George Osborne Gets Booed Handing Medals at the Paralympic Athletics Medal Ceremony

[ttosca]

The nation boos at the Tory scum:

SammyPaws Also, when Neil Morrissey did his programme on his time in care he was, like you, one of the lucky ones who lived with a nice house mother (who he discovered was key in shaping his successful destiny), much to the envy of others who were being abused.

And its not a magic wand, but a welfare state I think is required. Patchy yes, but the best option, even if a few dodgy sorts take advantage of it.

Well that's wrong for a start, the rights of the child should always come before those of the parents in such situations - that's another thing that this government is trying to sort out. Speeding up the adoption process so children aren't left to suffer while some feckless parents are encouraged, usually to no success, to sort their lives out.

There are also many children that are only alive because the state intervened. Perhaps if social services were more worried about the children and less worried about upsetting parents/ lawsuits/ being PC they might be more successful in their interventions.

Also sammypaws Marylin Monroe was sexually exploited and died of a drugs overdose, not a great fate. If you want to see what happens to a significant number of victims of child abuse who have been through the care system - visit a women's prison!

As I have said many times before, I support wholeheartedly a properly functioning welfare state.

So you don't think the mafia/ Kennedys did it then?

No its not about the needs of the parents, its that removal from the family can be traumatic for the child. And rather than 'feckless' the parents are often troubled adults with poor parenting skills because of their own neglegent/abusive parents.

Perhaps then, another policy would be place such problemed children in independent schools rather than foster homes, it would certainly provide a continuity of care?

I think there are more options that should be considered other than foster homes - which to be honest, a small minority of carers seem to treat as a business rather than a vocation.

Whatever the reason, the children should be taken from them - they are of primary importance and the circle has to be broken somewhere.

They knew how to go about having children so they should have thought about what it entailed in looking after them.

So putting children in children's homes then.

I hate to break it to you but it's been done and it was pretty much a disaster.
How can you provide continuity of care in an institution?
How do you know the people running in the institutions won't be treating as a business opportunity?

How does your plan solve anything?

So what is the answer then?

We know the answer isn't giving out more money for nothing, we know it isn't taking children away from parents and putting them into homes, we can't pay benefits in food vouchers because apparantly that's demeaning, so what do we do to stop children being neglected?

I would hardly call boarding schools childrens' homes. One of the reasons that children in care find it so hard when they come out of care is that they have had no access to a good education. It is possible to stay in them over the holdays so continuity of care is there. I can only talk about independent senior schools, but we certainly had teachers who looked after one particular year group as they went through school.

As I said I am sure there are other ideas that might work, the only thing that surely won't work is leaving them in a dangerous and abusive situation.

Good posts, sammypaws. I don't think you have been rude. On the contrary, you have been stoic, steadfast and serene under a barrage of sniping and abuse. It seems to me you are most probably a Conservative.

If anything, you have been over solicitous of your detractors, going so far as helpfully suggest that they get their chip seen to.

It is the lot of the Tories to be booed at the moment, but Osborne took it with good grace and accepted the role of pantomime villain. That booing was a pantomime letting off of steam, but as Xenia so rightly said, the booing that counted was at the count of the ballot box. That was no pantomime, that was about time.

'The nation did its booing them through the ballot box, the politer way to boo.'

Of course they are children's homes if the state have removed them from their birth parents and placed them in an institution.

It's hardly the same as having parents waiting for you at home and taking an active interest in your welfare.

I said the right are better at managing the economy

:o:o:o

The right are better at making themselves richer at the expense of everyone else. Shirley that is what you meant?

Indeed. They voted the Coalition in. Well no one really got a majority but the Lib/Lab proposed coalition did not work so here we are with a kind of mid range boring Labour like wet set of Tories who are doing nothing radical.

On children I don't actually agree with fast adoption. I thnk adoption rather than fostering should be of very much last resort and secondly that keeping children in their family is often the better solution - what typically happens now rather than taking the newborn bastard baby from its 16 year old mother's arms in the 1960s. I think social workers do a pretty good job at supporting families and should not rush to remove children and indeed ought to look at if fathers and grandparents and aunts etc could have them before whisking them away.

Never mind those in care there was a great plan this week that any chidl who could pass the entrance exam to any of 100 private schools who wrote to the Times would be allowed to take a place without any charge at all (means tested) and the state would pay half the fees and the school the other half. It would wonderful but I expect Gove is too committed to the state system. Pity. Nor would it cost more as it costs half a private school place in a state school.

Yes, but that's the problem, their parents aren't waiting at home and taking an interest in them. So what do you propose should be done?

More support for extended family to care for children when birth parents can't would be a start.

"We know the answer isn't giving out more money for nothing, we know it isn't taking children away from parents and putting them into homes, we can't pay benefits in food vouchers because apparantly that's demeaning, so what do we do to stop children being neglected?"

A lot has been done. It requires a holistic joined-up approach and a lot of investment.. The kind of thing tories call a 'waste' of money.

"Well that's wrong for a start, the rights of the child should always come before those of the parents in such situations - that's another thing that this government is trying to sort out. Speeding up the adoption process so children aren't left to suffer while some feckless parents are encouraged, usually to no success, to sort their lives out."

sammy The children's act explicitly states that "the needs of the child are paramount" sometimes it is in the child's interests to maintain contact with their birth family. Having worked with looked after children (before I had mine) I can tell you that children are often confused & disorientated but still have a bond to their family. People face all kinds of difficulties throughout their lives and some are better able to cope than others. Some people have been disadvantaged in multiple ways throughout their own lives and genuinely struggle to cope and need time and support to change. In cases of abuse where that abuse is premeditated, likely to inflict severe or lasting harm and is entrenched a child would be taken into care.

Social workers and care workers expect to be remunerated and they need constant career development and training, support and leadership, healthy budgets and job security, administrative support and other services they can contract. The cuts to social work budgets are massively impacting on the rights of children because social workers are thin on the ground, demoralised and demonised. These services need funding. These services should be maintained by the state.

Of course, the protection of children from abusers is important and should be funded, but it appears that social workers are bending over backwards to try and fix things that sometimes can't be fixed. I have a cousin who fosters children, one of whom has been with her for years, another she tried to adopt but was refused because she was too valuable a resource as a carer.

Some of the stories of those children are beyond belief but their parents retain the right to cause as many problems as possible, for example, one of them (an alcoholic, drug addict who physically abused the child), who knows that my cousin is of a different faith, insists that the child is taken by taxi, fifteen miles away to attend a weekly church service, of his faith background, though she herself is not a church attender. Surely, in some cases, where there is no hope that the parents will change their ways, no wider family to fallback on, then adoption is the kindest answer for the child.

"it appears that social workers are bending over backwards to try and fix things that sometimes can't be fixed."

You can't 'fix' broken people, families or situations, you can just manage and try to minimise the damage. Its realities narrative that can't satisfy the hunger for easy answers or cheap solutions.

hmm, social workers bending over backwards?? not mine, he's a useless waste of taxpayers money and a lot of them are the same. They are more interested in meeting timescales and ticking boxes than providing a service

I have to refer to this comment of sammys: "They knew how to go about having children so they should have thought about what it entailed in looking after them." It shows such naivity/ignorance underpinning the judgemental tory worldview. Such little consideration for coercive sexual activity, mental illness, chaos. It assumes everyones's lives are neat routines with planned activities around known options.

And thank you MiniTheMinx for stating the actual reality of the situation: "Some people have been disadvantaged in multiple ways throughout their own lives and genuinely struggle to cope and need t time and support to change."

Thankfully best practice has been thoroughly thought out and is ongoing, improving rather than the ignorant snap judgements of some of the posters here, so families facing difficulties have a chance..... Oh no! But judgemental ignorant tories are currently pulling all the funding to advance with their 'small state' ideology.... Argh... We're all doomed unless we stem the bloodletting!

Bit of a sweeping statement OwlLady. I'm training to do police work of SS (most likely SS) and that's not my primary motivation at all! :)

Hopes to restore OwlLady's faith