Out Loud and commented:
Great post. I think the biggest problems are power and secrecy with secrecy being perhaps the worst, enabling and increasing as it does the power of both social services and the courts. All court cases should be open. It should be easy to protect the identity of the children. I don’t know how many miscarriage of justice there have been I would hate to see yet another baby P case. If all trials were held in public the parents and everyone would be able to see the law being carried out as it should be and as parents deserve.
LikeLike
Rain falls downwards from clouds new research reveals !!!
This has been absolutely standard your years. If one child id taken from you at birth then they will automatically come for the next.
But this is POLICY, there was no need for research for it.
Under the Intergrated Family System as it is now know, if it comes up with a previous child taken, its an automatic marker to take the next.
Who else but SS Depts take children into Care ?
Its like some research in the 18th century – British ships out of certain ports are the main movers running a slave trade out of Africa !
The babies are take to fulfil the Forced Adoption trade in trafficking children.
This is because the demand is greatest for them in the market and because they are the easiest to forced adopt.
Also the Dread John Hemmings has already repeated published this data, taken from the official statisticians of the Dept of Schools, Families and Children. This was on the number of babies seized at birth for Forced Adoption.
This was not the intention of the plan by Tony and Cherie Blair in the late ’90’s, when they introduced Hillary Clinton’s plan to adopt more older children so they did not have to remain in Care and emerge damaged – the US Federal Safe Families and Adoption Act 1998.
But as in America this worked as not intended – vast numbers of babies were adopted as this was the market demand and easiest to adopt.
But the IFS in Britain was set to show need to have the expected baby taken into Care if the last was.
Why didn’t the judges, especially Nicholas Crichton do something ?
LikeLike
You made me smile with your intro 🙂 I think Nick has been trying to stop the cycle with FDAC, which is actually excellent and keeps families together – a model I have long argued should be standard, but we’re dealing, as you know very well, with bureaucracy and people vying for the pot, so it all gets lost in the mix.
LikeLike
I’m sorry but Nick and his friends base everything on the mothers being shock horror people and actually being heavy drinkers and on drugs.
The mothers are required to confess and accept therapy.
But what happens if they were in fact innocent ?
Someone thought they were drinking or they looked like they were drunk and it got into the SS paperwork.
Result child taken into Care and put to Forced Adoption.
Nick’s system simply does not allow for this.
LikeLike
I’m not sure that’s entirely fair, Dick. I do think it’s a good programme for those that need it and it’s very quick to keep families together or reunite them. I’m all for that.
LikeLike
I agree it is an excellent programme for those who need it, the sale of the jolly old vino in supermarkets and increase in drug taking means many women need this and kids go home.
But the assumptions of Nick and his friends are too witchhunting.
What happens if the women aren’t ?
We’ve seen it.
Kid to Forced Adoption or SGO as mum didn’t confess.
LikeLike
I hear you. I’m not sure the programme has treated any women who have no genuine addictions, that would be interesting to know, but it’s a very specialised programme with cutting edge professionals in the mix, not the standard crap we see in the courts on a daily basis, so these guys can tell the difference between real addictions and imagined ones. It’s going to take a very brave person to call out the rubbish diagnoses being made. But I think pressure groups have to keep hihglighting this issue.
LikeLike
it doesn’t follow if they are committed to that ideology.
We have seen such cases.
The sealed F C freezes out anyone challenging diagnoses, even NHS or people working for private clinics.
Psychiatrists who are professors and heads of psychology clinics tell us this.j
LikeLike
If they’re committed to that ideology, yes.
LikeLike
Good morning Natasha,
This topic is very close to home so I feel justified to consider this to be a dispicible practice! Having recently pulled out the Judgement concerning my grandchildren and looked at it again after the passing of time and in the cold light of day and I am even more appalled than when the judgement was first made 3 years ago! It was deemed OK for 2 children be separated, one to adoption, the other to long term foster care instead of letting us, the grandparents look after them, despite many positives!! The situation only changed by the adoption failing and they are at least together but remain in foster care. However a third child was born that we were not allowed to see as he was earmarked for adoption and removed at birth.
With the passing of time I’m sure that the eldest child has been extensively questioned by social workers and the fosterers and they would have found nothing detrimental about us but they would never admit they just might have got it wrong!
Instead they condemned our grandchildren to a life in care and all what that entails! One child is lost forever having been adopted!
Since that judgement I made my own investigations of the care system and I am left wondering at the humanity of the people involved to have wished and executed that life in care on my grandchildren when there was a viable option, for them to live with grandparents who love them very much, but they could not be bothered to investigate properly and so condemned them! It is very telling that we have been denied any contact since! If my grandchildren were happy they would be screaming it from the rooftops and organising contact so they could flout it but since they are not I can only assume they are not happy. If this is true then I hope karma exists!
Social workers should work with not just the mothers but the extended family too to enable the child to be brought up within its own family. If the mother or father has been convicted of a crime against the child then I can understand why the child is removed but even then the grandparents very often want the child but are denied by social workers who play God!
A social worker speaking on a breakfast show, was still trotting out the lie that its the courts that removes children and not social workers! This is such a disengenious statement to make when its clear its their reports that the judge makes judgement on! We may as well dispense with Family Court Judges and let social workers take over! Neither do anything good for families! I haven’t seen much good being done to their children either!
LikeLike
Good morning D, wow, sounds like the social worker was a little frightened, so she skewed the truth.
I’m so sorry about your grand children and what’s happened to you all as a family. I agree with you that more needs to be done to ensure that these kids are treated with humanity and dignity and the levels of care are unacceptably low, still today. It really is a disgrace.
LikeLike
Hi Natasha, thank you for your sentiments.
There really is no excuse! They have been taking children systematically for decades and its become clearer it’s all about number crunching, meeting targets and making profits! Its nothing about how well off the children are! That’s proved by the outcomes of children.
When I first heard what social workers do to the kids, denying them access to family for instance, I didn’tbelieve it! Why would a social worker stop contact? Then it happened to me and since I know I have never done anything bad to any of my grandchildren, I realised it was true. God only knows what is actually said to the kids! No wonder the kids are damaged, not by their families but the care system itself! Its outrageous! Where in the children’s act is this? Oh yes! In the child’s best interests! Its all about control! Not upsetting the fostering apple cart! They should feel ashamed!
Until there is an independent body that has the guts to tell the truth this diabolical system will not stop but grow! The fact that a decision is made on paper by committee that have barely met the kids or families but decide a child future based on their social work policies and their own narrow experiences! Its shocking that even when a child is in care, despite all the news articles that abound with abuse stories, foster homes are not inspected by Ofted but If you are a child living in a care home or a boarding school they are! Why should they be excluded? Why should a social worker make ongoing inspections of foster homes when they or their collegues placed them there? The children should stay with familes parents or extended family unless they have committed a crime against a child! A simple and logical system! They make it complicated because they don’t want to change it!
LikeLike
There’s a lot wrong with our family court system – and I’m the last person to support it – but what are we expecting social workers to do ? Leave another child to meet a grisly fate ? For those unfamiliar with the numbers, more children meet abuse and such a fate at the hands of their mother than their fathers. Yet on the other hand there are those cases where common sense seems to be set aside. It should be emphasised that the 7,000 + figure is for a 10 year period so arithmetically it works out to a 700 pa average (but why spoil a good headline !). The “90% of cases” sounds deliciously devised for newspapers – but 90% of what ? The total female population or just of questionable mothers ?
I suspect that those 7,143 mothers involved in ‘repeat care cases’ could possibly be the rump of those “high conflict” families we hear about. It would help if such data and research were not so boxed-in/confined.
It’s not just judges who believe many mothers are trapped in a ‘destructive cycle’ (of pregnancies and care proceedings); many of us who have spent years scrutinising the numbers believe it extends into other areas such as false allegations. The most common constants in care proceedings, child abuse and false allegations appear to be a misuse of drink or drugs (or both) and mental health problems, i.e. bipolar etc. Terrie Moffitt has done a great deal of mainstream research in the area of comorbidity – but much of it is overlooked by the mainstream media (and is completely unknown in some legal circles).
Ironically it is this firm equality of treatment between men and women who abuse that is now promoting an examination of whether punishment is suitable or whether it is “an experience that needs to be understood.” What a pity this ‘experience that needs to be understood’ is never extended in our legal system to men.
LikeLike
Hi R, yes, I agree that some children do have to be removed, so for me the two main issues are: how do ensure that mothers who have their children taken are supported/ helped to grieve without more distress and how do we avoid taking the wrong children?
LikeLike
what do we expect social workers to do?
Avoid fabricating evidence to support and justify a case which would not justify taking a child into Care.
Not to create a Narrative during a case to justify their actions or punish the family they don’t like.
Not to promote a fashionable theory, hoovering up kids, which is in fact an entirely untrue theory. I once found myself in the middle of such a scandal, which I knew would result in a large number of children going to Forced Adoption as their parents would obviously not confess.
Not to engage in Forced Adoption as the solution to the problems.
LikeLike
Hi RW, What do we expect social workers to do? Leave another child to accept a grisly fate? Social workers themselves say they cannot save all the children so they take any child that crosses their path. That’s what is wrong! You cannot justify taking 12000 kids into care in a year on the off chance that any one of those 12,000 may be hurt, or killed by one of the parents. The percentage of those families that harm children is very low but the percentage of kids harmed by social services taking the child away from their families and into care is very high! The childs pain is often suppressed in childhood and comes out when they are adults. Social workers should work with families first and foremost!
LikeLike
Any mother who has lost a child I tell them get your self a dog as a pet because the SS dont want to sell the dogs but if you have another child its gone for ever sold. Having said that what is now being used against parents are family pets and this info came from a social worker who is very upset that if parents have animals goodbye kids.. I tell you via the help line I hear all and info from some good social workers.
LikeLike
simple not all people had good parenting themselves as a child . The children do not come with a handbook make parenting classes a part of the national cirriculam . Learn the parents how to parent but if ss are after they will make going out the odd weekend for a drink a drink problem and if you ever smoked a spliff or had recreational drugs ( without children present ) you are a druggie . Its in the training and down to ss management and woe betide you challenge them back about their behaviour or habits ……. they are worse than stalkers …… my 17 yr old due to leave care feb i said do not get anyone pregnant cos ss will snoop ss told me careleavers if they get pregnant are under an automatic assessment by ss till 21 …… i believe they under one anyway …… so much for care system ……
LikeLike
Reblogged this on Samara4baghad's Blog and commented:
BEEN GOING ON FOR DECADES & GETTING WORSE IN UK
LikeLike
The judges are the real criminals.Any judge taking into care a baby at birth from a mother who has been neither charged nor convicted of a crime should be locked up for crimes against humanity.Laws are necessary in a civilised society and those who break them need to be punished to avoid chaos and anarchy.What is the point of having laws however when parents who have broken no laws are punished in the worst possible way by the forced adoption of their children?Why,on the other hand do social workers who continually break the law go unpunished?
LikeLike
You are right, the problemis the Family Court judges can’t judge.
But its origin is that the F C judges train themselves, inviting to their judicial training sessions the proponents of various dubious child abuse theories. This is what happened with the MSBP/FII theory with regard to Asperger’s Syndrome/ ASD/ ADHD.
As the specialists in these fields, who were furious, said “the judges always believe them and not us”.
LikeLike
Joseph Doyle Jr’s research is a must read! He set out to discover if abused children were better off left in their own homes. Interesting website: http://www.fightcps.com. shows his research which found that kids were better off at home than foster care!
There is also an informative video about the foster care system in America, where the foster kids speak out, which has paralles with the UK as well as a heap of other info.
LikeLike
Of course !
Babies are the easiest to Force Adopt, they are the most desired commodity by the market – the families wanting children.
The same applies in America.
Oodles of cash are paid to state and county authorities under the Safe Families and Adoption Act 1998as well. They just want that federal money in for their budgets.
It is also the basis of our system.
I still have the printout of how much many councils were being paid per annum.
My local councillors still deny they were being paid £1,000,025 until I hold it under their nose.
LikeLike