I want my baby back - Panorama

[Hels20]

I hesitate to put this on the board but would be interested in the views of anyone who watches this - it's tonight on BBC 1 at 9pm.

I hope it gives a balanced account. Then there is the Channel 4 programme on Wednesday T 10pm on Finding a Mum and Dad.

I agree with Devora - peace, read through some of the cases on family law week, it might reassure you - familylawweek.co.uk. Free to all, you don't have to pay anything.

Caiden, I don't understand what you mean.

SW can't remove children without court approval. The judge makes the decision, not them. So of course there is something you can do. You can engage with your (freely provided) lawyers and contest it in court. You then have a right of appeal.

Yes mistakes are made but I honestly think they are much, much less prevalent than some would have you believe. There is no conspiracy to steal children. There really isn't.

Spero - how do you know children are not being stolen? It is happening.

Here's a wall to bang your head on Spero!

All I can say is that in 15 years of practice, probably having poured over thousands and thousands of files of evidence, having attended 100s of court hearings and cross examined 100s of SW, I have never, ever, ever found any evidence to concern me that babies are being 'stolen'.

And when I ask the principle proponent of the baby snatching theory, Mr John hemming to provide me proof of his assertions, he send me one page of one document that PROVES THE OPPOSITE.

So send me your proof, and I will apologise and join your fight.

Until that happy and unlikely day, STOP terrifying vulnerable people.

Or I am going to seriously doubt both your sanity and your good faith.

Hairy, could you tell us why you think that, rather than just making a statement about it?

Right, I have got to walk the dogs. I will have to go, I have not been snatched by any SW or shamed into silence by any proponents of a conspiracy theory and will be more than happy to answer any questions on my return.

Hi Hairy

If you could provide some proof - any proof - of your statement, I'll withdraw my application to adopt on Monday.

Thanks.

I'm just wondering, question also open to spero et al - those who believe ss take kids willy nilly, what is their explanation for the children who should have been in care, like baby p? If it is so easy to lie and take children away, why are those who need it not taken?

and if the aim is to steal babies for adoption, why do they take so many children who aren't babies, cute, blond, blue-eyed (insert cliche of your choice) and are very hard to find adoptive homes for.

If their aim is to steal babies for adoption social workers are doing a rubbish job at it.

I think naming social workers in care proceeding could be the death knell of what is left of a beleagered profession.

I wouldn't do it - not in a million years. Does anyone know any country that names in the media the child protection professionals involved?

Beyond - IJ has said it is because they are black and or injured. Or something. But we know he is a cunt.

Any non cunt got an answer?

Kewcumber, the sheer bumbling ineptitude of the whole 'conspiracy' is the only thing that gives it any credence! When you see how woefully successive governments manage and control any major project, it almost makes sense...

My ex was in Intelligence - he was a massive fan of the cock-up over conspiracy theory and having met some people in the police force and inteligence community I can quite believe him.

Not that I think cock-up has any better results for individuals but it has a different solution that doesn't actually involve dragging more people into the problem as IJ and JH seem to want.

KewCumber

Following privacy laws, in Italy you can NOT name anyone without their consent. In cases involving minors under 18, papers and media cannot name them, they have to usual initials. ALWAYS.

Spero

He is the queen of the cunts lol

This was a heartbreaking show, and why oh why the children could not have been returned to these parents is beyond me. Social service is screaming out for adopters, wouldn't they have been better putting resources into keeping families together? I hope these children when they reach 18 sue the local authorities for removing them from their parents. None of these parents should have lost their children my heart especially went out for the 4 year old boy he should never have been adopted social services should have given the family more help and worked on getting to the bottom of what happened, the child obviously had a connection with his parents and grandparents, the adoption should be STOPPED. And other children who have been adopted and there is evidence mistakes was made the adoptions should be null and void. We wouldn't allow animals to be treated like this. Why should people have to go on the run with their children? Having just watched this with my mum she said had she have given birth to me nowadays I would probably be in care, as I was diagnosed with Chronic Juvenile Rheumatoid Arthritis when I was aged 2, but for the first 2 years of my life my mother had me back and forth to hospitals, she called ambulances she lied to get me seen by specialists and all said she was an overprotective mother and put her on vallium.

Luckybug, how would you actually make an adoption "null and void", perhaps years down the road?

And I don't think the comparison with animals is really on - children are not animals.

Hi Luckybug, welcome to Mumsnet.

Wow Luckybug I am so impressed at your insight into the situation given that you watched a programme made for TV and only giving the parents side of the situation!
Perhaps we don't need courts or law, we could rely on your wonderful insight after a short programme

Is this still going on? Have you organised shifts yet?

I'm gobsmacked with how patient some of you are. I have no idea where Spero finds the energy. Nuff respeck

Lucky bug, try reading the thread. And do just stop to think that we were only give one side of the story on this programme and that, if Social Services had been able to give their side, your perception might be different.

A civil servant acting on behalf of The Secretary of State for Education and the Department of Health (DH) has written a Response To Questions Raised After Panorama Progamme "I Want My Baby Back" It may be read at:
ccpexposed.wordpress.com/2014/02/11/reply-from-doe-in-response-to-questions-raised-after-panorama-progam/

It is interesting reading. Especially the issue as to under what circumstances the best interests of the child is the correct criterion to be used in deciding a course of action - and under what circumstances it is not.

I say the issue is interesting because, if that statement from the SoSfE & DH reflects HMG policy that that policy is incompatible with "ADOPTION AND CHILDREN: A HUMAN RIGHTS PERSPECTIVE" which is an Issue Paper prepared for and published by the Commissioner for Human Rights at the Council of Europe based on the treaty requirements set forth in the CoE's European Convention on Human Rights. It may be read at:
wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=1780157#P164_5489

In short the Dept. Health and the Council of Europe are at odds on this issue. One is right and the other is wrong. Or at least they can't both be right.

No-one disputes that best interests of the child is a valid consideration at some point in the process. The disputed issue is "at which point?".

Another case reported in the newspapers that appears to be on point. In this case the family actually did flee (that is to say travel illegally) as contrasted with legal emigration.
It cannot be coincidence that their case had been pending for some time but they used the underground railway just over 48 hours after the Panorama program was broadcast.
I'm sure more cases will come to light in time, the underground railway is, rightly or quite possibly wrongly, gathering momentum.
The elderly grandfather has been imprisoned and they are threatening to imprison the two grandmothers. As if that's going to change anything except create some folk heroes and get some criminals early release because of prison overcrowding.

Baby spirited away to Spain: 'lying' granddad jailed
www.getwestlondon.co.uk/news/local-news/baby-spirited-away-spain-lying-6712112
www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Fam/2014/303.html

I'm not sure what your point is. The grandfather was quite rightly imprisoned. We know no facts of this case other than that the parents are drug addicts, social services allowed them to live with their own parents so that if they are under influence of drugs, child hopefully won't be neglected and they decided to run away to Spain.

I think the fact that SS had allowed child to live with drug addicted parents, albeit under eye of child's grandparents, shows how desperate SS are to keep families together.

I'm not sure what your point is. The grandfather was quite rightly imprisoned.

That was my point, he is rightly imprisoned. Bearing in mind the date of imprisonment (31 January 2014) he will (by my calculation) be released on Monday and come home to a hero's welcome. Which, in my opinion, is counterproductive, more money spent and for what?