Shocking.

[IrnBruTheNoo]

Hard to believe that a couple who are doing a good job raising their DC are being slated like this...

www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/kerry-mcdougall-dumb-married-mum-2799857

This is outrageous

slated by whom?

Seems very cruel.

Sadly, there are too many of these stories of SWs removing children for these "reasons".

Fortunately, there is one MP, John Hemming, who helps parents in these cases

johnhemming.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/mark-and-kerry-mcdougall.html

I don't know if John Hemming is helping in this case, but he has helped in other cases

John Hemming is a loon and best not mentioned here,

god Hemming?? he's a trouble maker,and yes,best not mentioned here

two sides to every story....we have only one

Frankly, I wouldn't trust anything written by somebody that describes a person with learning difficulties 'dumb'.

If there is somebody who can help them, good for him and them

This is disgusting and seems like there is no other side of the story. They have been deemed fit parents apparently.

Its about time that sw's were given autonomy to stop the real child abusers, murderers and neglectful.

An article from 2010 says that John Hemming was helping the couple

"LibDem MP John Hemming, who has been supporting the couple, said: ‘There is no evidence that Mark and Kerry cannot be good parents and I just hope that the Irish authorities can resolve this as quickly as possible.’ "

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1245190/Mother-clever-raise-child-baby-removed-social-workers-running-away.html

Thing is, a huge number of women who have their children taken into care have very low IQs. They also have awful boyfriends, violence in their lives, and often don't cope with childcare. It's these - the violence and neglect - that should justify removal, not simply the SEN.

ss are privy to more info than us and john hemming! they aren't going to publish it are they?

She should be given support, not have the children taken away from her. If they've managed this far to raise the children without very little support, they're doing better than many out there.

So many other mums struggle to feed their children, and see to even their most basic needs.

I agree there are two sides to a story, but looking at the couple, they do seem to be doing a good job raising them so far.

SS do not need to provide any evidence at all for "risk of emotional harm" to remove children.

Very vindictive of the LA.

But also the couple didn't exercise a lot of common sense by returning to the same LA area. They could have chosed an different area within Scotland. They've made themselves sitting targets.

They went back to the same LA because of family links. Makes sense when you kind of think about it. If you've got a family, good to have that support around you (whether you've SEN or not).

John Hemming is certainly NOT a 'loon '.. He is a v good & brave man who works tirelessly for child protection . Read his blog if you have any doubts on that score

I agree Rockhopper. He's one of the few along with Christopher Booker, who is actually speaking out against the abuse of SS.

John hemming is a major shit stirrer and conspiracy theorist if will not help their case he is more likely to severely hinder it do a quick google search!

SS are damned if they get involved and damned if they don't.
Clearly the full picture isn't available, as soc services wouldn't be allowed to publish it. This is just an emotive bit of "journalism" where anybody with an iota of intelligence knows it is only stating the story from the perspective of the parents, and there is no possibility that SS can expand upon what the parents want the press to think.
Doesn't anyone remember the outcry there is each time a child dies, because soc services haven't done enough ?

Before anyone denigrates John Hemmings they should familiarise themselves with the work of Dr Liz Davies . She has an excellent blog .

Well said Rockhopper1

So why do you think the social workers are doing it? For kicks? A good story in the pub? Because they're bored and don't have enough to do?
Plus if a "protection order" is the same as child protection plan in England that does not mean taken into care. It means social workers getting involved with vulnerable children and their parents to look out for the boys. The evil gits.

I don't know about this case.

But here is a report from the BBC

"Babies are being removed from their parents so that councils can meet adoption targets, MPs have claimed.

The MPs fear a rise in the number of young children being taken into care in England and Wales is linked to pressure on councils to increase adoption rates.

Lib Dem MP John Hemming, who has tabled a Commons motion on the issue, said it was a "national scandal"."

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/6297573.stm

"In 2000, ministers set a target of a 50% increase in the number of children in local authority being adopted by March 2006.

According to the latest available figures, the number of "looked after" children being adopted had gone up from 2,700 in 2000 to 3,700 in 2004, an increase of 37.7%.

The biggest rise was in the one to four-year-old age range."

This large increase seems to have occurred under New Labour.
Why, I don't know.