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

Judge slams Social Services over forced adoptions

121 replies

edam · 01/05/2008 18:15

this is apalling but sadly doesn't surprise me after all the other cases. 'Best interests of the child' my arse. And see the unbelievably smug comment at the end!

I do hope the father gets legal aid to see a judicial review.

OP posts:
expatinscotland · 03/05/2008 23:53

That is true, edam.

My SIL was also removed, fostered and later adopted out - NOT against her birth mother's wishes, I might add - in Scotland.

milliec · 04/05/2008 10:42

Message withdrawn

edam · 04/05/2008 11:12

Seems to me the press have done a pretty good job of accurate reporting.

OP posts:
fiodyl · 04/05/2008 11:32

This story does not suprise me as I have been through hell with East Sussex's social services. They are prepared to lie, cheat and do whatever they can to get the result they want.
In the best interests of the children and families team, not the children and definatly not their families

smallwhitecat · 04/05/2008 11:45

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

edam · 04/05/2008 12:19

I'm sorry you've have to deal with these arrogant bastards, fiodyl.

OP posts:
fiodyl · 04/05/2008 12:21

Something should be done about it, but nothing will. And if u make any complaints against them you risk losing your kids forever.

FORCED ADOPTION SHOULD BE ILLEGAL

edam · 04/05/2008 12:30

I'm coming round to that opinion, fiodyl. There have been too many cases where SS have got away with murder - remember one recently where a judge pointed out SS had broken the law by snatching a newborn baby from his mother with no authority at all?

I know SS argument is that if parents could stop adoptions, children in care would be in limbo, unable to find a new family. But I think there has been too much wrong-doing to allow the present system to remain. It has to be changed.

Even in the appalling days when unmarried mothers were forced to give their babies up for adoption, they still had to sign the papers - no-one could take their children away without their consent. The consent was not given freely in many instances, of course, but it's astonishing that we've managed to make things worse, not better.

And it's a bit much for the care system to criticise parents - children in care have far worse outcomes than those living in families that attract SS disapproval. They are far more likely than anyone else to end up pregnant at a young age, unemployed, in prison or sectioned.

I know good SWs are under a lot of pressure, in many areas dealing with endemic staf shortages and little support. But there is something very wrong with a system that encourages SW depts to act as a law unto themselves.

OP posts:
edam · 04/05/2008 12:31

"the best interests of the child" is too often used as an excuse for "whatever the SS dept says". It's defined by SS so is hardly going to be independent or objective.

OP posts:
fiodyl · 04/05/2008 12:40

Parents who go to court to fight against he adoptions of their children, obviously care about what happenes to them. Social services should be helping and supporting these families not stealing their children to meet adoption targets.

luminarphrases · 04/05/2008 12:46

Coming at it from a Data protection bod angle, far too often the families in these cases don't get access to information on whatever it is they are supposed to have done and the social services block at every turn, often issuing a blanket refusal on giving the parents any information at all.

LaDiDaDi · 04/05/2008 13:06

I disagree that forced adoptions should be ended but I am horrified at the actions of ss in this case. The judgements are resounding in their condemnation and one can only hope that the professionals involved will be sacked, not only the social workers but also the solicitors acting for the local authority.

edam · 04/05/2008 13:11

Don't rate the chances of that happening, Ladida. Sadly.

OP posts:
LaDiDaDi · 04/05/2008 13:12

No, tnh neither do I. What is the social work professional body?

KerryMum · 04/05/2008 13:14

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

edam · 04/05/2008 13:26

The argument is it would be harmful to disrupt the child. Adoptions are supposed to be final. Although no-one seems to mind when you disrupt a child by removing them from their parents without cause... or when you disrupt a foster child by dropping in out of the blue to take them away to a new placement. It's common for the poor kids to come home from school to find the SWs car outside and be swept away without any notice at all.

OP posts:
KerryMum · 04/05/2008 13:27

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

edam · 04/05/2008 13:27

It's another example of 'the best interests of the child' being interpreted in a way that is entirely self-serving. 'Oh, we fucked up, but hey, the best interests are served by not doing anything about it.'

OP posts:
smallwhitecat · 04/05/2008 13:30

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

luminarphrases · 04/05/2008 13:45

i'd try and do a foi request, smallwhitecat, but i doubt you'd get anywhere as it would involve confidential info

smallwhitecat · 04/05/2008 13:48

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

edam · 04/05/2008 15:09

I think you are right, smallwhitecat, they are perfectly able to tell you about whether they are reviewing procedures or updating their policies and practice and whether anyone has been disciplined (without naming names).

Bet they try to bat you away, though.

OP posts:
smallwhitecat · 04/05/2008 15:10

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

fiodyl · 04/05/2008 15:11

SS will most likely just give u the info they have that supports their case. Thats what they do when they go 2 court, its why courts mainly decide in their favour

smallwhitecat · 04/05/2008 15:14

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn