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.

Explain anti immigration vs anti immigrant to a 5 year old. As a major figure in their life. Congratulations, you've just passed on your political view on the subject. And you're not (AFAIK) a member of a political party who view immigration as a major problem. And the imaginary 5 year old isn't the children of immigrants.

These DC will have to deal with anti-immigration/immigrant comments in their lives. It will be something they discuss with whoever cares for them.

Being anti-multiculturalism doesn't actually mean that you are anti-immigrants. It just means that you think the prevailing culture of the country should be the vaguely liberal-humanist-middle-of-the-road, muddling-along culture that has served Britain well. It means placing this native culture above, say, a culture that treats women like secondhand citizens, or one that has very strict religious ties. It doesn't mean that immigrants can't enjoy their own cultures, or that non-immigrants can't join in with them, too. For instance: a few years back I went to a French Epiphany celebration. My mother went to a Hindu wedding party last week.

I think it's time we admitted that the child protection profession has itself become too policitised to be effective any longer. We need to sit down and rewrite the rule book from scratch as a matter of national urgency.

Over politicisation and lack of objectivity has led to one too many scandals - I personally can't get over the Rochdale scandal. Those poor girls were failed repeatedly by idiots more interested in chasing the current social meme than child protection at all levels. The Baby P scandal would never have happened had the father of Baby P been listened to, and allowed to take care of his own child with the aid of his ex MIL. Yet that case has led to a crazy zealotry and all sorts of rushed fear-based descision making.

The family courts are an unaccountable mess - as so many ordinary seperating couples can attest to.

Slovakia of all places is currently taking our government to the European Court over our lunatic CP methods - so far removed from other nations have our processes become. I can only hope the Slovakians win, as the UK as a nation seems to unable to police this critical area of government effectively.

Of course. Let's not pay any attention to the fact that it was an emergency placement, never meant to be long term, or that the children of immigrants might be better being cared for by foster parents who aren't member of a political party who blame immigration for many of the problems in society and, amongst other things, want 5 year residency for non-uk citizens to be able to claim benefits - because of course that's why they come here . Let's just base it on the fact that the Conservatives have lost voters to UKIP and it's good press to reverse the decision. Forget the children.

And Labour have been just as keen to hop on the bandwagon.

We can acknowledge the political bias of the Telegraph and still read the quotes from the foster parents and see that they sound like they were more than sensitive to the cultural needs of these children.

I'd have posted from the Guardian but they've just put in a small quote from the foster parents.

This is why after a life time of being a labour supporter I've given up allowing partisan politics colour my opinion and take each situation as it comes without automatically assuming someone is right or wrong because of the newspaper they read.

In fact, lets just ignore all the guidelines. I'm sure none of you would mind foster carers taking DC to protest in front of an abortion clinic, or to hand out copies of the Socialist Worker.

I came on here thinking there would be universal condemnation of Rotherham Council - I am that there are people who are saying it was the right decision.

Don't you know how hard it is for loving homes to be found for needy children?!

Rotherham Council have said the foster parents were providing a good standard of care. This presumably means they were definitely not being 'racist' towards these children. There's no insinuation that they were being anything but good carers. So, fgs, leave them to it!!

Rotherham Council, go do your meddling, unpleasant, thought policing elsewhere. If the children are being mistreated then, yes, rush in. But that was not the case here.

It sounds like Rotherham Council are about to reverse the decision.

Will the people who have come on here to support the original decision and Rotherham council now have the grace to admit that they were wrong about this as well?

FWIW I think the foster carers should be judged on their actions and by all accounts these were very good carers who have done nothing wrong.

Not everyones experience of "multicultural Britain" is the same as yours, MrsDever. Not everyone can afford to live in Islington, for one thing.

UKIP want a similar system to Australia, not something I want this country to work towards

what are the projecting onto immigrant children

of course it is the right decision

mrs devere

Many public servants are not allowed to express political views or affiliate themselves to a particular party. It is there in black and white when you sign up for your job.

So is the rule that no foster carer can ever be a member of a political party as it is with the police? If not then you can't pick on one particular party. I think many socialists views are abhorrent and have been proven to lead to millions of deaths, I don't think members of the SWP should be banned from fostering.

narked
I'm sure none of you would mind foster carers taking DC to protest in front of an abortion clinic, or to hand out copies of the Socialist Worker.

But there is no suggestion that the people concerned have taken any active part in UKIP campaigning at all, just joined the party.

And just because they have joined UKIP does not make them racist or even anti immigration. Do you all support every single policy of the party you support? It is most likel they are just anti the ridiculous waster of money that is the EU.

What next?

People who are Tory members not being able to foster disabled children because the Tories are cutting disability benefit. People who vote Labour not being able to look after upper class children because they might be anti-elitist.

There is NO EVIDENCE that the couple were doing anything other than bringing up the children with love and care.

Those of you who think this is ok clearly want a thought police and would be happier in Russia, China or maybe North Korea.

Rotherham council have been forced to change the decision. By Gove throwing his weight around. On the basis of what plays well in the press, not what's best for the DC.

On the basis of what most people the country think is fair and reasonable, I think you mean. It is not "best for the DC" to be shunted from childrens home to foster home to childrens home on the basis of foster parents political views.

Wasn't Rotherham Council one of those criticised for failing to deal properly with grooming of young girls in their care? I'd laugh, if it weren't so utterly tragic for the children these dickheads are supposed to look after.

They're the children of EU immigrants. The foster carers have joined a party whose main policy is anti EU/anti immigration.

How many N Irish Catholic children are fostered by members of the Orange Order?

The whole thing is ridiculous.

Perhaps some Christians shouldn't be allowed to keep children either, their homophobic views against same sex marriages might rub off onto their children.
CofE kids will grow up in a sexist environment where women are deemed not worthy of certain roles.

Honestly, it's pathetic. Like some people mentioned up thread, there has to be more to it because you cannot take children away because of political or religous beliefs.

Seems like the children were happy and thriving. Seems like their cultural identity was being more than acknowledged. Sounds like the children felt safe and happy with this couple.

I'm not sure how that is political point scoring or just fact. The council have acknowledged that they were a nice couple and good foster parents.

I wonder if the couple were guilty of some political ignorance - maybe not understanding fully how Ukip policies are seen by others.

We need to be more accepting - not less and Rotherham council have made assumptions of racism without any proof of racism based on supporting Ukip.

Again, this was an emergency placement. Not meant to be long term.

And for those of you who view it as wrong that the DC should be removed, where would you draw the line? Or would you not draw it at all? Would you be fine with BNP members fostering? EDL members?

Going to Rotherham is like stepping back into the 1980s ...

Narked - if Rotherham council have caved into Gove in reversing their decision, what does that say about their ability to act in the best interests of the children?

Surely if they really believed that removing the kids was actually the right thing to do then they should stick to that and resist the pressure.

But as has been pointed out by others, the record of Rotherham council in looking after the best interests of vulnerable kids is appalling. This is just another chapter.

People should not be prevented from fostering for any political views. Having views is not against the law, and can never be. If their views are causing them to break the law, THEN you prevent them from fostering.