Multiple failings, IRO and whistleblowing

They like doing alot of things ‘just before’ their 18th birthday dont they. Including realising there was a mistake made on the alleged adoption order and having things like 2 adoption years held on written record, two timescales for the years the Case ran with SS/Council and then Cafcass. Restricting the parent who uncovered it all just short of the child’s 18th birthday (2017) when one of the wrong adoption years was stated to being (2002) 4 years prior to the adoption year the parent had been led to believe it was. 2002-2017 makes 15 years them having wrong information held on written record with a brief written apology and no offer of compensation when also on top, said child’s name couldnt be traced on the entire England and Wales register. So after the parent being refunded the money for one of the certificates therefore then they got sent one after anyway. The parent asked for an explanation should an entry be found with a certificate from the GRO but wasnt given one and was simply told in the end ‘I don’t know, a research department deals with it seperately.’ The parent got told there had been a mistake with the Adoption Order from Court with said child’s surname, so it got changed once said child was 17 years old without their (child’s prior consent) and said child had been going (unknowingly) under a false name to what’s wrote on their Adoption Certificate all these years. The ICO say at the age of 12, should anyone request information about them and their data then the child is meant to have their permission sought first. This is bearing in mind, the relevant paperwork would have been sent out to the alleged Adopter ‘re the newer full birth certificate and the Adoption Certificate and they’d have surely had the Adoption Certificate to see in full too as opposed to the one with serial number 05/05 on it (redacted, the parent’s copy) Council’s are meant to do regular periodic checks of data on the Care and Adoption records each Council holds for the children affected too. My opinion is too many people would have known! It’s for this reason, years later I’m of the very strong belief that where parents or any one parent contested the adoption and didn’t sign their consent to section 20 then really the children have been in long term foster care all along and I would advise parents to SARS under GDPR their life story work, what’s held on Consumer Relation files particularly in relation to Complaints but I must warn you, take it back to Family Court to challenge a null/void adoption order you’ll get told no jurisdiction with no thorough investigation done and you’ll likely be offered no support neither coming to terms with it. I’ve since gone through reunification. My young adult son is now home, even he wants answers and is not getting none! There needs to be somewhere for alleged adoptees and natural (I believe real parent in this case) to go for genuine, honest resolution to have miscarriage of justice addressed and now they say (Court) I’m not allowed to name the Council. Now the President McFarlane wants these Family Courts shrouded in more secrecy. How much worse can it get….

suesspiciousminds

It is part of the Christmas tradition of Suesspicious Minds that some Local Authority takes an almighty judicial kicking in a published judgment,  and this year I’m afraid it is Herefordshire behind the door on the advent calendar.  This is a damning judgment by Keehan J

2.The care of and care planning for both these young people by Herefordshire Council has, over the last ten years or so, been woeful.

A & B (care orders and placement orders – failures) [2018] EWFC 72 (30 November 2018)

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWFC/HCJ/2018/72.html

Herefordshire County Council obtained Care and Placement Orders on two children, A and B in May 2008. At that time, A was 11 and B was 10 (that sounds immediately to me like a highly optimistic order…)

Neither were placed for adoption, and the plan of adoption was abandoned by the Local Authority in September 2009. No applications were made to revoke the…

View original post 3,005 more words

Advertisements
Standard

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s