Parents 'should go abroad to avoid family courts'

[ScrambledSmegs]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-25641247

Yep, that's the BBC. Currently trending as one of the most read pages on the site.

I know they've tried to make this balanced by referencing CAFCASS, but it doesn't feel like much balance when the headline is something as scaremongering as that. It feels quite irresponsible.

Yes, I know that they're trying to drum up interest in their Panorama program, but I think they'd have been better off not publicising JHMP and his ramblings. Unfortunately, he's dangerous. Ridiculous and foolish, but dangerous.

"In the bad cases the authorities may indeed be able to (should) reach and take action against the mother, perhaps through Interpol, but they cannot reach the take child from overseas because the child has done nothing wrong. And that is the crucial part. Incarcerate the parents for proven wrongdoings, yes, perhaps. But take away the child, no because the child has done nothing wrong and is no longer resident and so not under their jurisdiction."

I know its generally seen as bad form, but I have a question re something you've said elsewhere, it is relevant though, I promise.

Holly, do you even realise that your view that if the mother moves out of the uk, her child cannot be taken back to the uk, completely contradicts your view that the italian mother recently, who was in the uk, yet her child should have been sent back to italy?

I'm trying to consider your view here, but it just looks like you have some sort of axe to grind against british SS, no matter what the circumstances.

Here is a recent example of how running away ended so badly for everyone.

www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2013/1434.html

Would be interested in your views on this Holly.

If you have mental health issues it is probably a bad idea to 'flee' to a foreign country where you may have difficulties speaking the language and getting access to health care.

Lioninthesun Tue 14-Jan-14 16:50:12 > Out of interest, do social services not get to put anything on a possible emigration request?

In the absence of such things as criminal conviction, emigration is a right for EU citizens under EU freedom of movement. That includes the child. There is no request involved so there can't be any input on it.

Spero Tue 14-Jan-14 17:32:22 > If you have mental health issues it is probably a bad idea to 'flee' to a foreign country

Precisely why prophylactic migration is better than flight.

As to a grudge against English SS, having personally experienced abuse for the same (albeit many years ago) it probably colours my outlook. Children mostly need be with their parents. My own parents did an awful thing to me, but they did it with the best of intentions and as best they knew how. Only later did the truly gross mistreatment by mental health professionals emerge. As someone who was raped as a child by a British mental health profesional I think I am allowed to bear a grudge.

Holly - you are certainly entitled to be extremely angry about what was done to you.

But the acts of one evil individual within the mental health profession, does not support a conclusion that everyone in that system is an abuser.

And this is what people have been saying to me on Twitter today.

It is detracting from the real debate which is how do we make these systems open, accountable and fair to the people who come within them. At the moment there are huge problems - which I say is down to lack of funding and training.

And which others say is down to deliberate malice and corruption.

www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2013/1434.html

The case is a tragedy and a truly huge waste of time and money. So typically British. All the more so that it all could so very easily have been avoided at a dozen different points by making very slightly different choices. I see the case was in effect continued to 18 November 2013.

I have to say that Miss B. was a damned fool to have allowed her daughter to ever set foot in England before reaching adulthood. But we have all been damned fools at times, I know I have. Many times. Migrating for about thirty years before returning to England was one of my better moves. Thatcher and Blair were England's darkest days.

which I say is down to lack of funding and training.
And which others say is down to deliberate malice and corruption.

I think reasonable people would say it is both. Or rather all three.

Or rather all four :-)

So you are of the view that people in the system are motivated by malice and corruption.

Is that ALL the people in the system or just some of them?

Is that ALL the people in the system or just some of them?

Obviously not all. Don't be silly. Corruption flows downhill, not uphill, everyone knows that. And I would say self-interest, aggrandisement, kink and megalomania rather than malice per se.

Yes. Above all, lets not be silly.

So, do you believe babies are needlessly adopted so that LA can get cash bonuses?

HollyHB Tue 14-Jan-14 15:15:57

"The expatriated parent's main concern is likely to be staying under the radar long enough to establish the child's residence in their new homeland and thereby end residence in England before further process. Not leaving any forwarding address must help in that regard."

But as the Panorama programme showed, the kind of parent who is most likely to be unfairly accused is the parent of a child with an undiagnosed medical condition which results in serious detriment, perhaps even danger, to the child.

That medical condition isn't going to go away because you run away to another country.

As a parent you must surely reflect that your child must have come by its injuries somehow: if not by abuse, then by something that needs investigating. And if that is your belief, what could be more irresponsible than keeping under the radar in another country. Surely the only responsible thing to do is to stay put and push for further investigations?

For the record, I am the parent of a child whose medical condition was misdiagnosed as abuse. I think it is fair to say that I was traumatised by the situation. But I never lost sight of the fact that my first duty was to dd, to stay calm and keep asking for help because it wasn't about me. I've had counselling since. But more importantly, dd has had treatment.

Oo cory, you killed the thread with your common sense

Holly, sorry for your personal experiences. You only answered half of my question? Do you see the similarities between the italian womans situation, and this one here, and do you have any thought as to why you are giving contradictory opinions on what is a very similar problem?

So, do you believe babies are needlessly adopted so that LA can get cash bonuses?

I don't know why babies are needlessly adopted. There is no way I could possibly know and I suspect you don't know either. Are local Authorities awarded cash bonuses for meeting targets? I was not aware of it if so. Or are bonuses just a red herring?

For the record, I am the parent of a child whose medical condition was misdiagnosed as abuse.

That must have been awful, I'm so sorry it happened. And it must terribly add to the anguish of a parent forced to migrate to disrupt a child's urgently needed medical tests.

The saddest part about this whole affair is that now parents will be reluctant to take their children for treatment if they have minor injuries for fear of misdiagnosis, as happened to you. It was surely not easy for the medical profession to destroy the great trust the public had in them, but somehow they have managed it.

The do-gooders have done enormous harm through their well intentioned (and other) efforts.

HollyHB Tue 14-Jan-14 21:15:43
"> For the record, I am the parent of a child whose medical condition was misdiagnosed as abuse.

That must have been awful, I'm so sorry it happened. And it must terribly add to the anguish of a parent forced to migrate to disrupt a child's urgently needed medical tests."

But how could I have been "forced to migrate" unless I had chosen to regard the disruption of dd's medical tests as less important than my own fear of legal proceedings or of dd being taken into care?

When you are in this situation, you have no means of knowing how serious your child's condition is: it could have been fatal for all I knew.

The idea of maybe risking her life, leaving her medical records behind, ending up in a place where she would have no chance of referral just so that I could escape the unpleasantness of police interrogation and a possible court case- what kind of a parent would I have been?

And what kind of an MP would you have to be to suggest that?

Holly, I'll ask again, do you see the similarities between the italian womans situation, and this one here, and do you have any thought as to why you are giving contradictory opinions on what is a very similar problem?

I'll break it down for you:

Woman has issues with social services in home country
Woman leaves country with baby (born or in utero)

Woman 1 - baby should be sent back to home country, even if to be put into care system in that country
Woman 2 - did the right thing, baby should stay in expat country, absolutely anything is better than baby entering care system

Any response?

HollyHB Tue 14-Jan-14 21:15:43

"The do-gooders have done enormous harm through their well intentioned (and other) efforts."

What about the not-do-gooders, the ones who believed Daniel Pelkas' mum when she claimed there was a medical reason for her son's emaciated appearance, because they were so afraid of being unfair to a parent?

I am the mildly traumatised parent of a child who is still alive. She was never questioned- and she will live all her life with her child's life on her conscience. I know who I'd rather be.

similarities between the italian womans situation, and this one here, and do you have any thought as to why you are giving contradictory opinions on what is a very similar problem?

I don't see it as similar or parallel at all. If we take Miss B. in the case you cited as an example, then yes, if the Swedish authorities had actually found the mother deficient in some way then it would be reasonable for Socialstyrelsen to repatriate the baby. Especially if the mother had been ordinarily resident in England. Just as the English should have (but still have not) sent baby Pacchieri to her land of citizenship.

But they did not, the Swedes found no defect whatsoever with Miss B.. It was only the English who pursued her, most nastily when she was passing through Heathrow airport. So idiotic of her to have afforded them that opportunity, but hindsight is 20/20.

cory Tue 14-Jan-14 21:34:25 > What about the not-do-gooders
Those too, enormous harm. Horrible.

The inescapable fact is that only ten years ago there used to be great public trust in medicine and justice for parents and now it has largely been destroyed.

No Holly - ten years ago it was just the same. It's only now we have social networking sites where scaremongering figures can fester and gather momentum.

I think the tests to prove these medical conditions show that the medical profession is improving - ten years ago this would have been impossible, from your way of thinking.

HollyHB Tue 14-Jan-14 21:40:54
"cory Tue 14-Jan-14 21:34:25 > What about the not-do-gooders
Those too, enormous harm. Horrible.

The inescapable fact is that only ten years ago there used to be great public trust in medicine and justice for parents and now it has largely been destroyed."

So what do you think a medic should do when a parent brings in a child who has serial unexplained injuries and/or looks completely emaciated and there is no obvious explanation?

If he keeps quiet, that (as you admit) is horrible and risks doing enormous harm.

If he intervenes, then he risks getting it wrong and destroying public trust in his profession.

So what should he do?

What would you do?

Could you comment on this, Holly?

"cory Tue 14-Jan-14 21:23:36
HollyHB Tue 14-Jan-14 21:15:43
"> For the record, I am the parent of a child whose medical condition was misdiagnosed as abuse.

That must have been awful, I'm so sorry it happened. And it must terribly add to the anguish of a parent forced to migrate to disrupt a child's urgently needed medical tests."

But how could I have been "forced to migrate" unless I had chosen to regard the disruption of dd's medical tests as less important than my own fear of legal proceedings or of dd being taken into care?

When you are in this situation, you have no means of knowing how serious your child's condition is: it could have been fatal for all I knew.

The idea of maybe risking her life, leaving her medical records behind, ending up in a place where she would have no chance of referral just so that I could escape the unpleasantness of police interrogation and a possible court case- what kind of a parent would I have been?

And what kind of an MP would you have to be to suggest that?"

This is the thing though - all of JH's supporters have no evidence and follow a man who has done nothing to actually change anything. Spreading fear, yes, they can do and attempt with vigour. Anything which actually means they have to think independently or come up with answers to HELP and they run a mile.