AIBU to be horrified by the Stolen Children of England

[LivingOnTheDancefloor]

I just watched a French documentary called "England's stolen children" and can't believe this is happening in England. Horrifying, scary, unbelievable, it is like a horror movie...

Basically, social services are taking babies from their parents based on suspicion that abuse might happen in the future, except that the decision is made based on ridiculous things.
A lady had her three children taken from her, including a breastfed baby because she went to the ER for a child's broken ankle and they judged that he must have been beaten by his parents (only based on the ankle). X years later the parents manage to prove the fracture was due to scorbut. And they found out the initial report from the ER says "no sign of fracture".
The judge admitted they shouldn't have taken the children and the parents were innocents. But the children were given to adoption so the parents will never see them again.
That is just one of the stories.
Some women are told while pregnant that their newborn will be taken as soon as he arrives (and thzney do it).
The documentary says it is due to the facts that counties have to reach a number of children given to adoption so they target poor/uneducated parents and find any reason to take their children.
And as fostering costs money to the state they prefer adoption.

AIBU to ask if you heard about it here in the UK? And if yes, what do you think? Could it be true or are they exagerating?

I am really shaken.

www.google.fr/amp/s/researchingreform.net/2016/11/14/englands-stolen-children-controversial-new-documentary-on-forced-adoption/amp/?client=safari

Sorry, no idea how to post links, and I am on my phone

Did they submit the evidence before the pre-hearing? In my experience there is a deadline a certain amount of time before a hearing in which evidence has to be submitted for it to be allowed to be heard during the hearing. Could they have missed the deadline? Their lawyer not submitted the evidence correctly? And I agree that it sounds very dodgy that the judge didn't demand police reports for some of those accusations.

And some questions cannot be asked, the judge would be right to say certain questions cannot be asked.

Ffs do you have any idea how heartbreaking it is to sit here knowing what has happened to my friends and their children and their families, and how it affected me and all the extended family, and see the hell they are living every single day, and then have it all analysed and Nick picked and ripped apart on here I am a bunch of strangers yet again claiming it doesn't make sense and it must all be made up and they must be guilty? I have told you all of this, the entire system is corrupt, it was all unfair and largely illegal I'm sure, I set myself that it couldn't possibly be legal allowing a verbal statement submitted over the lunch hour by the social worker is barrister with no chance for the parents to respond. I have already questioned how that could possibly be legal and you are responding with it doesn't make sense and I must not be telling the whole story or they've not told me the whole story? This is what I am telling you! This is what happened! this is why I am saying it was unfair! And you are coming back with that's unfair, it can't be true! What do you think I'm trying to tell you??? Look, you are strangers on the Internet, you are insignificant to my friends and nothing to me, it doesn't matter what you think or what you believe, and I keep saying I have heard all of this nonsense before, no one wants to believe that people in a position of power who are supposed to care for our children can possibly do this to families, but the fact is they do. And you can carry on not believing it until it happens to you or someone you love, or you can wake up and start realising that there are serious flaws in a very corrupt system and innocent people are being destroyed because of it, that's your choice. But I have told you all the truth, if you don't want to believe it then go ahead, but I was there. I saw my friend run out the court and collapse on the floor screaming at the ruling, I have seen her existing as a shell of who she was ever since, barely keeping herself alive and the only reason she does is the hope that one day she might have her children back in her life again. But you carry on questioning how there can possibly be bad people in the world who would do this to families. I hope you never find out for yourself.

Bats just there was nothing in those questions which was inappropriate or not related to the case. The judge just didn't want to hear it and had already made up her mind.

Natsku not bats🙄

I'm done. This phone is driving me loopy. I have things to do. I have argue this fee years. I'm not arguing is again. I was there, I know what happened.

AllPartofThePlan - I believe you. x

In my small experience SW are expert in making things sound terrible. For example they came to my house and there was a mess. On the table were a variety of papers and some empty coffee cups. In the report it said that the table was 'strewn with debris'. My daughter's hair was unbrushed - in the report it said that her hair was 'dirty and matted' etc etc I could go on.
In addition , prior to any meeting I was supposed to get a copy of the report and have a SW go through it with me,. This did not happen - a copy of the report was shoved thro my letterbox by hand after office hours on the day before the meeting.
These are just small examples.

Why should I believe you, a stranger on the internet over what I have witnessed with my own two eyes. You're moaning that strangers on the internet aren't believing you, but to us you are just a stranger on the internet. Everyone you are arguing with has their own unique encounters with children's services. Why should they discount their experiences in place of your second hand story.

Exactly Leanback

AllpartofthePlan - I am very sorry your friend was accused of being a 'druggie' when you know she wasn't.

But I am even more alarmed at what the bloody hell her lawyers were doing. Because there are tests that are quite good at finding out if people have taken drugs. Hair strand tests for e.g. can be segmented and show with pretty good accuracy what people have been taking over a six month period -if their hair is long enough.

so unless your friend had pretty serious alopecia, she would be able to prove quite easily that she was NOT taking drugs.

And how do you KNOW you read every single document? You weren't in court so you didn't have the trial bundle did you?

I am not trying to upset you and saying you are lying, your friend is lying - but I am saying you are being very naive and trusting.

either your friend isn't telling the whole truth, or her solicitors were staggeringly incompetent. Of course parents are allowed to put in written statements to defend themselves - it's absolutely the norm

It isn't merely the 'norm' - it is a REQUIREMENT. By court order. Parents must provide a written response to the local authority threshold document - i.e. that document which sets out the local authority case. Parents will then file final evidence. So at least two statements and often more.

I am afraid I simply don't believe that a case happened where the parents were 'not allowed' to file evidence. This is not simply unlawful, I have never, ever, ever known it to happen.

I have however known quite a lot of parents who didn't visit their solicitors or give instructions and ended up being in breach of the court order to provide written statements. But that is a rather different scenario.

At one point the parents didn't have a barrister for one hearing and they were expected to cross-examine the guardian and the social worker them selves

THIS WOULD NEVER HAPPEN.

What could however happen - and I have seen it - is that parents have refused the assistance of their lawyers, or sacked them on the day and the Judge has expected the hearing to go ahead.

But never, ever, ever would parents be just 'expected' to cross examine the social worker and guardian themselves, unless the parents had created the difficulty about lack of lawyers.

I am sorry, but I am getting really angry now. This is rubbish.

Babies aren't removed because a woman has moderate pnd. Sounds like she was missing out some key details

Classic example of circular thinking.

When have I ever said that your personal experiences are invalid? When have I said that you are talking rubbish and mustn't have all the full facts or must've been taken in by a charlatan, or that someone who couldn't be closer to you has deceived you for 40 years?? That is what people are saying to me. Of course there are children who are genuinely at risk and who are removed for legitimate reasons, but that doesn't mean all of them are. Of course there are some social workers who genuinely care about their job and their role and don't abuse their power, don't lie in reports, don't play sneaky underhand games which means the parents can't properly prepare or respond, but there are also those who are corrupt and are fucking evil and on a power trip and will do anything and say anything to get the result that they want. There are judges who are fair and balanced and ensure that the trial is run legally, then there are ones like the evil bitch in my friends case who blatantly broke the fucking law! On what planet can you allow a verbal report over the telephone at lunchtime to be submitted via the side they are on, not even the unbiased usher or my friends' barrister, as evidence and not give the parents a chance to respond!?! You all quite happily admit that baby P, Victoria Climbie and others were failed by a crap system and useless "professionals" so why can't you see others have similarly been failed and taken for no reason? Everyone is so quick to defend the social workers and the courts and assume it can't possibly be true, and that's called cognitive dissonance. You see and believe what you want to see you and believe. But I know that they twisted what I said to mean something entirely different in that statement, they accuse me of lying because they accused my friend of smashing up cars when I was with her the other side of town. This affected me personally. I got dragged into it too and in lying about my friend they lied about me. and this isn't new, it's not just today this happens, 30 years ago my cousin was put into foster care wrongly and still suffers repercussions from it today. Her children suffer repercussions from her childhood. Their children will probably suffer some. Her social work are failed her, just like my friends social worker failed her children. My parents fostered children for years and had constant problems with useless social workers making catastrophic fuck ups all the time. This isn't a new thing. The only difference is they have gone from extreme to the other, one minute leaving children in abusive families, the next removing everyone and putting everyone in child in need plans and child protection plans over nothing and terrorising families and scaring the shit out of them so they're too fucking scared to take their own kids to the doctor or send them to school! How does that help families or kids?

In my experience they bend over backwards to accommodate birth families. I have three adopted children who have 6 other siblings. All of which have been removed from their birth parents care. My youngest was taken into foster care at birth, 6 months after my second had their placement order granted. The birth family were given chance after chance to prove they could get it together to parent and the youngest was 11 months old before being placed with us. If there was a plot to steal cute babies from innocent families my youngest would have been a perfect target, yet the birth family were given chance after chance ( despite failing to attend a single contact session and ignoring the attempts of social workers to reach them). I'm not saying that mistakes aren't made but it's been my experience, and that of the very experienced foster carers I know, that the overstretched services are leading to more children remaining in homes they need to be removed from, rather than being taken into care unnecessarily.

I ask myself what is more likely.

that a kangaroo court exists, that threw out all and any respect for the rule of law, for Articles 8 and 6 of the ECHR, that a Judge and several lawyers sat back and let it happen, that a large number of professions lied and lied and lied again....

OR someone is standing by their friend and believing what they are told, because they love and support their friend.

i know which one I believe.

How? The presence of pnd is not enough to remove a child. The actions of the mother as a result of pnd is.

But why. Why do you think that all these professionals who are not connected to each other would conspire against one family.

A narrative is seductive. It alters what you think you're perceiving and can significantly alter what you think you remember.

Well lean, I believe your thinking is circular because you are considering whether or not this person's story is true but starting from the position that it could not be true.

allpart you're calling us sheep. That is pretty much saying our experiences are invalid.

The only sheep here is you. Blindly believing what you've been told when you do not have direct knowledge. You may think you do but you don't you only have your friends word for it. It may be hard to hear but what you've described simply wouldn't happen.

Spero then why don't you go down to the court and look at the files? I'll send you all the details by p.m. if you like! But I am telling you the fucking truth. They didn't have a barrister for one hearing because for whatever reason they didn't have legal aid, it was an appeal and they weren't entitled, I don't understand all the ins and outs, but they were not entitled to a barrister or legal aid. They had one at the previous hearing is, but for whatever reason, something to do with whether it was a new application or a continuation of the previous application, I don't know, but they were not entitled to legal aid and had to represent themselves. And get angry! You're a fucking family law barrister aren't you? Well go fucking sort the fucking law out then! And I said, the parents did submit a statement. They were not allowed to get in any extra witness statements or call in any witnesses or submit any extra documents from their GP and mental health professionals, the judge only allowed the court ordered psychologist and psychiatrist to submit their reports, the parents were not allowed to submit anything independent. And the drug story was just an example, that was not the specifics, I said I didn't want to give any personal private information out, it wasn't drugs, there were accusations along a similar line, but they weren't the main accusations and reasons, that was a loosely related example. if you want, I can send you fucking copies of everything! I have it all on email from my friend sending it all to me! And I did see the bundle. I was in the waiting room with them the entire time, and for the hearing where they had to represent themselves they had the bundle at home going through it all trying to prepare questions that the fucking judge then said they weren't allowed to ask! I can give you that bitch judges name if you like, it is permanently on my fucking broken heart after what that bitch did to my friends. She has retired now, but by all means I can give you her fucking name and the circuit she was on. I don't care if you believe me or not. you are a fool if you think that every case you represent has been submitted by and honourable fair social worker or overseen by an unbiased judge. Do you think all your clients are guilty because some fucking social worker says so? That is what happened to my friends. The social worker can't possibly live! There has to be some truth to it somewhere! Bullshit. Get fucking angry. You're in the fucking system, so change it!

I'm thinking about the sex abuse scandals in the Catholic church, probably in political circles and in football.

How many times was nothing done because someone thought, 'Now which is more likely'...

no I was saying there was information missing. Which there was.

I believe that SSS got details wrong. That maybe in statements the wrong date was given, or that there were some details that were not true.
But the account your friend has given you does not stand up to scrutiny. That may be what she told you, but she is not telling you the full truth.

No, you are saying that it couldn't be true as it stood.