To wonder about all the press on Social Services taking children away?

(459 Posts)
goldbracelet Thu 17-May-12 22:24:10

From good families and parents for no good reason. It is media hype or is there truth in it?

Talking with friends recently, some say they are careful about what they say to the GP for fear of what goes down on record. For example, they would think twice before saying something along the lines of, "I'm finding it hard to cope with my young children while sick with flu (or whatever illness)".

Amy social workers out there who could comment? Is it true that 95% of children are never returned to their parents once removed?

Scary. I can't believe this could happen.

bradywasmyfavouriteking Sat 01-Dec-12 15:36:47

Still, every cloud has a silver lining, at least I got a good laugh when one poster compared him to Nelson Mandela.

I can't even fathom how to start that comparison.

FlangelinaBallerina Sat 01-Dec-12 15:33:34

Ah mysecretworld I think the building you're talking about is the Manchester Civil Justice Centre, yes? Big glass one on Bridge Street in town, next to the river. I know it well. There certainly are a lot of family courts in there, and it's a big big building. I can't remember if the family courts are found over 8 floors though. It used to just be 5 or 6 but then I've not been in there for a couple of years. And bear in mind what a big area Greater Manchester is, and it holds overspill from other local courts because eg Oldham, Rochdale etc aren't that big. So it's basically the family court for a few million people. Not that massive when you think about it.

Honestly though, they won't all be doing care cases. A lot are private law cases ie parents arguing between themselves about who the DC will live with and have contact with. Social Services wouldn't usually even be involved, and there'd be no question of removal. I can see how it would look like that, but it's not the case.

Spero Sat 01-Dec-12 15:29:15

O yes indeed. I have asked him at least ten times if he will remove Ian Joseph from his website as an affiliated site. He has never, ever condescended to answer the question.

Still, every cloud has a silver lining, at least I got a good laugh when one poster compared him to Nelson Mandela.

bradywasmyfavouriteking Sat 01-Dec-12 15:18:39

The other prolific one is Ian Joseph

Thats him. JH said on here he does not support Ian Joseph and the 'golden rule'.

So I asked him on several threads was he going to ask Ian Joseph to remove his (jh) endorsement from Ians website. Because clearly Ian thinks he does agree and is implying that he does.

JH and his arrogance simply ignored the question over and over.

I can imagine the headline now if he sued. His personal life is a joke, it would be one more think to show how much of a cock he acts.

Spero Sat 01-Dec-12 15:11:24

He wouldn't dare sue me - it's not defamation if it's true.

I would love it if he did as that might be a good way to shine a little light on his activities.

What he did was make a complaint to my professional regulatory body, the same day I announced on a thread that I was making a formal complaint about him. He is a bully. They did not uphold his complaint.

The other prolific one is Ian Joseph - he of the infamous 'golden rule' that you never seek help from a social worker, even if your child tells you they have been sexually abused.

It's as if what these men really want to campaign for is the power of the patriarch to control his family without any state interference, even if that means a child is sexually abused.

bradywasmyfavouriteking Sat 01-Dec-12 15:00:03

He is a cock. And dodges all questions.

I to have email nick clegg, he doesn't give a shit.

To be honest its the fact that JH is allowed to continue as he does and the fact that Nick Clegg turns a blind eye that I would never vote liberal democrats.

I think he is disgusting as is Nick Clegg for allowing him to put children in danger.

Whats JH's mate called? The other one that get mentioned alot with JH.

MrsDeVere Sat 01-Dec-12 13:53:50

Wasn't he going to sue you?

These families are easy targets for those who want to build a profile.
They will grab any hope offered and they are very easy to drop when they are no longer useful.

We had a woman on here claiming to have been poorly treated by someone in a position of power and he just called her a liar. Denied all knowledge.
Because he could.

Spero Sat 01-Dec-12 13:08:13

I will tell you how hemming gets away with it. Because no one gives a crap about the damage he does. I sent a (hopefully) reasonable and fully supported list of concerns about his activities - the most serious being that he advises parents on the basis of his false and unsubstantiated allegation that the child protection system is both 'corrupt' and 'evil' - to my MP, Nick Clegg and the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards

The first two sent me dismissive one paragraph replies. The latter sent quite a rude letter saying in essence, unless I was complaining about financial impropriety, I could just go away.

Maybe if a child dies after he advises the parents to flee the jurisdiction, there might be an inquiry into his activities or at the very least he might be respectfully requested to stop campaigning in this manner using his status as MP.

Sadly I think it will take some tragedy to stop him.

What on earth his constituents think when they vote for him, I don't know.

MrsDeVere Sat 01-Dec-12 10:17:21

What I think is very very sad and very telling is that this poster was previously fairly reasonable and her denial about the situation was understandable
Scroll forward a very short time and it is obvious what sort of person she has been talking to
How easy it is to indoctrinate a vulnerable person
And does this ranting and threatening EVER get anyone results?
It never works it never improves the situation

I'm still trying to get over MrsDevere being a troll, seven years she's had me she shock

lotsofdogshere Sat 01-Dec-12 09:20:34

well, what a lively thread this is. John Hemming - how does he get away with it. He is dangerous, causes all kinds of distress to parents who are already distressed and frightened. It's good to see people who are currently working in the family courts (lawyers) social workers, and those who have been on the receiving end of social work involvement speaking calmly and honestly about a complex subject. OP you would be well advised to focus on supporting your daughter and grandson, and to keep out of the hysterical, dangerous anti social work gang you are clearly involved with. I do wonder if the whole thing is made up, and you are a troll

MrsDeVere Sat 01-Dec-12 08:54:26

<peeks out from under the bridge>
Mwah ha ha haaaaa

ErikNorseman Sat 01-Dec-12 06:05:16

Oh, and should birth parents put photos of their adopted children on FB?

Hell, no.

Well said.

Devora Fri 30-Nov-12 23:41:14

Oh, and should birth parents put photos of their adopted children on FB?

Hell, no.

Devora Fri 30-Nov-12 23:40:17

SO glad someone has finally had the courage to out MrsDV. To think I wasted all these months (years!) trying to be her MN mate... Trip trap grin

Spero Fri 30-Nov-12 23:08:33

Kleptronic - good post. Says it all really.

Wilson - ha ha, see you on the next thread. There will never be an 'out', you do know that?

AudrinaAdare Fri 30-Nov-12 22:37:44

I think that a lot goes on that social services are unable to report. The couple where the mother had mild learning difficulties for example in this story

It was discussed on MN at the time and although it was reported by the couple that they were being hounded for no good reason, a quick google led to the father's art work. I'm not saying that he poses a danger to children but I'd think twice about letting DD stay with my sister if her new BF spent his time this way. Who knows what else S.S know that the public don't?

TandB Fri 30-Nov-12 22:17:19

Unless I'm very much mistaken, I will be seeing MrsDV in the very near future.

I will attempt to rip her rubber face mask off and report back about just how hard she punches me.

Pumpster Fri 30-Nov-12 22:17:11

I had to BEG ss to get involved (15 yo involved in extremely risky behaviour, out of control) as they wouldn't take dd into care because I had parental responsibility. They did finally take notice but really, they do not take children into care lightly.

bradywasmyfavouriteking Fri 30-Nov-12 22:13:22

Oh my god not JH!!

Although I am sure his name has now been mentioned enough times that he shall appear any minute and back secret up. In his 'i will just post random, unverified info and ignore all valid objections and questions.

WilsonFrickett Fri 30-Nov-12 22:11:19

spero voice of reason (again). I'm out (again).

Spero Fri 30-Nov-12 22:09:33

It's chilling isn't it. How many people did she dupe. The only thing that can top this for me is if MrsDV rips off her rubber face mask to reveal that she is in fact John Hemming.

FivesAndNorks Fri 30-Nov-12 22:07:13

yeah sorry for the shock reveal of MrsDV but it had gone on long enough. I couldn't allow any more posters to be sucked into her web of sound advice and witty compassion.

Kleptronic Fri 30-Nov-12 22:06:22

Secret, it seems to me you are feeling powerless and angry because your grandson was taken away.

There will be reasons why he was taken away, and those reasons have been put before many people in a defined process subject to law. Stringent law, regularly tested.

There may be emotional factors for you raised by these events that are difficult to process right now. Because your grandson's confidentiality needs to be maintained, I expect you cannot speak about what happened.

I am sorry that you are suffering.

It seems to me you are trying to vent feelings by posting, and those feelings cannot be resolved here, in this way.

Not a one of anyone here can say that you were wronged. Not a one of anyone here can make it go away, or the pain stop. We do not know what has happened, and no-one can make an informed decision, because no-one here can know the facts.

No one on here can know the facts because if we did the details of a child's life would be on the internet, and there are people out there who specialise in targeting children. Apart from that, it is not right to put anything on the internet or in the papers which may come back to haunt a child when that child is grown. Nothing that can be connected with a child in real life should be know. Adults can choose, children cannot, so nothing should be said about them which can identify them, even if it's only enough to identify them to people who already know them. I feel strongly about this regardless of the circumstances of any child.

What you are saying about social services is not factually correct and could cause harm to people who may need assistance, for whatever reason, from social services.

I can see that you are hurting and angry. I can see that you want what has happened to be part of a failure of the state. It cannot only be down to that, for the many reasons given by many knowledgeable people on this thread, given that e cannot know the circumstances. There are too many safeguards in place for it to down to only the state after taking your grandchild.

Please look after yourself. Talk to people in real life about how you are feeling. I hope you are a real person. I hope you find resolution to your feelings.

FivesAndNorks Fri 30-Nov-12 22:05:26

This poster is not actually reading or responding to posts.
She is not constructing any sort of argument.
She is simply reeling off stuff she's found on the internet in a very haphazard fashion. Anyone (including me) wanting to actually debate with her is in for a frustrating time.
I for one am going to assume that the coherence and style of posting is representative of the thought processes and the logic used to arrive at the conclusions she has, and not get sucked in any further (or that's the plan!)

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now