to think Rotherham council have lost the plot over UKIP foster-carers?

[londonone]

bbc

I really really hope there is more to this than is being reported, otherwise I am utterly speechless.

Quote from Nigel Farage (UKIP leader) on this

'It was the Labour government that opened the doors to uncontrolled mass immigration into this country on a scale that we have never seen in the history of the island. And then anybody who tries to discuss or debate the issue is written off as being racist.'

I don't think they're racist. I don't think it's good for the welfare of a child in an emergency foster care placement - who was apparently calling them Mum and Dad - to have their carer being openly anti immigrant. That child's parents are immigrants. That child may be an immigrant. It can't be good for them to effectively hear their family attacked.

Because IMO they are xenophobic bigots who are trying to put an acceptable face to idiotic policies. Nigel Farage is one of the most disingenuous people, today you can see evidence of it. He's on BBC peddling a lie about how the foster carers were struck off the foster carers list, when all that happened was the council took the decision to remove these particular children from their care. That's not even remotely the same thing.

you honestly think that after deciding they are 'racist' the council would give them any other children to foster? Of course they wouldn't.

It seems there is now to be an investigation. I suspect the social workers concerned will be sacked.

UKIP states unequivocally that 'Multiculturalism has split our society'. And that immigration should be frozen - and that's their public face.

Their manifesto was co-written by Aidan Rankin, who has also written for and has links with Third Way, a breakaway from the Nazi National Front.

So - ethnic minority children have been placed with a couple who belong to and subscribe to an organisation that believes that those children are from families who have wrecked 'our' society, and that those children should not be in this country in the first place.

Once this was known, the children were removed from that couple's care.

I can't see the problem.

Why should they be sacked?

Does anyone seriously think it's a good idea to have the children of eg Polish immigrants placed with people who are very strongly anti immigration? do you think those DC won't pick up on their comments?

This is no better than McCarthyism.

Surely if they support a political party who seem to mostly trade on not wanting multiculturalism or immigration then they are probably not the best people to foster children who are immigrants of a different culture?

Is it really for the best for children to be placed with people who are likely to talk to them about multiculturalism being wrong? Surely that's not going to do the kids any favours? And isn't that the important bit? Rather than worrying about offending the foster parents?

Do we know that they've been stopped from fostering totally, or is it just that it was decided that immigrants were probably not best placed with people who disagreed with immigration?

My understanding is that UKIP want tighter controls on immigration - and they think 'multiculturalism' hasn't worked and that a 'uniculturalism' should be encouraged.

You could argue that makes them more right leaning but I don't think susbscribing to those views makes you inherently racist.

Leave the political theory to one side and look at the welfare of the DC.

Is it a good idea for the children of immigrants (who may well be immigrants themselve) to be cared for by people who are openly anti immigration and believe that it has caused many of the ills of our society? Do you want DC looked after by people whose views are likely to make them ashamed of who they are.

"Is it really for the best for children to be placed with people who are likely to talk to them about multiculturalism being wrong? Surely that's not going to do the kids any favours? "
I really don't understand this.

how do you know the couple think that?

And I don't think it makes them racist. I think it makes them a bad choice for these DC.

Why are they "idiots" for being UKIP members?

Because when it boils down to it, MN is more left-wing than the SWP.

There's very little room for any opinion which is anywhere to the right of Lib Dem.

It's sad but unfortunately true.

They didn't simply vote UKIP. They joined the party. So presumably they feel strongly about their policies.

From the UKIP website:

'Last year we had more arrivals than ever before (239,000 - that we know of!). Almost 500 million EU citizens are entitled to work, live and claim benefits in the UK. Britain no longer has control over her borders. This is driving unemployment up and wages down. It is causing enormous strains on housing, schools and hospitals. Britain?s borders are now effectively North Africa, Russia and Turkey; not the White Cliffs of Dover.'

UKIP's immigration policy states the party wants an 'end [to] the active promotion of the doctrine of multiculturalism by local and national government'

Would you consider these views compatable with looking after the children of immigrants who have a different culture and language which would need to be supported?

Cozy Saying that multiculturalism doesn't work is hardly going to be the best thing to tell children from another culture. Maybe this couple wouldn't ever tell the children their views, but it can't be guaranteed, and while you may shout about thought police/1984, what it boils down to is protecting the children. Who I presume have had a rough enough life in order to be put into foster care in the first place.

The welfare of the children is always, and completely rightly, paramount.

The feelings of the foster carers will always come second - that is the whole point of foster caring - to do whatever is necessary to give the best possible care to children who have not had that care in the past, for whatever reason.

If the local authority have any concerns whatsoever that a particular set of carers are not the best possible option for a particular child or children, then they are quite right to move them to somewhere they feel is better suited to their needs. It has been recognised for a long time now that a child's cultural and ethnic identity is important and needs to be recognised and supported. It is part and parcel of caring for that child.

If the local authority had concerns about a foster carer's ability to provide a proper diet for a child with allergies or cultural dietary requirements, they would place them elsewhere. If they had concerns about a carer's ability to support an emotionally disturbed child, they would place them elsewhere. If they had concerns about a carer's ability to physically cope with a child with serious disabilities they would place them elsewhere.

In this case they have concerns about the carers' ability to appropriately nurture these children's cultural identity, so they have placed them elsewhere.

The carers should be able to accept that a decision has been made that these particular children are better served in a different environment. Going public rather smacks of this all being about them, rather than about the children.

Narked

Leave the political theory to one side and look at the welfare of the DC.

Is it a good idea for the children of immigrants (who may well be immigrants themselve) to be cared for by people who are openly anti immigration and believe that it has caused many of the ills of our society? Do you want DC looked after by people whose views are likely to make them ashamed of who they are.

Balderdash. D'you think the foster parents are so cretinous that they can't separate their care of children from their political views? Your contempt for the foster parents is palpable.

"Who does it benefit?"

The children.

You know, the important ones in all of this sorry mess.

Amusing to hear McCarthyism cited in this context. Does anyone remember who was being rooted out by McCarthy? Answers on a postcard...

MurderOfGoths

Cozy Saying that multiculturalism doesn't work is hardly going to be the best thing to tell children from another culture. Maybe this couple wouldn't ever tell the children their views, but it can't be guaranteed, and while you may shout about thought police/1984, what it boils down to is protecting the children. Who I presume have had a rough enough life in order to be put into foster care in the first place.

What is multiculturalism?

It's a serious question. What actually is it? I don't think that you, or any of the other Guardian-reading latte-sipping Islingtonites, actually know.

I'll tell you what it isn't. It isn't Ebony and Ivory, Living Together In Perfect Harmony. It isn't everyone being friends and getting on. It isn't social harmony.

And it is not remotely equivalent to McCarthyism or 1984.

They aren't being told what they should believe, or even what they should vote. They aren't being punished for their beliefs. They aren't even being told what beliefs they should or should not pass on to their own children.

They simply aren't being felt to be suitable to do one of the most delicate and difficult jobs that anyone can do.

Foster carers are required to meet spectacularly high standards - standards that many of us would probably fail to meet on the basis of our bog-standard, day-to-day parenting. There are all sorts of things that they are allowed to do with their own children but not with those who have been entrusted to their care.

One of those things is clearly not to expose them to anti-multicultural beliefs.

"The children.

You know, the important ones in all of this sorry mess. "
How does it benefit the children to be brought up in the culture of another country from the one they live in?

Multiculturalism is (IMO) different cultures being able to coexist, obviously it requires huge amounts of compromise to work. Just because it is hard doesn't mean it isn't worth striving for. What is the alternative really? That we are all the same? Never going to happen.

Well Cozy is a beautiful illustration of the attitudes of sone people.

Even if they would have supported eg language classes, people's attitudes come out in day to day life. When they discuss something that's in the news. When they are talking to friends. When 'immigrant' is a negative to the foster carers and the children are immigrants or their parents are, the children will get that message.

One of the DC was already calling them mum and dad. They were obviously very good carers. They were bonding fast. One of the DC is described as a baby. The danger isn't the DC being mistreated because of their origins, it's that the DC would come to view their origins and their birth family as something negative and undesirable.