Childrens rights v the rights of the (criminal) father. Disgusted..yes, Horrified..absolutely, surprised..Sadly, no.

[littlemisssarcastic]

Unless this article is completely fabricated?

This is just one example imo of how children are not always protected in our society, and that sometimes, the 'human rights' of abusive parents do come before the rights of the children.

Here

Shame the article came from DM- people are failing to grasp the point now.

"Difference is that the DM doesn't issue orders on a daily basis that affect children's lives, the courts do"

Exaclty- people are putting their head in the sand, with the excuse "its the daily mail".

What a relief for the courts not having to justify their stupidity and enabling.

To be honest if it were me and my kids they would have to find my first

I would be off to Ireland and they would have to wrestle my kids from my cold dead hand even supervised visits

babybarrister speaks sense. I recommend posters read her link before getting hysterical. I too work in family law and I have faith the system protects vulnerable children and has a child's best interests at heart. I have faith because I have knowledge, experience and expertise in the area. Sensationalist journalists do not. Nor, I suspect do many of the posters here. That makes the responses understandable.

Yes Im sure you do kitten

I absolutely do. So it's glitterkitten LLb to you!

On top of the LLB there's the year LPC, the two years training, several years PQE, and daily court experience. So perhaps I actually do know more about the system than you.

You p**d me off. So have a back

My point is that judges are not infallible and are not always to be trusted to do the right thing for the children.
Quite often Sometimes, they do what is in the best interests of the NRP, regardless of how this affects the children.

I have no faith in family courts anymore, and that's not just because of one or two newspaper articles. I do not believe judges have the best interests of the child in the forefront of their mind. I also do not believe that solicitors have the best interests of the children in mind, their primary motive imvho is to secure terms of contact which their client finds satisfactory.

Apparently, CAFCASS have the children's best interests at the forefront of their agenda's but as I have seen time and time again, CAFCASS are not always successful or effective in ensuring children are kept at the forefront of the judge's agenda.

If as a country we were to put the children first, we wouldn't even be entertaining the idea of a paedophile having unsupervised access to a child. We would also be much tougher on making sure that the NRP's who, at present, face virtually no consequences whatsoever that I can see for failing to take responsibility for their DC would face much tougher consequences, and the law wouldn't tolerate NRP's who do not see or do not financially support their DC.

At present, the system seems to be very favourable imo towards irresponsible NRP's who bleat on about their rights with little if any consideration for their DC and their DC's feelings. If as a nation, we are serious about putting the children first, perhaps the first step shouldn't be to relax the rules further for NRP's who are sex offenders, but to force encourage NRP's who are irresponsible to be responsible??

littlemiss I agree with many of your posts. The system isn't perfect, it isn't infallible, it could be improved but it doesn't have as it's motive to place a child at risk. It's not a dark force of evil where judges rub their hands together with glee whilst allowing a child contact with NRP's. All decision making is an application of the Children Act Welfare Checklist, often with expert input, a child having it's own rep via a guardian and lengthy proceedings.

Please also remember these are the very courts who are lambasted by DM and on here for being too quick to assume a child is at risk, being too cautious. So are the courts OTT? Too lax? Or just doing a generally good job with only the extremes being reported?

glitterkitten If you truly believe that the system protects vulnerable children (Aren't all children vulnerable btw? ) then I assume that you work within a system where there are no children (where it is known to the family courts) who are still living in abusive households, even after the abuse has been carefully documented, sometimes by the police, where the children are provided for by both parents, and the parents are told what contact is best for their children, based on what a neutral party has decided ie CAFCASS, rather than the parents deciding for themselves, where NRP's are not denied contact by a RP if a court has ordered it and where a child who is at risk of abuse sees their NRP under supervision? I would also assume that you work in a system which punishes parents who neglect the needs of their children in favour of their own needs?

Please would you tell me where I, and many other parents on here can access this system to resolve any contact or maintenance issues effectively in the best interests of the children? I'm sure I'm not alone when I say that there are a huge number of parents, on here alone, who would be very grateful for that information.

TIA

Well I suspect your daily exposure has totally prejudiced you into the courts wholly dense way of thinking glitter. The courts are plain erroneous in their handlings in many cases including my own.

Lucky you never been on the wrong end of it, huh?

So what pisses me off, is you having the audacity to claim only you have experience of significance.

Do not have the audacity to tell other posters they have no experience; they are the ones with the real experience that effects them 24/7 for the rest of their lives.

We and our wonderful children are not some open and close case that cease to be affected the minute we leave the court room. This is our lives

I'm very aware of that coco. furthermore I'm a mother. Give me some credit!

All I can say is that my experience of the Court system leads me to have faith in it's motives. I didn't mean to upset you, it's clearly a sore point.

Yes it is a sore point- a very sore one. I feel utterly let down for my child.

Yes I am not in court everyday but I am left with the nightmares of courts mishandlings everyday.

But its ok- I just didnt like to be told I have no experience because I do.

I agree glitterkitten that judges and solicitors get no joy whatsoever out of what is probably quite frequently a frustrating process where abusive or neglectful NRP's continue to have their rights upheld to the detriment of the children.

I don't understand why courts are not tougher with neglectful or abusive parents though, whilst still claiming they are working within the best interests of the child. Clearly the two are poles apart. As a nation, we cannot claim to be working within the best interests of the child if we are turning a blind eye to the neglect and abuse some children are suffering.

All parents should be held accountable if their actions or non actions are causing the child to be neglected or abused, and similarly if their actions or non actions are having a negative effect on the child's emotional growth and development.

I see NRP's choosing not to support their children financially.
I see NRP's who don't bother to adhere to contact, and are given chance after chance after chance to change contact to suit them more and they still don't bother.
I see NRP's who are abusive to their children, and who dump their children on the new partner while they go out and nothing is done.
I see RP's living in abusive situations where the children are adversely affected and the courts are aware and nothing is done.
I see RP's refusing responsible NRP's access to the children and nothing is done.

If we are to look at the situation from a completely unemotive point of view, where does the system currently solely look after the childs best interests??

Excellent post littlemiss

I think exactly the same as you.

Since when did interent access become a "human right"? Does that in turn mean that anyone not living in the UK without internet access in thier country will be able to get some sort of refugee status?

I can say this much anyway regarding the article, I couldn't give a a rats ass about a pedophile's human rights in this situation (or in most situations if I am perfectly honest) and that in the mother (or father's) shoes I would fuck off out of the country and not be found again.

Even if visits are supervised would you leave a child to sit in a known child abusers vicinity for "the pedophile"'s sake? Imagine as a woman what it would be like to be forced to sit with a known rapist?

It must be a horrible situation for the children to know what they are looking at.

Damn right Southern

Its all very well for the court to order x, y,z whilst forgetting their are vunreable children you are damaging on the other end of this order- not to mention the other parent.

Imagine being forced that you have to give your child to an abuser- even for an hour. If anyone can say they would be happy with that, well....

Did any of you dingbats read Lilymaid's link before you started shitting your pants in outrage, or were there too many long words in it for you or something?

Who care's what the link says? Face reality, quit your make- believe- this is people lives that have already lived.

They do not need a link or newspaper article

Imagine being forced that you have to give your child to an abuser

I can't even bring myself to think about it :( Surely being forced to to give up your kids to a pervert is a violation of the mother's human rights too coco. So sorry for any of you who have had to go through this.

Iam confused as to why some people are arguing against a blanket ban, not having a full ban leaves it all up to human error.

If you want to see your kids - don't rape and abuse other children or look at kiddy porn. pretty simple really

Fuck off SGB you nasty piece of work. Judges in the UK have let child rapist off because "the girl looked older" because the child was "dressed slutty" all sorts of shit. If this were a feminst issues instead of a child one you'd be screaming your little head off.

Have any of you posters with Orders that you believe are so damaging considered taking the matter to court to vary it? Did you get advice on why an appeal shouldn't be sought? The effect on the mothers mental health is also something the courts can be invited to consider, and would.

Sigh. The point is that the law has to be structured to be fair and reasonable - a badly-framed law that's cobbled together to soothe dimwits who have been reading sensationalist newspaper reports will cause more trouble than it prevents. It's not just about allowing nonces free access to kids on the grounds of Human Rights.

just re read that post of mine and realised it could come across as a crass patronising insult and that was not my intention!!

What I meant that if there is such a negative effect on you and your family as a result of the order, take further advice about how you can convey this best to the court.