12 minutes of the snatch of a 2-year old boy from a 20-year old mum who had been in care since age 13 and whose mum had been in care as well. Here’s her Facebook page. And her Facebook group to fight for little William.
11 minutes about lies by Social Workers until surprise, surprise, 6 months later, she actually got her son back – but he is still traumatised from the separation, and she feels she’s sometimes sitting next to a stranger…
And all that “in the child’s best interest” – when
- a child is taken every 20 minutes in the UK – according to Channel IV
- 1 in 5 men are supposedly paedophiles – according to James O’Brien on LBC on 03 Oct 2014
- the National Inquiry into Organised Historical Child Abuse is dragging its feet
- The Coleman Experience blog welcomes you to Filthy Britain…
And here’s what the Department of Education emailed re “in their best interests”:
Dear Ms McNeill
Thank you for your email of 26 July, addressed to the Minister of State for Justice and Civil Liberties, about children in care. Your email has been passed to this department as we are responsible for the policy on family law and I have been asked to reply.
Our system of family justice is based firmly on the principle that children should not be taken into care without a court independently assessing all of the evidence first. The government believes this is right. The evidence must, in all cases, be carefully scrutinised by the courts. Parents have legal representatives who are appointed to support them and ensure their views are heard, and to ensure that evidence put forward can be challenged. In addition, applications made to the court are subject to separate scrutiny by the child’s guardian, who must submit their own analysis of the evidence and ensure that the child’s interests and views are properly represented. Where, despite these checks and balances in the system, there are concerns about any individual case and its conclusion, cases can be subject to appeal.
This government agrees that there would be benefits in having even greater openness and it is important that we make progress on this. The question of how to open up the family courts further, and balance access with proper controls to prevent the disclosure of sensitive information which might be harmful to parties in the proceedings if released, including vulnerable children and adults, remains a difficult and controversial issue. The President of the Family Division is taking this work forward and will consider how progress can be made.
The government also wants to improve the lives of the thousands of children who enter the care system and who deserve a second chance of a safe, stable childhood. For those children who cannot be returned home, adoption is one way of providing this.
Children should clearly only be taken into care and placed for adoption when it is in their best interests. While it is important to consider if safeguards within the system are sufficiently robust, it is also important not to undermine the work of the professionals we rely on to keep vulnerable children safe. To do so risks damaging the chances of many thousands of children who would greatly benefit from the stable family upbringing a successful adoption can provide.
Once again, thank you for writing.