Italian adoption case III

[Juliet123456]

The last thread says all I need to know about those in the system. It also the most legally dangerous thread I have ever seen on mumsnet. I hope someone has been through the posts for libel risk. It also entirely one sided and biased and makes me laugh.

The defensiveness of those involved in this area will hopefully disappear once we have the openness that JH and indeed many others are seeking and obtaining as the judges increasingly accept that it helps everyone to understand what are very difficult decisions - parents, children and lawyers and social workers and expert witnesses in this field.

It will continue to be important always to get to the facts and where possible publish the facts. I continue to believe that almost any of us could have our children removed if the state set its mind to that. If publishing more decisions and giving rights to parents and those involved and the children to write what they like on twitter, facebook and the like and to let parents and children even when separated communicate and talk about any issues they choose will help then let us hope the law continues down that course.

@Spero
"The journalists don't appear to care."

Hmmm... not sure about it. They're biding their time I guess...
Just my two cents, so don't take this as evidence of any kind... I've just a feeling that this story will backfire on the ones who started it, it already began to sway elsewhere....
Today I counted 4 people still hanging from JH and the DM lips and about 4 times more people disagreeing with them...

3/4 of the posters on this thread have a perspective now different from what was intended when the first articles came out one week ago. And I guess that is a major progress in such a short time.

@Spero, don't lose hope ;)

OK ladies, for Lake it is bedtime.

Say hello to JH from me (psst don't tell him I'm not in bed of course, just on the online forums, trying to convince Italians they should come to UK if they like to have their babies snached from British ss... )

Argh...Nazi comparisons drive me insane. As to people going on about the "SS" and making SS comparisons. It makes me feel that history teahcing is failing somehow, because some people completely fail to grasp what the Nazis believed and did

If this was Nazi Germany, the poor mother would have been "euthanised" by now, and I'm not entuirely sure the baby would have allowed to live either, because of the risk of inheriting illness

But if believing that Social Services are comparable to the Schutzstaffel makes you feel better, keep on being an idiot all your life

Its depressing isn't it, they don't give a jot about the system just about sensational headlines

Juliet, if the last thread says all you need to know about those in the system you will stay forever ignorant because 'those in the system' are in the main not on this thread
What Juliet do you think should happen to the children in abusive families
They often spend too long as it is either in the abusive family or in the care system
They do not have time to wait. Babies brains continue to develop after birth and how they develop depends on the love and nurture they receive
Once a brain has developed you cannot undo how it has developed. they do not have the time to wait for a BP to get their act together

Even so, I have seen great work done by social workers to keep families together

Do you agree Juliet that a parent should whisper to a child that they are being stolen by wicked people?
Do you know how much more that will screw them up?
Do you even care about the children caught up in this Juliet?

Lake when you get back can I have a link for where this came from

Foreign tourists and business visitors should if pregnant feel safe that their babies will not be confiscated and adopted by strangers.At present they are all now at risk

And if the original link is in Italian can I send out your translation with the link ?

Foreign tourists and business visitors should if pregnant feel safe that their babies will not be confiscated and adopted by strangers.At present they are all now at risk

BULLSHIT, YOU LIAR

I could expand on that, but saying that all tourists are at risk, even if they don't have severe mental illness, is so truly obviously pathetic lying, it needs no more explaining

Stop being an idiot and actually read what happend in this case

Good night all. Sterling work. I have had a whisper that time is being bided.

Keep the faith.

@Carpe, sending you a PM ;)

hey as long as I get tweeted by Carl Gardner I am happy.

I am surprised that mumsnet are allowing this thread?

Why?

Why? Because it is defamatory? It most certainly is not. Every criticism of JH is founded on debunking his own words.

Because we are mean horrid bullies, picking on the little defenceless millionaire politician who was forced to leave his cosy pub to be subjected to internet abuse by hysterical and baying harridans?

Do me a favour.

If you don't want to get called out as someone lacking in integrity and basic reading skills, here's a hint - don't broadcast your deficiencies over and over and over again on a public forum.

And yes I am talking about JH.

I reckon he get's some of his best ideas down the pub. It can be a very creative environment.

I hope he was drunk for most of this thread.

Because the thought that his contributions to the discussion represented the keenest insight of his sober mind is frankly horrifying.

No-one who genuinely confirmed about this mother and, particularly, this child, would contemplate referring them to Christopher Brooker and Sue Reid. That has done them both a great deal of harm.

Sorry, meant No-one who is genuinely concerned, not confirmed.

I have an aoplogy and more question evasion practice for Mr Hemming.

When this quote was presented

Foreign tourists and business visitors should if pregnant feel safe that their babies will not be confiscated and adopted by strangers.At present they are all now at risk

I was mistakenly under the impression it came from you. I aologise for assuming it was written by you prior to absolute confirmation that you were the author.

However I now have the link and can see the author is in fact IJ.

My question is, do you agree with him ?

It would be very good to have a specific and detailed response from JH to my queries posted at 14.22 and 14.25 today. Still, if he doesn't reply we will have to conclude that he concedes that his much vaunted Employment Tribunal case does not prove what he says it does.

OK you lot I think we need to give JH and Juliet and (and someone else who I can't remember) a break and the truth came out so for your delight and edification here is the truth:

Once upon a time there was an Italian lady who had a baby and the nasty evil Italian baby snatchers, swooped and snatched and said the baby had to be cared for by his grandmother, and then the lady had another baby and yes, the horrid baby snatchers came again and took her baby away and gave it to the grandmother.

Then the Italian lady came to the UK and she was pregnant. She got a bit flustered in the hotel (probably because she was pregnant ) and her breathing was a bit shallow so the police were called and then they called 2 doctors and an evil social worker (who was supposed to be approved under the Mental Health Act, but that was probably a lie) and they all signed a piece of paper to say the lady was a bit mad, and then they took her to a psychiatric hospital and she had to stay there. There the wicked doctors and nurses made her take pills and sometimes gave her injections that she didn't want.

Then the nasty doctors and nurses went to see an important man in a court to ask if he would give his permission for the Italian lady's baby to be delivered by C section because they thought she was "too stupid" to make a decision herself. The man in the court said the nasty doctors and midwives could deliver the baby by C Section and then the lady was dragged off and they cut open her stomach and pulled out the baby.

Then the nasty evil social workers went to see another important man in another court and asked if the baby could be taken from the mother because they wanted the baby for adoption to meet their targets. Also they would get extra money if they could get the baby adopted and one of them wanted a new washing machine and dryer, so the extra money would come in handy. So the important man said they could take the baby from the mother.

Then the Italian lady went back to Italy and the nasty social workers went with her, to ask her parents if they would look after the baby and they said NO as they were tired out looking after the other 2 children. The nasty social workers were very happy as they knew they could get the baby forcibly adopted and they would get the money they deserved. They were a bit down on the number of babies they had been able to snatch for that particular quarter of the year.

Then another important man who was a Member of Parliament called John Hemming heard of the case and he helps loving parents who have had their babies snatched from them by the evil social workers. He hopes to get the Italian lady's baby back for her and she is very happy.

The end.

Happy now JH and his 2 supporters on the thread.

Simon Myerson QC has replied to my tweet to say what JH says on line is up to him - what matters is that people find out he is unreliable and then he can know more than everyone else and it won't matter.

Which is all very well and good but I think a lot of people are missing the crucial point - it is not simply a matter of him SAYING these awful and mad things, but he makes a point of ADVISING.

Advising very vulnerable and desparate people who want to believe him. That, I think, is the real danger here.

And to cap it all he acts in this way as a serving MP, paid for on public purse. He seems to be on these threads on all hours of day and night. Just when does he attend to his constituency?

Hav to say, I assumed it was Ian Josephs as soon as I saw it - it had IJ written all over it

Also remember that IJ believes that social workers invent conditions like Bipolar, Scizophrenia etc and stick them on people in order to discredit them. Like that poor lady I quoted above, who was told that she was being slapped with a dx of Bipolar as part of a SS conspiracy to steal her baby.

As far as IJ is concerned, everyone is at risk because this lady doesn't have anything wrong with her at all and if you come to the UK and have a minor panic attack, social workers and doctors will conspire to have you briefly asssessed and diagnosed with scizophrenia for no reason at all, so they then have an excuse to steal the baby

it is not simply a matter of him SAYING these awful and mad things, but he makes a point of ADVISING

^^That.

I see him as the poltical plaform version of Jeremy Kyle.

That'd be nice wouldn't it? If bipolar, schizophrenia etc were all imaginary. Rather than shitty horrible conditions that people have to live with.

JH not sure why I'm asking as the chance of a response is about as rare as hen's teeth, but I will ask nonetheless : Have you at any time been a manager in Social Services? NO I thought not. I have, for 15 years and in cases where care proceedings are initiated the LA social services department have to produce a Care Plan for the child and submit this to Court, so that at the final hearing the Judge knows exactly how the LA intend to secure the future of the child/ren involved.

The care plan is drawn up by the social worker with case responsibility and will as someone as pointed out be the subject of discussion between the social worker, the team manager and the Fostering & Adoption Team Manager, and any other professional who needs to be involved. In 15 years I have known cases where a social worker or/and a team manager thought that further assessments need to be carried out, or the parents ought to be given another opportunity to adhere to the child protection plan with which they agreed. These are complex matters and need full and careful consideration.

I recall one case where I (as the Fostering & Adoption Team Manager) disagreed with the views of the social workers that a child should not be removed from the mother, but the child's social worker and team manager are making the Care Plan and presenting the case in court so of course their view would prevail. I was as it happens proved right and following an incident where the 8 month old baby was left in a pram in a babygro and a thin cover in the winter, outside while the mother (who had moderate learning disabilities) played on a weegie board inside the house, the baby was finally removed from her care.

It is quite ridiculous that a social worker files a care plan in court that goes against the views of the team manager. No social worker has to agree with their team manager and in such circumstances the team manager's manager would be called in to the discussions and if necessary her manager and so on through the line management structure. What can't happen is for the social worker to arbitrarily file a document in court which does not have the backing of the department, which is what appears to have happened in this case The view of the social worker is neither here nor there, the issue is as has already been pointed out, that the social worker went against departmental policy.

SO once again JH you have failed to provide the evidence that you claim to have

Another Question: Do you think we are all of such limited intelligence that we can't see through your desperate attempts to support your conspiracy theory................do you.............honestly???????

Yes or No will do............???????

I think i've established already that he won't even answer yes or no questions.