Monthly Archives: November 2017

The End Of Forced Adoption In The UK? Meet The Social Workers Challenging The System.

tummumsaid:

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

via The End Of Forced Adoption In The UK? Meet The Social Workers Challenging The System.

Standard

The End Of Forced Adoption In The UK? Meet The Social Workers Challenging The System.

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.

Researching Reform

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.

Adoption 1

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.

Adoption 2

The paper predicts that non consensual adoption will eventually come to an end in the UK, largely due to fierce…

View original post 637 more words

Standard

Government Ignores Freedom Of Information Request On Its Child Protection Consultations

Researching Reform

The government has failed to respond to a Freedom Of Information Request we made last month which asked them what had happened to all of its child welfare consultations.

Delayed

We sent our request on 15th October. The reply was due on or before the 10th November. Unusually, we never received a notification from the FOI website alerting us to the delay.

The government’s failure to respond in time means that they have broken the law. Researching Reform has now launched a review to find out why the request has been ignored.

FOI review

We’ll update this story as soon as we know more.

FOI

View original post

Standard

Forced Adoption – Question It!

Researching Reform

Welcome to another week.

A petition calling on the government to investigate forced adoption and fostering in the UK has been started by the family of murdered toddler, Elsie, whose real name was Shayla.

Shayla was killed by her adoptive father after the local authority placed her in his care.

The petition has gathered over 4,000 signatures and calls on the government to carry out an independent review of both forced adoption and fostering. The petition calls these practices a form of child abuse, and suggests they are tantamount to child abduction. It also highlights the ‘risk of future/ significant harm’ test under S.31 of the Children Act 1989, which allows social workers to remove children on the basis that harm to a child could take place in the future, often with very little evidence to support the view. The petition also calls out the lack of transparency in the…

View original post 260 more words

Standard

Social Workers Caught Fabricating Evidence Boosts Call To Track Documents

Researching Reform

Yet another social worker has been exposed for making up evidence in a child protection case, which could have resulted in the mother losing her child to the care system.

Linda Fraser, who works for Bristol city council as a senior social worker, edited child protection records in order to persuade the judge to place the child in care. Ms Fraser then lied to the court about having done so.

District judge Julie Exton found that Ms Fraser had added new information to case notes in order to bolster evidence against the mother. Ms Fraser then tried to suggest she was suffering from poor mental health and stress at the time and could not remember altering the records. The appeal court wasn’t buying it, and details of her conduct were sent to the Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC), who then summoned Fraser before a disciplinary panel.

During the HCPC hearing, Ms Fraser denied…

View original post 618 more words

Standard

Someone had blundered

14. I am profoundly conscious of the impact of my decision on both the birth parents and the prospective adopters both of whom will be distressed and unsettled by this uncertainty. I would however, emphasise one important and, in my judgment, inalienable right, namely, that of J to know in the future that the process by which he may have been permanently separated from his family was characterised by fairness, detailed scrutiny and integrity.

If this has only been noticed recently, i have good reason to suspect my child/natural child (now young adult) could potentially be the fifth and sixth one (re: your paragraph 2) and to cut a long story short it has taken ’10 whole years’ to come to light. Neither the said now young adult (who does want answers) or i (on their behalf) seem to be getting any answers.

You can make an application to Court and go about things the right way and be instead, slapped with a Restriction Order on you when really, you required much needed answers.

Maybe not so unusual and unique when you consider this first-

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/misinterpretation_or_misrepresen#outgoing-672786

Thank you.

Source: Someone had blundered

Standard

Someone had blundered

14. I am profoundly conscious of the impact of my decision on both the birth parents and the prospective adopters both of whom will be distressed and unsettled by this uncertainty. I would however, emphasise one important and, in my judgment, inalienable right, namely, that of J to know in the future that the process by which he may have been permanently separated from his family was characterised by fairness, detailed scrutiny and integrity.

If this has only been noticed recently, i have good reason to suspect my child/natural child (now young adult) could potentially be the fifth and sixth one (re: your paragraph 2) and to cut a long story short it has taken ’10 whole years’ to come to light. Neither the said now young adult (who does want answers) or i (on their behalf) seem to be getting any answers.

You can make an application to Court and go about things the right way and be instead, slapped with a Restriction Order on you when really, you required much needed answers.

Maybe not so unusual and unique when you consider this first-

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/misinterpretation_or_misrepresen#outgoing-672786

Thank you.

suesspiciousminds

 

I’ve written many times about how unusual it is for a Court to revoke an adoption order. If memory serves, I have only found four examples before – one last year where the adopters physically abused the child who returned to birth mother and who felt very strongly about wanting the order revoked, one where a step-parent adoption was made where the mother had not told the birth father that she was terminally ill and if he had known that he would not have consented and I can’t remember the details of the other two – they were both from the 1970s.

 

This is the fifth one.  Which also, bizarrely, became the sixth one as well. This child may well, in due course, have the unusual and unique history of being adopted twice by the same people.

 

RE J (A Minor: Revocation of Adoption) 2017

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Fam/2017/2704.html

And it is…

View original post 1,528 more words

Standard