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

Advertisements
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

Council Put Children’s Lives At Risk To Cut Costs

Researching Reform does not think this is the only council in England and Wales implementing this policy or encouraging a culture of bullying within child protection teams. We very much hope more whistleblowers from other councils will come forward.

Researching Reform

A whistleblower who worked as a social worker for Worcestershire County Council, has called out the local authority for its unethical practices which placed children’s lives in danger. 

The whistleblower, who was part of the council’s failing children’s services team, says the local authority prioritised cuts above everything else, and bullied and intimidated social workers who refused to put quantity before quality when it came to preparing child protection assessments.

Further claims made by the former social worker include:

• That “stressed and tired” social workers were exploited – with some working 25 hours without pay, on top of their contracted hours.

• Several social workers were going on sick leave due to stress.

• One social worker went to work with a broken hand, afraid of the consequences of not meeting a deadline.

• A social worker dealing with 40 cases – more than the maximum which is meant to…

View original post 128 more words

Standard

BBC’s Today Programme And Researching Reform On Children’s Right To Speak To Judges

Researching Reform

BBC Radio 4’s Today Programme this morning focuses on children’s right to speak with family law judges. Researching Reform had the privilege of talking with Sanchia Berg about the policy, what happened to it and why it was needed.

The piece includes thoughts from a boy called Oscar, who says he feels children should have the right to speak to judges and that it would make the process more friendly.

An extract from our conversation can be heard at around 0:52:00 over on BBC Radio 4’s live player, and the accompanying article on the topic can be read here.

For a summary of this policy, and its development over the last ten years, our Lexis Nexis article offers a complete history.

Many thanks to Sanchia for inviting us to share our thoughts.

Court cases children

View original post

Standard