Councillor's who have had their children/grandchildren removed by the state

Dear Sir or Madam,

With the following reference letter taken into consideration, can
you please declare how many Councillor's/Elected Members have had
their children/grandchildren removed into 'care'then placed for
adoption. How many letters of complaint have been sent to
Judges/Courts (many of whom end-up in the House of Lords) with
their concerns about the system especially those
relating to the interests of the children being ignored along with
the wishes of parents/relatives, as is the case below.

http://nameshamesocialworkers.blogspot.c...

[A letter a dear friend of mine sent to the Judge in the Family
Court,( edited to protect identities) the Judge used paragraph 4 to
remove them as party. Yet he failed to answer when asked in Court
what would stop children’s services coming after their own children
if they failed ‘so-called assessments including a psychological
assessment that the Council and Judge were trying to rail road them
into.]

After our recent LIP experience of the Family Courts regarding
contesting the ICO (at your suggestion), in the hope our
granddaughters would be returned to live with their grandparents.
We now have ‘little faith’ in either the LA professionals who
unfortunately, do not appear to act in the ‘best interests of the
children’ or the present system that fails to make them accountable
for their actions.

It may just be coincidental that I was standing for election in
November 2007 after I had complained to the Director of Children’s
Services , on a separate issue and took my complaints to the LGO.

Apparently, we could risk being labelled mad or worse if we go to
the press; yet it seems pointless to Appeal without the media.

Regretfully, our stance on being assessed has not changed for the
reasons given at the initial hearing; having young children of
adoptable ages and no belief in the CSW comment ‘that the SS do not
canvas for work’ our family has already been destroyed.

Please do not think us paranoid. A continuous stream of high
calibre news articles including award winning Journalists, looking
into ‘children’s services’ alongside the UN investigation into our
Family Courts, EDM’s signed by numerous MP’s and
Jack Straw’s announcement to allow the press (April2009); all
suggest otherwise.

There appears to be a mass of contradictions/inaccuracies and
double standards.
Selective incomplete evidence, (mainly opinion based) interpreted
as ‘fact’ without the full information requested from September
2002 including ‘notes’ from both the SS and CG. A different
criteria/ model supplied (non-relative assessment), which is
neither objective nor subjective. And discerning to note that there
is no record of us receiving £100 cash from the SS .

Ironically, a Councillor on the ‘Children’s Champion Board’ sort my
advice about ‘children’s services’ and is aware of our previous
experience.
Although I did not ask him, he seems to have attempted to help; I
am not his constituent nor did I ask about kinship care allowance
and our children are not known to social care or receive services.

Charles J in Re R [2002] 1 FLR 755 and Munby J in Re L (Care
Assessment: Fair Trial) [2002] 2 FLR 730In Re R,

Relatives are expected to jump through hoops and endure fishing
trips that were simply not required on the two previous occasions,
when XXXX and XXXX were placed in our care, on the second occasion
after an interview with CPO.
The LA may have been concerned about a possible Judicial Review and
this may have contributed to why an offer of a mandatory referral
for (FGC) ‘not best practice’ as suggested in Court, was not
forthcoming.

D-v- Southwark LBC [2007] EWCA Civ 182
. Munby J Manchester City Council – V – F (2002) 1FLR 43

What is the definition of better than good enough parenting?

The House of Lords (2008) ‘grandparents only have to be reasonable
enough parents’

“Innocent yet presumed guilty unless we comply - On the balance of
probabilities?”
We probably have far more experience than many of the professionals
involved, having raised 6 children.

Supervisory contact is only required we believe, if there is a
danger to the children.
Being a XXXX/CRB checked with no previous concerns, it is insulting
and degrading to be only offered expensive supervised contact in an
unnatural environment. While our offer of contact in our home (with
foster carers if need be) and Cllrs/Corporate Parents offering to
be present, is ignored/rejected.
Whilst bizarrely XXXX & XXXX have been transported by taxi
virtually on a daily basis from XXXX that is 5 minutes from XXXX,
to XXXX approximately a hours drive by their first set of
inexperienced carers; all at the taxpayers expense?

Where are our granddaughter’s Human Rights to a family life? Having
been placed in foster care, where their well-being has deteriorated
after being separated and passed from ‘pillar to post’ and respite
care, instead of with relatives.

DCSF – figures suggest that at least 2 children a week die and/or
are abused in care.

Research suggests that there are well-evidenced advantages1 for
children who cannot live with their parents to be raised by
relatives or friends:
Farmer E and Moyers S (2008)‘Kinship Care: Fostering Effective
Family and Friends Placements’ (Jessica Kingsley); Doolan et al
(2004) Growing up in the Care of Relatives and Friends (Family
Rights Group); Hunt J (2003) Family and Friends Care; coping Paper
for Dept of Health; Broad, B (ed) (2001) Kinship Care: the
placement of choice for children and young people (Russell House;
Hunt Waterhouse & Lutman (2008forthcoming) Keeping them in the
family (BAAF) Dr Lynne Wrenndall, Charles Pragnell. Lisa
Blakemore-Brown, Brian Morgan, Dr Helen Hayward-Brown, Bruce
Irvine,
Dr Clive Baldwin, Stephen Clark, Cathy Johnson (2004) Taking the
stick away: the service users’ joint statement

It is hoped that XXXX (babies are far more sort after for adoption
and a marketable commodity) will be given a Voice Child Advocate,
(the CSW rejected this in favour of the CG only).

The FGC Co-ordinator’s comment ‘ holding a FGC at a late stage
“energises families” is insulting and worthless when the LA holds
all the power and should not be advising family members that I must
agree to be assessed.
The joint comments from the LA solicitor and CG who later offered
to alter her notes? The LA solicitor told me ‘ the LA only had a
duty to consider family members.’
If Human Rights and the PLO can be so brazenly be disregarded/
ignored, is it any wonder that ¾ of children end up adopted or on
SGO with strangers instead of relatives.

The CG Solicitor’s remarks outside the Court ‘that LA Counsel could
speak for me, or XXXX a passing Solicitor could represent me or
they would adjourn and the Court would/could not allow my
grandchildren to be placed with us on ICO’ (reiterated the CG
comment) and meeting immediately after Court, with the CSW/Counsel,
but not us. And the CG & ISW lunching in the Café across the road,
all show how cosy the relevant professionals appear to be, hardly
independent.

‘ Generally speaking, guardians act as cheerleaders for social
services departments. They are entirely compliant, and seem
incapable of doing more than being a cheering section’. Eric
Pickles MP. (We cannot disagree.)

As Corporate Parents we should act in the way we would if the
children were our own. I am appalled at what I perceive to be
professionals who fail to act in a professional manner and seem to
have no intention of working to reunite children with families. The
public would be astonished at the costs involved and outraged that
relatives are over looked in favour of expensive foster care.

Totally amazed that such draconian measures of removing children
without a mandatory referral for (FGC) can amount to; crystal ball
gazing opinion backed up by expensive reports paid for from the
public purse.
How is it possible to review a past non event and make a decision
based on what may or may not have happened if a FGC had been held,
when it could/did not take place?

Children are not mere commodities to be passed around for profit;
clearly everyone involved is being paid, (the larger the bundle the
more costly?), which could be better spent on ‘real’ child
protection and desperately needed front line services to support
families to ensure that mandatory FGC referrals are completed;
improved services.

I came into politics in order to defend the children of the poor
and help make sure that families receive the services they deserve.
Councillors are more aware of their responsibility to ‘looked after
children’ and the CEO is reviewing the case following a subsequent
meeting with the XXXX Leader.

The one simple thing that can never be altered is my
granddaughters’ heritage, we are blood relatives, our
granddaughters will always be dearly loved and wanted; this can
never be obliterated. Hopefully they will be reunited with family
members, who if given the opportunity could have applied (if need
be) for a RO via private law.

The Court has the power to remedy matters and take the more
proportional approach that the LA has not done to-date. Please take
into consideration our views and concerns when making your
decisions about our granddaughters futures.

Regards,

Mrs Williams

Dear House Of Lords,

May be your corporation would care to comment on why children are
being placed with strangers for adoption , over perfectly 'good
enough'grandparents and why the courts and local authorities are
acquiring children and benefiting from 'unjust enrichment'

The annotations attached to this request alone, paint a very morbid
but truthful picture of in-justice, which thankfully the men &
women of this nation are increasingly aware of and continue to
speak out against, unlike the highly controlled censored media.

Regards,

Regards,

Mrs Williams