by Andrew Holman
I spend huge amounts of time reassuring parents with learning difficulties that social workers do not make the decision about child removal. That the decision is made by a court, or exceptionally with the help of the police, but that would only be in extreme circumstances of imminent danger.
It was, therefore, difficult to believe my ears this morning hearing John Hemming MP on Radio 4 talking about social workers illegally removing a new born baby from its mother in Nottingham. I realised my morning’s dental appointment was at risk upon arrival at my offices with phone calls from various journalists. ITN were after a lunch time news slot and my crown was going to have to wait.
The judge described this case as “most unfortunate” when he ordered the return of the child. That has to fall into the award category for understatement of the year! These actions, if seen to be true, undermine all of the work that has been done since the Fran Lyon case last year when Hemming and the popular press made similar allegations of child snatching. And that was in a case that followed procedure! The vilification of social work that followed was hugely damaging.
Despite the judges intervention, this case will only go to prove people’s worst fears that social workers can remove babies at will. How it happened will all be revealed in due course, but for now there is a no win situation.
We don't know, this mother could be the worst in the world; the baby could be at serious risk of harm. But if removal is reinstated following the private court hearing people won’t believe that. The conspiracy theory of meeting adoption targets will be given credibility in the eyes of many, including a great many parents who need to be reassured that working with social workers is the best and most productive way forward.
Wise words indeed by Andrew. For once the impact the case - and that of Fran Lyon just a few weeks ago - has had on the profession have been appreciated.
It will be interesting to find out why an EPO wasn't applied-for, or why the local police weren't requested to enact a PPO. These mechanisms are there to account for any circumstance within the legal framework, and a failure to employ the tools that the law (and public) provide social service departments to carry out there work lawfully and without public ridicule is inexcusable.
Technically you may be correct in asserting that the judiciary make these decisions.However in practice very few judges will go against the advice of the SS as they the judges would now become responsible for what may or may not happen in the future(having turned down the advise of a fellow public servant).It is fairly clear that the general public have little confidence in the abilities of state socialists to assess risk.In the past this task was performed by the sources of social capital within the community,nowadays any views other that those of a public servant are pretty much ignored as the country has moved to total reliance on bureacratic solialism to solve our welfare needs,this must and indeed will change.
The underlying issue is that the Family Courts normally act as a rubber stamp for the proposals of the local authority.
With the financial and target pressures for adoption it ends up as an evil system that does not treat children and families well.
I make absolutely no apology for my comments about this. The system goes wrong far too often both in terms of false positives and false negatives. It needs to be fixed.
Apologists for this monstrosity like yourself should be ashamed of yourselves particularly if you claim to be advocates for people with learning difficulties.
You should be aware of the truth.
People with learning difficulties are targeted by social services, quite often “learning disability” is used as a poor excuse to remove children, there have been cases where the mothers IQ is deemed too low to care for there own child or they can’t move around as easy as able-bodied parents, disabled people are generally classed as too stupid or disadvantaged to care for a child in many cases.
Courts do not make the decision to remove children, this is a total falsehood, the decision to remove children is made even before court proceedings begin, the decision is the social services & is reflected within assessments and other documents they create, ultimately they bring the case to court because they want to & they present the evidence that they want to present & to get children removed & they can remove children at will.
Regarding Fran Lyon, is it quite clear by now that the social services were trying to remove her child for no reason other than ‘misplaced concerns’ or for some other ‘unknown reason’. Fran’s child is currently doing fine & is safe, not only from Fran but also from the social services, it’s a shame when a citizen of the United Kingdom has to leave their own country just so their child is not adopted for no reason, don’t you think?
“We don't know, this mother could be the worst in the world; the baby could be at serious risk of harm”
The mother could be the best mother in the world also, not that it counts for much.
Dear Andrew Holman
I am a brilliant mum and have never done anything wrong but as I critisised a social workers report as it was full of flaws she got an E.P.O walked into my sons school and took him! Since then, to justify her actions and also cover up (my son was and abused by the people she placed my son with)I have had nothing but lies written about me. Your words will fall on the deaf ears of many parents who have been lied about by Social Workers to cover up their wrong doing. Re the Fran Lyon case, its just the tip of the iceberg and you know it!
Children are taken away easily by Social Workers when their parents are innocent: I know that as I am one of them!
Mr Holman,
I and my children are Australian citizens yet in our brief three months in the UK with my British (soon to be Australian) husband, my family and children were harrassed, traumatised and abused by social services and medical staff. Documents were changed and I have the documented lies which can be proven to be lies and copies are in the hand of lawyers here in Australia. Your nazi clones even had the gaul to try to further traumatise my children by sending interpole to track us over seas. Of course the police here tell us if we see anyone hanging around to call them right away and assure us we are safe and they cannot continue their persecution here and advised us to follow the matter up as their actions are illegal. I find it bizarre they would go to these lengths unless of course they were worried of the outcome of the truth to be revealed. I have great faith that if one is a good person, the truth always comes out. No one here has any concerns for the welbeing of my children. Only praise for keeping them same from the UK authorities and getting them out of the country. I have over twenty years experience in teaching and as a therapist and parental adviser I can tell you the social workers and people working with children in the UK were absolutly clueless to the needs of children and only seemed to have their own giggly, power hungry interests at heart. Feel free to respond.
Sincerely
Ali
Social services arevery two faced and many believe they are god.
To remove a child from its mother without going through the correct procedures is shocking and should not have been allowed in the first place.
I for one know that social services say one thing yet mean anotherI have recorded meetinto deal with where they have said one thing yet have then gone on to say the complete oppersite.
No wonder many have no faith in this service.
Its sly and devious.
Many are biased so should not be allowed to work with such delicate situations.