foster children removed for being UKIP members

[EdgarAllanPond]

story here

it seems there were no other reasons. placement otherwise working well.

The majority of which people?

InNeedOfBrandy

Flatpack you have just contradicted yourself

No I haven't.

And yes the majority of people do believe ukip is a far right party and a diluted version of the BNP.

No they don't. You and your rich Islington mates might think that, but you think that about anyone to the right of Pol Pot.

joanbyers the voters obviously thats why they are not in gov now or even the opposition.

And yes you have, flatpack but whatever. Making up and adding "friends" onto a point does not make a good argument/or personal insults joan.

InNeedOfBrandy

joanbyers the voters obviously thats why they are not in gov now or even the opposition.

That's a curious ignorance of the First Past the Post voting system that you have there. Maybe I'll just plonk it next to your ignorance of UKIP and your ignorance of what multiculturalism actually is, and we can all judge you based on that.

And yes you have, flatpack but whatever.

No really. Show me how I've contradicted myself.

The family have been fostering for over seven years and their record is said to be exemplary. I am speechless. It's shocking.

Also the social services have said the family were caring for the children very well. Shouldn't that overcome everything else.?

exactly but lets discriminate against some more people who don't quite sing from the same hymn sheet as wonderful all knowing what is best for every child Rotherham council.

I agree with the decision totally.

Ive also never met a supporter of UKIP who wasn't racist, even if they pretended not to be.

No they don't. You and your rich Islington mates might think that, but you think that about anyone to the right of Pol Pot

Ha ha! I love those silly assumptions you make.

Do you think its only idealistic rich middle class people that hold those opinions?

i would be amazed if in seven years of fostering these were the first non-uk or non-white children they had fostered.

if they would allow their political views to colour their treatment of children, would this be the case?

the BNP is a socialist party with anti-immigration views.

UKIP is an economically liberal (so, right-wing) party with anti immigration views.

Load of shite, there will be other reasons. SS woman on the radio earlier said there was nothing wrong with the way the children were being looked after.
These people have been foster parents for years, I imagine they have looked after no end of children from different ethnic backgrounds but there has been no problem until now. Also I wonder how likely racists would be to want to foster 'ethnic' children? If they have been covering up racist tendencies they have obviously done an excellent job of it up until now .

How dare social services dictate to people how they can vote? UKIP are a legitimate political party and people are allowed to vote for them if they want, it being a democracy and all.
Apart from making sure children are cared-for and happy they should keep their noses out. No wonder there are so few children finding adoptive homes nowadays if you can be so easily rejected by the thought police.

They seek to aspire to one brutish culture how is that not divisive as a policy. How can people who subscribe that, which is not small print, by the way, but a very clear and dominant aspect of their policy actual think they are able meet and represent the needs for those children in the long run. I can understand why in emergency measures it was good enough, but in in the long term care of the children not that I would agree as my personal views are that they should not be foster carers full stop, but I can see and understand that.

I just wonder really what one British culture they seek to aspire to? As I don't think there is one culture even within indigenous British people.

They aren't dictating who they can vote for, they are saying the long term needs of these children can't be met by your self due to a difference of interest.

It's political correctness gone mad and I'm not surprised to see which regulars instantly think this is a rational decision.

I completely agree with Pixel. If this was a racist couple, why would they foster non-white children? If they were racists, there must be easier ways to earn money than look after children who have a skin colour you hate and then do so to an 'exemplary' level.

Troll, which 'long term need' does being a member of UKIP make them incapable of performing? A child's education? Discipline? A loving home?

It reminds me of a friend of mine training to be a childminder. When OFSTED came to inspect her, they said she lacked 'multicultural toys'. So as a non-white myself she called me and asked me what my kids played with? I was stumped as my DD's barbie was white....so were her dolls! So I called my Jamaican friend....whose daughter also had white barbies! Neither of us had even thought about if our toys were multicultural before. The important thing was did our kids like them.

It's the same thing here. The only thing that matters is whether or not they can provide the stable caring loving home the kids desperately need.

Anti-immigration doesn't mean someone is racist. There's plenty of legitimate reasons why someone would feel the UK is full. Our house prices for starters. The lack (or perceived lack of) jobs maybe? Or what about the fact our water system down south cannot cope with the increase in population because of immigration.

Saying I think the UK is full so we shouldn't take more people in, is not the same as "I think white people are the best and black/brown people are not"

If this decision is based solely on political affiliation then it is an incredibly dangerous precedent to set. What next? Maybe you won't be allowed to foster if you are a member of the Green party since you must be a lentil munching hippy and kids need to live in the real world? Or maybe if you are a Labour supporter then you clearly have no financial sense at all and kids need to have someone who won't go and spend all the money?

But there is no evidence they were imposing their views on the children. Just because they disagree with an open-door policy does not mean they have judgements about the individual children they are fostering. It is possible to separate the two things you know. You can think that these children are here and need all the love and care they can get, but still believe that there has to be a limit somewhere to how many more people this country can take. I'm sure lots of foster parents hold the same view whether they vote for UKIP or not.

It's the one British culture belief that does it for me not immigration as such. How can they embrace the diversity of these children and promote and understand their culture, if the subscribe to a group which believes they are not entitle to their own non British culture.

And not even their non British culture, their own British culture would may not even be in line with the one British culture ukip aspire to. My own British culture as a white, catholic Scottish woman may not even fit in with the one British culture and I would be concerned to allow my children to be fostered by a family who subscribe to such a notion. I would be interested hear the voices of the children's parents.

As I mentioned in the other thread, the couple described themselves as former Labour voters, it's unlikely they suddenly had a massive volte face in their beliefs more that they felt that UKIP better represented their existing beliefs. To that extent if Rotherham didn't approve of the way this couple think, it should have done a better job exploring the issues when assessing them to become foster carers.

also, you can't assume these individuals subscribe to all UKIPs policy sheet - they may just want out of the EU.

not an extreme view.

True, I've got family members (through marriage) from Nigeria, China and Japan. It's never been an issue, all have been made welcome (although my chinese stepbrother is a miserable sod, I could do without him).

I still think we'd be better off out of the EU.
I might vote for UKIP next time.

"

Could you imagine being sent to live with a family that didn't like white people and subtly made it clear. It would be awful for the dc to live like that. I'm glad ss have moved them."

it would be, however is there really reason to believe this couple were like that? membership of UKIP doesn't mean they were endlessly ranting about 'forriners taking our jobs' does it? that's just an assumption on the SS part, perhaps?

frankly a couple that were doing that would be too hate-filled to foster any children, wouldn't they?

"Me too I think its progress tbh"

progress? it rather put me in mind of the fact that my mothers adoption in 1960 was blocked by SS as it was 'out of class' - presumably thinking her adoptive mum would look down on her for being a lower class indiviudal (and also, unbelievably, that was an unresolvable mismatch). not a fair assumption.

At the end of the day (I know... old joke ..... the sun goes down!) these are just children who need someone who has been checked and checked again, as all foster carers are, and found to be safe enough to care for them. I doubt the lo's give a monkies about politics. I find it hard to believe that most foster carers do not have political views, religious views or views on things like being a vegetarian or going green to save the planet. The thing is that foster carers would never inflict their own views on their foster lo's. Children's needs for love and care are the same whatever their ethnicity or skin colour. None of the children I have fostered would understand the first thing about politics and trust me you are too tired to debate it with them.

In the world of Social Services I am guessing that everything has to be politically correct. In the real world we roll up our sleeves and actually do the foster caring and good carers (as these foster carers were said to be) continue to wipe bottoms and change wet beds and nurse poorly lo's as respectfully as is possible no matter what the lo's ethnicity.

Whatever happened to diversity - the foster carer's as well as the lo's!! It shouldn't be a one way street.

why is it so important that the children's culture is paramount anyway. This is Britain. Do other European nations such as the French go on about multiculturalism in the way that we do here? Who dreamed it up in the first place.

It has all become rather silly.

I think it's horrific. The people I know who vote ukip are most definatly not racist. Their circle of close friends confirms this.

I am not realy sure if the opinions of the parents realy count at the moment? Their Children were in care for a reason, they were thriving, settled, warm and fed.

I hope the truth comes out, as, as it stands it makes Rotheram council look the racist party.

If they abide by confidentiality rules, we may never know the whole story.