http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...

these comments from the public show that no one believes justice can be obtained in the courts and especially so in family courts held behind closed doors

SS are trying the propaganda route to gaining public confidence and support. Behind the scenes we all know it will generate more referals, mainly malicious which will cost children and families dearly. This is simply to generate more snatches, aim = ......'More adoptions, especially as Cafcass is being crippled because they are paving the way for Coram to take over the cases they say they can't handle'.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0VOM8TPSbWU

another stolen baby

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBECaytLv...

who the heck are coram

This is the response from an MP.

Greg Mulholland MP 06 October at 14:43 Report
Your comments are stupid and offensive. I do not wish this sort of thing posted on my FB page. I am deleting you from my friends list and putting a permanent block on you. Please do not attempt to contact me again for any reason whatsoever.

This is the way MP's think they can respond!! They do not serve the elected, they serve themselves and are very arrogant

Dear Ms Stewart-Taylor

Thank you for your emails dated 21 September to various government ministers about adoption. I hope you will appreciate that due to the high volume of correspondence the Ministers receive they are unable to reply personally to each one. I have been asked to reply.

I can appreciate the circumstances your family has faced must be distressing, however as you are aware the Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF) is unable to intervene in individual cases as these are best dealt with locally where all the circumstances are known. I would however expect social services to explain to you and your family the reasons for any decision made in relation to your child’s care and to work with you on achieving the best outcomes for them.

Local authorities should issue a ‘letter before proceedings’ to parents. The content of the letter must be explained to parents. It should be written in plain English and avoid jargon. The letter should be written to take account of language barriers, and any learning disabilities parents might have. On receipt of the letter, parents are entitled to bring a solicitor to a meeting with the Social Work team to discuss the local authority’s concerns, and consider what improvements can be made to the child’s care. Parents are entitled to access legal aid. After the meeting, the Social Work manager will send a note of the outcome and agreed plan to the family and their Solicitor so the contents can be explained.

The decision to take a child into care is never an easy one, and it is a decision that is taken by the courts, and not by individual social workers. In every case where a child is taken into care on a care order, the courts will have considered all the evidence and taken the view that the child has been significantly harmed, or would be if they were not taken into care.

In every case concerning the upbringing of a child the court is required to treat the welfare of the child concerned as its paramount consideration. To assist the court, a children’s guardian (who is independent of the local authority) is appointed to advise what is in the child’s best interests. Parents must also be legally represented, and are entitled to legal aid.
Where the court makes an order placing a child in the care of a local authority, the authority will continue to work with the family with a view to the child returning home. However, a stage may be reached when it is apparent that the child cannot return home. It is at this stage that the local authority must make alternative plans to provide the child with a permanent family home, adoption is one way of providing this and is appropriate for some children, depending on the facts of each individual case. The final decision on adoption rests with the courts and before a court makes such an important decision it must be convinced on the basis of the evidence that this is the best way to meet the child’s needs on a long-term basis.

The Children Act 1989 places a duty on Social Services to safeguard and protect children. If you are unhappy with the way in which you were treated by Social Services you have the right to make a formal complaint under the ‘Local Authority Complaints Procedure’. You may therefore wish to consider writing to either the Director of Children’s Services or the Designated Complaints Officer for the authority in which your children have been placed. They must then consider the complaint, appointing at least one person independent of the local authority to take part in dealing with the issues raised and provide you with a written response within 28 days.

If you are unhappy with the council's response, you may request a Panel hearing by writing to the council within 28 days of the response. The Panel should be chaired by an independent person. If you remain dissatisfied with the handling of their complaint under the local procedures and think that a local authority has treated you unfairly as a result of bad or inefficient management ("maladministration"); and that this has caused you injustice (such as loss, injury or upset), you may wish to refer your complaint to the Local Government Ombudsman (LGO).

More information on making a complaint to the Local Government Ombudsman is available at: www.lgo.org.uk or by calling the advice line on 0845 602 1983.

I am sorry I am unable to help you further.

Yours sincerely

Janet McNamara
Public Communications Unit
www.dcsf.gov.uk

Captain Coram a wealthy man worked tirelessly in 16oo's to prevent foundlings as they were called suffering from death and abuse. He got sick and tired of stepping over the babies abandoned in the street to die , which wasn't helped by all the gin houses, women from all walks of life turned to him for help to give their baby a chance of life,unfortunately many had to be turned away.

It now appears his efforts have turned into the very beast he was trying to prevent;to save foundling children who had been abandoned.

My name is Jane Webb I have five children Stephen Cresswell, Liam Cresswell ,Jamie Abnett , Mitchell Abnett and Ethan Lloyd. We were subjected to domestic violence by Ethans father which included both physical abuse on myself, and my children ,and mental abuse. We left him to go to a refuge, three months after we left my children were stolen by the state, for domestic violence Womens Aid were involved with me for 2 yrs and critisized the local authority, despite several police forces being involved, and the British Consulate, Social Services and cafcass, to this date, did not contact anyone for evidence. When my child Ethan Lloyd was 4 months old and residing with me his Father Darren Lloyd was convicted of glassing someone in the face, while his mate held him, and Class A Drugs. Darren Lloyd is now on license from prison and Social Services have placed my child in his care, with the full support of cafcass and the Judge. I urge you all to spread this far and wide and put on your relevant websites so I can get justice and protection for my children
thankyou x

A letter has just come to me, dated the 12 November 2009 from Bridget Prentice MP Parliamentary Under Secretary of State.

It is a response to my lobbying MP's re corruption in the Secret Family Court System. She is responding to David Gauke MP the Ref is MC257983

The letter reads as follows.

Dear David

Yvonne Stewart-Taylor , my address is here omitted.

thank you for your letter of 14 October to Jack Straw, about social services and openness in the family courts. I am replying as the Minister responsible for the family justice system in England and Wales. You refer to an earlier letter which my officials have not been able to trace, but I apologise for the delay in responding to you nonetheless.

I am very sorry for the experience that Mrs Stewart-Taylor has had with social services and the family courts regarding her grandchild. In order to preserve the principle of judicial independence, I cannot give opinion on a specific case but I hope that she will find the following general comments helpful.

It has, since 1991, been the policy of successive governments, as set out in legislation, that children should live with their parents wherever possible and that services should be provided to children in need and their families to enable this to happen.

The child protection system is designed to identify families who may be vulnerable and seeks to offer help at an early stage in order to enable children to remain in their family. Social workers must work closely with parents to identify and evidence where change or improvement is necessary in order to enable a family to stay together.

I assure Mrs Stewart-Taylor that local authorities are not given financial incentives to increase the number of children in care or remove children from care of their parents in order for them to be adopted. The decision to take a child into care is never an easy one, and the decision to make a care order is taken by the courts. In every case where a child is taken into care on a care order, the courts will have considered all the evidence and taken the view that the child has been significantly harmed, or would be if they were not taken into care.

where the court makes an order placing a child in the care of a local authority, the authority will continue to work with the family with a view to the child returning home. Happily, the vast majority of children are returned to their parents. for those children who cannot return home to their parents, they have the right to have alternative plans considered to provide them with a permanent home; adoption is only one of the available options of providing this.

The final decision on whether a child should be adopted rests with the courts. Before a court makes such an important decision it must be convinced on the basis of the evidence that this is the best way to meet the child's needs on a long term basis. where the parents/guardians have not given their consent, but it may only do so in limited circumstances. The court would have to be satisfied that the parent could not be found or is incapable of giving consent, or that the welfare of the child requires the consent to be dispensed with.

The Government does not have, and has never had, a national target to increase the number of children being taken into care. the target on adoption reflected the Government's desire to reverse a long-term decline in the number of children already in care finding a permanent home through adoption. The adoption target ended in March 2006. Similarly, the Government does not set adoption targets for local authorities, although authorities themselves may choose to develop targets with central Government through the Local area Agreement/Local Public service agreement process.

Mrs Stewart-Taylor is also concerned about the ability of parents or families to speak out about their case. The extent to which a parent, child or the media can publish information about individual children is complex and determined by a number of different aspects of legislation. The issue is the need to balance the rights of children to privacy, with the rights of other parties, and those of the media, in relation to freedom of expression.

The government has already taken some action to make family proceedings more open- the media can attend most proceedings, and the rules about disclosure of information have been amended to make it easier for people to seek the help and support they need.

these changes do not yet apply to adoption cases.Adoption is the most difficult and life changing decision a family court can make and needs special consideration. There are concerns that the identity of children and adoptive parents might be exposed, particularly in small rural populations or ethnic community areas. we are therefore considering, along with people most involved in adoption work, how best that these proceedings can be made more open but alongside legislation to ensure that identities are protected.

We will also introduce new legislation that will put the reporting and admission regime for all tiers of family court on the same foundation as that for youth courts. This will allow the media to report the substance of what they witness, but not any information that would lead to revealing the identity of the families involved. The Government will revise the law on reporting restrictions as soon as parliamentary time allows.

I hope that this letter is helpful. I am enclosing a copy for you to forward to Mrs Stewart-Taylor, should you wish to do so.

Kind regards

Bridget

BRIDGET PRENTICE

I would be interested in what anyone thinks about this. It has taken 6 years to get to here. I have been lobbying every MP for many years, repeatedly and finally we get this response.??

Dear Ms Stewart-Taylor

Thank you for your further email of 16 December concerning your complaint about children's services.

I am sorry that you felt disappointed with my previous reply and are unhappy with how you have been treated by Cumbria Children Services. The first step in these circumstances is to follow the local authority complaints procedure, details of which are available from the Town Hall, Civic Centre or local council offices.

If you have already exhausted this route and are concerned about possible maladministration, you should speak to the Local Government Ombudsman on 0845 602 1983 or 024 7682 1960.

I am sorry I cannot be of more help on this occasion.

Yours sincerely

Pamela Kearns
Public Communications Unit
www.dcsf.gov.uk

Your correspondence has been allocated the reference number 2009/0105986. To correspond by email with the Department for Children, Schools and Families please contact info@dcsf.gsi.gov.uk.

If you have any further queries why not browse our Popular Questions website. This site has been built to allow you to quickly find the answer to your question http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/popularquestions

I have done both the actions you have suggested 6 years ago. It did not work. It does not work. Now what?

We were discriminated against on grounds of Race, and I have their apology in writing and they also discriminated against us on Religious grounds.

There is very definitely mal administration and down right corruption In Cumbria family Court system. The ombudsman simply covered up for the blunders and deliberate abuse in our case. In the end so called professional protects any other so called professional. It is a closed shop and they close ranks, refuse to even consider complaints against them which are strong enough to have them disciplined or struck off. The whole system is flawed, and innocent parents and children wronged by these heathens have no recourse and no redress. FACT.

Now you tell me you are powerless too. MP's are also powerless, and have stated so to me. So who the hell is running this country?? These heathens get away with abusing Rights of Children and their families Human Rights and know they can be as ruthless as they wish as no one can challenge their shameful behavior.

I will just have to keep on naming and shaming, and the list is getting longer and longer.

Your response will be posted on a public website for all to peruse at their wim and share it far and wide.

The cover ups will stop when their is enough public opinion on our side and we will expose and keep exposing, the injustice, until radical reforms are made and those who have wantonly sat on the fence are struck off.

Thank you for even bothering to reply as most do not even show us that much curticy.

Yvonne Stewart-Taylor