Child taken from womb? Truth into darkness....

[LakeDistrictBabe]

Ok, the old thread is nearly full. If you read the other three, I don't need to re-write everything again ;)

But you know I am referring to the case involving an Italian mother and the British social services.
Opinions welcome.

that those opposing my view normally resort to abuse rather than logic.

I am probably the person most angry with you here (at the moment). Becuase on top of everything else, you misled me as per the public nature of the Italian court doc extract you posted. And as has been repeatedly asserted on all the threads we both partaicipated in, I.live.in.Italy. Thus subject to Italian privacy law.

If you feel I have abused you, report me to mumsnet HQ. There is a little report link near all of my posts. We'll call it quits. Cos I have been reporting you. Left, right and centre. Just not to MNHQ.

Alhough I am inclined to think that howls of..

I, poor defenceless millionaire MP am being ABUSED! by mummies on the internet

...are about deflection and distraction.

I think the last thing you want is the conversation to keep coming back to how you may be facing the consequences of breeching a court order. And why.

Goddam those pesky parents who can't look after their kids. If only they could stop being rubbish for, say a year, we could get some really good stats...

As it is they keeping popping up all over the place, regardless of time or place, and ruining the inflow outflow charts.

I will email stats to Spero when I have free time on my laptop. I am using a phone atm

Christ on a bike Spero block his email. Who knows if it's stuff covered by the offical secrets act this time. He keeps upping the ante with the confidental "proof!". So god's knows what he'll send this time.

Take no chances.

As a matter of interest John, have you been approached yet by the Libdem executive about your actions these last few weeks, and specifically the publication of a confidential, Italian court document, and the public naming of not only Baby P in this case, but also her two older sisters?

have Parliamentary Standards been in touch?

Because if they haven't I would indeed be inclined to agree with you their is a conspiracy of silence.

A conspiracy to bury bad news if at all possible.

Do NOT make the mistake of underestimating folk here.

Nor their ability to bring apparent failings to public light, and to indeed lobby (an activity you have shown us the way on) both in the media and in parliament and using due process of law to ensure censure and even more dire consequences for the public careers of our elected representatives who break the law.

Because in a democracy these avenues are open to all citizens.

HTH.

O goody. Another email! Possibly from somebody else's court proceedings? With lots of lovely names? Maybe the identities of some more children?

But hey hoh life goes on eh.

No, let's keep prodding him. With any luck he will send me something I can take to the police.

That would be my best Christmas present.

With any luck he will send me something I can take to the police.

Well, if it is, hold on to it for a while. Don't want him getting away with concurrent sentences.

I am still astonished John that you seem so wholly unfazed by your catastrophic error of judgement that led you to

NAME in the public domain, both the two older sisters, and the little baby at the heart of this case,

ON AN OPEN FORUM on the internet, for the world to see.

Until you can acknowledge this your opinions can have, in my opinion, no merit.

To be so at odds with decency and fairness and the protection of vulnerable children so as to say, oops, a mistake, shows your posts to be wholly at odds with the majority opinion in this country and on MN itself.

And this is your biggest mistake of all:

because if you had come back and said, in all honesty I really fucked up there, I'm glad its been deleted, I am so so sorry et etc, we might, despite all the evidence of your posts to the contrary, have actually believed just a tiny tiny bit in your ability to admit mistakes and do the decent thing.

A massive missed opportunity John. Really. Who on earth does your PR?

I would sack them right now. As a PR professional. I really really would.

It appears that Spero does not want me to email her the stats. OK. I don't mind. I am quite happy to email the stats, but if people don't want them.

In any event the proof that there are currently adoption targets operating still with the wrong denominator is available across the net.

No John, you cannot have read her thread properly.

She is all eagerness to see your stats.

just in case you missed her post I will copy it for you

O goody. Another email!

Don't feel constraint here John, you owe it to the public and all those poor families to get the truth out there.

Thing is John, none of us can find the stats that PROVE SS are taking babies into care simply to turn them into adoption fodder for bonuses.

We have looked and looked.

It it is so freely available, do post it on here, by pass spero.

It is up to Spero really. These things come as excel spreadsheets and are a bit difficult to read when posted here.

No John.

It is up to you.

You say you have the info.

Email away. provide an written analysis of the data, if you can.

I have already shown you how to save an excel sheet as a jpeg so you can attach it here, if you would like to provide us all with the data so we don't have to rely simply on your or spero's interpretation.

I want to beleive you are a man of integrity.

I am struggling.

You do need to be able to prove it. Not just to sad families, who, while loving their children, are unable to care for them adequately, but also to intelligent and informed bystanders, who, if only you had to nous to realise, could prove your greatest supporters.

You have a once in a lifetime opportunity to sway intelligent, thinking, women over to your side.

Up your game and do it.

It appears that Spero does not want me to email her the stats.

There are these things, called "names".

You may be familiar with the term.

The "name" Spero did not say don't send. The "name" CarpeVinum suggest she should consider declining.

Name.

Lable for a person, so you can work out who is who.

May or may not be subject to a court order that prohibits posting it on the internet.

Just wanted to say what a grand job you posting MNers are doing.

JH - the Haringey press thingy you linked to was about the fact they had been able to recruit more adopters, not grab more children. You are not exactly covering yourself in glory (understatement).

No, no, John seemed to make such an almighty cock up of his last cut and paste in a post, no way would he do it again.

I am convinced that anything he sends spero, or publishes here, will prove beyond as doubt his claims that LAs are deliberately taking babies and children into care in order to provide adoption fodder for central government bonuses.

Because surely that is the whole point of him posting here? to convince an important constituency in the uk internet world of the justice of his convictions?

Actually perhaps the best is for me to put them on google docs.

docs.google.com/file/d/0BzMKhMcESE6uT1ExdzhpSjFHLXc/edit

These are the estimates I did. Obviously they come out to a figure higher than 1,000 per year, but I generally make the claim of 1,000 per year.

The point about this is that in fact the children adopted were mainly new children rather than those "languishing in care". Sadly the process has actually produced more statutory orphans.

I can give the figures for those as well (including those freed for adoption, but not adopted and those placed for adoption, but not adopted.)

drive.google.com/file/d/0BzMKhMcESE6ucHhtb3ZFZGRiS00/edit?usp=sharing

Now for these children the situation is particularly awful because they are the sort of children that appear in A&S v Lancashire County Council

And here is the judgment
www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed98855

No wonder the children ask that the important people (such as Spero) listen to them; See para 10.

10. These boys have suffered real, lifelong damage and they are now entitled to demand an effort of understanding. This has become important to A, who attended the hearing in the hope that lessons might be learned for the benefit of other children. When he was recently asked what improvements he thinks could be made to the system in which he spent his childhood, he replied: "FOR THE IMPORTANT PEOPLE TO LISTEN TO US."

I had an interesting meeting with Women Against Rape this evening before I left for Birmingham
twitter.com/BarristerBlues/status/413401533695283200

Michelle Freedman who tweeted that tweet is a family court barrister who left the country to escape the system and protect her children from it.

She has now left her children abroad and has come back to fight on behalf of human beings (children and adults) and against the state.

WAR had some interesting cases that I was not aware of. I look forward to working with them in the future.

Right your first excel spreadsheet I assume has been filled in, and the columns and headings have been inserted by you.

My first note is that this seems to refer to SCOTTISH adoptions?

Forgive me for my ignorance, but Scottish law is somewhat different to English Law?

Are you actually saying that it is in fact the SCOTS who have are at the heart of this supposed practice of taking into care in order to supply children for adoption?

This is a whole new angle none of us had considered. Hm.

Will read more now.

Right. I need more than a minute to analyse this data.

However I would point out that your third link is wholly random, and does not link to your previous two links.

We are all, as we have said again and again, Critical Friends of the processes in care and adoption in this country. Many children do need adopting. The process needs to be clearer, kinder and speedier than at present.

No one dispute this John, whatever your posts might suggest.

Are you actually saying that it is in fact the SCOTS who have are at the heart of this supposed practice of taking into care in order to supply children for adoption?

The plot thickens.

Oddly enough I take the view that human beings in Scotland are much like human beings in England. One could, for example, consider Scotland as a "control experiment".

Now there may be people that consider Scots to be a different species, but I do not share their view.

There are people who believe that my figure of (over) 1,000 a year is too low an estimate. However, I think it emphasises the point of a system going wrong on a day by day basis.

I have talked to other MPs about this. Basically there are 533 MPs in England so it is in fact only two cases per constituency per year.

However I would point out that your third link is wholly random

I think it is time now for you to leave random cases aside and actually deal with the fundamental issues at the heart of our system.

All individual cases can be considered heartbreaking. But hard cases make bad law.

No one disputes that the system can and should be improved. This takes political will and money, neither of which the Tory/Libdem coalition seem intent on providing.

If you could use your clout to actually initiate a lobbying campaign that dealt with the central issues (not silly conspiracy theories) but actual, hard core, provable failures in the system, and point out the way to improve it so as to significantly impact positively the outcomes for ALL children in care, then maybe you would be doing a bloody good thing, and we would be behind you.