Hi Spero,
I'm just being honest with how I feel. I was in an abusive relationship several years ago, and the person who abused me threatened me that if I reported the abuse, he would cite me as unstable, because I had suffered depression and anxiety in my past. I held back reporting the abuse because of it, and spent my pregnancy in utter terror.
I have learned from various women's centres, that this is common in domestic violence cases. Mothers are threatened by perpetrators, and because of the law as it is, in that parents do risk losing their children, when accusations are made, and from their past health being questioned, many victims do feel afraid to seek help.
It was an awful situation to be in. If mental health wasn't exploited in courts of law, as it is, I believe it would help many abuse victims, as well as mothers who suffer post natal depression - in seeking help. This would be in children's best interests.
I do understand if a child has fractures, or broken bones, precautionary measures should be put in place, of course, whilst investigations are ongoing, but removing children into a care system, in that children are abused, seems wrong. Court proceedings are extremely lengthy, and children being torn apart from their families is psychologically damaging. Surely it would make more sense to place children with their extended families (if CRB, and character checks are carried out?)
I have known people in private court proceedings, who have had information offered in-accurately, and selectively by court reporters, and it is a frightening prospect thinking that this could happen in care cases.
I think it would be a re-assurance to many parents, if there was more transparency, and for cases in that there is 'reasonable doubt', parents be allowed to speak out about it.
I think parents should be allowed to see all of the evidence in bundles, in advance, because without it how can they contest it? And offer evidence to disprove it? If there are in-accuracies, how can they point them out?
I don't think the wheels should start in motion, for forced adoption, if there is any chance of doubt, in public law cases, because once children are adopted, there is no turning back. Parents have lost their children wrongly, and despite judges later making findings to this effect, children are not returned.
I have experience with court, and I know that in-accuracies can happen. People have pointed out how the DM offers stories selectively - what needs to be understood, is that sw's and court reporters, can offer information to judges in exactly the same way. Thankfully the majority of sw's are wonderful, and have children's best interests at heart. But there will always be bad apples - this is just life - it applies to every job sector.
Court reporters can offer damning reports to the court, very easily. I'll give you an example: a parent suffered depression in their past, alcohol misues as a teenager, and self-harm (perhaps they were raped, and this affected them in their teenager years.) Several years later the mother has a baby, she seperates from the father, and during a custody dispute, he cites her as mentally unstable, knowing that in her past she suffered problems.
A good court reporter would look at the evidence, in relation to the child: Is the child well looked after by the mother? Hitting all of her mile-stones? Happy - healthy? It would also be recorded in the report that the mothers past health problems are in her past.
A bad court reporter would offer to the judge 'history of alcohol misuse, self-harm, and depression'. It's not just newspapers that offer information selectively.
Imagine if this happened in a care case, it would be devastating. Judges can only make decisions based on what they have in front of them.
There have also been cases publicised, in that opinions were used to take children. I don't think children should be removed based in opinion alone, opinions will always be subjective, and could be wrong.
I think facts should be offered in court reports, but that all the facts should be offered, not selectively.
Maybe somebody can think of a better idea to improve things?