• About
    • Privacy Policy
  • GSW
  • Guide To Making A Subject Access Request
  • In Dad’s Shoes
    • An Overview
    • Invitation
    • Media
    • Photos
    • Press Release
    • Soft Launch
    • Speeches
    • Summary
  • Media Coverage
  • Parliamentary Debates
  • Voice of the Child Podcasts

Researching Reform

Researching Reform

Monthly Archives: June 2017

European Court Orders Charlie Gard’s Life Support To Continue, Despite Legal Challenge

20 Tuesday Jun 2017

Posted by Natasha in child welfare, Researching Reform

≈ 3 Comments

Charlie Gard’s life support must continue for at least another three weeks, so that the European Court Of Human Rights (ECHR) can come to a decision about whether or not Charlie will undergo pioneering treatment in America.

The Supreme Court has, reluctantly, extended the deadline, allowing Charlie to remain on life support until midnight on 10/11 July.  (Para 20 – and thank you to John Bolch over at Family Lore for drawing our attention to this document).

The decision sits awkwardly with a legal challenge which has been mounted by Great Ormond Street, the hospital overseeing Charlie’s care. Great Ormond Street’s lawyers are arguing that the ECHR has no authority to request or order an extension of Charlie’s life support pending their decision to hear the case. The ECHR have countered this claim by pointing to their regulations which allow for such an order to be made where removal of treatment during the Court’s deliberation would lead to a “real risk of irreversible harm.”

This is an incredibly difficult situation, where medical opinions about the chances of success and survival are based on highly subjective evidence. You can watch the Supreme Court had down its decision, below. Meanwhile, Great Ormond Street has also released an FAQ on the case.

 

 

Share this:

  • Tweet
  • WhatsApp
  • Email
  • Telegram
  • Pocket
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Print

Like this:

Like Loading...

In The News

20 Tuesday Jun 2017

Posted by Natasha in News, Researching Reform

≈ 3 Comments

The latest news items that should be right on your radar:

  • Male child sex abuse survivors charity ‘struggling with demand’
  • Guns kill 1,300 US children every year, study finds
  • Sharp rise in suicides by gun among American children is found

boy-reading-newspaper-new-001

Share this:

  • Tweet
  • WhatsApp
  • Email
  • Telegram
  • Pocket
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Print

Like this:

Like Loading...

Question It!

19 Monday Jun 2017

Posted by Natasha in Researching Reform

≈ 4 Comments

Welcome to the week.

As another survivors’ group leaves the nation’s Independent Inquiry Into Child Sexual abuse (IICSA) amid allegations that it is not fit for purpose and has marginalised the very people it was set up to listen to, the future of the Inquiry has again been thrown into question.

The Survivors of Organised and Institutional Abuse (SOIA) have withdrawn from the child abuse inquiry, claiming that it has been going downhill for some time and has consistently ignored survivors and victims assisting their investigations. The group said this:

“It is with deep regret that Soia announces its withdrawal from the inquiry… We emphasise that each of us will continue to vigorously campaign outside of the IICSA, for the rights of survivors of organised and institutional abuse to justice and healing… We wish to thank all those who have contributed time, effort and their own money to WhiteFlowers and Soia.

However, we believe that, despite our efforts, IICSA remains not fit for purpose…. Indeed it has descended into a very costly academic report writing and literature review exercise with survivors totally marginalised from effective participation in the research process.”

The group had four core participants sitting at the inquiry, who have now left, however they represented a much larger group of hundreds under its own SOIA umbrella.

We have received correspondence from one SOIA member who disagreed with the decision to step down from the Inquiry, indicating that feelings about the IICSA amongst survivors are mixed.

Our question this week then, is this: do you agree that the Inquiry is going backwards, or is its work still important in forming a complete picture of abuse in Britain and beyond?

face_question_mark

Share this:

  • Tweet
  • WhatsApp
  • Email
  • Telegram
  • Pocket
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Print

Like this:

Like Loading...

Impromptu Thank You

15 Thursday Jun 2017

Posted by Natasha in Researching Reform

≈ 7 Comments

Researching Reform usually thanks its readers and posters in the New Year with the release of WordPress’ Blog Report, which celebrates a site’s audience with fun stats and charts, however this feature has now been shelved and so we never got the chance to show our gratitude.

It’s been on our minds for a while to do this, so we’d like to do this now.

As the years have passed, we’ve welcomed more of you to the site. We are incredibly privileged to have a diverse readership which includes families, young men and women, charities, social workers, lawyers, judges, peers and politicians.

We are humbled by those readers who have chosen to remain with us, and we would like to thank you for your enduring loyalty. You are family.

New visitors come to our site every day. Some subscribe, others dip into our stories and features. We value and appreciate every encounter.

Our genuine thanks for reading, commenting, sharing and exploring with us. We strive to be thought provoking, helpful, refreshing. Whatever you are looking for, we hope you find it here. If you don’t, we are always open to suggestions.

 

Addams Family Banner Thank you

Share this:

  • Tweet
  • WhatsApp
  • Email
  • Telegram
  • Pocket
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Print

Like this:

Like Loading...

The Buzz

14 Wednesday Jun 2017

Posted by Natasha in Researching Reform, The Buzz

≈ 3 Comments

The latest news items that should be right on your radar:

  • Child Abuse Inquiry launches consultation on impact of child sexual abuse on victim and survivors and provision of support services.
  • Charlie Gard to stay on life support until 19th June as European Court considers case
  • Gloucestershire council sorry for ‘serious failings’ in children’s services

Buzz

Share this:

  • Tweet
  • WhatsApp
  • Email
  • Telegram
  • Pocket
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Print

Like this:

Like Loading...

Trace An Object To Stop Child Abuse

13 Tuesday Jun 2017

Posted by Natasha in child abuse, Researching Reform

≈ 5 Comments

We came across an incredible project online, and so we had to share it.

Europol, the EU’s law enforcement agency, which works with member states to tackle serious international crime and terrorism, has launched a new initiative to help stop child sexual abuse online.

“Trace An Object” asks members of the public to help Europol identify the origins of specific items found in sexually explicit material involving minors. The idea is that these objects are potentially specific to one location or country and so Europol are appealing for eyes to look at these images and see if they can help to work out where these objects come from.

The project was launched just a week ago and it has already received over 10,000 contributions from the general public.

If you’d like to see whether you can identify any of the objects you can take a look at them on Europol’s dedicated page, which has been updated recently, so do check back from time to time. Submissions can also be made anonymously.

We think this is a wonderful project. More and more of us are online and using the internet for good, so getting people from around the world involved in making the internet a safer place is a natural progression for web users, and an excellent use of our time.

We wish Europol lots of success.

trace an object

 

 

 

Share this:

  • Tweet
  • WhatsApp
  • Email
  • Telegram
  • Pocket
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Print

Like this:

Like Loading...

Child Abuse Inquiry WILL hear Ealing Abbey Allegations

12 Monday Jun 2017

Posted by Natasha in child abuse inquiry, Researching Reform

≈ 3 Comments

Welcome to another week.

After leaving survivors and victims furious when it suggested that an investigation into serious child sexual abuse allegations at schools run by Ealing Abbey monks would be dropped, The inquiry has backtracked and confirmed that it will now hear evidence on the allegations at hearings scheduled for November and December, but not before the criminal proceedings on the matter are concluded.

Inquiry Chair, Alexis Jay’s statement from the IICSA website is added below:

Following the preliminary hearing this week, the Chair of the Inquiry has announced a decision in regard to the English Benedictine case study hearing in the Roman Catholic Church investigation.  Prof Alexis Jay’s decision is as follows:

“One of the issues for determination arising out of this hearing is whether or not evidence should be heard in relation to Ealing Abbey/St Benedict’s during the English Benedictine Congregation (EBC) case study hearing due to commence on 27 November 2017 and continue in December 2017.  Related to this is the issue as to whether or not the EBC hearing should be adjourned so as to enable such evidence to be heard alongside the evidence relating to the other EBC institutions currently proposed for investigation at that hearing.

Having considered all of the submissions, my decision is that the EBC hearing should take place as planned in November and December 2017 and that evidence in relation to Ealing Abbey/St Benedict’s will be heard but not before the relevant criminal proceedings have concluded. Reasons for this decision and my decisions in respect of any other matters will follow.”

The news will no doubt be welcomed by survivors and victims.

alexis-jay_1

Share this:

  • Tweet
  • WhatsApp
  • Email
  • Telegram
  • Pocket
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Print

Like this:

Like Loading...

European Court Rules Charlie Gard Must Stay On Life Support For A Week

09 Friday Jun 2017

Posted by Natasha in child welfare, Researching Reform

≈ 9 Comments

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has ruled that Charlie Gard, a little boy with a rare condition which has left him on life support, must continue receiving treatment for a week whilst the court considers the case. 

Charlie’s parents attended an emergency hearing at the Supreme Court yesterday to ask permission to appeal the decision to turn off their 10 month old baby’s life support, and allow them to travel to America with Charlie for pioneering treatment which could improve his condition. Their appeal was turned down, and so their legal team appealed to the European Court.

The team will be arguing that the decision is in direct breach of Charlie’s and his parents’ right to family life under Article 8 of the Human Rights Act.

The ECHR hopes to make a statement on Tuesday as to whether it will accept the case. In the meantime it has ordered that Charlie must stay on life support, which was due to be switched off today, until it has come to a decision. This is an exceptional measure, which the ECHR is able to make under its current regulations, as removing Charlie’s treatment would lead to a “real risk of irreversible harm.”

As a result of this development, the Supreme Court’s decision has effectively been put on hold. Lady Hale, one of the three justices taking part in the hearing at the Supreme Court, still remains one of our favourite judges despite taking what we felt was a narrow view of the law in relation to the ‘significant harm’ threshold and its context. She makes a poignant observation:

“Any court will have the utmost sympathy for parent exploring every possible way of preserving the life of their baby son… As parents we would be all likely to do the same. … However, as judges, we are concerned only with the legal position.”

So what is the legal position? Charlie’s parents’ legal team had argued that the decision to switch off life support and seek out alternative treatment should rest with his parents unless it could be shown that to do so would cross the ‘risk of significant harm’ threshold. This threshold is part check list, part subjective reasoning, which is what makes it more fluid in nature, and therefore its terms more dynamic than those found in legislation. It was specially designed that way, by Lady Hale, so that it could respond to child welfare developments as they came about. However the Supreme Court judges took the view that the hospital was entitled to bring proceedings and that this right had to be prioritised over any new interpretation given on the concept of significant harm.

We would modestly disagree. Courts create precedent, which is the active interpretation of the law as it should be applied in society at any given moment in time. This case should have benefited from that process in its purest sense.

Researching Reform wishes Charlie Gard and his family luck for the next appeal.

Charlie

 

 

 

 

Share this:

  • Tweet
  • WhatsApp
  • Email
  • Telegram
  • Pocket
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Print

Like this:

Like Loading...

Your Story: Complaints As A Short Cut To Care

09 Friday Jun 2017

Posted by Natasha in Researching Reform, Your Story

≈ 30 Comments

This week’s story highlights the often disorganised and emotional responses to vulnerable families, which can lead to professionals losing sight of the real issues in a case and instead choosing to take a defensive stance to protect their local authority’s decisions, even when they are poor ones. Crucially, this kind of behaviour deeply affects the Voice Of The Child, whose wishes and feelings go unheard, causing them significant emotional harm.

1. Could you give a brief summary of the facts of your case?

I’m a single father who before his son was taken into care was the sole and primary carer. It was incredibly difficult juggling work and parenting on my own and on a couple of occasions I was forced to leave my nine year old son in the house on his own for a few hours. The incidents were reported to the police and I was charged with child neglect, although the charge was later dropped. Nevertheless my son was taken into care. He was routinely pin ponged backwards and forwards from my care to state care and then foster care – initially returned to me because I protested relentlessly but found himself back in care because I refused to let the poor handling of our case go. I chose to seek compensation for my son’s removal and shortly after that, the council involved changed its mind about revoking the care order. I’m still fighting to get my son back.

2. What went wrong in your  case?

The evidence used to take my son into care was contradictory and based on factual errors. For example, a video of police raiding my home was used as evidence that my home was in disarray, but the video does not show a badly kept home. This was confirmed by one of the judges in the case, who said the video was completely at odds with the police report. I later received an apology from the CPS. This, however, didn’t stop the situation. I was also diagnosed with a mental health disorder linked to my culture and religion because I dared to complain about our treatment, which I found irrational and offensive. Three other, independent doctors also examined me and found no evidence of any mental health disorder. My son also desperately wanted to stay in my care, but his wishes and feelings were continuously ignored. After some time in foster care, he was a changed person. He began to show signs of aggression and depression after he became addicted to a violent video game, which I was blamed for even though he was not in my care. I also found the more I complained, the more our contact was reduced. I now only see my son 4 times a year.

3. What happened after you alerted the professionals to the errors?

They refused to look at the evidence properly. Anything I said which flew in the face of their decisions or perceptions was ignored and treated as a hostile act. It’s an unnaturally defensive environment which seems to focus on the best interests of the agencies, rather than the child.

4. How do you feel the errors were dealt with?

They weren’t, except to say that they were met with deep resistance.

5. What do you think could have been done differently?

I could have been offered some support as a single, working parent. Someone could have helped me find a way to juggle my work with my parenting responsibilities. Instead I was treated like I was subhuman, and below normal levels of intelligence – I’m a classically trained musician, who speaks several languages.

6. What message would you like to pass on to the child welfare system?

I think the system needs to bin ‘emotional harm’ and ‘future emotional harm’ as the criteria used to take children into care and that only in exceptional circumstances, and only through the criminal courts, should the state have the power to remove children from parents. I would also like to see the police receive greater funding to deal with serious crimes against children rather than allowing social services to be involved in the first instance. Social workers should be directed by the police in an investigation. All the money this would save could be spent on helping families and support parents to find work. I would like to see a bonus system in place for social workers too, every time a social worker manages to keep a family together.

pablo (2)

Share this:

  • Tweet
  • WhatsApp
  • Email
  • Telegram
  • Pocket
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Print

Like this:

Like Loading...

Charlie Gard’s Parents Go To European Court After Supreme Court Denies Appeal

08 Thursday Jun 2017

Posted by Natasha in child welfare, Researching Reform

≈ 3 Comments

The Supreme Court has this afternoon, rejected Charlie Gard’s parents’ appeal to keep him on life support and travel to America for pioneering treatment. They have said Charlie can stay on life support for 24 hours whilst the parents appeal to the European Court Of Human Rights.

Our thoughts are with Charlie, his parents and family.

Charlie Gard

 

Share this:

  • Tweet
  • WhatsApp
  • Email
  • Telegram
  • Pocket
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Print

Like this:

Like Loading...
← Older posts
Newer posts →

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 8,512 other subscribers

Contact Researching Reform

For Litigants in Person

June 2017
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
2627282930  
« May   Jul »

Archives

  • Follow Following
    • Researching Reform
    • Join 815 other followers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • Researching Reform
    • Customize
    • Follow Following
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
 

Loading Comments...
 

    %d bloggers like this: