Sunday, August 27, 2006
Family Court Stories
There is some interest in the media (link to Observer story) about the Family Courts.
I am particularly interested in the aspects relating to Public Law (which is where Social Services come in).
The argument is put forward that the secrecy is there to protect the children.
Why, then, when it has been proven that everything claimed to justify a child being taken into care is false and the case was dismissed with the costs awarded against a local authority does the case remain secret?
There are situations where children (that are over 12 ie Gillick competent) and parents want to talk to the media about what has been done to them by Social Services Departments, but they are not allowed to.
What is so very wrong that a child is not allowed to talk about the way that child was treated by the system?
The problem with much of Labour's legislation is it assumes that people who have authority will not abuse that authority.
Exactly how many cases involve an abuse of authority is not clear. The MPs group dealing with Munchausen's by Proxy (now renamed FII) is trying to find out.
The system (in this case the DFES) collects statistics in a way that makes it impossible to know the answer.
The problem with the system is that there is a need for a system to deal with situations where children are being maltreated by their parents.
There are, however, hundreds and probably thousands and maybe tens of thousands of cases where the system instead is maltreating both children and parents. posted by John Hemming ¶ 12:14 pm
I am particularly interested in the aspects relating to Public Law (which is where Social Services come in).
The argument is put forward that the secrecy is there to protect the children.
Why, then, when it has been proven that everything claimed to justify a child being taken into care is false and the case was dismissed with the costs awarded against a local authority does the case remain secret?
There are situations where children (that are over 12 ie Gillick competent) and parents want to talk to the media about what has been done to them by Social Services Departments, but they are not allowed to.
What is so very wrong that a child is not allowed to talk about the way that child was treated by the system?
The problem with much of Labour's legislation is it assumes that people who have authority will not abuse that authority.
Exactly how many cases involve an abuse of authority is not clear. The MPs group dealing with Munchausen's by Proxy (now renamed FII) is trying to find out.
The system (in this case the DFES) collects statistics in a way that makes it impossible to know the answer.
The problem with the system is that there is a need for a system to deal with situations where children are being maltreated by their parents.
There are, however, hundreds and probably thousands and maybe tens of thousands of cases where the system instead is maltreating both children and parents. posted by John Hemming ¶ 12:14 pm
Comments:
<< Home
Relating to this article on the Family courts, it is hard to comprehend that any reform is going to change the way the social services and associating agencies perform. As they all gather their information together before hand and present it in court only to influence the judges decision. What hope does a parent have with all agencies united in one big fast! One area to consider when reforming.
Also that the party, usually the innocent person in these proceedings has the right to speak freely in court as in many courts a mother or a father has to sit and instruct a solicitor who unbelievably will ignore their request to speak out...Usually these instructions can only be approached on the spot due to lies and coruption noticed while actually in the court proceedings, if these are allowed to be brought up at the time, then the court will be made fully aware and can exercise their views in public. This is only fair to the children as many a times injustices do not get back into the court room as the solicitor or judge does not see it necassary.
What we all have to bear in mind is, these so called professionals have not lived with the partners of these innocent people and it the innocent that know best when it comes to the other person lying. These lies can scar and result in a life time of destruction for families torn apart when the social services and agencies choose to support the abusive parent.
Post a Comment
Also that the party, usually the innocent person in these proceedings has the right to speak freely in court as in many courts a mother or a father has to sit and instruct a solicitor who unbelievably will ignore their request to speak out...Usually these instructions can only be approached on the spot due to lies and coruption noticed while actually in the court proceedings, if these are allowed to be brought up at the time, then the court will be made fully aware and can exercise their views in public. This is only fair to the children as many a times injustices do not get back into the court room as the solicitor or judge does not see it necassary.
What we all have to bear in mind is, these so called professionals have not lived with the partners of these innocent people and it the innocent that know best when it comes to the other person lying. These lies can scar and result in a life time of destruction for families torn apart when the social services and agencies choose to support the abusive parent.
<< Home
