To think that there is no good in these kids future

[PatPig]

Story here:
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-22462545
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2322073/Smirk-teenage-thug-moments-killing-OAP-handbag-Pair-15-year-olds-including-father-jailed.html

Age 14 and 15 they killed an old lady to buy Nike shoes, they will serve 3 years in a young offenders institute, one boy has already fathered two children, both have convictions for assaulting their parents, there's violent burglary, kidnap and assault.

AIBU to think they will be let out in 3 years having spent several years in the company of similarly unpleasant teenagers to spend the foreseeable future committing more crime and causing more misery?

Exactly.

If your first few years are ok, or you have at least one adult in your life looking out for you, chances are you can be ok.

But if you have nothing and nobody, if the abuse and deprivation starts in the womb, its a very different story.

Well said Jake.

YANBU, that is how they will come out, almost 99% guaranteed. I dont know what the answer is, but it isnt what the government are currently doing.

These boys attacked a helpless OAP and that behaviour is truly shocking and not deserving in being part of society. I dread to think though what their experiences for the next 3 years will.

Dawndonna I suggest you actually read the link. It addresses Lott and whitley.

What would your objection be to sterilising violent criminals? There isn't really a human rights argument as imprisoning people contravenes there human.

I wonder if you have ever read child protection files, because from the way you post it seems as if you have probably not come face to face with the realities of how one people treat their children.

I have been reading this thread with interest and agree with most of what dawndonna has said, and also JakeBullet's comment above.

I don't know why these two boys did what they did, but I am convinced that their upbringing was seriously at fault. Violent criminals can come from all sorts of backgrounds. However, I don't believe that a child who has always been loved, respected, taught to show empathy, work towards rewards rather than have everything handed to them, respect boundaries... I don't believe a child raised that way would treat another human like an object to be used.

I think there are two important things here:
We (society) should be putting a lot more energy and money into identifying and supporting families who struggle with parenting for whatever reason.

We should also be looking very very closely at how we can reduce the rate of reoffending. And if that prison in Norway is achieving good results, that seems like a good place to start. Surely it's more important to prevent crime than it is to punish criminals?

I think that people in general really have no idea how appalling som parents are. baby p was not an exceptionally bad case, there are hundreds of families up and down the country like that and worse. These families are beyond help and support, the damage is permanent

Then we need to be removing the children sooner, improving the care system. Educating young people much better to try to enable more of them to do a much better job than their own parents.

There is not the capacity in the care system and outcomes for children in care are appalling. We need to stop them being Conceived

Jesus Goal. What fucking right have you got to decide that.
Oh, and I did read the whole thing. Lott and Whitley were backed up in 2005 Foote and Goetz, and Nevin. Levitt and Donahue also admitted they'd got their figures wrong, in 2005.
I think you have no right to say who can and cannot conceive. You are saying that if you are on benefits, you should not be allowed to conceive. If I were not in the position I am in, I would not be allowed to conceive, but because I have enough money I can? That's pretty outrageous, Goal. You've also told a number of people on this thread that because they're on benefit they shouldn't have children. How dare you!

Goal, there is the capacity for adoption, though. I live in a very rough area of Liverpool, there has just been a similar conviction, teens killed a homeless man "for kicks". All around me are lads who don't stand a chance, because of bad parenting and the whole environment. A 21 year old was recently shot dead in the garden behind my house, lads from the age of 12 are caught up in gun crime and younger kids are used in drug activities, because the cannot get charged if caught with drugs on them. On top of that, I am a CP SW, I work in the next LA to where I live, because otherwise I would be writing CP plans for my neighbours children. I have seen the CP process work well for some families, as I have the "justice system" and the add on services provided. However, there is a number of children that would be better served to be removed earlier. I am hoping that as Child Protection standards increase we will see less of the violent crimes that we do, committed by children. Removing benefits or tougher prisons are not the answer, we have tried that, other countries do that and those measures don't work.

I was going to add that the one thing to undo the work being done by various services is the tightening up of the benefit system and Housing Benefit, the process breaks down when families have to move and this is what the new system will cause, unstable housing, so any help put in place and monitoring, will be interrupted, as well as education etc.

I was going to add that the one thing to undo the work being done by various services is the tightening up of the benefit system and Housing Benefit, the process breaks down when families have to move and this is what the new system will cause, unstable housing, so any help put in place and monitoring, will be interrupted, as well as education etc.

I work in a quite well funded LA, when the change in government happened,we were all told to tighten our budgets. The Family Support team that I am connected to had no choice but to cut one of the after school interventions for 7-10 year olds, who are on a CP or CIN plan, these children were mainly boys. The group did excellent work around "having a voice" and "not needing to use aggression to gain self worth", drama and art was used, as well as other means. This is the age that we need to target, but these are the services that have been cut. We will spend triple in the prison service, if we don't spend on these provisions.

Wow dawndonna- I strongly suggest you read the link again as you seem not to have understood it fully. I also suggest you read the thread again and then apologise as I have not said at any point on this thread anything about benefits, I have talked about violent criminal being stopped from conceiving children. Read the thread.

Birds- my understanding is we do have capacity for adoption of babies but certainly there is a shortage of adoptive parents for children aged 5 plus with behaviour problems. IME the issue seems to be a reluctance on the part of SW and courts to remove children until the damage has been done and it's too late. Once again I have not at any point said anything about benefits or cuts.

Just out of interest birds - would you leave your own kids with any of the parents whose kids are on the cp register? Because I sure as hell wouldn't and that tells me they are not doing a good enough job.

Goal, that was my point, I agree that some families cannot be "fixed" and children should be removed sooner. That is what all of the agencies, especially Banardo's have been pushing for. SS now have even stricter time scales to work to and Permanency Plans are being written at 6 months, now, rather than letting Foster Care drag on, with the (often dysfunctional) parents coming and going in and out of the child's life. Some people cannot parent, even with every support system put into place and they should not be allowed to damage their children. It is true that the outcomes for children in the care system is no better than those bought up in dysfunctional households and we need to make vast improvements.

Goal, that was my point, I agree that some families cannot be "fixed" and children should be removed sooner. That is what all of the agencies, especially Banardo's have been pushing for. SS now have even stricter time scales to work to and Permanency Plans are being written at 6 months, now, rather than letting Foster Care drag on, with the (often dysfunctional) parents coming and going in and out of the child's life. Some people cannot parent, even with every support system put into place and they should not be allowed to damage their children. It is true that the outcomes for children in the care system is no better than those bought up in dysfunctional households and we need to make vast improvements.

Birds - given the cost, disruption and still uncertain outcomes, would it not be better in many cases that these children were not even conceived?

Goal, children are on CP plans for many reasons. I am currently fostering a relatives child, there have been issues, but they can be solved, if the help is accepted and taken on board. The focus of this thread is a certain type of person, who cannot parent and how we address this.

I would never agree with Eugenics, no. I know of lots of people who should have put more thought into becoming a parent, from all walks of life, even colleagues and fellow professionals. Some people don't have the ability, or self awareness to understand why they shouldn't be planning on having children, yet. That is were education and better services can help, targeted services and generally for everyone.

I would never agree with Eugenics, no. I know of lots of people who should have put more thought into becoming a parent, from all walks of life, even colleagues and fellow professionals. Some people don't have the ability, or self awareness to understand why they shouldn't be planning on having children, yet. That is were education and better services can help, targeted services and generally for everyone.

I suppose at is where we differ, I don't agree with children having to suffer because of their parents which is how it works at he moment.

I have seen the CP process work well and the lives of both parents and child turned around, it isn't all doom and gloom. What we are seeing, in some cases, is the children of the parents who were left in homes that they shouldn't have been in, because CP thresholds were lower. If CP levels were consistent across all LA's and a few of the issues in Child Services/Family Courts ironed out, then there will continue to be an improvement. The one thing that we do need, is the general public to be willing to make referrals about what is happening. Child Mental Health services need an overhaul, as do all MH services and increased funding.

Agree re mental health. IME cp thresholds are ludicrously high and health education and the police frequently make referrals only to be told that things aren't bad enough. What percent of severe cp cases would you say actually have a GOOD long term outcome?