Skip to main content

Couple took cash for 'loaning adopted girls to paedophiles'

This sort of story reported in the Daily Mail makes one wonder about the reliability of the assessment processes used by local authorities.

Whether there will be a serious case review or not is unclear. I think there should be some inquiry.

Comments

Jerry said…
Whether or not there will be a serious case review surrounding this is not known, I would say that the case its self leaves many more unanswered questions.

Were the children "forcefully" adopted? one big question we will never probably know?

Will the birth parents ever find out?

Why did these people be able to slip through a system enshrined in strict policy and procedures?

The biggest question that will need answering here is what will happen to the poor children.

More so what happens if these children decide to search for their birth parents when they are older, will the authorities prevent this tooth an nail in order to cover the horrendous act from the birth parents.

Could you imagine if it was your own children that this happened too, the forced adoption and the horrendous acts that followed. what would you do...............
moira said…
My adoption was not properly screened in the 70's. Both parents had emotional problems and the child psychiatrist described my adoption as a severely disturbed background. Father didnt want to adopt but social services didnt think it necessary to ask probing questions or do medical assessments or checks on their own childhoods.

The problem is if you are damaged by these adoptions then social services become involved in your own family.Even if you do well social services seem to enjoy being vindictive to people who have been in their system. They are very harsh. My solicitor said that ss said in a case that a woman fought against her getting her child back because she had been in care and they made the point their care isnt very good. Its all sick and so hypocritical. In some cases SS can be become persecutory like in mine and you have to have other profs tell them to leave you alone as "she is an excellent mother". They just pick on what they think are vulnerable targets. I hate them and thats sad to say about an organisation who frequently boast they support families and keep them together. its very rare I hear that happen.The support is absent or abysmal.

Popular posts from this blog

Millionaires and politics

The Labour Party spent most of the last election criticising me for being a successful businessman (aka millionaire). That is business in the private sector employing over 250 people. It is worth looking at the situation for the Labour Candidate now:

For the year 2016-7 Annual Income from Parliament74,962Specifically for her book51,250Other media income etc5,322.82Total declared income131,534.82

Traditionally anyone with an annual income of over £100,000 has been considered to be a millionaire. I did not use my position in parliament to increase my income.


I have been asked for sources for this. This BBC piece looks at how one should define rich. It was written in 2011 so the figures will be slightly out of date. There are perhaps 2 relevant pieces:
"In 1880 a rich person would have had £100,000 in assets or an income of £10,000 a year, he says. About a hundred people a year died leaving £100,000 and by 1910 this was 250 - "a microscopic fraction of the number of death…

Gender Issues comparison of candidates

John Hemming believes that an MP should represent everyone in their constituency.  This should be regardless of their race, religion, gender, abledness, sexual orientation or anything else.  It should be everyone.

When he was an MP he worked on issues relating to men, those relating to women and those relating to non-binary people. Everyone.

For example here is John Hemming on a demonstration outside the courts with the campaign group Women Against Rape (it related to the case of a mother who had her child removed from her because the mother was raped).




Jess Phillips, who campaigns on women's issues, notwithstanding the questions asked about her appointments in her parliamentary office, had the following response when asked for a debate on issues specifically relating to men:

The Labour Candidate's Book Promotion Tour and Why It Matters

In the 2015 General Election the Labour Candidate criticised John Hemming for having an external interest and made a pledge that she would be a "Full Time MP for Yardley and my only other job will be mom & carer ...".  Here is a copy of that pledge:


Since that point she has been working on paid Television Programmes and has also written a book. John Hemming has made no secret of the fact that he chairs the board of the company he founded in 1983. This involves one meeting a month. When he was the MP for Yardley he was a full time MP and the Job of being MP for Yardley came first. The Labour candidate has reported 1,274 hours of work other than being an MP in the two years she has been elected and her income in the last year was over £131,000.

Ignoring the question as to how she reconciles that with her "pledge" the question is raised as to what extent her external activity conflicts with the role of Member of Parliament for Yardley. She is supposed to de…