to think that John Hemming is a dangerous man?

[Spero]

For all the Hemming apologists - please read this.

www.ministryoftruth.me.uk/2011/04/27/hemming-an-abuse-of-privilege/

Some of JH's points are valid. Some of the general criticisms of SS are valid.
But some of his ideas, views and suggestions are so far fetched, that they make him look idiotic, and discredit any of his semi-reasonable points.

yukoncher - who ever told you the judge had already made up his mind was simply wrong. Most judges find care cases exhausting because they realise the enormous consequences of the decisions they make. A judge may form a view on the evidence to date but in my experience they are always open and willing to hear fresh evidence. No judge that I have ever met wants to take a mother's baby away. Most of them are parents themselves and know full well the emotions and pain involved.

All I can say is that the clock is ticking very loudly when a baby is involved. Everyone is very anxious to make sure a baby has a safe and secure home as soon as possible. The damage done by not having a secure home and constant carer can be really serious. Most of my current clients did not have a secure and loving attachment with their parents or carers. This has left them with very serious emotional problems which continue to impact on their lives well into adult hood.

Very difficult decisions have to be made in these cases. I am not saying that the right decision is always made but that such decisions are not made lightly, on a whim or no evidence. As you say, your child's Guardian was trying to help.

This interesting article includes an interview with Fran Lyon

www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2007/09/20/105839/Fran-Lyon-Case-The-hidden-agendas.htm

That is right Oblomov.
He makes the whole thing a circus with him as the ringleader in a nice red coat with shiney gold buttons.

yukoncher - definitely, people need to know their rights. I really hope threads like this can help and thank you for sharing. I can't know how it feels but I assume it must be a hard thing for you to talk about.

Maryz - agree with every word you say.

Can you start up a website to try and counter all the 'forced adoption' poison???

It's bloody theraputic to get it out! :)

Spero you have experience with these court cases then?

I was told at the time the court child guardian was quite important, it wasn't the fostercarer, incase that's misunderstood.
I haven't found anything online explaining their role in the court.
Could you say their job description, just to confirm it in my own mind?

Fran Lyon is real. She is currently doing well with her little girl.

Trippy's case is not one I remember but if she emails me I will review my records and can then consider commenting further. Her child would not be 6 until July next year based on what she has said.

I only post on Mumsnet in my own name. I think it is a good idea for politicians to discuss things in online fora and to be accountable in that way.

I spoke recently to another MP who told me a of a case where the mention of his name caused the judge (who had previously not read the papers) to make a decision different to that which the local authority had requested.

I am beginning to agree.
Anyone really concerned should focus on helping, rather than demonising childrens' services full stop.

Yukoncher - the Guardian is appointed by the court to represent the child. The Guardian almost always has a lawyer too (but I have never seen the need for this as most Guardians are very experienced and know the law inside out!).

The Guardian's job is to inform the court about what she or he thinks is in the child's best interests. The Guardian should be visiting the child and parents fairly regularly thoughout proceedings.

If the child is old enough, a very important part of the Guardian's role is to speak directly with the child and report back to the court. If the child and the Guardian disagree, the child can instruct his own solicitors but the Guardian will remain involved.

The Guardian writes interim reports and a Final Analysis for the final hearing - a very important document. Generally the court will take what the Guardian says very seriously and will have to give reasons if the court goes against the Guardian's recommendations.

I have met Guardians of variable quality but only a few I thought were really bad - one hadn't seen my client for 8 months!! before the final hearing and got all sneery when I cross examined him, saying it wasn't his 'job' to visit parents. I said it was his job to at least assess for himself what the mother was up to and how she was coping. I thought he was a prick, but he was the worst so far. The best ones are brilliant and are more than happy to stand up to LAs when they disagree with them.

oh my gosh! I'm star struck!
I real celebrity in the same thread, Argh! :D

John Hemming's idea of what 'accountable' means obviously differs from mine.

Thank you very much for that Spero.
I think our child gaurdian was good, she seemed the only one in all of it to take into consideration my love for son.
So she and social services took opposing sides in court on whether I should have my son back. Me and the child guardian lost, and DS was adopted.
Is it unusual for that to happen?

It is unusal for the court to go against the Guardian, but it can happen. I had a sad case with a young mother who had already had three children by the time she was 17. A psychologist said she was benefitting from therapy and was really turning her life around and the Guardian supported our application for an adjournment of the final hearing to give her another few months to see what she could do in therapy.

The Judge was very against us; I think he found her past history too overwhelming and the LA were very clear that they wanted to find adoptive parents in the next few months and that no potential parents would even consider the child if they knew his mum was still fighting for him.

I felt very sad about that one because I felt that she did deserve that chance. But I couldn't advise an appeal because there was nothing in the Judge's decision that was wrong in law - he simply came down on the other side of the line from me and the Guardian and he gave clear, full reasons why.

This is why these cases are so hard. Often there is no 'right' answer, just the least worst answer at the time. And only time can tell if a decision will have a happy outcome.

Thanks for sharing this with me Spero.
I hope my DS when he's older, will be more reassured that I never did anything wrong to him, with the knowledge that the child gaurdian tried to help keep us together in court.
However, I'll tell him everything happens for a reason, and so his adoption was still meant to be, so he's still comfortable with it.

I take it the young woman you speak of, lost her 3 kids?

I appreciate these are rare cases still.

What is better now about the system is that everyone recognises the importance of people knowing their roots, where they came from. Adoptions used to be completely closed doors - some children were never even told they were adopted. Now, every child will go with a Life Story book that has photos of as many family members who are willing to give photos, you can put your details on a register so as soon as he is 18 he can look for you, you can have letterbox contact.

I am sure he will come to find you and I am equally sure he will be comforted beyond measure to know that you loved him and fought for him. I really don't see how anyone could blame you for being a child and struggling.

The young women with three kids had the first two with family members so she did still see them, but by the time the third came along there were no more family members who were able to take on a baby so he had to be adopted if he couldn't be with her. It was an utterly tragic case - she had her first baby at 14, was HIV positive and had been a drug abuser. She came from a chaotic and difficult background. I can only hope she carried on with the good work that she was doing as she had all her life ahead of her. But to carry that burden of three lost children must be so hard, I am not surprised it sinks some people.

I've got to go to bed now, all this child snatching and trampling on the rights of parents doesn't half take it out of you.

John Hemming - if you are still reading, I think you are a vile, dangerous man. I hope that this time you have gone too far and something is done to remove the cloak of respectibility that your position as MP gives you.

Why don't you prove me wrong? Review Trippy's case. Tell us how she's got it wrong and how your advice helped her.

Bet you don't.

I work with families where social services are involved, I can tell you horrendous stories (but I won't) about neglect. It takes a horrendous amount of evidence for a child to be removed. The main reason for that is that children almost always do better with their birth family than anywhere else so it's cheaper and more effective to keep children at home and support a struggling family than it is to take them out and into the care system. For that to happen it generally has to be bad or considered nto be in the immediate interests of the child (eg where there is an immediate risk of severe physical/sexual abuse).

JH does not and has never accepted this.

Trippy, please don't engage with this man.

Going back to Fran Lyons, from the links, wasn't there some worry in the first instance (and this was why SS first became involved IIRC?) of violence from her then partner towards the child? And then the stuff about her MH issues came out? So initially it wasn't actually FL that was a cause for concern, but who she was with?

I might have remembered that wrong, but fairly sure I read something of that ilk.

So the legends are true..

You say his name three times and he appears.

Quite.

john hemming - Now that you are here, would you mind explaining why you help (future) parents escape SS and therefore helping them break the law, rather than changing the laws themselves? That seems to be the problem some people on this thread have with you.

I remember Fran Lyon's story. She came on MN to post about it at the time. She was frightened and very grateful to John Hemming.

Whatever SS thought or didn't at the time, the mere fact that FL is right now living with her daughter and has not abused her in any way should make it obvious that SS was wrong to attempt taking her newborn from FL.