Shocking abuse of power by Childrens Services

Dear Sir or Madam,

Having been appalled at the amount of abuse I have found having
stumbled across this and other sites, I was rather hoping that
things had changed over the years, sadly it appears not.

Please provide all information that has lead to this decline in
children services and answer the following FOI request.

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/a_...

Can you please provide details of how many complaints received
about unlawful practices of Judges and Council SS Legal Team
(children social services) , barrister's etc Cafcass Legal teams
etc , regarding Children taken into ‘care’ by Kent County Council.

Relatives who put themselves forward are considered guilty until
proven innocent, and demands are made that they jump through
assessment hoops, when the House of Lords made it quite clear that
grandparents only have to be good enough parents. The system as it
stands is no better than a 'child trafficking ring.'

It is appalling that in Family Court’s so many children are being
taken into care based on mere opinion of – so-called professionals
and placed for adoption with strangers rather than relatives.

In 2007,local authorities in England applied for 8,173 care orders.
7,624 orders were made. 336 applications were withdrawn, 290 "no
orders" decisions and 21 orders were refused.

In other words, the judgement of the social workers working for the
council was so good, they were only refused by the judge 21 times
(0.27%)

More importantly 93% of the time the judge merely rubber-stamped
the care orders.

House of Lords - Down Lisburn Health and Social Services Trust.
Baroness Hale of Richmond. Judgement

34. There is, so far as the parties to this case are aware, no
European jurisprudence questioning the principle of freeing for
adoption, or indeed compulsory adoption generally. The United
Kingdom is unusual amongst members of the Council of Europe in
permitting the total severance of family ties without parental
consent. (Professor Triseliotis thought that only Portugal and
perhaps one other European country allowed this.) It is, of course,
the most draconian interference with family life possible.

Although kinship placements are supposed to be the preferred option
in this country, only 1 per cent. of social worker-instigated
placements ended up with kinship carers, compared with 45 per cent.
in Denmark, for example(EVIDENCE given in parliament 16th June 2008
by Tim Loughton MP shadow minister for children)

Thank you.

Peace be with you.

A Freeman