Mum on the run goes to Spain

[johnhemming]

This is a story of a couple going to spain to avoid the removal of a baby at birth.

I know concern in parliament about the failures of the family courts is growing. However, there really should not be any toleration of a system whereby people have to emigrate to avoid the removal and adoption of their children.

I track a lot of cases that are not in the media. It really is that bad.

Thanksfully we still have a free press int he UK. The sooner we lift all confidentiality on all children proceedings and social services reports the better. In my view I'd rather have all my personal affairs, SS reports if there were any and details of my children in the public domain because I think the damage done by secrecy is so so much worse than that done by expiosure of a family's private affairs. We are only just starting to touch on that now.

Thankfully because of the internet families are now able to take back some de facto power. The more who secretly record social workers and post the results on youtube, who scan and post materials on line and the like the better. There will of course be cases where removing a child is justified although in my view that should happen very rarely but until everything is open is not a fair system and parents can be powerless.

I'll agree in part, Xenia, I think there should be more public knowledge of the courts. However, I think children should be protected from public prurience (and there is a massive audience -look at all the 'child called whatever' books).

Encouraging people to secretly record any conversations and then post them on the internet is just wrong and I'm surprised that you think this is a reasonable course of action.

" JH, if you were fighting for the thing most precious to you, would you go LIP with a MK friend? In fact, if children are the thing most precious to you, then will you give me assurance that if you are involved in legal proceedings for anything less important then you will go LIP with a MK friend, like this poor mother did? I can assure you that I bloody wouldn't."

Obviously then Wahwah you have never been on the pointy end of the family courts, you forget that you walk into that place with a job to do, parents who walk in their face a life altering decision for themselves and their children, to most barristers and solicitors it's just another case, they have nothing invested, MK friends do, they are damned well going to work their butt off to reunite that family because they have been there and understand what the parents and children are living through.

You may not rate MK friends, but check out any parenting forum that deals with family court issues and parents are using MK friends or going LIP and they are winning.

I believe it all started with FNF, moved onto FFJ & MFF and then on to the ss based sites, I had a solicitor and barrister for over 3 years, sacked them, went LIP and won what my child wanted within 8 months ( and that was waiting for court dates). You might not like MK friends but the fact remains they win cases.

"Encouraging people to secretly record any conversations and then post them on the internet is just wrong and I'm surprised that you think this is a reasonable course of action."

I agree in principle that it's wrong to post the conversations on the internet, but only until after the case has been resolved.

People should record ss and cafcass guardians etc for their own records so they can draw on the conversations that have taken place and if something comes up in court where the ss or cafcass have lied, threatened or blackmailed a parent then the transcript should be made available to the judge with a cd copy for backup.

This wins or loses cases and is invaluable.

Another good reason to be LIP or have a MK friend, because a barrister will not enter this evidence.

My point Atlantis is not about the commitment and ability of MK friends, but that no mattr how good they will never have the experience or training of a qualified legal representative, so I would only consider that it might be appropriate to use one if I had no access to such a professional.

In relation to entering as evidence recordings that have been made wihout consent. Are you saying that barristers won't do this? For what reason? I assumed such recordings were not admissable because they weren't legal...

I think the points about LIP and Mackenzies have been well made.

Too many lawyers fail to challenge the system. It would be interesting to analyse the outcomes of cases by the question of whether or not people are self-representing.

I agree that there havebeen some well made points, buy Jh you have not answered mine.

Why was the mother in the appeal you link to not advised of a barrister that your organisation thinks effective with Mrs H helping her?

Given your contention that this mk friend set up us as good if it better than trained legal representation, then can you assure me that you will not use a lawyer to represent you in any future legal matters?

wahwah Given your contention that this mk friend set up us as good if it better than trained legal representation, then can you assure me that you will not use a lawyer to represent you in any future legal matters?

I have been on the end of a threat of a defamation action this year and involved in at least two judicial review applications (both currently at permission stage). I have not instructed any lawyers for either of these.

Incidentally in the past I have managed to get a consitutent released from a 5 year prison sentance and won and lost judicial review applications as well as winning a contract dispute piece of litigation. All without instructing any legal advisors.

I do involve legal advisors in certain limited circumstances.

" I assumed such recordings were not admissable because they weren't legal..."

Actually it is not illegal to tape anyone even without their knowledge if you are doing so in order for your own personal use; ie; to keep a record of what was said at the time without the need to write notes.

" In relation to entering as evidence recordings that have been made wihout consent. Are you saying that barristers won't do this? For what reason?"

Barristers wont usually bring this up as evidence because it is a grey area inside the court, although we have found that most judges will enter this into evidence if the sw or cafcass officer is said to be lying and the tape will obviously prove this.

In criminal cases I believe it is not admissible in court.

Thanks Jh and Atlantis for your clarifications.

Flipping heck, JH, you have put your money where your mouth is! I consider you've answered my questions fully. I have to ask though, what are the circumstances you would instruct a lawyer?

Atlantis, as a SW I would be furious if I was recorded without my consent (although Im pretty sure I have been on a couple of occasions), but if I was lying to a client, then I guess I'd hardly be in a position to complain- after all I'd be facing disciplinary and deregistration.

It's a shame that records of meetings are not always routinely written by SWs and sent to parents, or indeed, written by parents and sent to SWs. I've found this really helpful in the past.

It's certainly not my area but if it's not a criminal case I do think evidence like that can help and anyway some of these issues and cases are more about publicity, power of the authorities, politics and getting a result which may be working around the legal system. You need to think laterally. You need to consider all options. Most parents would rather run away with their child than lose it. I certainly would. There but by the grace of God so all of us parents - the almost absolute power for our children to be taken from us is truly frightening. In fact I'd rather more children died at the hands of parents and there were less power at the hands of the "authorities".

" but if I was lying to a client, then I guess I'd hardly be in a position to complain- after all I'd be facing disciplinary and deregistration. "

Most complaints are not upheld by the GSCC, they seem to prefer to keep the bad sw's rather than improving the profession.

I'm sure someone will label this part of the 'conspiracy theory' but it really isn't the GSCC is as bad at punishing bad practise as the medical profession is.

" It's a shame that records of meetings are not always routinely written by SWs and sent to parents, or indeed, written by parents and sent to SWs. I've found this really helpful in the past."

It would be more helpful if all meetings were recorded as a matter of course and a copy handed to the parents at the end of the meeting, that way there would be no problems entering the recrdings into all trials as a matter of course and no sw would be able to lie because they knew they were being recorded.

Atlantis, that would save a lot of paperwork. I used to dream of just that when I was a door knocker...

I instruct lawyers to do some forms of work. Generally not litigation, however although there is a case currently relating to MG Rover that I have lawyers acting.

I may ask for advice (and pay for it as appropriate) in specialist areas. However, I have access to the justis database amongst others.

My most effective litigation success was the Aston election petition which I drafted although most of the subsequent work was done by Councillor Ayoub Khan.

a press story about Aston