Former teacher guilty of sexually abusing and murdering baby boy he wanted to adopt - CPS

And that's why nothing changes.

Yet there is case after case of abusive men being given access to children even though it is accepted they abused the children's mothers. These are the cases that are undeniable, because the men went on to kill the children. There are hundreds more children being abused, who the public will never know about.

https://www.channel4.com/news/the-19-children-killed-by-a-domestic-abuse-perpetrator

Extract:Twelve-year-old Jack Sykes and his nine-year-old brother Paul did not want contact with their father. He’d been violent and abusive to their mum, Claire.He’d humiliated and frightened them.But the family courts decided they had to have contact with him after their parents separated and on one of the court ordered visits, he killed them both.[...]
Claire Throssell says she laid out exactly the risk her ex posed, a man she says couldn’t even contain his anger during the hearing. The court gave him access to the boys anyway.

“I’d written in my court application that he was capable of killing the boys. He’d already stated that he understood why fathers killed the children. He had already been violent to me. He’d been abusive to the boys. I knew the boys weren’t safe with him. They knew they weren’t safe with him. He’d gone for me outside court. He couldn’t contain his temper within the courtroom, he was told to be quiet, and the judge allowed him to still shout at me across this room.”

https://womensaid.org.uk/nineteen-more-child-homicides/

As I said, the only thing that is ever going to stop this is the fear of legal action from survivors.

If I make the wrong decision at work and someone suffers harm or dies as a result as a result of me ignoring information that was right in front of me, I have the potential to be criminally prosecuted as well as sued, and I'm paid less than a social worker or a judge.

There are nowhere near enough adopters at the moment. Yes, there are more adopters wanting babies than older children, but there are not as many adopters as children in nearly every category (e.g. baby, older child, siblings).

Whilst men pose a greater risk to children than women do, you are correct in asserting that all suspicions should be followed up and there should be no one deemed above suspicion.

When I first read about baby Preston, I couldn’t stop crying. That poor, innocent child—the horror he had to endure during his life is unimaginable.

I watched a video of Varley’s reaction upon hearing about Preston’s death (in the hospital). During his fake hysterical breakdown, he shouted, “I’m going to hell!”

He clearly knew that the depraved crimes he committed against that child would come to light. He knew he would go to prison and he knew what awaited him there.

Hell.

I read recently that prisoners in cat A prisons have a list of high profile killers that they want rid of.
Ian Huntley, Ian Watkins and Kyle Bevan have already been offed. Wayne Cousens is rumoured to be on it.
I reckon these two pieces of sub human detritus will be joining the list soon

Similar to the case in Keighley (Star Hobson) involving two women in a same sex relationship. Concerns were repeatedly raised by the grandparents but they were accused of homophobia and their worries were dismissed by social workers.

It makes sense if you think a baby is a sex toy, which at least one of these men did.

I was always under the impression (I may be wrong, but recall that being the experience of friends of mine who'd adopted) that babies of Preston's age were in the highest demand from potential adopters, with older male children the hardest to place. Is there a shortage of adoptive parents for babies or is it more for older kids?

You are missing my point. This is from an earlier poster's comment and are the sort of post I am referring to

"The foster mother was eager to just extend the foster period a little, so she could keep him until grandmother was strong enough. Social workers would not allow anything so obviously in the best interests of the baby. Not if it spoiled their aim of ticking a box on gay ideology."

I am not suggesting that the fact they were men, or gay, can be discussed. I am pointing out that this is not how the care proceedings and adoption process work.

Apparently 'semen' was found in his stomach contents. DNA was from one of the men. Im not sure how true this is, but ive read this in several places now. And with the beyond awful reports we have all heard... Ive no doubt this is true. Those two pieces of total shit need justice delivered in prison and very quickly.

It just doesn’t make sense why he’d try to adopt a baby if he intended to treat them badly. It is the most callous, calculated and horrific thing I’ve heard in ages. Poor baby.

Bastards. Some people don’t deserve to live.
The poor jurors who had to hear all the evidence.

Yet another innocent child has lost their life because of disgusting, specimens of Men.

What has sickened me is the reaction to the guilty verdict by Varley. Apparently he put his hands to his face before collapsing to his knees, retching and vomiting. He knows he was guilty, so why behave in such a strange manner. Does he know what awaits him in jail do you think?

A child is dead and he vomits because he’s found guilty. Oh please!

Someone cut his balls off!

There is a desperate shortage of both adopters and foster carers. Personally I don't think approving non monogamous couples is the answer, not by a long shot.

I do think it is interesting though that men are being placed with babies these days - see also social media stars Matthew and Ryan and baby Lincoln.

When i adopted in 2001, babies mostly went to traditional couples. There has been a huge shift.

For the longest time, ethnicity was the big matching criteria. I don't know if this was a factor in this case. It could explain why these men were chosen over other prospective adopters available.

I have already mentioned that I think that sws love male adopters because they think they will cope better with challenging teenage behaviours, especially among boys.

I think most people are talking about within the adoption placement and the matching itself, not the decision to remove Preston from his birth mother in the first place. Have I misunderstood or is that what you're saying about the care plan? That's an earlier stage surely? Before looking for a suitable match for adoption? I don't think people were referring to "woke" potentially being involved at that stage at all,

We do need to be able to talk about the adoption matching process itself though and whether it is vigorous enough or fit for purpose (it's not just this case, obviously and it has many facets ). As, I'm sure, will any subsequent investigation.

Absolutely agree.

Often adopted children don't even know who the birth dad is. He may have been a minor figure in the birth mother's life. He may well have been abusive - men often target vulnerable girls for access to their existing children.

But every adopted child knows who their birth mother is and then the question arises: "why didn't she look after me?"

My adopted children never gave their birth father (a very dark figure) a moment's thought but they were consumed by why their birth mother didn't care for them.

This taps into society's expectations about how mothers should behave but also something vital within the children themselves. They were not removed straight after birth, they spent months (younger daughter)/ years (older daughter) being neglected by birth mother and even though they can't physically recall it, they experienced it and it is in there, and therapy can't touch it.

There is a theory called the Primal wound which relates more to babies removed at birth, like Preston was. It is about the sudden loss of the person you have been attached to for 9 months and how it impacts the child longer term.

So mothers can be tricky in adoption in a way that the dads aren't.

Here is some other info https://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&client=ms-android-samsung-rvo1&source=android-browser&q=why+do+adopted+children+have+mother+issues#lfId=ChxjMe

I cant believe anyone would defend these monsters!!! It's sickening.

Of course people should be allowed to raise this as an issue. There's a long history of some people believing that certain groups are unchallengeable because they're a "sacred caste".

Yes it's difficult and challenging but when we're looking at children's safety and wellbeing we must be able to think the unthinkable. Predators rely on being able to bully others into silence and many posters have raised thoughtful and challenging issues about all this.

That would be my suspicion too.

I am a trainee social worker and am wondering how long I might last in my eventual job once I graduate. As a cynical middle aged woman, a feminist and blessed with a healthy level of suspicion (especially around men) I don’t expect I’ll find it at all easy. My current job involves clinical coding and summarising and absolutely nothing about people shocks or surprises me these days, but I’ve been thoroughly sickened by this case.

I am in the extremely fortunate position that I need not have any designs on a ‘career’ in social work and will be able to question and be a fully paid up member of the awkward squad should it be necessary.

My own personal view, that I obviously will never express openly, is that rapists and child abusers should be surgically castrated, with no recourse to compensatory prescription hormones. I don’t relish the talk of retribution in jail for these men, but can completely understand the anger that posters on the other thread are feeling.

R.I.P. Preston.

@Scout2016, so what do you say to @CraftandGlamour’s post above about adoption agencies being “encouraged” to consider “non monogamous couples”?

I suggest that all-male couples shouldn't be allowed to adopt, not because they are same-sex attracted, but because there is no woman present.

Likewise, I suggest that men shouldn't be allowed to serve as DSLs.

The risk to children is men: gay, straight, bi, black, white, arabic, asian, old, young, whatever, they are all MEN.

They must have training on cognitive bias though? And reflective practice?