People who have never experienced being in family court

[SavanahXx]

It really does my head in when people side with social services. They have an opinion that "they are just doing what's best for the child". These people that have the opinion mostly have never even had involvement with SS, therefore don't see the lies and manipulation of a situation that they use.

It's easy for them to say that a parent 'could pose a risk' but do you know how hard it is to prove you wouldn't?

I seen an utterly revolting article that really baffled me. Social workers manage to get away with this stuff daily. Yet its not reported as it should be. This child was removed, with a judges permission. Then placed back with the mother by another judge.
There is so much corruption in our society and it needs to change.

www.google.com/amp/s/www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/06/13/social-worker-criticised-child-taken-away-mother-refused-give/amp/

Eg. So the mother assaulted someone on a night out, does that mean that when she has a child she will beat them senseless? No.

Just because someone done something to an acquaintance/,stranger does not mean they would be capable of harming their own flesh and blood. You can't paint everyone the same.

Also peados aren't allowed anyway near anyone under the age of 16. So that would be the mum's fault for being in a relationship with someone who has a sexual interests in children. That is not protecting them.

I can see both sides I've seen children removed wrongful but then you also have cases like baby P. It's a knife edge and if being over cautious saves lives surely that's preferable to loosing an innocent baby over a mistake

The problem with this discussion is unless you've personally experienced it you have little to no understanding. It is incomprehensible to think people entrusted to look after the welfare of children could possibly be shockingly bad at their job, have their own agendas, lie and cover up their mistakes with ruthless disregard for the children and their families. But of course it happens! Everyone should be open minded and willing to see that this does happen! Look up this man Ian Josephs MA (Oxon) at www.forced-adoption.com/

I have personal experience of a close family member with severe mental health illness and only a couple of weeks ago on MN there was a mum distressed because A&E had turned away her suicidal son and dozens of people were telling her she was lying A&E wouldn't do that! But they do! I've experienced it with my family member!

@SavanahXx the problem is for people to know that paedophiles to exist there has to be a victim first.

They don't wear a sign stating they have done that and most never get caught.

Plus some women are truly that naive to believe that it would never happen to HER children, that he won't do it again.

The truth is the majority of CSA cases there is a triangle. The abuser, the one who did nothing or ignored it and finally the child.

This is aimed at everyone! I'm just going to say it. If you have clearly given them a good reason to signify that you have potential this is what happens. Own it and move on. Unfair? Tough titty! Any ignorance is a clear example of why shit like that happens.

Simple: protect your kids and they won't get taken off you. If you don't feel like you could've done more as a parent you aren't a good one.

Any mother assaulting people on a night out is a poor excuse of a mother. She needs to grow up and stop acting like a school girl and set an example for her children. By doing that she's risking the safety of her children by potentially going to prison etc.

Just commenting on the case linked to in the OP - the child was not removed because the mother did not take him for an ice cream, or because the mother refused to let the child have his hair cut in a particular way.

The judgment is here:

www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWFC/HCJ/2018/36.html

The child had already been in care for over 2 years. Regular contact with the mother had been resumed for the past 6 months, ordered by the same judge who made this decision.

The case was about whether the child should be returned to the care of the mother. The judge decided that he should be, but that a supervision order should remain in place for a further year.

Details of why the child was removed in the first place are not included in this judgment.

Op you sound very bitter and angry. Of course there are bad social workers just like their are bad doctors, shop workers , cleaners etc etc . You can't slag off an entire group of workers for a few bad apples as Is the same in any other sector.

You say it's "easy" to remove a child absolute bollocks easy how?

As for your example that's shit too, yes a person who is known for violence could harm their child even without directly physically harming them , they could witness violence and unpredictable behaviour.

@PencilsInSpace, thank you for that very interesting link. It is true that the child was not removed over the ice cream and haircut, but those were some of the local authority’s strongest ‘arguments’ for not returning him. Which is a good illustration of how, once in the jaws of the system, parents struggle to get out.

Also peados aren't allowed anyway near anyone under the age of 16. So that would be the mum's fault for being in a relationship with someone who has a sexual interests in children. That is not protecting them.

Exactly. So if the mother won't chuck the paedophile out, removing the children due to the risk of harm to them would be the right thing to do, wouldn't it, OP?

Eg. So the mother assaulted someone on a night out, does that mean that when she has a child she will beat them senseless? No

Try addressing the scenario I actually put to you, i.e. that of a mother who has had six children taken away previously due to her abuse and neglect. You are saying that if she has another baby, there should be no question of removing that baby despite the obvious high risk that s/he will be subject to the same treatment. How do you justify that?

It's not true that other countries in Europe dont have a mechanism for forced adoption.

I’ve had experience with social services. My children went into temp foster care when they were quite young. I was unable to look after myself never mind this and the social services were amazing. They worked with me to help me get back to a stable place mentally, to keep up a relationship with my children then to have them returned to me when I was finally able to look after them.

Social services are fantastic if you work with them and accept that they genuinely are there to look out for what’s best for your children. It hurts like fuck to be told you’re not doing good enough but if you’re any sort of parent you’ll realise that if you want your children to have a good stable happy life you’ll do whatever it takes to make that happen.

Am I talking about people who have abused their children? No i don't think I am. I swear people are stupid. if you're not going to read. Don't try and jump on the bandwagon. There are plenty of ftm who because of when they were younger/a few years before have been done for a crime or have mental health issues etc who have had their children removed for a potential of causing emotional harm or abuse.

*never mind them

No OP you are stupid and can't accept any opinion but your own

You referring to people as stupid and naive for disagreeing with you when not a single person has suggested social services are perfect or even close to it isn't really helping your case.

personally i think the parents get so many chances at the child's expense that it just perpetuates the abuse cycle

Haven’t read the whole thread yet but my dil went to court to protect her children from abusive ex.
She at first was lip but later got a barrister while he went lawyered up from the outset. So I suspect she made some mistakes .
Her children were removed from her and given to the ex as she was accused of being an emotional abuser.
The professionals did not listen to the children who did not want to see their father because he hit them. Their mother barely raises her voice to them
They were taken that day from the child minder. They were little more than babies. Never got to say goodbye. Had to leave their beautiful home, clothes, toys pets, friends, school. Never saw their mum for 13 weeks. Weren’t allowed. Then in a contact centre, where she passed with flying colours

Dad has now stopped contact again because after staying overnight, they didn’t want to go back to him . He still hits them
It’s been 3 months now
These are now severely traumatised children.

There’s a protest going on on October 19 in London, Parliament square
Organised by one of the mothers

Victoria Derbyshire has done a lot to get the ball rolling and other MPs

The article is very vague.

Boy wants a hairstyle like his friends and mum says no - unreasonable
Boy wants to dye his hair blue and mum says no because of school rules and thinks that he'll want it green then purple and damage his hair- reasonable

Mum says no ice cream because boy is overweight or has food intolerance- reasonable
Mum says no ice cream because she gets joy out of withholding treats - unreasonable.

Of course there are mistakes made by SS. For every child taken away unfairly, there will be a Baby P or Daniel Pelka who is missed by the system.

Because of the nature of their work we will not hear about the kids that they save.

My personal experience is that SS were excellent when I had a malicious allegation made against me.

From what I see and hear (anecdotally) I think that a lack of resources mean that their standards can be lax. A Dad can be violent to the mum but get contact with the kids after a divorce and being a drug user doesn't stop you getting child contact too, in an idea world I think kids would be protected in situations like that.

Quote from Jameson
Also to add to my previous post, the vast majority of abusive but especially neglectful parents, do so believing they are doing nothing wrong. They simply don't know how to look after children. Incidentally, they all loved their children too ... that doesn't change the fact that they were abusing their children and causing them significant harm.

Simply loving your children doesn't make you a good parenT

Agree, the children were taken to school in inappropriate footwear, ( plimsolls)food was sandwich and chocolate bar from garage, uniforms were dirty, girls long hair was brushed by teacher on arrival. Boys teeth badly decayed. Unvaccinated. All in less than a year

This was all because children didn’t want to see their dad who had only been a part time dad anyway.

Agree with you OP. Our family has been severely damaged by SS lies, manipulation, malpractice. I think the problem is (and I've come to accept this now) is that people don't understand until it happens to them. I would like to remind posters (and I think some will remember this) that a couple of years ago on MN, a Family Law barrister spero admitted that nowadays the focus is on removal rather than support. And how would you get that removal if it's good parents that need support. Obvious - you write lies in reports.

This lady told her story on the Victoria Derbyshire programme round about April and I haven’t been able to forget it
Could be very triggering

www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/evil-father-killed-two-sons-4533040