Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. If you have any legal concerns we suggest you consult a solicitor.
Interim Care Order?(59 Posts)
Quick background - I'm kinda stuck on how to word a statement to the courts regarding the opposition of the renewal of an interim care order - It was granted by the judge and simply told me to write how 'I plan to look after my son' - but I know that the statement has to stay focused on my child - but I don't know where to start - My son was put into care over my refusal to take him to hospital over a 2mm cut in his lip - hes possibly Dyspraxic. They have been using my past upto now to get him into care, even though its now no longer relevant, as nothing they say is the same now as it was then. What will the court be looking for in order to change it to a supervision order or follow the no-order route? Thanks in advance
Can you say a bit more about what led up to your DS being removed? A 2mm cut doesn't sound like a hospital-worthy injury, so I'm wondering what the background is?
Lougle - He cut his lip by falling out of bed, I used to live in Birmingham before I moved up north, the SS in the previous location were brought in by the hosuing department as I was made homeless due to violence - they put my DS on a care plan, but eventually I got sick of jumping through constantly moving hoops, their inability to put my son first, and them lying to other professionals (of which i have evidence by the folder-load) When I moved my case was transferred, and the SW came knocking after the school reported a cut on his bottom lip... They came out and checked it, then left. They asked my DS to strip when they were there and could see there was no other injuries on him.. but it upset him and he refused for a good ten minutes before I convinced him to undress.. They called the next day and asked me to take him for a medical to prove it was accidental, and with how upset my son had got the night before, and it only being a minor injury, i refused. So they got an EPO and took him. They then pulled my entire history, including the DV and stuff that had happened before I was even a parent. They said my political beliefs proved I had mental illness, and was a danger to my son. So they were issued with an ICO, and asked me to do psych reports. They then went and told my eldest sons dad that my youngest was in care. Despite them having different parents.
Cruxible - No, I'm a litigant, I'm self employed and earn too much to qualify for legal aid, but not enough to afford a solicitor
So you moved from one LA to another whilst a care plan was still in place?
Why did the school report the cut if it's only 2mm?
What are your political beliefs?
Sorry..so many questions. It all sounds quite complicated.
Lougle - Yes, I was living in a hostel with 2 children, they were going to evict me as I refused a property from them on health grounds for my eldest child - the entire thing was transferred, and one LA took the other to Court for failing to remove my children earlier
He said "mummy did it" - despite saying 10 minutes layer "just kidding"
I'm a Freeman-on-the-land - I believe the Government is corrupt.
It is complicated lol theres a lot more to it than I've been able to type here, those are just the base points to it! lol
Perhaps put in the statement how you will try to prevent injury from happening again, ie bed guards etc? Not sure really but hope you get things sorted, sounds like a nightmare
Is legal aid for care cases means tested now?
MerryChristMoose - Apparently in my case it is - I was a bit dubious about it and thought it was funded automatically. I don't trust solicitors either way
Ok, so I just had a quick read of 'Freeman-on-the-land'. That's not going to help you much, is it? Obviously, you can't change what you believe (necessarily) but it's not going to reassure SS if you deem the law to be merely a contract and that you aren't bound by it unless you agree to it....it doesn't really work like that!
I've only read a wikipedia entry, but that suggests that you wouldn't get a solicitor because to do so would mean contracting with the state...so that's out anyway, I take it.
I can see, given your beliefs, why you refused the medical, but that wasn't the most sensible move. Done now, though.
School must have had significant concerns, though? My DDs go to school with all manner of bumps, cuts and bruises (especially DD1 who has SN) and not once have school raised concern, although I admit that I always point out particularly 'interesting' bruises, such as the linear bruise on DD1's inner thigh which resulted from her falling awkwardly on the door threshold.
There was one interesting moment when DD3's montessori teacher mentioned that another teacher had noticed DD3 had a black eye. She and I were both relieved when I was able to point out that DD3 has a particularly prominent vein over that eye, and given the fact that she is so little, when her eyes are open the edges of the vein are hidden.
I'm suspecting, from what you've written, that part of SS's case against you is that you have 'no insight' into your 'shortcomings as a parent' and therefore are unable to change? That's the tricky thing. What you see as perfectly valid lifestyle choices and political views, will be seen by SS as an inability to put your children first, from what you've written.
What is a freeman on the land btw? Like an anarchist?
Ah, just googled.
I am surprised you would accept legal aid anyway, under the circumstances, indeed by the state? And I presume your DD's school is also independent?
Sorry that should have said 'funded by the state'
If you want to structure your statement you can use the every child matters points as a framework and write how your care meets the 5 outcomes. You can also look at the child concern model if your child has agency supper of some kind - SEN or something - that's when needs identified need to be met by a service and cannot be by the parent.
It sounds completed.
You need to say what your child's needs are, and how you plan to meet them.
Have a look at the 5 areas of learning and development.
Re: The freeman-on-the-land - I'm not as extremist as some of the stuff you read on here, I'll go into a 'contract' if it is of benefit to my kids, I'd be stupid not to. The whole legal aid thing never came under the consideration of it being from the state, I applied for it but it was refused, but as I'm studying law anyway and have been a litigant on different occasions for civil cases, I wasn't overly concerned about representing myself.
They have an issue with the belief because I asked them on one occasion (they knocked the door in the middle of us all having dinner) If I was oblidged to let them into my house, and if so, under what law. They said I didn't have to, and left. A few days later they arranged to come out, and I let them in. So they said my beliefs were causing varying presentation and that showed instability and mental illness.
I'm not an anarcist - I pay tax, have a driving license and pay business rates and VAT like everyone else, I just don't agree with the totaltarian state it is becoming and that where possible people shouldnt rely on the state -imho. I don't teach this to either of my children, they are free people and have the right to make their own minds up as they grow, a point of view which SS have pointed out in their reports before.
The judge has given me the chance to prove I can look after them, and wants a statement saying how I will do it, my problem is I don't know where to start as it needs to remain on my sons welfare, not writing it to be all me, me, me
It would impress them, if, at the end of a long statement about your child and his needs, you stated that you have modified your beliefs and no longer describe yourself as freeman of the land. Say that it occurs to you that your beliefs were never that extreme and now that you have done more reading into the situation, you have altered your beliefs.
Just being honest.
I don't know if this will be of any use - my Adobe Reader is playing up, so I couldn't open it to view it.
If the LA are applying for a care order for your child you will be entitled to non-means and non-merit tested legal aid. You don't even need to sign a LA application. Your solicitor completes and signs form CLSAPP5. Something doesn't add up here.
Lougle - Thank you, thats give me some really good points to bring through
Collaborate - You're telling me? lol
I'm very glad to hear you aren't an extremist. The last time I heard of Freemen-of-the Land was the Vicky Haigh case. She was found to be unable to put the interests of her child first or accept the authority of the courts. Vicky Haigh and her associate were held in contempt of court and committed to prison. Please don't follow their example and find out the hard way that everyone has to obey the law.
As collaborate says you will get legal aid - everyone does in care cases. If you don't go down the legal aid route you may get HUGE bills for psychologists etc as the cost is split between all parties and therefore normally paid by legal aid.
The welfare checklist is where you should be looking for statements etc.
Hi Krystal, this is a link to the Wikipaedia entry for Every Child Matters..It gives the five outcomes which all children should have so you have a guide.
If your views are not as extreme as some in your belief then say so in writing, what you wrote further back was good.
When I say something doesn't add up, I mean you are not telling the truth about legal aid and acting for yourself. It is a choice you made for yourself rather than, as you would have us believe, something denied you. I find it utterly bizarre that you would lie about it on a forum where you ask that people give their free time to offer help or support to you.
Collaborate - kind of a bold accusation to make - I'm not lying. Legal Aid is only available on level 2 hearings - I don't pretend to know what that encompasses, but apparently my case isn't a level 2. I Have spoken to relevant authorities about this, and am waiting for a response. However since my status for legal aid was not included in my question in my original post, I fail to see the relevance.
Everyone else - thank you for the advice, it has given me a good starting point for my statement
What country do you live in?
Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.
If you say so - truth is, Google won't prove anything will it, because you're not in my situation, nor are you someone close who does know, so regardless of what it says, I know the position I am in. Now do you have any useful input as I really can't be wasting time on here trying to prove myself to you when you're not someone I should have to convince, like a Judge, or a Social Worker.
Well, before I moved to Canada 20 months ago I was a Solicitor specialising in family law, a member of the Law Society's Family Law Panel and a Resolution Accredited Specialist. I know there have been some major changes to Legal Aid, but I'm with Collaborate on this one OP. Amongst others, Collaborate and I are exactly the "sort of people" you need to convince. You might get more sensible help that way.
Let's step this back a bit, then
Bearing in mind that it's a public forum, are there any details that you can give, such as what sort of/level hearing it is?
If you are self representing, you need all the help and advice you can get.
This is serious stuff and no one cares what your view of authority is, they'll treatyou the same regardless.
I would say that by choosing not to use a solicitor you are not doing everything you can to get your child returned to your care. You are not fully engaging in the court process and I am afraid that could count against you.
If you have been told you do not qualify then go and try a different solicitor. There may be some not so good ones, but you will be able to find a good one and a good solicitor will know everything you need to put in a statement.
OP talks of her case not being a "level 2", whatever that is. that's why I asked her what country she's in, as "level 2" does not correspond to the court process in care proceedings in England & Wales.
She tells of interim care orders. They are made after a LA has applied for a care order but before the court has made a final decision, and to apply for legal aid for that you use the form you can easily find via google CLSAPP5, which to anyone who cares to look is obviously for non-means tested LA.
Krystal - I hate to say it but that reply to Collaborate is exactly what you need to avoid. Being seen to have a big chip on your shoulder will not go in your favour! Personally, I would stress the fact that you see the necessity of working with Social Services to see that your son is getting the best care possible & show that you are willing to listen to concerns and address them.
BTW do you mean 2mm because that is very small, hardly visible to the naked eye.
That's why I queried it, redHelen. 2 mm is teeny tiny.
I'm also with Collaborate on this one. All parents are entitled to legal aid in care applications and it's not means-tested. There is, as is often the case, likely to be much more to the OP's situation than meets the eye. Nonetheless, if, OP, you insist on representing yourself you need to read the Children Act 1989 and in particular sections 31, 38 and s.1 and s.1(3) in the preparation of your statement.
I am experienced in the 'other side' of what the SS do
First may i ask, when you say you are 'up north' please don't tell me (as it appears your child has been targeted because of your 'religious' or whatever-it-is beliefs.. political? ... That you are in the area where children have just been removed from the care of foster parents simply because they are UKIP members?
Krystal - I hate to say it but that reply to Collaborate is exactly what you need to avoid. Being seen to have a big chip on your shoulder will not go in your favour!
I would have given the same reply to someone saying i wasn't telling the truth either .. the link to my story in case it helps .. http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/relationships/1574884-My-Experience-With-SS
SS can and do abuse their power. If they don't meet the threshold they are not above making things up, i'm afraid to say. And most solicitors you could instruct also work for the LA on other cases, so if you are able, represent yourself. I got further representing myself (an EPO against the SS granted in my favour) then i ever did when i had a solicitor. I hated that she got invited to 'professional meetings' and didn't provide adequate feedback.. felt very much in the dark, not a good feeling when you're fighting tooth and nail for your child..
Local Authority solicitors are employees of the LA. Solicitors who act for parents (such as me) are in private practice. Yet another conspiracy theory....
Krystal, I think following the guides that were suggested up thread are good. I am a bit concerned that you are struggling to keep your focus on your kids. Be very sure that you have someone who is willing to be truthful read it first to make sure it does in fact keep the focus on the kids.
Many of the judges have a lot of experience with statements from parents who can talk the talk but not walk the walk.
LOL its not a conspiracy theory. A lot of solicitors have work contracted out to them.. mostly they are representing the child = they usually agree with the SS = in the pockets of the SS.
Anyway if thats the only problem you could find with my comment i suppose i should think myself lucky.
Oops my link was pants .. here it is again .. www.mumsnet.com/Talk/relationships/1574884-My-Experience-With-SS
Also you might try contacting this woman :
Expose the Tyrants of Child Protection
The Sun Jane Moore Twitter @JaneMooreSun 28th November 2012
It can no longer be ignored by those who purport to be in charge of this country that something is deeply rotten at the core of Britains Social Services.
Believe me, the case of the three Eastern European children removed from a loving home because their foster parents were members of UKIP is just the tip of the iceberg.
Lurking below in the murky depths of our ferociously secretive care system , will be hundreds if not thousands of similar cases where a gross abuse of power has helped to destroy the lives of the very youngsters it was set up to protect.
Hopefully they will now rise above the surface : expose the ugly, playing-God mindset , and prompt a dramatic overhaul of these tin-pot dictatorships more reminiscent of Stalinist Russia than a democracy.
Babies forced in adoption after being taken from mothers on a mere suspicion of future emotional abuse , fathers and paternal relatives denied access to children on nothing more than maternal hearsay, and prospective well-meaning fosterers and adopters subjected to the ridiculously stringent political correctness that is making the headlines right now.
All concluded under a cloak of secrecy that claims to be in the interests of the children involved but all too conveniently protects the increasingly warped system itself.
Dont get me wrong : There are plenty of frontline social workers doing a fantastic job in often deeply challenging sometimes harrowing circumstances.
That they are so poorly paid indicates that their motives for choosing to do it are well-intended.
But even they must be despairing of the lucrative industry that has sprung up around what was once the noble and pure intent to protect children but has seemingly morphed into the far uglier whiff of political or financial self-interest.
Roger Stone, the Labour leader of Rotherham council, says that while membership of UKIP should not prevent someone from fostering, this was a complex case (arent they all?) involving legal advice and an external agency responsible for finding the foster carers. Sounds expensive.
It could well be an outfit like the National Fostering Agency, set up by two former social workers in 1995 and sold earlier this year to venture capitalists Graphite for an eye-watering £130 million.
And by the way, its only the UKs second biggest private fostering business.
In other words, theres money in them there ills.
Then theres the outreach workers , the experts paid to provide statements to the courts, the states legal advisors , the independent legal advisors the guardians, the police workers, the court officials etc etc . All with a vested interest in child protection .
Little wonder then that, according to a Children in Need census, in 2007 the number of children and young people who were the subject to a Child Protection Plan was 27,900.
In April 2011, it was 42,700.
Plenty of those will be genuine cases where the work of social services has proved vital, in the spirit of its original ethos to act in the interests of the children.
But all to many will be based on nothing more than an unfounded suspicion , plunging one or both parents into a Kafka- esque nightmare, a punishment without crime.
And worst of all, those who suffer most are the children, emotionally damaged by the actions of self-interested zealots who affect to care .
We are used to case-centric inquires such as the one surrounding the Baby P scandal but its now time to shine a torch into the dark, secretive corners of the entire system to try to make its work and objectives more transparent while still maintaining anonymity for the vulnerable.
I think she makes some
big fat way out there bang on the nose valid points ..
I'm not sure this is helpful to Krystal though - she needs to show that her child will do best by living with her. Being angry, lashing out at SS etc is not going to be seen in a positive light. And at the end of the day it is a much less expensive option to keep children with their parents than in foster care.
Goodness, some of you are going to help make sure that Krystal really blows this opportunity .
Krystal, do please listen to the voice of reason on this thread and don't be sucked in by people who want you to serve as part of their agenda.
Some of the posters on this thread have been encouraging OP to take a one way ticket to having her children adopted.
It's important to remember every case is different. It's true some social workers get it wrong, or are downright incompetent just like in any other profession and the courts could improve their transparency but that is a long way from conspiracy and secrecy.
I'm sorry ThingsThatGoBumpInTheNight has such bad experiences but I can't see how going to the press would help the OP and it could make matters considerably worse. It is a criminal offence of contempt of court to disclose information about a child involved in court proceedings. I mentioned Vicki Haigh earlier on and she and her "adviser" were given prison sentences for contempt of court so it can happen.
SOME? LOL grow some balls and name me for crying out loud. As it is only me that has spoken out really against this..this, pathetic excuse for a LA. Ask anyone, google it, i dunno, the general advice now is to go LIP if you know what you're doing, which the OP looks like she does, or ask around for a good solicitor.
The only people that will fight and fight properly for your child is YOU, OP.
You can apply for costs and also instruct a barrister in the same way as a common or garden solicitor.
If you choose to get a solicitor, ask their record.. Ask wins/losses, what they think from their experience the outcome of your case is likely to be.
I'm telling you now, i bet they have nothing but hearsay. They WILL make things up, or if you're 'lucky' use your past, every tiny detail they can dredge up, if you've had a good past they will move onto the last option..
The next thing that will happen if this is the case, is the 'expert witness' paid by all the parties, (a fair amount as well, 5-7 grand?) to psychologically assess you using CAPI and MMPI. Me personally, i would refuse these under your human right not to undertake medical testing blah blah.. but the likelihood is you won't be worried to take it, being as the payment for it is shared between all the parties, or free for you if you're LIP, meaning it should be fair, right?
However, it may be paid by everyone, but the psychologist is instructed only by the SS as to what they need to know about you. When you get the report, check out the last few pages, it will tell you the working history of the psychologist. Do not be surprised if you see that they have worked VERY closely with social services in the past, or actually for them. The woman who did mine certainly had.
These people are not supposed to test you if you have been through a traumatic event. Moving house, a death in your close family... but they don't count having a child ripped from you .. funny that.
Anyway, lets say by some miracle (last proper count of them not finding a 'borderline personality disorder/personality disorder/mixture of personality disorders was less than 1%, not good odds..) you fly through and there is nothing wrong with you, your family, your past or your upbringing.
That you don't have to undertake the magic number of 2 years counselling or therapy need to 'cure you' this time period being JUST outside that considered in the best interests of the child, another point i thought i'd raise for interest..
Then the SS will move the goalposts. They will probably start talking about 'working together' at this point. When they do that its because they know they haven't got a leg to stand on. You will be asked to decorate this room, provide this, or that, if you say to them, you taking my child has led to such and such behavioural problems, they may say to you 'thats your problem' like the team leader of my LA did.. lol.. follow what they say then, do all the little piddly hoop jumping, don't ask for any help or support, get your baby home, and stay out from under their radar.
Good luck I'm sure you don't need it, you sound clued up.
PS going to the press can be done anonymously, later on, or not at all, i just posted it to show that the SS and what they are doing is finally coming under scrutiny.
The only agenda i have is to make sure that one day family courts are open, judges/social workers and their like are accountable, and have to be truthful, hearsay evidence will not count, children will not be taken for pathetic reasons, and they will not be assaulted, sexually abused, emotionally abused, by the 'care system'
Here ya go so no one can say i'm being one sided
Krystal.. don't just read the article, read the comments too x
Maybe it's not social services stealing the children. Maybe they've been abducted by aliens...
I'm not interested in arguing about the merits of SS involvement, tbh. Krystal posted asking for advice. It is her children who may be permanently removed from her care. She needs to take positive action to reassure the Courts that she is fit to parent and meet the needs of her two children.
Krystal's situation shouldn't be a stage for people with agendas to scare other people about Social Services
She posted asking for advice, rejected advice given as out of hand (a bit late and the 'advice' was to 'get a solicitor' which didn't exactly address the OP)
Feeling a bit silly now?
No such thing as aliens Collaborate, if you think there is maybe you also believe in reptilian shapeshifters
I like lougle's assertion that i must have an agenda simply because i haven't been giving the same advice as the rest of you sheeple who haven't been in either the OP's position or mine thank you very much so what do you actually know
as its december now
Presumably from that last post you've had your children removed by the courts as well?
Can I just say the social workers are never the ones that instruct psychologists. The questions that need answering are normally sent from the children's solicitor and even then all parties can ask questions. The letter of instruction is agreed between them all!!
As for la's usibg the same solicitors as families etc. again not the case, they have a legal team at the council, they may instruct a barrister who will be from the local chambers and they may be used by parents but usually they don't and cross examine witnesses Eric thieves.
The children's solicitor and the guardian represent the children and believe me they are very separate from the la and they can very often want different things
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.