Skip to main content

14 Children taken in sequence into care

The linked story is to The Sunday Times' take on the same story reported previously.

Clearly a proportion of newborn babies taken into care are from mothers who are addicted to drugs. One of the saddest cases I met, however, was a mother in an assessment centre who had cleaned up, but the system was still trying to remove her child.

There is also the question as to whether or not it is the best way of handling things to simply remove each child at birth. This, after all, is not what is done in Scotland.

One of the advantages we have from a social science perspective in the UK is that there are different approaches in Scotland and England. This gives the unusual possibility of a control experiment (after all what is being done in both places is an experiment). Let me make myself clear in that I don't think what is done in Scotland is perfect, but it is a lot better than England.

The issue of addicted parents is a distasteful issue for people to discuss, but it is a very important issue. Simplistic approaches such as removing the children from families where either parent has taken for example cocaine would result in Boris Johnson MP losing his children. These are non starters as suggestions.

It is quite clear, however, that this cannot be left as a general issue to be resolved in secret in the mixture of local authorities and courts. Although there is no reason to identify the people concerned there is a good reason to consider the general principles based on a range of real stories.

One big problem with family law is that things are supposed to be done "in the best interests of the child". That is fair enough, but we don't have any rules to determine what is in the best interests of children hence it ends up as a subjective decision by the people in charge (Childrens Services, Judges).

A useful part of the article that I had not previously sourced is this:
"Researchers at Brunel University who studied care cases in four London boroughs found that 34% were caused by drug or alcohol abuse by parents, the biggest single factor. Of 186 children taken from 100 families because of this dependency, 67 had one or both parents addicted to crack cocaine."

That does not substantiate the argument used by defenders of the current system that the increase in newborn babies being taken into care is all as a consequence of substance abuse.

Comments

moira said…
I don't believe the argument that more babies are being taken because of an increasing drug problem.I remember the 80's and there was a real problem then with heroin.We have always had the drug problem and alcohol.

I hate the use of in the best interests of the child as nobody follows up the progress of the child in care to find out if their lives have improved.

You will find this"in the best interests of the child"is used to justify the most corrupt and malicious behaviour from social workers.

It is also used to justify bullying and abusing parents in particular vulnerable anxious people who genuinely love their children and are terrified by these aggressive social workers.

It is very subjective and does not take into account the extreme distress and damage caused to a child by his removal. also separation anxiety is a common occurence resulting from aggressive removal of the child and the bad handling of cases through incompentent and unskilled social workers.
moira said…
I don't believe the argument that more babies are being taken because of an increasing drug problem.I remember the 80's and there was a real problem then with heroin.We have always had the drug problem and alcohol.

I hate the use of in the best interests of the child as nobody follows up the progress of the child in care to find out if their lives have improved.

You will find this"in the best interests of the child"is used to justify the most corrupt and malicious behaviour from social workers.

It is also used to justify bullying and abusing parents in particular vulnerable anxious people who genuinely love their children and are terrified by these aggressive social workers.

It is very subjective and does not take into account the extreme distress and damage caused to a child by his removal. also separation anxiety is a common occurence resulting from aggressive removal of the child and the bad handling of cases through incompentent and unskilled social workers.

Popular posts from this blog

Statement re false allegations from Esther Baker

Statement by John Hemming
I am pleased that the Police have now made it clear that there has been a concerted effort to promote false criminal allegations against me and that the allegations had no substance whatsoever.
I would like to thank Emily Cox, my children, Ayaz Iqbal (my Solicitor), my local lib dem team and many others who supported me through this dreadful experience. There are many worse things that happen to people, but this was a really bad experience.
It is bad enough to have false allegations made about yourself to the police, but to have a concerted campaign involving your political opponents and many others in public creates an environment in which it is reasonable to be concerned about ill founded vigilante attacks on your family and yourself. Luckily there was a more substantial lobby to the contrary as well, which included many people who were themselves real survivors of abuse, which has helped.
I am normally someone who helps other people fight injustice. …

Statement re Police investigation into Harassment and Perverting the Course of Justice.

It was recently reported that the police were not investigating the allegations of Perverting the Course of Justice that I had made. This came as a surprise to me as I had been told for some time that my allegations were to be considered once the VRR had been rejected. I have now had a very constructive meeting with Staffordshire police on Friday 29th June 2018 and the misunderstandings have been resolved. At that meeting the evidence relating to the perversion of the course of justice and the harassment campaign against my family were discussed. The police have decided to investigate both the perversion of the course of justice and also the harassment campaign. I would like to thank them for changing their decision and I accept their apology for the way in which they did that. I am also in possession of written confirmation a police force would be investigating allegations that a vulnerable witness has been harassed for trying to expose the campaign against me. I hope that the aut…

R v SUSSEX JUSTICES ex p McCARTHY [1924] 1 KB 256

I have only just found this one which I think is accurately reported below (but if it is not please give me an accurate report).

KING’S BENCH DIVISION

R v SUSSEX JUSTICES ex p McCARTHY [1924] 1 KB 256

November 9 1923

Editor’s comments in bold.

Here, the magistrates’ clerk retired with the bench when they were considering a charge of dangerous driving. The clerk belonged to a firm of solicitors acting in civil proceedings for the other party to the accident. It was entirely irrelevant that there had been no evidence of actual influence brought to bear on the magistrates, and the conviction was duly quashed.

LORD HEWART CJ:
It is clear that the deputy clerk was a member of the firm of solicitors engaged in the conduct of proceedings for damages against the applicant in respect of the same collision as that which gave rise to the charge that the justices were considering. It is said, and, no doubt, truly, that when that gentleman retired in the usual way with the justices, taking with him the…