Skip to main content

Sue Reid on the Baby Snatchers

The link is to a Daily Mail article about the baby snatchers.

Where the growth in babies being taken into care is most dramatic is the newborn babies adopted last year of whom 920 were under 1 week when taken into care. In 1995 the figure was 370.

Remembering that some are taken into care because they are abandoned (possibly about 250) this is a massive increase in terms of babies taken into care from parents who want to keep them.

In reading Sue's article please also read my own post about Shaken Baby Syndrome where I look at the US experience.

Comments

Norfolk Blogger said…
A friend of mine nearly had his son taken from him three years ago. His sonw, who used to suffer badly from asthma, had an asthma attack and had to be rushed to A&E. When he got there, the doctor cared little about the Asthma, but questioned them (my friend and his wife) in some depth about the cut on their son's forehead. The next thing they know a social worker turns up and they are taken in to a separate room.

Now the cut was as a result of an accident at he nursery. They knew it was in the Nursery's accident book but since they took him to hospital on a Sunday, they could not get the records on a Sunday. It came to a point that Social Services were threatening to take their son (who was only 12 months old) in to care. The only reason they did not go ahead was beause my friend threatened them with the full force of the law and objected lucidly to their behaviour as professionals.

It is quite frightening what can happen to some people and how obsessive some so called professionals get.

It is also a lesson to anyone who might have to take their kids in to Hospital. Beeware if they have any cuts or bruises.

When my friend got the accident report from the nursery and sent it to the hospital, he did not even get an apology.
john said…
It is worth remembering the fees that the professionals get for given so called "expert" advice in the Family Court. There are judges who are only interested in having one expert in court. (The one that diagnoses guilty)
cal said…
my daughter gave birth on friday, that evening two social workers told her to find a solicitor for court monday morning. The court awarded social services a care order because my daughter is mildly autistic. Her rights, including those of a disabled person were ignored. She could not be in court, she's still in hospital, we, as grandparents of the child were kept out as we had no rights (so they told us). All the reasons for the care order were flawed, some of it blatant lies. Cal.

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…