Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

News

Italian adoption case III

999 replies

Juliet123456 · 07/12/2013 09:29

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.

OP posts:
Spero · 13/12/2013 17:31

He looked at my gas fire very lasciviously. I think he made up a problem about the gas valve so he could come back later and remove it. No doubt my complaints about feeling cold will be used against me as proof of my emotional instability. Corrupt doctors will sedate me, on on awakening I will find a hole in my wall where my lovely fire used to be.

What is IMPISH going to DO about this outrage?

MadameDefarge · 13/12/2013 17:31

Can't we just sneak into the Houses of Parliament and use their franking machine?

I think that is accepted practice nowadays.

Spero · 13/12/2013 17:32

My next door neighbour thinks she may have spoken to someone in 1987 who had a similar problem!

What more proof do you need? Just how many gas fitters must I call to find one not in the pay of the corrupt system?

MadameDefarge · 13/12/2013 17:33

Are you VERY VERY sure you actually had a fire in the first place???

Spero · 13/12/2013 17:34

If - unbelievably - further proof is needed, here is a link to my local paper where it published a very angry letter from me.

www.completelyinventedbollix.com

Spero · 13/12/2013 17:36

Only an hour before I have to leave for my works Christmas 'do' and JH has only about 70 posts left to answer me!

the winged pigs are quivering. Could tonight finally be their night?

Hush my pretties.

MadameDefarge · 13/12/2013 17:38

Well, I have found evidence that 'unwanted' fires are being sold for scrap at many local scrap dealers.

Clearly all those fires must have been ripped from unsuspecting walls by ruthless firestealers.

I think I shall write a very strongly worded (if incoherent) letter to the CORGI complaints department.

MadameDefarge · 13/12/2013 17:39
CarpeVinum · 13/12/2013 17:40

As luck would have it, I know a gas fitter who was absolutly fired for refusing to snatch a fire.

It had nothing to do with not following his line managers instructions to assess for gas leaks before telling the owner they could keep their fire. That was just GESTAPO! excuses added later to cover up and discredit his TROOF ! telling and whistle blowing. Everybody knows that all these gas leak checks are just made up bollocks so FireSnatching can be "justified".

I have a private legal document to prove it if any internet random would like to see it.

Ignore that bit about the "not following instructions. Just put the full stop where I say so, and you can see it clearly proves the CONSPIRACY!

MadameDefarge · 13/12/2013 17:43

How many homes are being left cold and cheerless this Xmas due to these callous practices?

Just how many, eh?

Loads, I tell you, loads. I have all the figures in a very confidential document I might have sent up the chimney to santa.

johnhemming · 13/12/2013 17:44

Spero: Do you accept that you have never provided ANY evidence in support of your assertion that a social worker was fired for recommending reunification?

No I provided the evidence which is that because a social worker recommended unification she was fired. The fact that she had been instructed not to do this [without further assessments] does not change the fact that she was fired because she recommended unification.

It is a bit futile discussing things if this relatively straightforward logic is something you refute.

An additional example is that councils were paid a bonus for hitting a target of adoptions. Generally that meant that children that would have returned to their parents (or indeed gone to grandparents) got adopted as predicted by BASW. However, at times also additional babies were taken into care.

However, there was no bonus for taking children into care.

Spero · 13/12/2013 17:46

Thank God IMPISH is on the case.

can we now contact some random Italian groups just to get a bit of international flavour to our ranting justified and very real concerns.

MadameDefarge · 13/12/2013 17:47

Surely you mean children already with a placement order, John? Not just random children in LA care?

No chance of them being returned to parents, and presumablely kinship adoption had already been ruled out in the process.

johnhemming · 13/12/2013 17:47

There is an international association of human rights organisations fidh which has two affiliates in Italy.

www.unionedirittiumani.it and
www.liduonlus.org/

AIUI the big difference is that the UFTDU only has lawyers as members whereas anyone can join the other one.

Spero · 13/12/2013 17:47

Sigh.
I knew the fun had to end.

JH You sent me a document written by the other side

It really doesn't prove what you think it proves.

Now answer the other questions please.

johnhemming · 13/12/2013 17:48

ps I am now going to Brownies (ie the pub).

AngelaDaviesHair · 13/12/2013 17:49

I was going post something laughing at "relatively straightforward logic", until I read:

"councils were paid a bonus for hitting a target of adoptions. Generally that meant that children that would have returned to their parents (or indeed gone to grandparents) got adopted as predicted by BASW. However, at times also additional babies were taken into care."

and all laughter died. This is beyond irresponsible, given that you peddle this to the desperate and vulnerable, it is unscrupulous, reckless, self-serving myth-making.

MadameDefarge · 13/12/2013 17:50

John, I heartily applaud your enthusiastic support of small local business.

Spero · 13/12/2013 17:50

You have just said However, there was no bonus for taking children into care

So please explain why you have previously asserted that this WAS EXACTLY WHAT WAS GOING ON

CarpeVinum · 13/12/2013 17:50

Here's an offical 201 page document of dense and jargon ridden text. There is a tiny snippet in there, wirtten on code, that proves my point about the systemtic opression of customers via the practice of firesnatching I know exactly where it is in the documeny, and have the code breaking key, but I can't be arsed to tell you. You find it.

See I win rightness ! Proof as requested by the harpy harridens who say I'm a bit light of facts !!

Spero · 13/12/2013 17:51

AngelaDaviesHair, o yes indeed.

Words fail me.

Spero · 13/12/2013 17:53

please can have the stats that you promised in 2011

Spero · 13/12/2013 17:53

when you get back from the pub or Brownies, please will you finally send the stats you promised in 2011

MadameDefarge · 13/12/2013 17:54

Too late Spero, he's gorn down the pub. Maybe he keeps his spechul stats papers there?

CarpeVinum · 13/12/2013 17:57

It really doesn't prove what you think it proves

Well it would if you drank the kool aid and came away from The Dark Side.

Yours

Cheifest Top Dog President of WANKER
We Are Not Keen on Evidence being Required