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.

ahh - x posts with hobbgoblin over FSW's - still suprised that someone that proclaims to know so much about the workings of the SS's didn't know what it stood for .

FSW used to be an acronym for field social workers. Family support workers are also known as social work assistants etc. It's not really being ignorant to not make assumptions.

I'm bowing out. these threads make my blood boil.

Wahwah,

So I'm deeply offensive but NN constantly attacking JH and anyone who doesn't agree with her front line dogma is okay to you.. hmm, rather telling there me thinks .

I have no problem giving out my details, just wanna make sure my child is out of the country first though as I have seen the vendetta squad in action.

Someone from the ss want to tell me how you can still be using discredited junk science like MSBP.. name change.. FII.. name change... factitious disorder to snatch children?

Me too bowling out WahWah and why do we bother with some of these truly dreadful women on these kind of posts. It's simply a point scoring excercise - as for all the crap because I queried FSW - it's just I had Fostering Social Worker in my mind and yes before I retired and was in front line SSD they were called social work assistants, but hey we should know by now, all these people want to do is ridicule us and score points, so good luck to them. I think that by coming on a trying to explain things we just play into their hands so I will no longer give them the satisfaction.

JH is a disgrace.

(@nananina's twonky attitude) for I am a dreadful woman.

' JH is a disgrace.'

PMSL.

Kinda like the pot calling the kettle black there NN, remind me someone how many ss depts up and down the country were 'excellent' in their ratings again.. hmmm.

Yet still they defend themselves for the 'wonderful job ' they do.

If you took a poll of the parents in this country you'd probably find most people would rather Osama Bin Laden knocked on their door than a SW.

And why oh why do they keep whinning on about 'SW's can't defend themselves, if they could then you could hear both sides of the story', yeah well stop blocking every attempt to open the family courts from it's grey shroud of secrecy then, everyone knows cases can be reported without identifying the family, happens all the time in the court of appeal. Oh wait, silly me it's because they can't get away with their lack of evidence/ perjury/ blackmailing tactics if they had to take responsibility for their actions.

NN you do give me a good laugh, it's better than listening to Tony Blair and his 'well they had weapons of mass distruction..' 'err, ok so they didn't, but we would just have had to find another -lie- reason to have gone to war..' '.. well actually I think the people are much better off now without him, I get thanked all the time..' 'well I would get thanked if I didn't have to hide behind security because the people love me so much..'.

Crazy much?

SS can take children away for no good reason. I know someone who was bi polar. When she got pregnant they said she would have to go into a special unit to be monitored with the baby when it was born even though her own mum had offered to have her live there instead. So anyway she went to this unit and the nurses there told SS that she didn't bond with the baby (which was rubbish) and that she was an attention seeker because she had terrible stomach pains one night and was crying on the floor in that much pain. They said even her own mother thought she was lying because when she came to see her she was firing commands at her to get bags packed etc but wasn't worried about her daughter. This was rubbish. Her mum is a teacher and used to doing that and is just how she reacts in a crisis - she is very practical. Anyway the baby was adopted even though the family begged that she would be allowed to keep the baby if she went to live with her mum and then her mum said she would look after the baby herself but they were having none of it

"with some of these truly dreadful women on these kind of posts. It's simply a point scoring excercise "

nana are you serious?.I have no idea of the back-history and don't even live in the UK anymore ( so feel no threat from SS) but this is what I have gathered from this thread:
JohnHemming, whoever he is, posted something about SS wanting to take a child away from a family, and said family have done a runner. SOme women on here believe he is right to support the family but anyone who has expressed this view has been literally jumped on by you.
So if I think its bad for SS to take children away at birth does that make me a "truly dreadful woman" too? Do you, perchance, work for social services i.e do you have your own agenda? Because it sounds like you do, which would be truly dreadful. Whereas mothers just chatting about this subject, and who don't have an agenda themselves, are just expressing an opinion aren't they?

I think what certain posters have mentioned on here about the mistakes that SS have made when dealing with them is very telling. I'm so glad I live abroad while my kids are little. It must be awful to feel you can be "jumped on" if you slip up, or if you come from an abusive background. I remember there was a case with a young girl who'd suffered sexual abuse as a child and therefore the SS suspected she may develop Munchausen's by proxy due to psychological trauma, based on no evidence it seemed, as this was to be her first child. THey decided to take her child away from birth. I then heard that an MP had taken her into his constituency and was sheltering her. IF this JOhn HEmming is that MP then I take my hat off to him for making a stand.

nappyaddict, thats so sad. God.

Message withdrawn

I work with some excellent social workers but have also worked with some dreadful ones. Because of my experience with the few dreadful ones I think we need to have people talking and questioning what happens. BUT we always HAVE to bear in mind that when we read stuff in the Press it's only ever one side of the story.

About 2 years ago there was uproar in the Press and on here when SS removed a baby at birth from a young mother. I don't remember all the details in the Press at the time but a judge quickly over-ruled SS and the baby was returned to it's Mum to cries of relief all round and condemnation of SS for acting so hastily - including from the mother and her family. Rather LESS newsworthy was the removal of the baby some months later after Mum hade thrown the baby at it's father during a row causing injuries - thankfully not life threatening. Sometimes we have to remember that SS are in possession of many more facts than we are privvy to.

Anyway - that's my last comment on this thread as it's just too emotive. SW are human and therefore fallible just like the rest of us but child protection is a serious and time consuming business. When people get it wrong the fallout is huge for everyone.

Thankfully I don't think they often DO get it wrong and of course the majority of times they get it right are not newsworthy.

Link here Bucharest.

And I thought my post had sunk without trace.

There are massive problems in the child protection industry.

It is not surprising that senior judges criticise me. They ignore evidence put in front of their faces and claim there is no evidence.

Luckily we are able to take cases to the court in Strasbourg which will reveal the cover ups that have been going on in domestic courts.

There is also a council of europe enquiry into these issues. That may take 2 years, but the truth will be told.

And yes I was the MP who sheltered Fran Lyon on her way to Sweden where she now lives with her daughter.

I am in touch with refugees in Sweden, Ireland, Spain, France and Australia. Those are people persecuted by the child protection industry in the UK.

In the mean time the system frequently fails to protect children.

There are good social workers and there is good practise, but there is a mass of bad practise. Birmingham estimates that 50% is bad practise.

Without getting back into the bunfight that has appeared on previous threads, what is the solution to this then? I assume people think that we need Social Services of some description, so how should it be organised so that children are protected?

There are massive problems in the child protection industry. AGREE

It is not surprising that senior judges criticise me. They ignore evidence put in front of their faces and claim there is no evidence. DISAGREE

I believe it's fairly unprecedented for a judge to criticise an MP in this way and therefore take his concerns seriously. I have never seen such a thing before. Ever. I think it is hugely important for parents facing the removal of their children, most of whom must feel utterly powerless and desperate, to be fully supported, including by MPs, who have the power to draw attention to terrible flaws within systems as others do not. However, that support should always be offered in a principled way and with integrity.

skegness without access to the transcript of the hearing how can you know whether or not the court of appeal judges ignored evidence.

To claim that I gave no evidence is plainly wrong. They can disagree as to the merits of the evidence, but that is a different issue.

A key document had no received stamp, was dated with an impossible date and had an address in a different format to other documents.

That IMO is evidence of the document being created at a later date and inserted in the file.

Whatever your view as to that argument you cannot say that the allegation that that document was falsified has no evidential basis.

I don't think the fact that there are issues within ss that need addressing is in any doubt. But equally I think this talk of ss kidnapping children to boost their adoption targets is nothing more than scaremongering rubbish.

There needs to be some middle ground between the extreme views that SS are somehow angelic beings who never get it wrong, and that they are all baby snatching monsters who will take your child into care because they need a child to boost their adoption figures.

it is naive to suggest that SS never get it wrong and that there have never been problems within the system. However it is also quite disturbing that an mp is prepared to shelter parents and to help them escape from SS when for all he knows their children might well be at risk of serious harm. Surely by doing this JH is not trying to change the system, he is sticking two fingers up at it and this gives the green light to any person whose child might be at risk to go to jh for a quick getaway.

How can we possibly know that all these parents JH has helped escape haven't gone on to harm their children abroad? If SS could get it wrong, then so could he. He's not the authority on child protection..

I also think that it's highly inappropriate that a serving mp is using MN as a platform to air his agenda. If this is a genuine issue then it should be brought up in the commons, not on a parenting forum where the reactions will be highly emotive and not necessarily balanced.

' ..adoption targets is nothing more than scaremongering rubbish..'

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1584940/Cash-prize-for-council-that-hit-adoption-targets.html

www.fassit.co.uk/adoption_statistics.htm

Come again?

'..How can we possibly know that all these parents JH has helped escape haven't gone on to harm their children abroad?..'

Oh I think the ss would kick up the biggest stink of their lives, don't you? They would hang JH out to dry with a nicely leaked story about the British parents helped to escaped have 'harmed' their child.

Plus the fact that the ss send their tracker dogs after them and when they are found the ss in the country they are living do an investigation and guess what? There's no problems.

'...I also think that it's highly inappropriate that a serving mp is using MN as a platform to air his agenda....'

Guess all those MP's who come in for a live chat to further their agenda had better go elsewhere then, at least JH is honest about his agenda.

I would love to get a social work manager on here for a webchat - they seem to have such different policies (or maybe they interpret them differently).

A close friend (she won't mind me posting this - she has done all over the interent) has been royally screwed by SS.

Her HV picked up on pnd but instead of talkig to her sent a social worker round. In thhhe meantime she left the fuckwit that fathered her baby and was doing alright.

She then had people randomly turning up at 9am wanting 'to come in for a chat' etc. Imagie how you could present yourselfs for such a surprise visit?
They put in her file that she couldn't form relationships (because she left her emotionally abusive ex) and put her DD on the register.

This threw her further into depression. I dropped a week of work and went to stay with her to try to sort it out.

It's ongoing but she has done nothing wrong. What a waste of state money.

Theshow-are you saying that your friends child was put on the register because she finished a relationship with an abusive ex? And that social services made unannounced visits for no reason? I must admit my feeling is that there must be a bit more to it than that.

Don't think you will find many social workers/managers coming onto these threads and sticking around.As soon as any do they get roundly castigated and the thread degenerates into insults.

But I think you are right that different Social Services have different policies- although in London there is a Pan London Child Protection policy that should ensure some consistency.

atlantis there is a vast difference between an mp who comes on mn for an organized web chat, and one who posts threads and makes alagations in order to whip up a frenzy.

Jh has been on mn long enough to know exactly how this thread would turn out.

wannaBe so what do you do. Are you a family law solicitor, or a barrister or indeed a social worker?

How do you earn money from this evil system?

SS - they are darned if they do & darned if they dont!

I think it is the hardest job in the world - I know I wouldnt want to do it!

We need to invest more into ss, reduce red-tape & provide regular access to support & help for those families that need it. SS departments are over stretched & under staffed. It is no wonder children & adults slip through the system.

The family court also needs to be more tranparent with provision for either side to contest.

Dont agree on politicians using this sight to whip up support for their own agendas!

"wannaBe so what do you do. Are you a family law solicitor, or a barrister or indeed a social worker?" None of the above. It is actually entirely possible to form a balanced opinion without being blinded by the tabloids. It is also entirely possible to believe that social workers are not evil (your words not mine) without being connected to them in some way. This is not a "them and us" situation..

"How do you earn money from this evil system?" As I said above, I don't. do you? Do these desparate women pay you to get away from this "evil system"?

Is it appropriate for an mp to be referring to ss as an evil system on an unmoderated website?