Whilst this is something we write about often on the blog and campaign passionately on, it is wonderful to see other organisations working to highlight poor policy especially in relation to children being removed from parents when better alternatives exist.
A new report by Legal Action For Women says that children are increasingly being removed from single parent families due to poverty and that mothers who actively come forward for help to improve their situations are finding their children are being taken from them instead. It also raises concerns over the ‘secrecy’ of family courts which prevent mothers from openly talking about their cases.
Dr Andy Bilson, who is emeritus professor of social work at the University of Lancashire, has been looking carefully at adoption data and concludes that the steep rise in care applications has less to do with an awareness of, or rise in incidents of neglect and more to do with policies which prioritise removal over support.
The article in the Guardian explains:
The report examined the cases of 56 women, all of whom came for help to fight for their children. Between them the women had 101 children; 71% of the women had suffered rape and/or domestic violence, 47% did not have a lawyer and 39% had mental health problems.
Anne Neale, one of the report’s authors, said: “Charges of neglect are used to punish, especially single-mother families, for their unbearably low incomes.
“The fundamental relationship between mother and child is dismissed as irrelevant to a child’s wellbeing and development, and the trauma of separation, and its lifelong consequences, are ignored.
“Mothers who are victims of domestic violence are refused help, blamed for ‘failing to protect’ their children, and punished with their removal.”
We could not agree with this report more. From financial incentives in adoption to a complete disregard for the importance of attachments and the impact of destroying them, the Family Court system is woefully behind when it comes to implementing effective and powerful child welfare policies. We know that there are other, far better alternatives to placing children in care for the vast majority of cases, so the question has to be, why is the child welfare system not using them?
Read Legal Action For Women’s report “Suffer The Little Children”, here.
Very many thanks to Charles Pragnell for alerting us to this development.
Researching Reform 
It is excellent news that this sort of thing is being taken seriously by welfare groups now, if not yet by the Family Courts. We all know about the secrecy, but not everyone knows about the needless removal of children from parents (not just mothers, either). This sort of thing should have gone out with the ‘tallyman’ in the thirties. Next up, with any luck, a spotlight on mothers (and occasionally fathers) who approach social services for help because there is evidence of abuse by the other parent and get vilified and lose their child/children as a result. Are things really changing? It would be good to believe so. The more publicity and genuine concerns raised, the more chance of eventual change in the thinking of Social Services and the very wrong decisions made by the Family Courts.
LikeLiked by 2 people
What is the situation in single father families?
LikeLike
Hi Yuri, the report doesn’t address single fathers, but it would be interesting to know.
LikeLike
Hi Natasha, Thanks very much for picking this up! We’d very much like to be in touch with you and wonder if you’d like to meet up? I had tried emailing you before but not sure it worked. Hope this one does! Best wishes, Anne Neale
From: Researching Reform To: annephoenix53@yahoo.co.uk Sent: Thursday, 19 January 2017, 11:05 Subject: [New post] BREAKING: Report Finds Children Unnecessarily Removed From Parents #yiv6152031497 a:hover {color:red;}#yiv6152031497 a {text-decoration:none;color:#0088cc;}#yiv6152031497 a.yiv6152031497primaryactionlink:link, #yiv6152031497 a.yiv6152031497primaryactionlink:visited {background-color:#2585B2;color:#fff;}#yiv6152031497 a.yiv6152031497primaryactionlink:hover, #yiv6152031497 a.yiv6152031497primaryactionlink:active {background-color:#11729E;color:#fff;}#yiv6152031497 WordPress.com | Natasha posted: “Whilst this is something we write about often on the blog and campaign passionately on, it is wonderful to see other organisations working to highlight poor policy especially in relation to children being removed from parents when better alternatives exis” | |
LikeLiked by 2 people
Hi Anne, thank you for your message. I didn’t receive any email, I’m so sorry. Would you mind very much emailing once more? I’ll keep an eye out for you x
LikeLike
Read this recent PHD containing extensive research and facts on the policy and legality of forced adoption.
Click to access Sam%20Davey%20Thesis%20Final%20Final.pdf
EU Parliament has also got involved on petitions by parents, particularly, those from other EU nationals, who have had their children forcefully removed whilst living in UK.
Forced Adoption must warrant, as one of the greatest scandals of our time.
We must constantly remember, that Forced Adoption is only allowed in the UK, no where else in the world as far as I am aware except Portugal.
We must also remember, hundreds of parents are being imprisoned, because they are in breach of CARE court gagging orders and therefore they cannot speak out.
Google me finola moss and read the NLJ articles on this, particularly ‘Authorised Abuse’ NLJ 2007, which shows how unfair the system is, and how there is no justification for the unnecessarily draconian secrecy of the care courts, as if adopted childrens names are changed, and during proceedings the social workers/ CAFCASS guardians PUBLICALLY inquire in schools, neighbourhood so all are aware, and in care the children’s anti cedents follow them.
We also have no proof that adoption or care is in a child’s best interests/welfare.
And often care orders are based on an opinion, that future neglect/abuse will occur and not that any has.
Child protection social workers have now for at least 6 years, been told to concentrate protection on the under 4s, one of the main reasons for Rotherham abuse, this is under the huge push for ever earlier intervention, which serves the adoption industry as easier to adopt. We also had a drive to split up sibling groups for the same reason.
We now have a drive to build more care homes.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Reblogged this on Musings of a Penpusher and commented:
Good to see these matters aired and discussed at long last.
LikeLiked by 1 person
More open discussion can only lead to improvements in judicial understanding and greater justice which will certainly improve life for all.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It becomes increasingly reasonable to ask whether the economic dimensions of child welfare extend to the state’s ideological view that the speedy removal of children from their families, simply, saves money. This might explain the demands on workers to behave in particular, sometimes punitive, ways. Furthermore, we might speculate that a ready market is envisioned for such children, prompted by a range of social phenomena, not least the disconnect in the minds of many employers between a woman having a career and also being a mother; which is an attitude informed by the very same ideology.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Absolutely Graeme, thank you for your comment.
LikeLike
Sir Martin Narey, once stated adoption saves £38,000 per child but how he managed to reach this figure I do not know.
But, in view of the amount of profit, recycled, or otherwise, made by the foster industry and adoption.And the number of charities, on a sustainability basis that diversified into it, it is more likely, that it is the actual incentive to make money, with a minimum of £30,000 per adoption fee and unlimited discretionary, that has created this policy and the legislation, of now 3 successive governments, who have used adoption as one of their flagship policy.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on No Punishment without Crime or Bereavement without Death!.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on BertieS.
LikeLike
“so the question has to be, why is the child welfare system not using them?”
it has to be for the money they are making from the removal of babies and toddlers. the older children are swept along in the drag net because the SS have no choice as it would look suspicious if they left the older children with their parents. its without doubt the babies and toddlers they are after and the money must be quite substantial when we see the risks they are taking to break up entire families using lies and deception.
its a SS Frankenstein Monster that must be destroyed and the victims justly compensated for what has been perpetrated against them.
LikeLiked by 3 people
The fact, that the government last year, proposed legislation, that would exonerate the Local Authority from any duty of care to those in care, proves that this is not about child protection but mainly exploitation.
This legislation is necessary, to allow the LA to commission private child protection services including assessments, adoption, fostering care homes, but not be legally liable for these services.
Already many protection services are already privatised by the back door and being put under special measures.
This means that they are being run by a monopoly cult corporation, that has an overriding duty to its investors, eventually, it is likely they will be venture capital backed, and not the children in their care.
The LA, do not want these children suing them when adult, for breach of their Human Rights and the damage done, as has already happened with some children successfully suing for over 23 foster placements.
If protection privatised, due to business confidentiality, it will be almost impossible to find out what is happening within the corporations to these children, and how money or how much is paid out of public funds and for what. Outcomes are not now not even measured.
Freedom of Information Notice do not apply to private companies, even if they are running public services.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Reblogged this on | truthaholics and commented:
|”Anne Neale, one of the report’s authors, said: “Charges of neglect are used to punish, especially single-mother families, for their unbearably low incomes.
“The fundamental relationship between mother and child is dismissed as irrelevant to a child’s wellbeing and development, and the trauma of separation, and its lifelong consequences, are ignored.
“Mothers who are victims of domestic violence are refused help, blamed for ‘failing to protect’ their children, and punished with their removal.””
LikeLiked by 2 people
In the eighties/nineties, Woman Aid rarely allowed social workers in their Refuges, as they knew, for particularly under 4s evidence for care proceedings was usually their motive.
But in 2000s Womans Aid where were made the Common Framework Assessors for the Government of children and influenced by Refuge USA, children were removed if partner abusive which was why they were in the Refuge.
Womans Aid and NSPCC, then campaigned to get the Children and Families Act change in 2004 of the definition of ‘harm’, for the care threshold widened, to include a child witnessing emotional or financial abuse.
All this resulted in nearly all young children of abusive fathers, even if they were enstranged being placed in care.
Charities are run on a sustainability/ profit basis, albeit recycled, and their main source of income now is from government, and they are also now required to prove vague public benefit, so can lose this at any time so controlled by state.
All this mainly due to Blair New Labour but made worse now by Coailtion and Tory.
Now Legal Aid will only given in custody disputes if abuse alleged leading to more abuse allegations and thus removal. i
Google NLJ charity MATTERS under finola moss read my Article about this.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Pingback: Report Finds Children Are Unnecessarily Removed From Parents – Parental Alienation
Reblogged this on World4Justice : NOW! Lobby Forum..
LikeLike
Reblogged this on L8in.
LikeLike
I’d like to get in touch with you too, 25 years ago I worked for the local authority as an administrator in social care. I was driven out by mental health issues arising from what I now know to have been psychological abuse by my line manager (a senior social worker). Our subsequent involvement with them as a family, due to misunderstood issues arising from autism, has shown me that this form of psychological abuse is endemic in the practice of many social care departments. Additionally, our authority moved responsibility for autism from disability teams to child in need teams, but did not provide training so they identify autism as emotional abuse or neglect not autism. the 2009 Autism Act put a training obligation on local authorities but it si clearly not being followed through. It took 9 months for me to get my SW to even read the local autism strategy (I still can’t access it) and she went from “there are so many such conditions we are supposed to know about ” to “all our child in need workers should have autism training”…
My conclusion from all of this is that our social care system is a national disgrace and needs urgent review and reformation – but how to go about it? i’d willingly join any organisation that seeks to bring this about.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hi Lin, in so sorry. You’re very welcome to get in touch via email.
LikeLike
As a MUM of an autistic daughter now 20, I can confirm all you say, google my story on finola moss.
The Autism Act 2009 spent millions of NAS money etc on campaigning lawyers etc but was, I feel, a deliberate con, as it purported to give autistic a right to autism friendly services, but does not, as it is effectively not fit for purpose, as to enforce the rights under the Act,a judicial review has to be taken by the individual autistic family and this needs lawyers and risks huge costs of other side if you lose, which is highly likely as JR is now very restricted.
I know of no one who has succeeded or even taken such JD. So LA do not have to be autistic friendly on their assessments of parents in fact they in law are treated as if parenting a normal child.
This is all deliberate, to feed the highly lucrative autism for life residential and education care industry.
LikeLike
Thank you for sharing your experience. I believe the workplace bullying that goes on in Social Services is rife. I am so sorry you endured such anguish. Havong SW’s involved in my life made life a living hell… my child is coping as he is strong and resilient and was raised well…. however he is now oppressed and considered a ‘good boy’ for being so. I 100% believe that is there was no profit to be made in Child Protection, reform would occur, radically.
LikeLike
This is right now what is going on with me and my 3 daughter’s. In 2014 had to request help as I was due to have a major operation and with no one to care for my children ask social services for help. They gave minimum help and by 2015 I struggled to care for me and my children. in 2016 I finally placed my children under section 20 and since then had a lot of issues sorted and now social services are withholding my children because they think I have a personality disorder of an emotional state and feel I can’t safeguard my children currently a year of fighting been told if I get psychology intervention I might be able to have my children returned. Need to talk to you with more in depth information as I feel unfairly treated and both me and my girls have our human rights invade.
LikeLike
Thank you for your comment, K and I’m so sorry. You’re welcome to email me at Sobk13 at gmail dot com.
LikeLike
It’s been a while I’ve got an update went to court in September 2017 children in long term foster care I have been doing everything possible and what’s been asked for by soical worker and even the court order is being broken by the sw leaving my family being torn apart and pushing me out of the children’s lives i will not give in or go away but no-one believes the system is wrong in my case or even wants to listen i am feeling very lost and alone.
LikeLike
Hi, I’m so sorry, As I mentioned before, you’re welcome to email me with further details.
LikeLike
“court order is being broken by the sw leaving my family being torn apart and pushing me out of the children’s lives”.
This is a very common theme as many other parents have gone through this and many are right now.
When you say – “no-one believes the system is wrong in my case or even wants to listen”.
who are you referring to ?
if its your Local Authority complaints dept, that will be the case as they will defend corrupt Social workers and their team managers tooth and nail.its common place all across the country and so is the collusion with Family court Judges.
LikeLike
Thanks for your response ao where can i go with this aa i feel the whole system is corrupt
LikeLike
have the LA made any indication that they are applying for Adoption for any of your 3 children.
LikeLike
My reply might not be seen as constructive as such but a bit of information and advice. I had involvement with SS many years ago and through that, as well as what I know other people have gone through or how they’ve been treated, they will not give help to begin with or indeed very little leaving you to struggle in difficult situations then when things worsen blame you, your parenting etc as an excuse to take or keep your children. They aqre not daft and know exactly what they are doing. Keeping children in care, even if for the wrong reasons, is more lucrative to them than giving you appropriate help – the get money for the former and the latter costs them. As for breaking the bond between the custodial parent and the children, that is one of their aims, in the expectation it makes the children reliant on them as they would be on that parent. Complain to the local authority and they will stick up for the sws, even denying they have lied when it is clear that they have. They will only back down a little if you can provide proof, even then they will deny lies have been told, just that, as in my case “some of the information given to the court wasn’t strictly correct.” They will do anything they can to get out of the blame or responsibility that shows they have done wrong.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Very Interesting article. I’ve noted something else as well.
LikeLiked by 1 person