Panorama - I want my baby back

[BeyondTheLimitsOfAcceptability]

Anyone watching?

This promoting of the idea that SS want to steal babies makes me very uneasy...

The Court of Appeal judgment in the McCartan case is at www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed95929

@spero thousands is an estimate - from what Ive seen and judged (being a reasonably intelligent individual and bearing in mind that there are two sides to most stories) - going back to about 1990 Id say. We shouldnt put time limits on these things. A child illegally adopted in 2014 is as wrong as one illegally adopted in 1990. In 24 years at least a 1,000 - I reckon so?

The biggest area of issue, as Im sure you're aware is the 'risk of future emotional harm' Children removed due to parent(s) being in care as kids themselves, being with abusive partners, aspergers, low intellect, home schooling - the list is endless.

@nennypops - so you believe Jill McCartan or her partner harmed the child

Still waiting for a sensible reply as to what you do when you find out that a child has been wrongly adopted? Postcards accepted.

@lioninthesun - that's why you dont recruit poorly. We have a saying at work - you pay peanuts you get......

I've posted this on the other thread too.

What's the answer?

How do we, as a society, go about protecting children from abuse and neglect, while avoiding miscarriages of justice; getting it right 100% of the time?

Someone answer me that specific question.

Another one for you. Say a child is removed aged 1. When they are 10, it is found that they were removed incorrectly.

Are people seriously advocating that the child be removed from the only family they know, and placed back with their birth family... Who are strangers?

Is there anyone that can possibly believe that that is in the best interest of the child (rather than simply the best interest of the birth parent?)

@lioninthesun - missed your other post -sorry.

If you dont think these cases exist you're living in cloud cuckoo land. I was sent one this morning by a young lady who lost her children (she got them back), social workers subsequently sacked. But it took a while. Its going through compensation now. It is not unreasonable to think that said social workers had not done this before. The case is shocking.

Thank God the children weren't adopted eh?

MrsBW yes - without question. And with millions in compensation

MrsBW yes - without question. And with millions in compensation

Wow. Just wow.

wizardpc: don't put words into my mouth. When did I ever say that I believed that Jill McCartan's child had or had not been wrongly adopted?

And in answer to the question about how we get it right 100% of the time, while protecting children from neglect and abuse?

Sorry, conflated two posts there. When did I ever say that Jill McCartan or her partner had harmed their child?

you linked to the court transcript.

So you accept they were wronged?

Perhaps, rather than journalists being allowed into Family courts, there needs to be independent monitoring of family court cases?

wizardpc: still waiting for an answer to my question about evidence of many cases of wrongful adoption.

Jill McCartan's child could easily be returned. She's about 3. People adopt three year olds. No problemo on that one!

wizardpc: As I said back upthread, we don't know one way or the other whether Jill McCartan and her partner were wronged, because we have only heard one side of the story. I linked to the Court of Appeal judgment transcript purely because I thought people would be interested to see it.

@nennypops - speak to some of the parents involved online. 'Many' is an understatement in my view.

@nennypops - you have a £10 to decide whether they were guilty - where's your money? I'll say without question they are not guilty.

And, wizard, do you think that millions of pounds would ever satisfactorily compensate a 10 year old child who has been taken away from loving adoptive parents? Do you believe that a three year old child would be left unscarred by being taken away from the people who have been her parents for virtually all her life?

wizardpc, speaking to the parents involved does not constitute proof. As an absolute minimum, you would need to see the other side of the case including the evidence produced by social services in those cases.

If that is your evidence, should we take it that you don't in fact have conclusive evidence of large numbers of wrongful adoptions?

wizardpc: I would decline your £10 because I haven't seen the evidence so I don't know whether they're guilty or not. I am really quite troubled by your notion of what constitutes evidence in cases involving the wellbeing of vulnerable children.

well given that the parents speak (normally) and the courts/social workers won't it's difficult (granted). However, I look at things objectively. I factor in that and I am aware of many cases where it is (on the balance of probability) wrong. Remember 'balance of probability' is a pretty unique usage tool in family courts.

Social workers aren't allowed to speak. When you say you look at things objectively, do you have full access to all the evidence produced in child care cases?

No-one has said it is easy for anyone. However, of the three parties involved (real parents, child, adoptive parents) - the adoptive parents come last.

Just one question really - what are we to do for parents whose parents are wrongly taken?