Interim Care Order?

[KrystalVixxen]

Quick background - I'm kinda stuck on how to word a statement to the courts regarding the opposition of the renewal of an interim care order - It was granted by the judge and simply told me to write how 'I plan to look after my son' - but I know that the statement has to stay focused on my child - but I don't know where to start - My son was put into care over my refusal to take him to hospital over a 2mm cut in his lip - hes possibly Dyspraxic. They have been using my past upto now to get him into care, even though its now no longer relevant, as nothing they say is the same now as it was then. What will the court be looking for in order to change it to a supervision order or follow the no-order route? Thanks in advance

[floatyjosmum]

Can I just say the social workers are never the ones that instruct psychologists. The questions that need answering are normally sent from the children's solicitor and even then all parties can ask questions. The letter of instruction is agreed between them all!!

As for la's usibg the same solicitors as families etc. again not the case, they have a legal team at the council, they may instruct a barrister who will be from the local chambers and they may be used by parents but usually they don't and cross examine witnesses Eric thieves.

The children's solicitor and the guardian represent the children and believe me they are very separate from the la and they can very often want different things

[Collaborate]

Presumably from that last post you've had your children removed by the courts as well?

[ThingsThatGoBumpInTheNight]

as its december now

[ThingsThatGoBumpInTheNight]

She posted asking for advice, rejected advice given as out of hand (a bit late and the 'advice' was to 'get a solicitor' which didn't exactly address the OP)

Feeling a bit silly now?

No such thing as aliens Collaborate, if you think there is maybe you also believe in reptilian shapeshifters
I like lougle's assertion that i must have an agenda simply because i haven't been giving the same advice as the rest of you sheeple who haven't been in either the OP's position or mine thank you very much so what do you actually know

#wasteoftime.com

[Lougle]

I'm not interested in arguing about the merits of SS involvement, tbh. Krystal posted asking for advice. It is her children who may be permanently removed from her care. She needs to take positive action to reassure the Courts that she is fit to parent and meet the needs of her two children.

Krystal's situation shouldn't be a stage for people with agendas to scare other people about Social Services

[Collaborate]

Maybe it's not social services stealing the children. Maybe they've been abducted by aliens...

[ThingsThatGoBumpInTheNight]

Here ya go so no one can say i'm being one sided

suesspiciousminds.com/2012/08/16/what-should-you-do-if-social-services-steal-your-children/

Krystal.. don't just read the article, read the comments too x

[ThingsThatGoBumpInTheNight]

SOME? LOL grow some balls and name me for crying out loud. As it is only me that has spoken out really against this..this, pathetic excuse for a LA. Ask anyone, google it, i dunno, the general advice now is to go LIP if you know what you're doing, which the OP looks like she does, or ask around for a good solicitor.
The only people that will fight and fight properly for your child is YOU, OP.
You can apply for costs and also instruct a barrister in the same way as a common or garden solicitor.
If you choose to get a solicitor, ask their record.. Ask wins/losses, what they think from their experience the outcome of your case is likely to be.

I'm telling you now, i bet they have nothing but hearsay. They WILL make things up, or if you're 'lucky' use your past, every tiny detail they can dredge up, if you've had a good past they will move onto the last option..
The next thing that will happen if this is the case, is the 'expert witness' paid by all the parties, (a fair amount as well, 5-7 grand?) to psychologically assess you using CAPI and MMPI. Me personally, i would refuse these under your human right not to undertake medical testing blah blah.. but the likelihood is you won't be worried to take it, being as the payment for it is shared between all the parties, or free for you if you're LIP, meaning it should be fair, right?

However, it may be paid by everyone, but the psychologist is instructed only by the SS as to what they need to know about you. When you get the report, check out the last few pages, it will tell you the working history of the psychologist. Do not be surprised if you see that they have worked VERY closely with social services in the past, or actually for them. The woman who did mine certainly had.

These people are not supposed to test you if you have been through a traumatic event. Moving house, a death in your close family... but they don't count having a child ripped from you .. funny that.

Anyway, lets say by some miracle (last proper count of them not finding a 'borderline personality disorder/personality disorder/mixture of personality disorders was less than 1%, not good odds..) you fly through and there is nothing wrong with you, your family, your past or your upbringing.
That you don't have to undertake the magic number of 2 years counselling or therapy need to 'cure you' this time period being JUST outside that considered in the best interests of the child, another point i thought i'd raise for interest..

Then the SS will move the goalposts. They will probably start talking about 'working together' at this point. When they do that its because they know they haven't got a leg to stand on. You will be asked to decorate this room, provide this, or that, if you say to them, you taking my child has led to such and such behavioural problems, they may say to you 'thats your problem' like the team leader of my LA did.. lol.. follow what they say then, do all the little piddly hoop jumping, don't ask for any help or support, get your baby home, and stay out from under their radar.

Good luck :) I'm sure you don't need it, you sound clued up.
PS going to the press can be done anonymously, later on, or not at all, i just posted it to show that the SS and what they are doing is finally coming under scrutiny.
The only agenda i have is to make sure that one day family courts are open, judges/social workers and their like are accountable, and have to be truthful, hearsay evidence will not count, children will not be taken for pathetic reasons, and they will not be assaulted, sexually abused, emotionally abused, by the 'care system'

[STIDW]

It's important to remember every case is different. It's true some social workers get it wrong, or are downright incompetent just like in any other profession and the courts could improve their transparency but that is a long way from conspiracy and secrecy.

I'm sorry ThingsThatGoBumpInTheNight has such bad experiences but I can't see how going to the press would help the OP and it could make matters considerably worse. It is a criminal offence of contempt of court to disclose information about a child involved in court proceedings. I mentioned Vicki Haigh earlier on and she and her "adviser" were given prison sentences for contempt of court so it can happen.

[Lougle]

I agree, Collaborate

[Collaborate]

Some of the posters on this thread have been encouraging OP to take a one way ticket to having her children adopted.

[Lougle]

Goodness, some of you are going to help make sure that Krystal really blows this opportunity .

Krystal, do please listen to the voice of reason on this thread and don't be sucked in by people who want you to serve as part of their agenda.

[RedHelenB]

I'm not sure this is helpful to Krystal though - she needs to show that her child will do best by living with her. Being angry, lashing out at SS etc is not going to be seen in a positive light. And at the end of the day it is a much less expensive option to keep children with their parents than in foster care.

[ThingsThatGoBumpInTheNight]

Also you might try contacting this woman :

Expose the Tyrants of Child Protection
The Sun ? Jane Moore Twitter @JaneMooreSun 28th November 2012
It can no longer be ignored by those who purport to be in charge of this country that something is deeply rotten at the core of Britain?s Social Services.
Believe me, the case of the three Eastern European children removed from a loving home because their foster parents were members of UKIP is just the tip of the iceberg.
Lurking below in the murky depths of our ferociously secretive ?? care ?? system , will be hundreds if not thousands of similar cases where a gross abuse of power has helped to destroy the lives of the very youngsters it was set up to protect.
Hopefully they will now rise above the surface : expose the ugly, playing-God mindset , and prompt a dramatic overhaul of these tin-pot dictatorships more reminiscent of Stalinist Russia than a democracy.
Babies forced in adoption after being taken from mothers on a mere suspicion of ?? future emotional abuse ??, fathers and paternal relatives denied access to children on nothing more than maternal hearsay, and prospective well-meaning fosterers and adopters subjected to the ridiculously stringent political correctness that is making the headlines right now.
All concluded under a cloak of secrecy that claims to be in the interests of the children involved but all too conveniently protects the increasingly warped system itself.
Industry
Don?t get me wrong : There are plenty of frontline social workers doing a fantastic job in often deeply challenging sometimes harrowing circumstances.
That they are so poorly paid indicates that their motives for choosing to do it are well-intended.
But even they must be despairing of the lucrative industry that has sprung up around what was once the noble and pure intent to protect children but has seemingly morphed into the far uglier whiff of political or financial self-interest.
Roger Stone, the Labour leader of Rotherham council, says that while membership of UKIP should not prevent someone from fostering, this was a ?? complex ?? case (aren?t they all?) involving legal advice and an external agency responsible for finding the foster carers. Sounds expensive.
It could well be an outfit like the National Fostering Agency, set up by two former social workers in 1995 and sold earlier this year to venture capitalists Graphite for an eye-watering £130 million.
And by the way, it?s only the UK?s second biggest private fostering business.
In other words, there?s money in them there ills.
Then there?s the outreach workers , the ?? experts ?? paid to provide statements to the courts, the state?s legal advisors , the ?? independent ?? legal advisors the guardians, the police workers, the court officials etc etc . All with a vested interest in ?? child protection ??.
Little wonder then that, according to a Children in Need census, in 2007 the number of children and young people who were the subject to a Child Protection Plan was 27,900.
In April 2011, it was 42,700.
Plenty of those will be genuine cases where the work of social services has proved vital, in the spirit of its original ethos to act in the interests of the children.
But all to many will be based on nothing more than an unfounded suspicion , plunging one or both parents into a Kafka- esque nightmare, a punishment without crime.
And worst of all, those who suffer most are the children, emotionally damaged by the actions of self-interested zealots who affect to ?? care ??.
We are used to case-centric inquires such as the one surrounding the Baby P scandal but it?s now time to shine a torch into the dark, secretive corners of the entire system to try to make its work and objectives more transparent while still maintaining anonymity for the vulnerable.


I think she makes some big fat way out there bang on the nose valid points ..

[ThingsThatGoBumpInTheNight]

Oops my link was pants .. here it is again .. www.mumsnet.com/Talk/relationships/1574884-My-Experience-With-SS

[ThingsThatGoBumpInTheNight]

LOL its not a conspiracy theory. A lot of solicitors have work contracted out to them.. mostly they are representing the child = they usually agree with the SS = in the pockets of the SS.

Anyway if thats the only problem you could find with my comment i suppose i should think myself lucky.

[monsterchild]

Krystal, I think following the guides that were suggested up thread are good. I am a bit concerned that you are struggling to keep your focus on your kids. Be very sure that you have someone who is willing to be truthful read it first to make sure it does in fact keep the focus on the kids.

Many of the judges have a lot of experience with statements from parents who can talk the talk but not walk the walk.

[Collaborate]

Local Authority solicitors are employees of the LA. Solicitors who act for parents (such as me) are in private practice. Yet another conspiracy theory....

[ThingsThatGoBumpInTheNight]

Krystal - I hate to say it but that reply to Collaborate is exactly what you need to avoid. Being seen to have a big chip on your shoulder will not go in your favour!

I would have given the same reply to someone saying i wasn't telling the truth either .. the link to my story in case it helps .. www.mumsnet.com/Talk/relationships/1574884-My-Experience-With-SS

SS can and do abuse their power. If they don't meet the threshold they are not above making things up, i'm afraid to say. And most solicitors you could instruct also work for the LA on other cases, so if you are able, represent yourself. I got further representing myself (an EPO against the SS granted in my favour) then i ever did when i had a solicitor. I hated that she got invited to 'professional meetings' and didn't provide adequate feedback.. felt very much in the dark, not a good feeling when you're fighting tooth and nail for your child.. :(

[ThingsThatGoBumpInTheNight]

Hi Krystal

I am experienced in the 'other side' of what the SS do
First may i ask, when you say you are 'up north' please don't tell me (as it appears your child has been targeted because of your 'religious' or whatever-it-is beliefs.. political? ... That you are in the area where children have just been removed from the care of foster parents simply because they are UKIP members?

[Muffintop101]

I'm also with Collaborate on this one. All parents are entitled to legal aid in care applications and it's not means-tested. There is, as is often the case, likely to be much more to the OP's situation than meets the eye. Nonetheless, if, OP, you insist on representing yourself you need to read the Children Act 1989 and in particular sections 31, 38 and s.1 and s.1(3) in the preparation of your statement.

[Lougle]

That's why I queried it, redHelen. 2 mm is teeny tiny.

[RedHelenB]

BTW do you mean 2mm because that is very small, hardly visible to the naked eye.

[RedHelenB]

Krystal - I hate to say it but that reply to Collaborate is exactly what you need to avoid. Being seen to have a big chip on your shoulder will not go in your favour! Personally, I would stress the fact that you see the necessity of working with Social Services to see that your son is getting the best care possible & show that you are willing to listen to concerns and address them.

[Collaborate]

OP talks of her case not being a "level 2", whatever that is. that's why I asked her what country she's in, as "level 2" does not correspond to the court process in care proceedings in England & Wales.

She tells of interim care orders. They are made after a LA has applied for a care order but before the court has made a final decision, and to apply for legal aid for that you use the form you can easily find via google CLSAPP5, which to anyone who cares to look is obviously for non-means tested LA.