MSBP: Lost Mothers 2nd thread

[GillW]

New thread beacuse Bunglie needs the existing ones to be temporarily archived (and the last one was getting so-o-o-o-o long...)

Awe, (goes red), You are so nice Janh, will you be my mummy? The position is vacant. Just think, rather than personal secretary and P.A. to Bunglie on your C.V. don't you think Adopted by Bunglie as Mother, would be better. After all we do have something BIG in common!........Knickers! heee heee

Mummy2 seven, I am working on the fishing angle! I hope that the AP's give her permission to get to know me so that there is not a conflict of interest. I have no desire for my poor dd or ds, to feel the need to go behind someones back, to see me. They have been through so much and have had to keep secrets all their lives, I want it to stop, and for a bit of honesty. You are right the AF I think will/would be reasonable, but the 'am' oooh, move over, she sours the milk in the jug! She dislikes me, and does not trust me, everything is so different. I actually think the af maybe a bit frightened to tell her. but just my opinion. She could be really nice with others but definitely no maternal instincts. very sad.

Wayward, Yes, I did have a quick look at this on the other thread. I think it comes from some debate in the House of Lords. I am not certain what bit is lelevent or can help as I did not have time to read it. Anyone want to precis it for me?

Finally, Postsue, Great to see that you found our little corner, tucked away in the recesses of mumsnet.
I hope things are better for you with your daughter and that her being a 'stroppy teenager' is not driving you too bonkers. Just think you can go through it all again with your next one heee heee.
What was your question going to be to Blunket. (Ignorant here, know the name, but who is he/she apart from an MP?)

The mumnet shop, can you design something and they print it, is that what it is all about, so for instance I could design a T-Shirt, for my ds and dd and they would get it (or a hat) just a bit confused how it works. I know this is the wrong thread but has anyone tried them? I was disgusted, 3 different thongs, but no knickers, so sent message and tech2 said sh'e do knickers 'speshly' for me! hmmm is that not favouritism?

I knew it was too good to last.

I have had a letter back from the Social Services department.
I am too upset at the moment to tell you what it says, suffice to say that they are saying the letters are still accurate, and the children, (dd), will be given hers when she reaches 18.
The worst bit is they are saying that I REFUSED to see Meadows and that his findings are accurate. Sod, me, I'm in a wheelchair, I was labled by him, could not get treatment and they don't care that he was wrong.
My poor dd, what an 18th birthday present. It would destroy any progress that we have made, how can they say that they are still an accurate representation of the occurances that surrounded their removal and adoption.
I think you are correct GillW I am going to have to get an injunction, and the clock is ticking.
A very very sad Bunglie.

Bunglie - thats bad news

Makes you wonder what planet they are on.

I think you need to copy the letter to your MP and then get moving on the injunction front.

Is anything that is going on behind the scenes with Snail of any use to you in this regard?

I'm still hassling Margaret Hodge for a reply - is there anything else I can do to help??

Keep your chin up - there are bound to be setbacks on the way, but there must be a way forward!

Jxx

Oh Bunglie. However stop and think about it. They CANNOT reasonably say "his findings are accurate". How can they possibly know? They do not, presumably, have access to the information that you have been diagnosed with a condition which proves conclusively that Meadow's opinion (and that's all it is, an opinion, not a proven fact) that you were fabricating it was false if they have done nothing more than look at the files they had at the time. You have what in legal terms is new evidence. If we were talking of a criminal conviction that in itself would be grounds for appeal.

I'm sure you will not take this laying down - you still have plenty to fight for, and plenty of people willing to help in the fight. You need to get in touch with your MP asap and let him know that you have finally received a response, but that you are not satisfied that the council have made any real attempt to verify the finding (quote your new evidence to prove your point) and that their statement that you refused to meet Meadow is false (if they have that on the written report from him then he is guilty of fabricating evidence, on top of everything else, which is a GMC matter as well as a legal one).

Bunglie - I am so angry on your behalf that I think at this stage of affairs you might have to consider getting outside agencies who can really put some pressure on involved. It might be worth contacting the Today programme on Radio 4 as they've covered this a fair bit, and have been critical about how the councils/social services departments have found that no cases need reopening. The reporter who has covered a lot of the MSBP reviews (or lack of) and the Southall cases too is Andrew Hosken (I'd take a guess at [email protected]). I'm sure he/they would be interested in what you've been told, and could manage to use your story without positively identifying you.

Thank you for your kind words of support, still too upset to post properly, will later

Bunglie - trawling back through what you've told us over the months, I seem to remember that the talked to Jared(?) at the After Adoption advice/action line he told you that "he had NEVER heard of 'A Letter for Life' which the adoption agency had told me was common practice." If you can confirm that, then it would be another argument to back your case for getting the letter stopped/withheld as it cannot even be justified as "normal practice".

Sorry - it's not much, but I'm trying to find some crumbs of comfort for you - I really do believe that all is not lost as far as getting this d**d letter stopped, or at the very least getting the contents of it disclosed so you would have the opportunity to correct any intruths it presented as fact. Although it has been written a long time ago, to send it now could possibly still constitute defamation of character and be covered by the libel laws (you really do need a proper lawyer to confirm this as it's a bit of a grey area where there is such a long delay between the writing and the sending of it, and the person(s) responsible for the sending will not be the same as for the writing).

I probably don;t know enough but on the back of what has recently been decided about Meadows and Southall couldn't you say that you are going to sue for slander or whatever the written form of slander is if they hand the letter over - deformation of character by someone who has been rpoven to be untrustworthy in their opinions??

Sorry this is happening to you Bunglie when you had such a good time before!! Do you think you coulod speak the the AF - I mean if he is ok now surely he will see that this letter is going to cause more harm to DD than anything??

The AF made it quite clear to me on Sunday that he HAS to give dd the letter unless he is ordered otherwise. He did not feel that this was negotiable (sp?) so I dropped the subject so as not to sour the atmosphere.

Have to give a flute lesson now, eyes still red and swollen, so I hope the pollen count is high and I can claim that I have hayfever.

Twinkie - "great minds think alike" about the libel (or is it "fools rarely differ"?)

I don't that would work, if a judge said it, and it is in the final wardship hearing judgment that I have MSBP, they are justyfied in quoting it unless the judgment is overturned surely.
Sorry I do not understand it all.
Their argument is, my case does not fit the guidlines for review, surprise surprise!
They also say that the letter is dd's property. not the AP's not theirs, not mine, but a letter from the social worker at the time to my dd.
The other thing that puzzles me, I do not have a file at the social services I am allowed to look at. ANYTHING to do with the wardship case is in the children's files and I am not allowed access to them. I tried info on 3rd parties, data protection act etc. They will not budge. A report written about me is in my children's file and they are entitle to see it.
Does that seem fair/right?

Sorry, that should say 'I don't THINK that would work!'

Get a solicitor, you need someone to take on teh social services - they are manned by a group of "jobsworth" bureaucrats with an over inflated sense of their own importance.

Also AF has lost the plot a bit, of course he doesn't have to give DD the letter - who is ever going know ? And, if they didn't what would they do ?

I don't know much about this sort of law so not any help. But the first thing I would do as a solicitor is write a very legalistic letter demanding the destruction of the letter. Sometimes we scare people

Bunglie - after this long hard road that you have travelled along, you cannot give up on this one! There must be a way of stopping this blasted letter getting to your DD.

You must try and find some really good solicitors - I've forgotten have you some engaged at present?

Any lawyers out there - do they still do pro bono work - surely someone would take this on just at least for the getting an injunction stage of things.

Your MP - ring him and talk it through with him. Can he suggest anything - put you in touch with people who can help.

I'm so angry for you, and for your poor DD who deosn't need to be landed with this pile of crap just as she starts her A-levels!

Sorry to butt in guys - but just noticed 6pm on Channel 4 on Saturday 19th June is '30 minutes' titled 'the doctors who take away your kids' - Parents who have been wrongly accused of abusing their children speak about the trauma of their children being taken into care, often on the basis of a doctors opinion.

What a load of b*s. Sorry to be so blunt. We know precisely what the "guidelines for review" are - and can quote them back to the council if necessary. If your case hinged on disputed medical evidence, and experts other than Meadow were backing you than it unequivocally DOES fall within the criteria for review. The social services people are just washing their hands of it and banking on you not knowing the precise (even word for word) guidelines they were given.

Your MP will be in a good position to raise this - ask him to bring it up with Margaret Hodge (and possibly with Harriet Harman too) or I could dig out the details for you of the other MP's/members of the Lords who have in the past shown a particular interest in this subject (snail might be able to tell you which is the best one to approach) and you could write to one/some of them.

And I still think that the Today programme (see earlier posting) would be interested in this in the light of their earlier critical stance. (Bunglie if you have a copy of the old threads it was 2nd June when I posted the links to the critical pieces they broadcast).

I am just trying to pull myself together. I have spoken to my MP and he said he spoke to 'margaret' who advised I took legal action!! He had a few ideas but I shall let you know when I am more coherant and up to going through it. I think it is going to have to be the legal route. Why can't people just see that they were wrong. Do they think I sit in a wheelchair for fun?
Sorry I am getting upset again and I don't want to.
I want a giant babygrow, to curl up in, they look so comfortable why should only babies have them? I want a mummy to hug me, I want to suck my thumb until it is wrinkled and here one of twinkies awful jokes.
I will feel better tomorrow, sorry.

Bunglie - if you look on www.lawcentres.org.uk/ that will give advice on a law centre in your area that hopefully will be able to give you some free advice or maybe give you some pointers as to firms that may be willing to take on the work for free. The bar does have a Free Representation Unit, but individuals cannot contact them directly; referals would have to be from solicitors. Have you had any progress with your old firm on retrieving your old files? If you have a look on the Legal Services Commission website this should give you an idea if you would be eligible for Legal Aid/and or whether this would be available for getting an injunction.

So sorry to hear that you are having problems with social services and getting your case included in the review. Re DD - I wasn't implying she should go behind the aps back, just that once she has left home for uni she will be less concerned with their reaction than when she is under their roof, and the aps will have to be less protective of her.

Hey Bunglie - giant babygrows do exist ... see here