Social Workers who commit perjury.

http://www.youtube.com/user/thelostpacke...

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.??

The general standard of social workers, from my experience in Stockport, which includes dealings with more than 20 children's social workers across Disability section, Family Section and Early Intervention Section and Local Safeguarding Children Board section, is that they do not comply with their stated remit as social workers, which you will find on the GSCC site, here:
http://www.gscc.org.uk/page/35/Codes+of+...

However, they realise that it really doesn't matter, because the GSCC - General Social Care Council - doesn't follow through on most complaints, so they are on very safe ground in not complying.

The only thing to do in dealing with any social worker or their superior officers, is to record every dealing with them. Transcribe and use every recording and set it firmly against every record which they make.. and of course send under Data Protection Act, for a full and unexpurgated copy of the entire Records file, about the child and you .. to include all letters, minutes, emails, notes, copies of records of telephone conversations, and every other record, in respect of child, parents and any other person who is on record.

They will prevaricate and block. They will possibly state that you are a nuisance, that you are a persistent complainant (The Ombudsman tells them how to do that, and recommends it) that you are mentally deranged, that you have no right. etc.. etc.. etc.

The police will back up lying social workers, with no thought about the welfare of any child.

Persistence, and as much recording as possible, will at least back them into a corner. If there is a group of people, who will stand together, so much the better. If Grandparents get involved, they will try to exclude them. Bring them in as witnesses, unpaid but formal 'administrators'. Send formal letters to each Council/Police/NHS Department stating that 'X' is employed as your formal administrator, with full right to act for you where necessary. Don't warn anyone, but take them with you whenever you attend any meeting, as minute takers. Use the strength of any relative. The only place which will not accept them, is the (laughably named) Family Court.

Protest! Make sure that they are fully aware that a relative - especially a grandparent - is involved heavily with the child. If they hold a different surname to the child, they are in a prime position to make a fuss, and no-one can say that they are acting against the DPA, if they do not mention - by name - who their grandchild is.

http://www.ukcolumn.org/events/blowing-w...

Open this link and come on mass to this event. this site will give you full instruction as to how to present your evidence.

Now is our chance to bring the monsters down and reclaim our Common law rights, expel corrupt officialdom and expose this mass corruption, treason and tyranny in the UK. Lawful, peaceful, non violent mass non compliance is our weapon against all those responsible for destroying innocent families and abusing OUR CHILDREN. Thank you.