A new piece of research written by social workers predicts that forced adoption will come to an end in the UK. The document also offers new research on the impact of adoptions on birth parents and asks whether it is right for the government to pursue adoption at any cost.
The report, entitled, “The End of Non-Consensual Adoption? Promoting the Wellbeing of Children in Care,” has been co-written by Joe Smeeton, Director of Social Work Education at the University of Salford and Jo Ward, a Principal Lecturer in the Division of Social Work and Professional Practice at Nottingham Trent University.
It’s a brave piece of research which in part goes against the grain in a country where removing vulnerable children without parental consent is seen as an acceptable practice.
The paper predicts that non consensual adoption will eventually come to an end in the UK, largely due to fierce opposition of the practice, and because fewer and fewer countries are engaging in forced adoptions, preferring instead to get parental consent first before an adoption can take place.
The research itself is balanced and fair. Jo and Joe look at the history behind adoption, the relative benefits it can sometimes offer children, particularly very young children who may not have suffered neglect or abuse for a long period of time, and the arguments against removing children from parents without consent.
They explain the paradoxes inside the world of adoption, for example, the long held view that adoption is part of our social fabric and a priority in child protection, as set against an emerging view that it must now be a method of last resort. They look too, at the guidelines shortening the time care proceedings must take and by contrast the need to move slowly in some cases. Interestingly, they pinpoint the forced element of adoptions in the UK as an underlying driver for many of these paradoxes.
The researchers also mention the tension between what they perceive to be a child rights versus parental rights paradox – and here, we would disagree with them. Whilst they explain, quite rightly, that sometimes harmful delays inside the system are down to parents trying desperately to exercise their rights with a view to halting an adoption, the research doesn’t fully explore the importance of a child needing a connection with its biological family.
We have spoken with many adoptees over the years, and several have told us that even when placed with the most loving families they carry a deep hole in their hearts not knowing who their birth parents are, and that this has left them feeling angry, a feeling which they have spent their entire lives trying to manage. It is this important connection which the research doesn’t delve into, and so we warmly invite Jo and Joe to look at this element.
The research also touches briefly upon post adoption contact, which has now become possible since the introduction of a new clause inside the Adoption and Children Act (2002). This section allows the court to make an order in favour of post adoption contact either during the making of the adoption order or any time afterwards. The contact may be in favour of:
There is also a deeply sensitive and insightful discussion on the ethics of adoption, how it affects already vulnerable people, both mothers and fathers, and completely ignores the impact it has on families, to the point where no after-care is offered to the grieving parents or extended family members.
Ultimately, the paper asks us to rethink the ways in which we care for vulnerable children, and invites a discussion on what permanence should look like in the twenty first century.
For their courageous effort and their determination to start a positive discussion about more humane ways forward in child protection, we would highly recommend reading Joe and Jo’s research. Do also take a look at a paper by Joe which he co wrote with Kathy Boxall, called “Birth parents’ perceptions of professional practice in childcare and adoption proceedings: implications for practice.”
We’d love to hear what you think.
truthaholics said:
Reblogged this on | truthaholics and commented:
Finally, the long-overdue death knell of non-consensual, forced adoption/foster care is beginning to sound:
“Most significantly Re B-S draws our attention back to a judgement by Hale LJ Re C and B [2001] 1 FLR 611, para 34: “Intervention in the family may be appropriate, but the aim should be to reunite the family when the circumstances enable that, and the effort should be devoted towards that end. Cutting off all contact and the relationship between the child or children and their family is only justified by the overriding necessity of the interests of the child.” This is fortified by a judgement in the Strasbourg court
YC v United Kingdom
(2012) 55 EHRR 967, para 134:
“Family ties may only be severed in very exceptional circumstances and … everything
must be done to preserve personal relations and, where appropriate, to ‘rebuild’ the family. It is not enough to show that a child could be placed in a more beneficial environment for his upbringing.” The judgement leaves us in no doubt about its opinion that the court should assure itself that the local authority responsible for the provision of services have explored and exhausted all the alternative ways to support and protect the child, short of applying for orders contemplating non-consensual adoption which, to be made “only in exceptional circumstances and where motivated by
overriding requirements
pertaining to the child’s welfare, in short, where nothing else will do” (Sprinz 2014)”
LikeLiked by 2 people
Derick Gibson said:
But Will It End? It’s been going on since the 80s With Loving Happy Families who had Loved Happy and Wanted Children When Our Family Life’s were Destroyed because of Lie’s and Jealously I know this is true because it happened to Our Family in 1985 And It’s Still Heartbreaking in 2017 So Will it End ? So that It’s Stopped Once and for All From a Loving But Heartbroken Still Dad
LikeLiked by 6 people
Dr. Manhattan. said:
So many familiar comments made by the 3 people in that write up.
How this country could do this to its own law abiding citizens i just dont know.
they have effectively used Punishment without Crime against parents as the excuse to remove children.
LikeLiked by 5 people
truthaholics said:
A double bind.
Systemic failings by two separate arms of the state (local authorities social services) and the judiciary with both pitted against the birth family are completely unacceptable.
I reserve my ire for forcible child removal on the basis of surmised future emotional harm where even experienced Judges have disregarded their oaths of office to do right by all manner of people as HM’s subjects and instead apparently been swayed by government policy so as to turn a blind eye and thus abandoning the balances and checks of the law.
Trained Judges ignoring facts and evidence and instead rubber-stamping blatant lies incapable of withstanding objective scrutiny, reported by over-zealous anti-social workers and cheerleading guardians who shamelessly replaced the voice of the reportedly at-risk child with their own misleading opinions.
The hidden cost of this course of conduct is too high – treating capable, loving parents and their established family life with contempt instead of respect since first instance and then passing off the previous proceedings as fair.
The icing on the cake is Judges treating the corporate parent’s business plan with more respect than the so rudely disrupted established birth family life, all of which was up for proper judicial consideration at Court.
Enough is enough.
Abolish forcible child removal save for emergencies where there is clear proof of actual harm not surmise.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Roger Crawford said:
We haven’t been able to change the system from without, maybe it needs this change to come from within. Long overdue, I’m hopeful this is the beginning of the end of it.
LikeLiked by 4 people
daveyone1 said:
Reblogged this on World4Justice : NOW! Lobby Forum..
LikeLiked by 1 person
maureenjenner said:
Reblogged this on Musings of a Penpusher and commented:
At long last; this may be the chink of light at the end of a long, dark nightmare of a tunnel.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Sabine Kurjo McNeill said:
Reblogged this on No Punishment without Crime or Bereavement without Death!.
LikeLiked by 2 people
tummum said:
Music to my ears. It’s the families and their children who are made to suffer the rest of their entire lives at the end of the day. A blind eye is being turned to procedural errors and very serious mistakes. Once parents/natural parents are discovering the deeper evidence they are not being supported, or getting their questions answered satisfactorily and are instead being met with even further contempt!
Rather than out the LA responsible, there are Judges instead preferring to restrict the parents/natural parents/journalists or gag them when bringing applications to air their concerns leaving them with the more questions than originally thought left to answer. Reminded the parents/natural parents they do have the powers to injunct journalists and where families have been wronged beggars belief!
It is meant to be about the best interests of the children, but then how come when adoptees/alleged adoptees want answers, they are going ignored by Family Court’s?
All i have seen is avoidance and half answered questions and then ones considered to eg make vexatious requests. I believe anywhere where there are wrong spelling of children’s names/d.o.b’s/discrepancies with what happened for what year held on written record there are potentially ‘double case files’ meaning ‘double the money’ made using our innocent UK children.
Why would professionals refuse to put the things they say into writing, return emails from court failing to attach the author’s name, bribe parents with their contact being stopped unlawfully just because they won’t play ball the LA’s way for a quicker outcome not for the children’s best interests necessarily but for them.
There are children who get hurt where it is proved in criminal court it was not deliberate too, yet LA’s will still carry on playing the NAI card falsely using risk of significant harm regardless. False diagnosis is another one, and rather than hold their hands up they would rather change tactic and move goal posts all the time instead of these criminals facing the prosecution and being held to account like they deserve.
The thing that has grinded me most, is when Judge’s fail to write everything as they should into court orders and judgements, but then again i suppose where there is fraud discovered by a Judge, they are going to be reluctant to do so and to protect who? because it isn’t the children.
Great post again Natasha, thank you. I will be sure to share everywhere i can xx
LikeLiked by 3 people
Natasha said:
Thank you for your thoughts xxx
LikeLiked by 1 person
linda cork said:
social services do more emotional harm to children by forced adoption instead of trying to help and support families to keep there children where they are loved and happy
LikeLiked by 2 people
tummum said:
Reblogged this on tummum's Blog and commented:
Music to my ears. It’s the families and their children who are made to suffer the rest of their entire lives at the end of the day. A blind eye is being turned to procedural errors and very serious mistakes. Once parents/natural parents are discovering the deeper evidence they are not being supported, or getting their questions answered satisfactorily and are instead being met with even further contempt!
Rather than out the LA responsible, there are Judges instead preferring to restrict the parents/natural parents/journalists or gag them when bringing applications to air their concerns leaving them with the more questions than originally thought left to answer. Reminded the parents/natural parents they do have the powers to injunct journalists and where families have been wronged beggars belief!
It is meant to be about the best interests of the children, but then how come when adoptees/alleged adoptees want answers, they are going ignored by Family Court’s?
All i have seen is avoidance and half answered questions and then ones considered to eg make vexatious requests. I believe anywhere where there are wrong spelling of children’s names/d.o.b’s/discrepancies with what happened for what year held on written record there are potentially ‘double case files’ meaning ‘double the money’ made using our innocent UK children.
Why would professionals refuse to put the things they say into writing, return emails from court failing to attach the author’s name, bribe parents with their contact being stopped unlawfully just because they won’t play ball the LA’s way for a quicker outcome not for the children’s best interests necessarily but for them.
There are children who get hurt where it is proved in criminal court it was not deliberate too, yet LA’s will still carry on playing the NAI card falsely using risk of significant harm regardless. False diagnosis is another one, and rather than hold their hands up they would rather change tactic and move goal posts all the time instead of these criminals facing the prosecution and being held to account like they deserve.
The thing that has grinded me most, is when Judge’s fail to write everything as they should into court orders and judgements, but then again i suppose where there is fraud discovered by a Judge, they are going to be reluctant to do so and to protect who? because it isn’t the children.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Pingback: The End Of Forced Adoption In The UK? Meet The Social Workers Challenging The System. | tummum's Blog
Dr Jo Ward said:
In the article we cite evidence that for some children rather than being left in very neglectful and damaging situations, adoption is right. But it is true that adopted children need to both know about, and sometimes have contact with, their birth families, and we would fully support this.
LikeLike
Natasha said:
Thank you for your comment Jo.
LikeLike
Heather Collins said:
I have a scientist background so am used to working with evidence which should be the crux of all allegations . In the cases that I have have come across the ‘evidence ‘ most often is not substantiated. and in a great numbet of cases is proven to be pure fabrication. .Unless you are willing and capable of dissecting a case without reliance on the statements of certain professionals then a true picture cannot be obtained .
LikeLiked by 3 people
[Name Withheld] said:
Where to start?. My family ripped apart on grounds of risk of future emotional harm after my daughter became quote hostile and emotional as they came to remove her babies.why future emot harm? Because dad had mild learning difficulties . the government then paid soc servs £10.000 for each of the 3 kids removed in a bid to get children off the care systemand when targets were not met soc servs started hitting on vulnerable families for easy to snatch children .The lies that were told the statements that were worded to mean very different to the original wording and this was the tip of the slimy iceberg. I could go on and on. My daughter lost her children then her family home reclaimed as they no longer needed the space then 3 yrs later her previously good marriage followed suit and they are now devorcing. Its agony not knowing where our babies are whether they are happy loved cared for. And the mental health complete breakdown of both parents has been heartrending andcevastating. As grandma i have had to try and hold allof my family in 1 piece whilst greiving too . all they needed was support and help. Turs out the kids behavioural problems were caused by global developement delay syndrome NOT poor parenting as continuously quoted in duplicitous statements. Sick sick system . the so called british care system should be ashamed
LikeLiked by 3 people
Natasha said:
Thank you for your comment, I’m so sorry to hear about what has happened to you and your family. I hope the community on this site will be able to offer you some comfort. And apologies for editing your name, I have had to do this for legal reasons.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Dr. Manhattan. said:
What a heartbreaking story.
and to think its just one in thousands of similar stories of good law abiding families destroyed by the very system that was meant to help people get back on track. it is without any doubt a Criminal system and needs smashing in the most aggressive way possible and all those who took part in the corruption should be jailed and stripped of assets to pay the victims.
Forced Adoption has become a Lucrative Multi Million pound Business Empire in this country and its time to take it Down once and for all.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ian Josephs said:
Yes Dr Jo, Closed Adoptions should be banned and adoptions when they happen should be “Open” so parents know where their children have gone and to whom.Similarly children should know who their birth parents are and further details if they requst them.
Adoption without parental consent can be ok if the baby is “left on the church steps” and no parents can be found.Forced adoption is very different (and most UK adoptions are forced) as this means that a parent has begged in various courts to keep a baby or child and has been denied by a family court judge deciding on adoption as “a last resort” when in fact a return to a parent under a supervision order is possible or family members have put themselves forward as carers and been ignored or disregarded .Most parents who contact me have no criminal record but have been condemned as unfit parents by the very subjective opinions of social workers intent on winning their cases once they get to court . Parents desperate to keep their children must love them dearly to go through gruelling court appearances trying to keep them. Most should surely win but in fact only one in 400 care orders are refused !(judicial statistics) so what chance do they have?
Forced adoption must be abolished and so should the punishment of parents and children by social workers and judges who split up families when no crime has been committed. Punishment without crime is abhorrent and should be outlawed !
LikeLiked by 2 people
Dr. Manhattan. said:
As always absolutely 100% correct Ian.
LikeLike
Sarah said:
I’m a mother fell victim to losing my two babies in 2008 (I was 19)! Since this I’ve suffered with untreated reactive depression, needless to say at 31 is now clinical! After falling pregnant 8 years later, ss came back to safeguard my child from an assumed lifestyle of 8 years ago, still assumed to be led today! I worked tirelessly with life and their threats to remove my child, whilst pregnant, almost enduring my child early and unmeasurable stress on myself! the day they stepped down 12 months later (10months old child)! I broke down on that day with no support or guide and was arrested for using alcohol whilst with my child (big mistake) but I have recovered from my breakdown and found better tools to ensure I done surrender to past behaviours! Ss then offered to pay the dads court fees to get a care order, ensuring I couldn’t get her back easily!! Because I fell once after all their involvement!! However ss here have closed and referred the case to said child’s dads place of residence; as he’s looking after her, the new borough have called him twice and I am sat her reading articles of familiarity daily! I see my child at her new home for a few hours every Sunday and am waiting for weekends, then rehabilitation but as soon as child returns, ss will be back with brute force!! Idk what I can do, I’m going to the gym, an alcohol talking space (I binge drink in times of loss or surrender) I await BPD specialist assessment and treatment as my brains wired wrong, seems I was left at 19 with 0% and also trying to attempt a law degree from bottom access to higher education, all whilst dad raises my child! Ss involved now do what? I’ve not even had a call!! This is totally all so very wrong! As I proved in 12 months I was an able willing and good parent (they stepped down) wouldn’t some help and support been a better choice, since this I’ve found a few great rehabilitation centres you can go to with your child, thus ensuring it was merely a lapsed due to an accumulation of stress and been with my child recovered and home by now! Please help me understand this better and please send anything and everything on this article and the support I can offer!!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Natasha said:
Thank you for your comment, Sarah. I’m so sorry. Thank you also for sharing your experience, I know a lot of people will identify with what you’ve expressed, and is very helpful feedback for those interested in how the system affects people in the long term, as well as the short term.
LikeLike
Dr. Manhattan. said:
Sara it is a very traumatic experience to have your children removed and at 19 thats even worse. but what i would say is given your circumstances i would say that you are lucky you still get to see one of your children for a few hours every Sunday. others dont even get that. many have gone into Adoption never to be seen again till they are 18 or older which is a life sentence for those parents and children. you are very Lucky they didnt go for Adoption on your youngest child. at least she is with the Father which is 100% better than the alternative.
bottom line is Forced Adoption is a Evil Business that needs to be stopped in its Tracks Asap. Good luck for the Future.
LikeLike
Joanne said:
You can tell the difference between a family who loves and wants their child and those who don’t. You wouldn’t fight so hard for children you didnt love or care about. Due to “lack of resources” they claim they can’t supervise families enough. Family support workers can easily help manage the risks. Slowing down supervised contact gradually replacing it with unsupervised and have as many welfare visits and appointments as possible. We’ve all asked for them all I’m sure. But it’s never promising enough. They seem to leave the risky parents with kids who have marks left right and centre and they never flag it. They want kids without any history of health concerns or behaviour concerns as theyre “easier to adopt”. Risky and abusive people wouldnt offer intense supervision and plead for anything to prove innocence. Sometimes i think they usr forced adoption for the cheaper easier way out and they see it as there’s no risks. But they’re still failing. Turning a blind eye on the abused and at risk. If they are all for “the best for the children” why so many lies? Falsified reports? Lack of sympathy when it comes to tearing families and si lings apart. Its all corruption and a money making exercise.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Dr. Manhattan. said:
Absolutely right Joanne.
LikeLike
Ian Josephs said:
I believe that “forced adoption” is a crime against humanityand that all those who perpetrate it should be locked up !
LikeLiked by 3 people
Dr. Manhattan. said:
Yes Ian im with you on that one. they should be locked up and stripped of assets for compensation to those whos lives they have destroyed while they go around with a smile on their faces.
LikeLiked by 2 people
[Name Withheld] said:
I can think of a few things more befitting than Jail for some of the Social workers etc I have had to deal with. One in particular who has never even once had the guts to look me in the eye. I only hope her shame keeps her awake at night for the rest of her life.
LikeLike
Dr. Manhattan. said:
“I only hope her shame keeps her awake at night for the rest of her life.”
Unfortunately these people dont lose sleep. they are very like organized crime families in the USA and even the Nazis during WW2. they can destroy lives and not feel a thing. these people are cold hearted and dangerous.the type who would kill you if they were licenced to kill. LAs like these sort because they get the job done.
LikeLiked by 1 person
LUTALO KAMBUI LANSANA said:
Completely true they are evil, they are dangerous, and they should be put in prison for a life time. What hurts me the most is why are we all standing still and allowing this barbaric act to commence. We are in mass they are not.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Dr. Manhattan. said:
Good point!
LikeLike
karamal777203265 said:
Forced adoption is a sin and it goes against human rights. It’s an oppressive ruling . It causes emotional harm on all parties involved. It definitely needs to be outlawed.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Dr. Manhattan. said:
while it makes Big money for the Agencies involved and Big savings for the Govt it probably wont be abolished for quite some time.
More pressure needs to but put on the issue.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Pingback: More Social Workers Question The Benefits Of Adoption | Researching Reform
[Name Withheld] said:
I am in the heart of a forced adoption and battle with care orders, this drive needs to stop it’s affecting many families and devastating, my children are heartbroken saying goodbye to their siblings each time they see them knowing it’s precious time due to forced non consensual adoption. It has an impact on parent and child’s mental health and then social services and courts use this against you to keep children even more. Use the money they do spend on cases supporting families and not snatching as soon as they do. The big spate of adoptions were in the 60/70s and now it’s happening again and in the next few years there’s going to be a big hike in young adult mental health and we wonder why..it’s them causing emotional harm. What happens to the children that do need the help they go swept under the carpet. Suicide rates in the care system?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Natasha said:
Thank you for your insightful comment, and I’m so sorry you and your children are suffering.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Karen Lloyd said:
to lose a child to forced adoption is heartbreaking. you never come to terms. it’s punishment without crime. for what social works get children removed on. most is hear say 2nd 3rd hand hear say. these people want locking up. it has to stop
LikeLiked by 3 people
Ian Josephs said:
Scrap social workers and leave child cruelty for the police to deal with .Forbid adoptions that are opposed by a parent.Restore free speech to children in care and parents who visit them ! Never stop contact between parent and child even if sometimes it is indirect by phone or skype;
One day,one day……………………………………
LikeLiked by 3 people
Bestwestie said:
My friend is going through this right now.
Her grandaughter has been taken, and placed in foster care.
Her son, the father of the child had been issued with a plan to adopt document, which without his consent .. is being forcibly progressed.
Its tragic.. the family have been through so much, and not given a chance to retrieve the situation.
It is a social injustice..
Why can it still happen in our country?
What can we do?
Time is short..
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yvonne Taylor said:
Really, are you serious? 2018 and its worse. Forced adoptions or rather long term fostering is a massive worldwide trafficking children commercial industry feeding philanthropists and tax dodgers at the expense of grieving families raped children, drugged children, and murdered children. Other peoples Sons Daughters and Heirs Sold to the highest bidder like slaves in an auction. A price on the head of a vulnerable child is pure evil. … Its done by trickery deceit and fraud tactics and needs banning and the criminals who benefit from unjust enrichment need asset stripping and jailing …. A.R.R https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/adoption_act_1926_orphans_5
Adoption Act 1926 – Orphans
The Adoption Act 1926 had the intention of rehoming Orphans who did
not have any parents or family members.
What greater consideration does the state or adoptive families give
when the mothers and fathers and family chosen by nature have given
love and blood (DNA) and do not consent to the state taking their
children.
Or are the parents treated as mere trustee’s of their children and
the State as the beneficiaries entitled to take and make gifts of
their children to strangers?
Where is the fundamental right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of
happiness for the sons and daughters of these mothers and fathers
created by nature and entitled to the protection of equity.
Provide all information held relating to this Act being passed into
law including who objected and how many times it was rejected
before being passed ?
Thank you kindly for the very interesting links, that shall be of great use, in the understanding of how a few good people tried to stop the desecration of the scared family, Heirs are a creation of nature. And those who forced the conversion of God given rights into mere legal titles to be traded like chattel.
Former Great Lord Chancellors would be turning in their graves if they knew what had become of the civil law and what it was being used for.
Adoption Act 1926 – Orphans
Mr H Gibson made this Freedom of Information request to House of Lords
The request was successful.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yvonne Taylor said:
https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/jewish-adoption-in-america/ USA but relevant and interesting ” most biblical and rabbinic references to the practice relate specifically to orphans, a paradigmatically vulnerable class of individuals for which the Bible mandates we protect and care.” “Whoever brings up an orphan in his home is regarded, according to Scripture, as though the child had been born to him.” “About 15 percent of all couples in the United States have some kind of infertility problem — defined as the inability to achieve or sustain pregnancy after one year of well-timed, unprotected sex. Adoption experts assume the infertility rate is higher among Jews, who tend to postpone marriage and childbirth.
Because of the emphasis Jews place on family, their relatively high socioeconomic status (adoption can get expensive), and this presumed higher rate of infertility, Jews are considered a population likely to pursue adoption.
In the 2000 National Jewish Population Study, just over 5 percent of Jewish households with children reported an adopted child residing in the home. According to the U.S. Census Bureau of 2000, the first U.S. Census to include “adopted son/daughter” as a category of relationship to the householder, adopted children make up two and a half percent of all children of all ages. This suggests that the rate of adoption in the Jewish community is about double that of the American population at large.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
Pingback: The Narrative Around Adoption Is Changing | Researching Reform
Gillian said:
But is anybody in government aware of this research, all the fb groups opposing the 1,000’s of forced adoptions – the comments – how awful it is, the consequences being suffered, the illegalities we discuss perpetrated by local government officers, the corruption whereby employees are profiteering – judges are not biased – fingers in pies – all that?
IF government are aware, & unapproving of all the TORTUROUS TERRORISING done to LOVING CARING NON ABUSIVE PARENTS, WHY the hell is it a business / racket that is still booming???
LikeLike
Dr. Manhattan. said:
Very good point,
but with all booming businesses the Govt are coining in millions in Taxes. Look at the cigarette and alcohol industries, the Govt know that millions of people have gone to an early grave but do they Ban it ? No of course not because it pays well.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Mike Howard said:
As Yvonne Taylor says, it is not just forced adoption we should be concerned about, Long term Foster care is now just as bad, with Fostering/adoption agencies making millions from the misery of children in care and their families.
Contact denial is a practice exercised by most LA’s for different reasons, some financial and some vindictive which makes long term Foster Care as bad as adoption. [edited]
This report is a step in the right direction, but I suspect it is false hope akin to Lord Munby’s many pontifications which are regularly ignored by judges below him in the family courts.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ian Josephs said:
And yet the solution is so very very simple !Turn back the clock to the times of my youth when there were no social workers and no family courts. Child cruelty was a matter for the police and no child was removed from parents unless at least one of
them had committed a serious crime against that child or indeed other children.
“No punishment without crime ” sounds like obvious common sense but most of the three or four parents that contact me every day with new cases and asking for my advice have broken no laws but whose children have been removed for risk of future harm !” We love our children” they cry in the family courts in vain as they are emotionally beaten by souless social workers making expert prédictions of family doom backed up often by female judges (who are usually the worst) and who behave in court much like the one in Alice in Wonderland presided over by the “Red Queen”
LikeLiked by 3 people
Dr. Manhattan. said:
Ive argued that one many times.
if the Police find there is no case to pursue (which is usually the case) then why are the SS allowed to launch court proceedings against the parents with Military style strategics.
LikeLiked by 1 person
LUTALO KAMBUI LANSANA said:
My friends children had been physically and emotionally abused in care and still continue to be to this day, in the care of the LA. She had a female judge for her court case and she informed me during the x examination of the Guardian, that I she was told by the judge that she was not allowed to ask the Guardian specific question because the Guardian was not responsible for the welfare of her children, and there are many other outrageous acts that the judge committed through out her court proceedings. The judge also completely ignored all of her evidence that proved that the false claims against her were untrue, from police logs, refusing to remove her children, because from their prospective her children were safe and well and they had no concerns at all about their welfare and also other detailed paper work from a range of other professionals, that proved that the false claims from her previous SW were complete lies. To no avail, wickedly SW’s and even judges are immune from committing perjury, falsifying documentation, lying in oath etc, etc.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Dr. Manhattan. said:
Yes they do seem to be immune but thats only because the public have allowed them to be. things are changing now and their little Rats nest hidden from public view for so long is under threat. they are guilty of the psychological damage of so many parents and children and now its time for this Holocaust of Corruption be exposed and held accountable for its actions. No stone shall be left unturned.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Dr. Manhattan. said:
The main area of Failure by Munby is that in the past few yrs of his ranting he has not referred one case of perjury and collusion to the Police for investigation. if he had i suspect we would be looking at a very different Family court system today.Not to mention the prosecution of many professionals involved in the Swamp.
LikeLiked by 1 person
LUTALO KAMBUI LANSANA said:
Tremendous point Dr. Manhattan, it’s completley true why hasn’t he, it’s evident that he must of herd of endless cases of it taking place. There is a big possibility that he may not have as much power as we think he has. Or he just doesn’t care enough.
LikeLike
Dr. Manhattan. said:
I dont think he does have much Power and thats why the lower Family courts take not a scrap of notice of anything he says. Corruption and Collusion is still going on in Secret. the Family Courts are nothing less than a Rats nest.very Secretive and kept from the Public eye.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ian Josephs said:
The only power a top judge like Munby has is that when he makes a decision of principle in his court then in theory lower court judges must apply the same principle in their courts;
Unfortunately he may well say that” adoption is a last resort when nothing else will do” as an attempt to stop adoptions for insufficient reasons only to find that other judges interpret “nothing else will do ” in such a broad way that almost any petty fear of future emotional harm is said to be such a grave risk to a baby from its mother that no solution envisaging return of a baby to the mother can be considered;
Judges can’t initially make the law but by interpreting it the way they want they decide what the law means even if that was not the intention of those who passed it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yvonne Taylor said:
https://archive.org/stream/commonlawproced00kerrgoog/commonlawproced00kerrgoog_djvu.txt one who takes the time to read and absorb this will comprehend how far we need to step this back and save the future of humanity and our Natural Heirs Sons and Daughters and whom paved the road to this gulag we are ALL now in.
LikeLike
Yvonne Taylor said:
or else, we can continue down the bending slippery slope being infants imbeciles and lunatics with the CROWN corporation as our guardian parent? is a pencil x in a box for an unknown candidate sufficient to deem us incompetent ?
LikeLike
Yvonne Taylor said:
whilst some are suggesting mob justice as a solution, because they really have had enough. I differ and am totally against taking the law into our own hand, other than to be educated and therefore sufficiently equipped to demand a remedy through fair right and just means . Some may find the following of use towards this end. “Equity in English Contract Law: the Impact of the Judicature Acts (1873–75)
Just before the Judicature Acts came into force, the equity bar objected that the new court would be dominated by common law judges, whose ignorance of equity would ‘endanger the very existence of Equity jurisprudence’. This objection, though ridiculed at the time, can be seen in retrospect to have had some substance. In respect of several important aspects of contract law, notably unfairness, mistake, and privity, former equitable approaches were, after 1875, effectively marginalized both by the courts and by the writers of treatises on English contract law.
https://www.tandfonline.com/…/full/10…/01440365.2012.698885…
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/the_chancellor…
I am sorry to hear we no longer have a Vice Chancellor with the capabilities to sit as a Chancellor under the inherent equity jurisdiction of the High Court.
Can you confirm when a Vice Chancellor will be appointed to hear equity suits under the inherent equity original jurisdiction side of the court. And confirm whether or not the Chancellor of the Chancery Division can still sit as a Chancellor to hear these suits.
For clarification the Equity of which I speak is strictly the inherent original equity not the substituted version created after the merger of the court rules ( but not the merger of the separate jurisdictions ) after the Supreme Court Judicatures Act of 1873 and 1875.
I have been advised by Judicial Office colleagues that there will not be a Vice Chancellor appointed – the office was abolished some time ago and the current judicial offices and their relationship with the executive are outlined in the Constitutional Reform Act 2005.
Regarding the second point you raise, I am advised that Supreme Court Judicature Acts merged the equity jurisdiction and the common law jurisdiction into a single High Court, with a uniform system of pleading and procedure. The equitable principles still apply from time to time and the Chancellor is of course competent to hear all cases relating to equity matters, as are all the judges of the Chancery Division, although cases brought in the Chancery Division are not necessarily attributed to any one judge even when a specific request is made.
I am extremely disappointed that a Vice Chancellor is not to be appointed to hear exclusive equity jurisdiction cases.
It is impossible to abolish Equity Jurisprudence that should be operating within all the courts since the merger of the rules to ensure complete justice.
Please point to the precise part of the legislation that shall show where the equity jurisdiction and the common law jurisdiction were merger, rather than just the merger of the procedural rules to enable a uniform system of pleading and procedure and not the merger of the separate jurisdiction.” anyone who feels they would like to work as a team in bringing a remedy for all please let me know . https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01440365.2012.698885?src=recsys&journalCode=flgh20
LikeLike
Ian Josephs said:
Great stuff I am sure if only we could understand a word of it ! Maybe Yvonne could explain this bit at the end of her comment……………….
“Please point to the precise part of the legislation that shall show where the equity jurisdiction and the common law jurisdiction were merger, rather than just the merger of the procedural rules to enable a uniform system of pleading and procedure and not the merger of the separate jurisdiction.”
I would love to oblige you and point as requested if I only knew what I was pointing at and why !!
LikeLike
Shamim Khaliq said:
i think she’s bringing back the idea of a higher court of justice, a lord on whose mercy you can throw yourself when the lower courts lose sight of fairness in their nit-picky rule-following. a law above statute, for me caught up with noblesse oblige. i think, furthermore, she is saying that if we cannot have the lord presiding in open court to hear cases of injustice, as in the old days, then can we at least have this idea of equity or fairness brought to our common courts, so judges do not have to do what in good conscience they cannot, because at the moment all they do is implement statute.
LikeLike
LUTALO KAMBUI LANSANA said:
Giggle To, Myself, abbreviation; G.T.M. Well put Ian, in layman’s terms would help for those of us who are not versed in law, and for those who are not versed in law, thank you Ian for breaking it down and explaining to the public, that it’s unidentifiable where to the 2 (equity jurisdiction and common law jurisdiction) merge.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Yvonne Taylor said:
Have you read the links provided Ian? It will make more sense if you do. Someone has taken the time to research and ask informed questions to the right places. They clearly have not just done this for their own benefit. But for the good of all and spent considerable time in this noble act. In 2002/3 when we were affected by interventions from multi agencies there was little or no place to turn for help or assistance, but for a few support groups, whom while being sympathetic could do little to help. Today, is a different matter, as those who had been previously affected and suffered gross injustice, were able to have contact with others, also suffering similar or the same and realized theirs was not an isolated case. not everyone has the capacity or the time to unravel the gulag , as it was termed by Jack Frost who wrote a very good book on the subject.
Having been prevented from earning an honest living due to false allegations, in my three professional careers and having had my political career ended through the same. I decided with time on my hands to use it wisely to help others. When first setting off on this journey I felt 10 years would be sufficient . How wrong I was. You know as well as I do, the goal posts keep changing and its not a fair right or just game. it is a game of commerce for all involved except the families who’s lives are turned upside down and ruined by the experience. Those who have not suffered this experience have little or no concept of the pain that never has closure. Neither can they comprehend the financial decline that follows. For those with a modest income its devastating, as justice is based on ability to pay. It should not be the case, but is.
As a result of the snowball effect of false accusations and having the good name and character of your family derided in a small community, even though none of us had any criminal record or even a caution prior to 2002. We have been targeted, due to names being held on police , probation and other agency files, and so far have been forced to defend family members and friends in criminal trials with success. I have manged to get CIC for raped children in care system. I could go on . Its a long story and now 16 years on. Like many others I will not stop till this evil practice stops. As the number of families affected becomes greater , more will help each other. This system needs customers , so more and yet more will suffer. This is the sad reality. Because we have not comprehended the working of this system, many have been easy targets. However, miscreants occasionally attempt to ‘set up’ and underestimate families who will stand up and be counted. Reading law ,( I am still learning), has not been a choice for me, its been a necessity. To protect my family and others from corporate criminals. It has been rewarding and I would encourage others to do the same. Our battle is not over yet, but a light is there at the end of the tunnel and we should never throw in the towel.
I agree with you any many points you raise Ian, if I could explain complexity in simple terms I would.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Jim Moore said:
The only issue I see is that we have no right to effective remedy (EUCHR Article XIII, absent from the Human Rights Act 1998 I wonder why!), ergo there is no higher court than the House of Lords who will, undoubtedly as they seconded the Laws as they came in as House Bills, side with the Law as written – even if it’s blatantly treasonous to do so – and continue as normalised to destroying families and feeding the Machine.
I beg to differ with you, Yvonne, but the only winning move is not to play. The Law as it stands without effective remedy is broken and you have to tread a VERY narrow path to beat it or take another road and leave the country the SECOND you start to see CPS traffic.
LikeLike
Yvonne Taylor said:
Perhaps the answer lies withing the question! or is crystal clear if one reads the links. ‘colour Of Law or At Law. I am sure if anyone could comprehend this it would be Lady Hale as she is well versed she states in Constitutional Law , perhaps the good lady might like to be copied in at this stage?
LikeLike
Yvonne Taylor said:
correcting my ‘spelling’ the answer lay’s within the question 😉 perhaps.
I would suggest that the law is not merged , and would be the reason they fail or refuse to answer .
LikeLike
alan dransfield said:
Whilst I welcome any change in this current adoption system, it must also include name and shame of the BASTARDS who have been behind this scandal
LikeLiked by 2 people
Dr. Manhattan. said:
Re-blogged from Stowe.
” New post on Marilyn Stowe Blog
Cafcass rated as ‘outstanding’ by Ofsted
by Stowe Family Law Web Team
The Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service – Cafcass – has been rated ‘outstanding’ by government inspectorate Ofsted.
Ofsted praised the service, which intervenes in court cases concerning children, for “listening to children, understanding their world and acting on their views” and for its “exceptional [and] aspirational” leadership.
At its previous inspection in 2014, Community Care reports, Cafcass received only a middle-of-the-road ‘good’ rating, and just five years prior to that, it was given a damning ‘inadequate’ assessment by Ofsted, which is responsible for auditing all organisations which work with children. In 2010 the parliamentary Public Affairs Committee still believed Cafcass was not fit for purpose.
Chief Executive Anthony Douglas said the newly won glowing assessment was the culmination of years of effort by the service.
“There was no big bang, it was relentless hard work, and progressively, just dispensing with sideshows and getting on with the core business.”
He added that Cafcass had “reframed most of what we do in terms of impact upon children.”
—————————-
i know personally as resent as 2015/16 that a Cafcass worker made serious mistakes in the protection of a 6yr old boy in the hands of a Corrupt child protection S/worker yet despite both being reported to HCPC they got away with it.
to date those failures have not been addressed and that little boy has been repeatedly denied an independent Advocate and help for CYPS by the SS.
the Guardian sat back and allowed this to happen. thats how “outstanding” they are!.
LikeLike
baby-i said:
It is to be hoped that these principles will also apply to the serious issue of bay abandonment in the UK. The UK is out of step with the rest of civilised countries in this regard. The new charity baby-i is determined prevent the deaths consequent upon baby abandonment, whilst dealing with the causes, raising public awareness, and putting in place the steps needed to achieve the best out come for mother and baby.
LikeLike
Pingback: Why The British Government Won’t Apologise For Forced Adoption | Researching Reform
[Name Withheld] said:
he UK my baby was also taken away I did nothing to him he was a happy nursing baby. I have no drug alchahol use no criminal record and they adopted him due to a psychological assessment that said I had minor personality disorder which meant “future risk of emotional harm” this happened in Hertfordshire in UK. 5 years ago. I was 23 with no family. they target young and vulnerable women. I wasnt a British citizen so I couldnt get any assistance of any kind.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ian Josephs said:
“No punishment without crime”,”No more forced adoption” “no children taken from sane law abiding parents” and no child should be taken for “future risk of harm” are all easy ideas to understand and would solve most of the injustices and other problems if they were put into effect !
LikeLiked by 1 person
Dr. Manhattan. said:
Yes they go for easy targets.
parents who have to rely on Legal Aid solicitors are pretty much doomed going from the stats that suggest the SS win 95% of cases.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ian Josephs said:
JUDICIAL COURT STATISTICS (page 26)
In 2011, there were 32,739 children involved in disposals of public law cases, including 31,515 orders made, 792 applications withdrawn, 350 orders of no order and 72 orders refused.
Only 72 care orders refused out of 32,739 cases !What chance do these poor parents have in our hopelessly prejudiced “family courts”?
Judicial and Court statistics 2011 – Gov.uk (see page 26)
LikeLiked by 1 person
Pingback: You are told that the UK is an example that should be followed here in Australia and that we don’t adopt anywhere as many as we should like the UK do. – IDENTITY
Pingback: To Our Readers: Merry Christmas, Thank You, Let’s Make 2019 A Monster | Researching Reform
Jacqueline said:
My son’s were taken away at two months old by [edited] social work.for adoption. I never had the chance to get them home. The UK government, and social workers need to change their ways on forced adoption. This is inhumane.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Dr. Manhattan. said:
They will never change their ways on forced adoption. too much money at stake.
the business of Child snatching for Adoption needs to be ended. only then will you see a huge drop in court proceedings and Adoption figures falling by up to 90%.
LikeLike
Jacqueline said:
Forced adoption needs to stop.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Ian Josephs said:
Mothers should realise that to the “SS” babies are just cash cows and any efforts by mothers to prove they are good parents are met with derision by social workers once they have decided to snatch a newborn.
Fight them all the way and you will have half a chance of keeping your baby .If you cooperate and admit your faults , you will be doomed to failure and permanent loss of your child ……………
LikeLiked by 1 person
Anonymous said:
So what can you do when your proven innocent yet they force adopt your child anyway. It’s completely wrong and corrupt you don’t stand a chance from the start
LikeLiked by 1 person
Dr. Manhattan. said:
The usual Cliche is “Seek legal advice”
which of course many parents can’t afford.
LikeLike
Paul Roberts said:
will they turn back the clock and give us back the family life that they stole from us too?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Dr. Manhattan. said:
Plenty of discussions yet nothing much changes.
LikeLike
Pingback: S1, Ep 4. Non-consensual adoption – VOICES OF FAMILY LAW
[Name Withheld] said:
My 2 grandkids have been taken over a year ago through my daughter having a violent relationship,she had no support,got treated like a criminal,me and my husband have spent a fortune trying our best to get them back but no hope.
The professionals opinions are saying possible future harm, all because my daughter has mental health isues and are blaming my parenting,how can that be??so I loose my grandchildren?the local authorities are the blame,they didn’t help my child,they lie.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ian Josephs said:
The social workers have scorecards to show how many children they have removed.
They have to fill them in to get good cases and promotions so never expect them to help or understand you !
LikeLiked by 1 person
Natasha said:
Ian, do you have any of these score cards?
LikeLike
Ian Josephs said:
i got my info from the bbc and gov sites as below .
UK social workers scorecards
Shaping the balanced scorecard for use in UK social … – Somers – Cité 111 fois
… , economic viability, stakeholder value and worker … – Jeffery – Cité 21 fois
Using a balanced scorecard to implement sustainability – Epstein – Cité 352 fois
Résultats Web
Local authorities to have scorecards for adoption – BBC News
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-17355685
14 mars 2012 – Local authorities in England are to be issued scorecards, under new … on reforms to social work practice, the courts and the National Adoption …
[PDF]
Social Services Scorecard 2016-2017
Click to access App%201g.pdf
Percentage of social work vacancies in all teams. 22.2%. 22.9%. 24.8%. 23.3%. 18%. 24%. R. Percentage of children supported to remain living within their …
Adoption scorecards – GOV.UK
https://www.gov.uk/government/…/adoption-scorecards
Adoption scorecards: year ending March 2018 – methodology and guidance … Adoption scorecards and underlying data: year ending March 2017 …. Statistics: children’s social work workforce · Longitudinal education outcomes study: how we …
English councils confirm they set targets for the number of children to …
http://www.transparencyproject.org.uk/english-councils-confi...
7 nov. 2016 – The original intent behind scorecards (effectively a national target to raise numbers …. Significant numbers of councils in England are setting local …. “Three social worker and three community nursery nurses have also been …
LikeLiked by 1 person
Natasha said:
Thanks Ian
LikeLike
Dr. Manhattan. said:
Michael Gove has always been an advocate for fast track Adoptions and putting pressure on Councils to speed up their processing.
in contrast to this David Simmonds, chairman of the Local Government Association’s Children and Young People Board, said children in care and adopters should not be viewed as a commodity to be processed as fast as possible.
“While councils are rightly keen to reduce delays in matching children in their care to loving families, the government’s scorecard system risks shifting focus from the quality of placements onto just the speed of placements.”
So it would seem Central Govt are to blame for the Adoption nightmare that has destroyed thousands of families all over the country.
Is it any wonder they take no notice of parents who complain about corrupt Councils and their dishonest Social workers who routinely fabricate case files and Lie on Oath in the family courts.
the Govt should be on trial for this massive national Scandal.
LikeLike
[Name Withheld] said:
Hello, my name is [edited] and my children been removed by [edited] council with false allegations about my health. I need to be able to appeal against the court decision of not returning my children, however my barrister and solicitor states that I have no grounds.
LikeLike
Ian Josephs said:
I bet you probably had a bent barrister and a crooked solicitor who agreed with everything the”SS” wanted ! I bet they gagged you and never called you to the witness box to show the judge all the points you wanted to make.
If I am wrong I apologise to them but if I am right you can ask for a REHEARING on grounds that you were never allowed to speak or present your case.
Good luck …………
LikeLike