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

[Barbadosgirl]

Grindelswalwand please could you let us have the citations/evidence to support what you are saying. That is not written by, say, a This Morning Presenter but actually shows why and how this all works.

[Benedikte2]

OP the documentary is misleading.
The hoops a social worker has to go through to get a court to agree to take a child into care are massive. Numerous statements full of evidence required and the Local Authorities' solicitors have to agree that the legal threshold has been met before BEFORE you even get to court. Then the court has to agree to an interim care order after listening to evidence from both parents and social workers etc. A court appointed Guardian represents the child and has interviewed everyone. Before a final care order is made the parents are usually ordered to attend assessments by psychologists etc or sometimes they attend a residential assessment with the child where parenting ability can be observed.
The process is very time consuming and laborious and there are regular reviews re the child's progress in foster care, assessments of supervised contacts, assessments of parents progress on any parenting/drug and alcohol courses etc.
Only after the final (permanent) care order is made is a placement order made authorising the Local Authority to place the child with prospective adopters and it is several months after this that an adoption order is made. Up until that time if circumstances have changed or new evidence becomes available the parents can apply to have the care order put aside. The fact that this is so rarely done is a measure of how strong the Local Authority's case has to be to satisfy the court.
The Government did several years ago complain about how long the process took and how every effort should be made to expedite the adoption process but this did not relate to a direction to take more children into care for adoption but to get (already overworked social workers with ridiculous case loads to work even more hours) the cases through the court quicker and to put more effort into adopting older and special needs children . The MPs like many of the public think to adopt a child all you need is lurve and overlook the fact that the majority of these children are emotionally damaged and require adoptive parents with more than average patience and skill if the adoption is to be successful.
It would be fair to say that in many cases the birth parent or parents are unable or unwilling to change their lifestyle and or parenting and very often start to fail to attend contact sessions with their children. More mothers than you would believe decide they would rather remain in a relationship with a violent partner or a partner who has physically or sexually abused their children than have their children returned to their care. These women are almost invariable the product of abusive childhoods themselves. The whole situation is so sad and all one can do is ensure the children are given an opportunity to grow up in a safe and nurturing environment

[comehomemax]

brie siblings are now kept together wherever possible but there is always an assessment to see that is safe for all of them as some siblings have trauma bonds that can cause huge long term issues.

[FeliciaJollygoodfellow]

I'd be interested to know who you've heard that from Grindel. Because it sounds like bullshit made up by someone with an axe to grind.

[Mondegreens]

Evidence for any of that, Grindels? I have never actually heard anyone claim before that SS target middle-class families, or that middle-class families are more likely to be 'easily scared' than, for instance, a family with a poor level of literacy and little experience in dealing with intimidating authority figures. Or what the point of removing a child from one of the imaginary easily scared middle-class families solely because of a 'slight bump on the head' or parental worrying would be.

[Grindelwaldswand]

Ive watched countless documentaries on it and it's something i follow closely in the news, especially after the baby P scandal i think SS have gone overboard because of that which is why children like the one in the OP have been removed for a simple broken ankle from a normal childhood accident the same as when a toddler learning to walk comes into A&E with a worried parent wanting to do the best by them and all they get for their trouble is a social worker been called because of protocol trying to accuse them of child abuse. Let me tell you i was abused as a child and i know for a fact parents who beat their children or abuse them are not the sort to turn up st A&E demanding a CT scan or worrying their minds over a bump! Those parents keep their children out of sight to avoid SS like my parent did. Those are the parent's SS should be looking for not the responsible ones just trying to do their best for their child and worrying over every bump and scratch.

[Grindelwaldswand]

And it's Grindelwald.

[Memoires]

SS move heaven and earth to keep families together these days. If MH is an issue they will support and advise and help the sufferer to get the treatment they need. They don't just take the children just because a mother is depressed. FGS Grindelwald, did you read that in the Daily Mail?

[OliviaBensonOnAGoodDay]

I hate this kind of shit because it tends to be taken as truth by increasingly desperate people - grandparents and other relatives of children at risk who are denial about what's been happening in those children's homes.

It completely works against them too, because once social services starts hearing this kind of baby snatching rhetoric, that's when the walls will start to go up.

Should be illegal to peddle this nonsense.

[Grindelwaldswand]

Why is the Daily mail the go to newspaper on this site constantly mentioned. And no actually i read the Guardian and The Observer.

[Grindelwaldswand]

But why do their walls go up ? What do they have to hide ? Surely they can just produce evidence of their actions for these worried families and put the "lies" to rest years ago no ?

[Barbadosgirl]

Every single time these threads come up I ask for evidence or a citation or some thing to back this up. Never get it.

We have the full bingo card here. Adoption targets pegged to social worker bonuses. Secret courts. The mythical child taken into care for a bump on the head or a broken bone.

Do you know that over on the Adoption UK boards there are a huge number of adoptive parents brought to their knees by children with profound issues where getting support is a huge battle and where sws deny there are any issues until everyone is at breaking point. Is it because they are evil? No. it is because they are utterly cash strapped and can only justify acting when there is a crisis. What Hemings, Josephs and some of the more conspiracy obsessed posters here fail to see is that this is the system we are working in. The one where it costs £35k per year to take a child into care. The one where mental health, education and support services are decimated by budget cuts. Even if there was a quota to take children into care (and WHY? Can someone just explain WHY anyone would ant to do that and what is to gain) where on earth does the money come from to pay for this AND the sw bonuses?

[Alfieisnoisy]

Social workers don't take babies.. they are not allowed to. Courts make those decisions and there has to be massive amount of supporting evidence. So much so that children often remain in damaging situations because getting that evidence is hard.

[Barbadosgirl]

OliviaBenson not only do I love your handle, I love your style! Exactly. The walls go up because as soon as the judges and other professionals hear the forced adoption conspiracy theory garbage they know they are not dealing with families who are going to be receptive to change and working with services to help their children and situation. They are dealing with people who are being told and believe they have an absolute right to do whatever they want with "their" children and their rights, feelings and interests are paramount: more important than the rights of their children.

[Mondegreens]

So you're upset people aren't spelling your name right, while you post unsubstantiated fantasies, Grindelwald?

[dibly]

No they can't, sadly, because of the data protection act. My LG is adopted, if I could tell you why, believe me, it doesn't make pleasant reading. Suffice to say that no one would want a child to be brought up in that kind of environment. As a responsible parent there is no way that I would share that private, very personal to her, information to satisfy the idle musings of someone on a forum.
If you really do want to learn more on the reality of why children are adopted, the legal cases are reported here www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=fo6 but to return to the OO, I'm sorry but this forced adoption stuff is utter bollocks.

[AuntMatilda]

Maybe not so much nowadays, but if you want more evidence (it's very painful viewing) there are some documentaries on youtube OP. I have to agree with tonalddrump, I've not experienced this first hand but I have 'second hand' i.e seen it happen to a close friend. It was/is horrific and the children suffered immensely. The situation was far from perfect but she was a loving Mother and didn't deserve it nor did her kids. This was in the 90s. So sorry but yes, I think it does/did happen.

[Manumission]

They are dealing with people who are being told and believe they have an absolute right to do whatever they want with "their" children and their rights, feelings and interests are paramount: more important than the rights of their children.

Not all BPs are like that Barbados. "Can't provide adequate care" BPs are just as likely (more likely?) to believe these theories as "Just don't care" BPs, aren't they?

Maybe more so because, knowing they haven't acted maliciously, they struggle to understand or rationalise what's happening to their family.

[tldr]

ive heard of social worker's getting pay rise's for the number of children they get adopted per 6 month's.

Godammit, am I the only person not profiting from my children's unfortunate choice of birth family?

[crashdoll]

Grindlewaldswand I had to laugh at your assertion that social workers get bonuses for removing children. Firstly, there are pay scales and generally, you have to evidence progression to move up. Secondly, there is absolutely no evidence for this, although it does get mentioned a lot. It's categorically not true.

[Barbadosgirl]

Aunt Matilda, just out of interest, do you think if your friend had been secretly harming her children in the 90s she would have admitted it to you? Apologies to ask such a crude question but the point is people who abuse children tend to keep it to themselves. They have neighbours and friends and go shopping and pay their bills like everyone else. They appear perfectly lovely to everyone else: that is how they get away with it. If you got friendly with someone who casually mentioned that in their spare time they liked burning their children with cigarettes you would probably terminate the friendship after you called the police. So the fact someone was friends with you, convinced you she was a good mother and nice person doesn't mean the sws and the system are wrong necessarily, it could equally mean you were deceived.

[HennaFlare]

I've just witnessed the same as AuntMatilda. Loving family, not perfect but certainly loving. Their child was adopted this week after over a year in care. The original statements which prompted the investigation were withdrawn and admitted to be malicious, but too late. Ball was rolling and the statements were included as evidence despite the statement-maker not standing by it anymore.

Nobody thought this would happen, everyone thought they would be vindicated after an appalling year and rebuild their lives. That hasn't happened. Their child was adopted.

I don't want to give any more info as it's just too identifying but they will never recover from this. It's absolutely soul destroying to witness. I can't imagine what they are living through

[slenderisthenight]

I know personally of one case where a very, very healthy, nurturing family (mum was a paed. nurse, four healthy children) were utterly stitched up by the court.

It didn't work on that occasion. The judge saw through it and swept the floor with the social workers who had tried to do it (they had their own adoption plan and were willing to fight dirty to make it happen).

Case closed on that occasion but they were lucky.

It happens.

[Barbadosgirl]

Manumission, of course they are not. My son's bps were not but the point is, the mentality that tends to go hand in hand with the forced adoption brigade is like that and it does vulnerable bps a disservice because they can think it will help get their child back. It doesn't. The only people that really benefit are the likes of Heming, Joseph and Brooker who get to air their opinions and agenda. A very experienced poster on here called Spero has seen these tactics fail in court and has some interesting comments about what might motivate these men.

[slenderisthenight]

Social workers who think it's all bollocks are in their own bubble. I'm glad they can't imagine this happening - it means it doesn't happen in some places.